The Shape of Things to Come
Performance & Direction: The Shape of Things to Come Review
Last updated: February 5, 2026
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is The Shape of Things to Come (1979) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a FLOP with a verified audience rating of 3.9/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Science Fiction.
Cast Performances: A Masterclass
The success of any Science Fiction is often anchored by its ensemble, and The Shape of Things to Come features a noteworthy lineup led by Jack Palance . Supported by the likes of Carol Lynley and Barry Morse , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
Final Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?
Story & Plot Summary: The Shape of Things to Come
Quick Plot Summary: The Shape of Things to Come is a Science Fiction, Adventure film that explores futuristic concepts and technological possibilities while examining humanity. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Explained: The Shape of Things to Come
Ending Breakdown: The Shape of Things to Come attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to science fiction resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
Ending Analysis:
- Narrative Resolution: The story concludes by addressing its primary narrative threads, providing closure while maintaining some ambiguity.
- Character Arcs: Character journeys reach their narrative endpoints, reflecting the film's thematic priorities.
- Thematic Payoff: The ending reinforces the science fiction themes established throughout the runtime.
The final moments of The Shape of Things to Come reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Who Should Watch The Shape of Things to Come?
Consider Watching If:
- You're a completist for Science Fiction films
- You're curious despite mixed reviews
- You have low expectations and want casual entertainment
Top Cast: The Shape of Things to Come
All Cast & Crew →








Where to Watch The Shape of Things to Come Online?
Streaming HubThe Shape of Things to Come Parents Guide & Age Rating
1979 AdvisoryWondering about The Shape of Things to Come age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of The Shape of Things to Come is 98 minutes (1h 38m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 3.9/10, and global performance metrics, The Shape of Things to Come is classified as a FLOP. It remains an essential part of the 1979 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is The Shape of Things to Come worth watching?
The Shape of Things to Come is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Science Fiction movies. It has a verified rating of 3.9/10 and stands as a FLOP in our box office analysis.
Where can I find The Shape of Things to Come parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for The Shape of Things to Come identifies it as PG. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of The Shape of Things to Come?
The total duration of The Shape of Things to Come is 98 minutes, which is approximately 1h 38m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked The Shape of Things to Come
How The Shape of Things to Come Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for The Shape of Things to Come
**A slow, dull movie.** A movie that feels like a Star Trek script that was thrown out for being too dull. There is just too little going on for too long. The movie touts that it is based off of the H.G. Wells' story of the same name, though aside from some character names and the title, there is no other correlation. The sets are cheap. The costumes are unremarkable. The robots are blatant knock off of the Lost in Space Robot and R2-D2, but without the pizzazz. The plot is plodding. Jack Palanace acts like he lost a bet and had to be there. I'll give the movie that the two female leads, Carol Lynley and Anne-Marie Martin are attractive and the best actors that I've never heard of. Looking them up, they've been in far better movies. Watch those instead. Also, the explosion _is_ cool. If you still want to watch it, Rifftrax improves it greatly. Though as they frequently put it, "so bad it's still bad." It apparently has also been done by by the MST3K crew for season 13. I'd suggest picking which group of comedians you prefer and watch that, because watching a second time likely won't be worth it.
**_Practically any episode of Buck Rogers is a superior choice_** Shot in the fall of 1978, this is a cheesy Star Wars knockoff that merely uses the HG Wells name as a selling point since the story has nothing to do with his 1933 novel. Meanwhile the robots in the story are variations on the Robot from Lost in Space. I mention Buck Rogers because the sets, costumes and FX are comparable to that contemporaneous TV series. Also, Jack Palance, who stars as the villain here, also played the antagonist in one of the better episodes of that series, the two-part “Planet of the Slave Girls.” Meanwhile Anne-Marie Martin plays the female protagonist (oddly credited as Eddie Benton), and she also appeared in one of the better episodes of that show, “Twiki Is Missing.” Unfortunately, whereas the Costume Designer for Buck Rogers was a genius who knew how to dress women to emphasize them in all their glory (not tawkin’ about sleaziness), the costumer for this flick fumbled the ball with both Anne-Marie and the lovely Carol Lynley. Don’t get me wrong, their costumes are a’right, but that’s about it. For a quality low-budget Star Wars ripoff, check out Roger Corman’s entertaining “Battle Beyond the Stars,” which came out the year after this one. That said, this flick can be enjoyed to some degree if you’re able to roll with its all-around cheesiness, similar to a lousy Star Trek episode. It runs 1h 38m and was shot in the studio in the Toronto area with location sequences done in Montréal. GRADE: C-
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.









