Too much of everything

Admirable film.

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

In the future, human race sets up colonies on the Moon, when Earth becomes uninhabitable. A madman decides to destroy the Moon colonies with his robots and automated ships and only three people and their robot dog can stop him.Wow. In the future, the world will be threatened by a cheesy-dialogue Jack Palance in a stupid cape! Who can save us? Awful robots so dumb they couldn't even get a job on "Battlestar Galactica"? It sure seems that way, doesn't it? Thanks to Blue Underground, you can see this film in the finest quality possible. Now, there is nothing they can do to make the movie any better, but at least it will look and sound good while you make fun of it.

I had never known that H.G. Wells wrote a novel called "The Shape of Things to Come" until I saw the 1979 movie. Having seen the movie, I did a little research and found that the movie had practically nothing in common with the novel. It sounds as though the novel had a plot similar to "Nineteen Eighty-Four", and the 1936 version of the movie followed the novel more closely.Looking at the movie on its own, it's pretty fun if totally silly. Jack Palance seems to be having a lot of fun as the man threatening to attack the moon colony. The robots - both good ones and bad ones - are the movie's particularly corny aspect. The whole thing comes across as a big excuse to be goofy, and so you'll probably enjoy the movie a lot more if you just accept it as ridiculous entertainment.

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

Absolutely Awful! This movie has nothing in common with the 1936 classic movie with a similar title. I wonder what the "pitch" was like, "Let's remake one of the most important early science fiction movies written by of the great early science fiction writers.....but we are going to change everything but the title." Think of it as "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" remade and set in metropolitan Chicago about a young advertising executive, his hectic life, and a loveable dog named "Nemo"