the war, starts four years into the future, 1940, then it vigorously spans nearly a whole century until the year 2036.
Futuristic tanks and air-battle scenes are featured in the war-story, also chemical and biological warfare.

1) What the heck is the purpose or function of that preposterous headgear Raymond Massey is wearing when he first flies in?
2) For Sci-Fi, they sure got it wrong about the use of gas as a military weapon or crowd controller in the future.
3) Huge planes travelling at ridiculously slow speeds? That's the opposite direction the real things took.
4) It looks like they didn't have a real democracy in the future and that a lot of the population were real idiots, (Hmm - maybe that one came true.)

A great film, but most versions in the past have been murky and grainy... Fortunately, Ray Harryhausen collaborated on a version that is available on DVD that has a COLOR version included, plus it has been re-mastered very well... Any fan of Welles should buy this version!

The movie itself seems to be from 1936, so the action, the war, starts four years into the future, 1940, then it vigorously spans nearly a whole century until the year 2036.
Futuristic tanks and air-battle scenes are featured in the war-story, also chemical and biological warfare. Because of a new epidemic disease, only half of the population survives. The anarchic post-war situation is ended by an invasion of foreign forces, that is prepared with a non-lethal aerial gas-attack. Upon that civilization is restored more shiny than it was before, progress and futuristic buildings and costumes are shown. The story culminates in a flight to the moon, that causes quite some excitement and protest. The controversy about it seems to be, that it is an unsafe attempt with no warranty, that the two test-persons indeed return to earth. Finally one man and a woman are shot into space inside a capsule from a giant cannon. Interestingly Wells projected the 'moon-shot' 100 years into the future, while in reality the moon-landing took place only 33 years later, with the main controversy about it, that the USA spent enormous resources on the project, just in order to be there first, before the soviets.

to the heart of the matter to be the crux of what makes a good movie a better one than a bad. Of course, for the audience then, they had no notion of the war to come, whereas it is a bit difficult sitting through the first half hour or so as I'm just pushing for the peek into the future world this film devises. The helicopter was a nice touch before its time. Ever fascinating to see what the past gets right and wrong in these predict the future surveys from a bygone era.

(Note: A major part of this review will consist of comparisons between the book and the movie.)

This movie is great, an epic masterpiece. I watched the movie the same day as I finished reading the book. It was actually pretty hard to find the book in any bookstore, considering that the movie's script was also released as a book. Luckily I managed to find the actual book due to the slight difference in the title. The original book is called "The Shape of Things To Come" while the script and the movie are called "Things To Come".

Like all book-based movies the book is of course better than the movie. When it comes to this one I also think that you need to have read the book before you watch this movie to be able to appreciate it. There is a couple of things that bother me, though.

One thing that I had a very strong reaction to is the fact that they've altered the ending and several of the dates. In the book, Theotocopulos doesn't have any influence at all. He just writes down his opinions in a diary and talks about them to a similar-minded woman whom he is romantically involved with. She doesn't appear in the movie at all. Also, they've altered several of the years that things happen in. In the book, the second world war ends in 1950 and the diseases begin to appear. The "Wandering Fever" is by the way called "Masculated Fever" in the book.

There are several differences, and it would take way too long to write them all down in this review, but the movie is still a great adaptation of an epic book. I strongly recommend the book if you've got the patience to read it, considering that it isn't light reading. Even though I'm 16 years old, I think most other people of my age would find the book very boring. Personally I think it's the 2nd best book I've ever read. (The best book I've read is "I Am Legend" (1954) by Richard Matheson.)

To summarize the whole review: "Things To Come" is a great movie, but to really appreciate it, you must have read the book before watching the movie. ("The Shape of Things To Come") The book gives a more explicit context to the depicted events.

In a future after a war that leaves the world in ruin the Free Masons establish a New World Order and build a civilization of subterranean mole people, but that's not all.

They also build a giant phallic cannon and aimlessly shoot their children into outer space to their ultimate demise in what can only be described as the biggest masturbation scene in cinematic history. Um, yah...

Life extension technology is also touched upon, but despite all the craziness, and a war to boot, this movie never really takes of and is a bore right to the end.

Give it a miss.

After an appeal in us supreme court a ruling says first admendment rights were violated by congress.Therefore any work that was in pd before the act of 1996 would under copyright law here would stay in pd.

This film reflects the fear of the people in the 1930s of the coming of a new war and it´s possible aftermath with the whole civilization destroyed and some kind of new early middle ages following with local warlords ruling all over the land wonderful: Ralph Richardson), fighting each other for natural resources. (Soon enough there would be a real war. Of course, this war did not destroy the whole civilization, but in many ways more cruel than anyone could have imagined before.)

If this "new order" which replaces the warlords, this highly technocratic rule of engineers and scientists and gigantic technical projects, should be really wished as a "thing to come", can be doubted. Nevertheless, a marvellous film

Was this the first post-apocolyptic film, or just the first talkie? I could just see Mad Max defending the petrol from the Boss!

Fantastic. HG Wells always a pleasure. Had a chance to buy a collection of all his works oncem still regret now doing so. Thanks

Made in 1936, this movie correctly predicted World War 2 and they almost got the year right. The movie was wrong about the progress of the war and underestimated the way in which Science and the Military bounce off each other to invent new ways of killing people. The movie is 100 percent right in saying that "war is hell" and the human race has to get over it if we are to achieve our full potential. This movie was based on an H.G. Wells book and it conveys the main theme of that book - that the human race should explore the universe instead of wasting money on armies and wars. This was also the main theme of Star Trek (the 1960s series and all the later re-makes) and it is a theme that never gets out of date. This movie is both scary and entertaining. Well worth watching.

This is an excellent film, the film that as a kid encouraged my interest in science fiction, however the film is not in the public domain.

In the US it did become public domain in 1964 until copyright was renewed under the Uruguay rounds agreement act in 1996.

Should be in the AFI top 100, no accounting for taste.

The screenplay was written by H.G. Wells. It is the only screenplay he ever wrote. The book,"The Shape of Things to Come" was the last thing he wrote as a social commentary on the way things were and if we were are not careful, the "shape of things to come". The book was pessimistic and when approached to write the screenplay he was asked to make the film's ending more as a ray of hope for Mankind not darkness and gloom as was written in his social commentary(fable not science fiction).

I cannot believe that no one has done a review for a such a great movie. To me one of the best sci-fi pictures of all time. Although I only remember seeing Raymond Massey as the head doctor of the Dr. Kildare television series of the 60's. I came across this movie first years ago when it was shown on TVO. Then our public library got it in on VHS. This to me is better because of what they had to work with. Some may or may not agree with me better then the Star Wars (although I am a fan of those) movies and alot of CGI of today. A masterpiece.