UnowPriceless
hyped garbage
Contentar
Best movie of this year hands down!
SteinMo
What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.
peacedrumbrook
If you were a kid in the seventies and loved Star Wars and the cheesy derivative clones it inspired, from 'Jason of Star Command' to 'Galactica', then this is for you. Of the bigger Star Wars-inspired space fantasies of the era, 'Shape of Things to Come' may have the most most in common with 1979-1981's 'Buck Rogers in the 25th Century' movie and TV series. Though Buck's budget had the advantage, the overall look is quite similar. The cheesy "futuristic" art design, materials and props that were available and may have looked 'far-out' to the 1980 eye are all in place. The lead actress has Erin Gray's 'Wilma Deering' hairdo, and, hey, there's Jack Palance, who played an evil villain in a Buck Rogers 2-parter, playing, well, a evil villain, in a, well, very similar costume. Having Barry Morse from the popular 70's British show 'Space:1999' also thrown in makes for good measure. There's the oh-so-imitated renegade robot, with his domed head and oddly 'Robby the Robot'-esquire body. He's the comic relief. Noting a theme? It's the era. Appreciation of this film is probably purely generational, because the movie is BAD. But it has immense charm. Watching this for the first time in 2009, at age 41, I felt as if I were watching a perfect spoof of the genre I am so nostalgic for.Brooke Ellis
FilmWatcher
What's most striking about this hilariously awful film is that someone actually thought that it was worth putting up money to make it. Two years after Star Wars and Close Encounters, someone actually felt that terrible dialogue and direction foisted upon decent actors like Jack Palance and Barry Morse, special effects out of a high school film class, a cheesily overwrought synthesizer score, and clunky 50's toy-robot villains would make for a worthwhile movie.I recently saw it with the benefit of fast forward (as another commenter said, the only way to watch this film) and have to wonder if it's really a parody. Everything about it is so stereotypically and perfectly awful, one wonders if the director was pulling a stunt like Princeton physicist Alan Sokal's hoax "postmodern physics" article in a doofy po-mo "science" journal.But Carol Lynley looks great, as does the Canadian National Exhibition complex in Toronto lit from behind.
oigres
I too, saw this excuse for a movie in theaters expecting it to be a remake of the 1936 classic. Talk about major lunch-bag let down! The only worth while event of sitting through this insult was listening to the wise-cracks and jocularities coming from the audience. Watching Barry Morse (a fine actor) humiliate himself with contortionistic facial expressions related to an attack of hemorrhoids was laughable! Jack Palance(another fine actor)didn't fair any better with his army of robots looking like walking garbage cans! All in all a complete waste of time. Possibly twenty years from now this might become a cult classic or mercifully disappear out of cinematic history!
pvd007
This film was released in Swiss theatres in 1979. It is probably the worst film I have ever seen in a movie theatre. Terrible story, bad acting, even worse special effects. I have voted on 1718 films in the IMDb and I have given TSoTtC a 2 out of 10 (there are worse films that have been released to video only, like OCTAMAN for example for which I voted with a straight 1 out of 10)
