Things to Come is a masterpiece of British Cinema. Based on H.G Wells’ story The Shape of Things to Come, it offers a utopian vision of the future filled with ideas and concepts that, in spite of the fact that we now know that some of these propositions were naive, are staggering in their seriousness and realization.

Often to the dismay and irritation of the cast and crew, Wells was involved in all aspects of the production of Things to Come. This is a project that was very close to his heart and he was keen on making sure that the result would be an appropriate visualization of his ideas and values. Previous screen adaptations of his work had left him unimpressed (First Men in the Moon 1919, The Island of Lost Souls 1932 and The Invisible Man 1933, among others), branding them as amateurish works. Yet, he maintained an admiration and respect for the cinematic medium and saw Things to Come as the opportunity of a lifetime (especially that he was nearing 70 at that time).

He was given almost unlimited powers (plus a substantial sum of money) by Alexander Korda, the Hungarian-born head of London Films who in the 30’s and 40’s would be responsible for many British classics. Fascinated by Wells’ mind, Korda agreed to finance the most expensive British film to date, with a budget close to £300,000.00 and a shooting schedule of one year. The film was marketed as Britain’s answer to Hollywood, a proof that the British film industry could compete with its American counterpart. It was also portrayed as a boost to the economy, bringing hundreds of new jobs for the building of the sets and for some of the scenes in the film.A remarkable aspect of this production, and a substantial contributor to its success (in the context of film history only since it achieved relatively poor commercial success), is the number of personalities and ‘experts’ who contributed to the film. William Cameron Menzies was brought on board to direct. A master visualizer, the recipient of the first Academy Award for ‘Interior Decoration’ and practically the father of the storyboard, Menzies had become famous in Hollywood for his abilities to translate scripts into powerful visual realizations. Menzies would go on to become Hollywood’s first ‘Production Designer’. Vincent Korda, Alexander’s brother, was hired as set designer, and is responsible for the majority of the visual language of the film. A major aspect of his strength as set designer was his ability to collect and compile design and architectural styles and influences and merge them together to create an outstanding final product. As such, one can detect in the many facets of the design of Things to Come various influences, and in some cases, direct contributions, from several masters of that time: Bel Geddes’ streamline concepts influenced the designs of the bombers and tanks as well as various shapes in the interior decoration, Fernand Leger provided ideas for some of the costumes and concepts, Le Corbusier’s work inspired the design of the city of the future with its suspended gardens, much of the furniture design came from Oliver Hill and Laszlo Moholy-Nagy brought his skills to the design of some of the machinery and various objects.

The end result is magnificent, a beautiful spectacle to behold, with an arresting score by Arthur Bliss. The quality of the production design is remarkable for the time, surpassing in beauty, scale and believability many modern films that have attempted to create similar visions. But the achievement is not limited to the scenes of 2036, which in the film, constitute the distant future, the time at which mankind will have learned its lessons and the world will be a better place. It also applies to the bombardment and destruction of Everytown during the war, a war which would last between 1940 and 1966, as well as to the reconstruction efforts after the end of the conflict. Every set has been meticulously built, with perfect attention to details, creating a world that is of the utmost credibility.

If the visual aspect of the film is its strong suit, the dialogues may have been its weakest. Wells’ talent for prose did not always translate well to film dialogue and, in spite of the efforts by the scenarist who was brought in by Korda, many of the lines are delivered mechanically and more in a linear fashion than in the dynamic and ‘interactive’ way expected in a film. Here again, we can see traces of Wells’ influence and interference.
Despite this certain weakness in the dialogues, the acting is fairly solid, with serious and dedicated performances by Raymond Massey as the purposeful scientist and future leader of the world (two different characters), Ralph Richardson in the role of ‘the boss’, the man trying to keep the world in its ‘barbaric’ state after the war, and Cedric Hardwicke as Theotocopoulos who in 2036 represents the only obstacle to the realization of Wells’s utopia.

Wells’ utopia is at the center of most of the criticism that has been targeted towards the film over the years. Thanks to the luxury of hindsight, we can now see how wrong and naive Wells was in many respects.
First of all, Wells’ vision is a Utopia, even though the world has to be almost entirely decimated before the seeds of a better world can be nurtured. This idea of a happy future where all will be well is much more of a foreign concept today than it was then. Science Fiction literature and cinema have been bombarding us with dystopic visions of the future, and world events in the past have provided backup to the idea that the future may not hold in store too many positive things for us. Yet, Wells had a vision and a plan to get there. His belief in science and in the possibility of future wonders is a commendable and, in many ways, an admirable one. It is a shame that our world has reached such a state that most people are unable to fathom a happy future where science can co-exist peacefully with other aspects of human life. But the dream still has merits…

Secondly, Wells’ plan to achieve this utopia was heavily based on ideas that bordered on fascism. He believed, not in state controlled, but in world controlled economics, where ideas of nationalism will have disappeared. Society will be ruled by an elite of scientists and philosophers (Plato’s Republic) who will have implemented systems for the good of the entire world population. In this structure, work will be efficient, clean, automatic but not without individuality. This was an important point for Wells who insisted that in spite of the mechanical aspects of many things, Man will retain his individuality and personal happiness. Wells hated the film Metropolis and its portrayal of elitists and beauty-less skyscrapers, its constant frantic and buzzing pace, where the workers have been turned into slaves by a capitalistic system. Instead, he wanted to see a happy worker, with plenty of leisure time, individuality and satisfaction, working in a clean, calm and airy environment. The existence of a ruling elite made up of rational scientists did not strike him as paradoxical, or even dangerous. Nor did the idea of living indoors, bathed in constant artificial light, with little access to nature, and even less to diversity or non-conformism. He saw the giving up of certain rights as essential in achieving collective happiness. And it is within this state of collective satisfaction that individual contentment could be reached.

It is clear that we are in fact moving closer to Lang’s vision than to that of Wells. And there is little doubt that much of the vision in Things to Come does appear fairly naive today (including the Space Gun idea, based on a technology that even in 1936, was already quite suspicious). But in the end, whether Wells got it right (at least he got the start of WWII pretty much right - an achievement in itself) matters less than the seriousness and beauty that underlies such hopes and vision for the future. In this respect, Things to Come offers a positive outlook on a future that could have been, a refreshing experience in a world now dominated by a fear of the future.