Things to Come

The picture is a right adaptation of the novel titled ¨The shape of things to come¨ by H.G.Wells . A story of 100 years : a decades-long second world war leaves plague and anarchy . The film narrates like after a lengthly war among nations and continuing with plagues , rampages and starvation the world is destroyed . A country ruled by a tyrant (Ralph Richardson) fights against an airplanes confederation (leading Raymond Massey) . Then a rational state rebuilds civilization and tries space travel . As utilizing technology , wisemen and scientists try to rebuild the future world creating a peaceable society .

The motion picture is agreeable and very interesting though when the protagonists speak philosophical speeches is a little boring . Raymond Massey interprets two roles on different generations , at the future world plays a ruler , builder a sidereal rocket , in opposition to Sir Cedric Hardwicke who is facing the progress . The excellent main cast is completed with habitual actors of the British theater and with important cinematographic careers , thus : Ralph Richardson (Greystoke and four feathers) , Anne Todd (Paradine case) , Derrick De Mornay (Young and innocent) , Raymond Massey (Lincoln in Ilinois) and Sir Cedric Hardwicke (Ten commandments) . Cinematography is very good although in black and white and was realized by excellent cameraman George Perinal (Thief of Bagdad and Colonel Blimp).

Arthur Bliss music score is atmospheric and conducted by usual orchestra director of the classic British films : Muir Matheson . Production Design by Vincent Korda is fine as well as spectacular , he's considered to be the best British designer of that epoch . His brother Alexander Korda was the main English producer . The film was well directed by William Cameron Menzies who subsequent directed another Sci-Fi classic , Invaders from Mars . Rating: Good . Above average .

There are some film classics that we have almost lost. I don't mean the might-have-beens, like Laughton's "I Claudius," but films that were released and quite successful and are now in grave need of rescue. The hallmark of such films is the terrible quality of the available prints because the master negative is lost. "My Man Godfrey" and "Nothing Sacred" come to mind. And, of course, "Things to Come".

If the abstractions of the art deco aesthetic could be reified into a story, "Things to Come" might be the result. If the Chrysler Building really were a rocket ship and could fly past the moon and stars and comets of art deco friezes...if we could look into those naive mindsets, whose visions of man's destiny were being energized by the discoveries of relativity, atomic energy and deep space...we might indeed embrace the images of "Things to Come".

Some of the scenes may strike us a corny - as might those of Fritz Lang's "Metropolis" - but they are no cornier in their context than those in "2001, a Space Odyssey" or, for that matter, "Starship Troopers". Here is an honest attempt to project the world into the future, not some silly cowboys-in-space flick.

"Things to Come" makes only a couple of demands: first, that we ditch our smug sophistication and presentist prejudices; second, that we have the discipline to see past the print quality. It may take repeated viewings, as it did with me, but in the end you will be rewarded by a unique odyssey, not into our future but into the future of history.

While this film stands the test of time as a science fiction classic, its importance may not lie in its depiction of future wars, pestilence, and rebuilding. The most telling prediction comes in the latter part of the film -- the worker revolt. I disagree with the premise that workers would revolt out of fear of space travel. But, the idea of revolt out of fear of what technology is (and will) do to their lives is a real fear. Even today.

Sociologists who've read the Unibomber's manifesto have said that, while his methods and mentality were unsound, some of his suppositions on the effects of automation on humanity were plausible. We've evolved from a craft culture (human) to a mechanized culture (where humans used machines to meet the needs of humans) to an automated culture (where humans are expected to adapt themselves to the needs of their machines). Don't believe it? Pull a check out of your checkbook and look on the back. You'll find the words "Do not write below this line." This is NOT a request or suggestion, it's an ORDER to conform to the needs of machines that read checks.

Still, the film clearly illustrates a future that will eventually occur -- one where some people put all their trust and faith in our modern marvels -- while others left powerless and impotent by these modern marvels ask whether this progress was worth the price.

Eisenstein dreamed of an "intellectual cinema" which would expound theories and illustrate ideas. He hoped to film Marx's "Das Kapital". In reality, intellectual cinema has been achieved more often in the decadent West's commercial movie business: most notably by Kubrick in "2001" and, 32 years earlier, by Korda and HG Wells in "Things to Come".

Don't look to this flick for well-rounded characters, a coherent A-to-B storyline or naturalistic dialogue and body language. It's a grandiose thesis in images, designed to pose Wells's constant question: must Man drive himself on to explore his and Nature's potentialities at all costs, or will he grow tired and afraid of transforming the world and his own nature?

At the beginning, we see the destructiveness of total war: potentialities for harm, even for collective suicide. Nations fight each other to the death, the "Wandering Sickness" bounces civilisation back to a primitive subsistence and it requires a new breed of airborne technocrat to set progress rolling again. At the finish, we see the revolt of the masses spurred by artists and abstract thinkers who fear progress; they are out to smash the Space Gun before Man can launch his children into the frightening terra incognita of space.

Along the way, a devastating prophecy of World War Two, all mass bomber raids and poison gas, with tank blitzkriegs for good measure. It must have chilled the blood of the film's original spectators, for the first bombs on Everytown demolish a cinema. Cameron Menzies shoots the raid in dynamic Russian-montage style with a brilliant use of sound: the incoming bombers which will "always get through" buzz louder and louder like a swarm of hornets. After years of deepening chaos, order is roughly restored by Ralph Richardson's Mussolini-like "Boss" (who says Thirties films weren't allowed to do satire?) before he is brushed aside by Raymond Massey's burning-eyed, supercilious Airman, who seems more of a tyrant than Richardson. No democratic nonsense for Wings Over the World.

The final sequence of Everytown in the future is an art deco poem in gleaming silver and grey, which evokes the streamlining so in vogue between the wars. Wells's imagination does not stretch to jet propulsion, and the "helicopter" spotted by one IMDB reviewer is more probably based on Ricardo De La Cierva's autogiro; but other aspects of 1936's future, such as the mall-like internal public spaces full of plants and giant TV screens, are spot-on. In the long montage of rebuilding Everytown, laser cutting technology and computers are implied: the movie was released the year Alan Turing's famous paper on computable numbers was written.

More than "The Private Life of Henry VIII", "Things to Come" stands for Korda's rescue job on the British sound film. For it went beyond anything Hollywood, then preoccupied with Thalberg-esque costume frolics and Warners' problem pictures, could imagine. London Films demonstrated that British skill in special effects could surpass America's, while the score by Arthur Bliss was the first to be sold on disc.

None of this necessarily matters to today's casual viewer, and the occasionally creaky or "fratefully refained" bit of acting is bathetic; but these flaws are easily forgiven against the grandeur of the conception, and the abiding relevance of the final question sung into the starry night. "Which Shall It Be?"- dangerous development or soothing stagnation? The choice is still ours.

Powerful, yet creaky science fiction film from the 30's by the Korda clan. H. G. Wells's work is brought to the screen as a vision of what warfare will bring mankind in the century to follow. The film shows the destructive nature of war and how is will catapult us back to a state of barbarism, warlords, and another Black Death-like plague called the "wandering Sickness." However, because man clings to science, man will rise above all this and create a new, modern society free of warfare. The film has a lot of historical inaccuracies to its discredit NOW, yet much of what is preaches is plausible sometime, and much of it has some truth to it in some form. The theme that man can prevail and keep discovering/conquering new vistas is a laudable one. The film shows that progress and science are the things which advance us as a people. I thought of Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged as I heard one of the characters say something to the effect that the scientists/inventors had formed their own civilization, free of corruption and violence. The pace of the film is somewhat tortoise-like at times, yet many scenes are very compelling. The set designs are outstanding in the futuristic world of 2036(where they valiantly try to put a rocket in space to make a preliminary orbit around the moon). Acting is good with Raymond Massey and Cedric Hardwicke giving good performances, but it is Ralph Richardson as a "Boss" who deserves the most praise for giving a powerful performance of a man with inherent human traits that stymie progress. A though-provoking film indeed!