Counter-Currents
3,429 words
H. G. Wells is best known for being one of the founding fathers of science fiction, along with his French counterpart Jules Verne. While he was a wordsmith by trade, he had a strong influence on the medium of film almost from the beginning.
The first-ever “blockbuster movie” is generally considered to be the 1902 Georges Méliès film A Trip to the Moon, whose plot was a combination of Verne’s novels From the Earth to the Moon and Around the Moon, mixed with H. G. Wells’ novel The First Men on the Moon. The First Men on the Moon was adapted again for a now lost British silent in 1919.
You can buy Trevor Lynch’s White Nationalist Guide to the Movies here
There were two noteworthy Wells adaptations released during the pre-code era of Hollywood which are now considered to be landmarks in the sci-fi/horror genre. The first was 1932’s The Island of Lost Souls, an adaptation of Wells’ The Island of Doctor Moreau. While The Island of Lost Souls is now considered a classic, at the time of its release, Wells’ story of a mad scientist “playing God” by manipulating evolution to create human/animal hybrid abominations was wildly controversial. It was banned in 14 US states, as well as in Britain, Demark, and Sweden. Then there was 1933’s The Invisible Man. Based on Wells’ novel of the same name, The Invisible Man was one the most innovative horror films released up to that time and popular enough to inspire five sequels.
In the last years of his life H. G. Wells tried his own hand at screenwriting, and wrote two screenplays which were made into movies by the British studio London Film Productions. The lesser of the two (but still highly enjoyable) is the 1937 film The Man Who Could Work Miracles starring Roland Young (best known to American audiences as the star of the Topper film series). The Man Who Could Work Miracles is about an unremarkable Londoner who suddenly finds himself in possession of God-like powers. It’s a fun and breezy little movie and plays out like a longer version of one of The Twilight Zone’s more lighthearted episodes. There are some political themes in it, but you’re not supposed to take them very seriously.
Wells’ other screenplay, the film of which we are discussing today, is Things to Come, which is dead-serious, enormously ambitious, and epic in scope.
It is hard to watch Things to Come without comparing it to Fritz Lang’s Metropolis. They both present us with very different visions of the future. In the case of Metropolis, it is a capitalist dystopia where everything is in art deco. In Things to Come, it is a socialist utopia where everything is in art deco. Both movies smashed budget records in their respective countries. When Metropolis was first released in 1927, it was the most expensive German film ever made, and likewise, in 1936 Things to Come was the most expensive British film ever released at the time.
Personally, I’ve always seen Metropolis as more of an aesthetic masterpiece than a great story. The striking visuals are what are what you remember, while the plot is at times quite silly, the acting overdone, and its messaging heavy-handed. If we’re talking only about aesthetics, Metropolis wins, but in terms of story, Things to Come is a much more interesting film.
Another difference between the two is that Metropolis starts you off right in the middle of dystopia. Things to Come starts off in the present day and shows you how mankind arrives at utopia. It’s a long journey, and mankind has to go through Hell before it gets to Heaven.
You can watch here. There is also a “virtual extended version” that you can watch here. Nearly 40 minutes of footage was cut (and is now lost) when Things to Come was released in theaters. The “virtual extended version” attempts to piece together what was lost through production still and intertitles based on Wells’ original script. The extended version does not add much in terms of story, but there is a lot of interesting philosophical musing and lively debate wherein Wells addresses counterarguments and plays devil’s advocate against himself.
The movie begins in Everytown, United Kingdom. It’s Christmas Day in the year 1940, and the world is on the verge of war. We are introduced to John Cabal (played by Raymond Massey) and his friend Pippa Passworthy (Edward Chapman). Things to Come covers one hundred years of history, and the same actors play these characters’ descendants in the future.
Cabal, Passworthy, their spouses, and their children are at a Christmas party, but Cabal can’t really get into the spirit of things because war looms and could break out at any moment. Cabal is fearful that if war comes, it will be disastrous. Passworthy is less worried and believes that if war comes, it might not be so bad.
But war does come — that very night. We see Everytown bombed by aircraft, and its citizens running in terrors as buildings explode all around them.
It’s worth noting that the air raid scene depicts something that had not actually happened yet at the time the film came out. There had been some small-scale aerial bombings and zeppelin raids in the First World War, but in 1936, the world had not yet seen mass bombing on the scale depicted here. The bombing of Guernica happened a year after the release of Things to Come. Thus, at the time, this scene was speculative fiction.
The movie deliberately leaves unanswered the question of which countries are at war or who started it. When the radio warns of the approaching air raid, the announcer says, “We do not yet know the nationality of these aircraft, though of course there can be little doubt of their place of origin.”
This is not the case in The Shape of Things to Come, the Wells novel that Things to Come is based on. The Shape of Things to Come gives a very detailed explanation of how the next great war begins and progresses. In the original story, war breaks out between Germany and Poland in January 1940 over the port city of Danzig. War then also breaks out between the United States and Japan. Not bad for prophesy.
However, in Wells’ vision of the Second World War, both the European and Pacific theaters become stalemates that drag on for decades. Wells seemed to believe that the Second World War would be like the First, only more so. Since the last war had dragged on in the stalemate of trench warfare, the next war would become a super-stalemate.
Wells also predicted that poison gas would be used extensively in the next war, which did not happen. Hitler’s refusal to use gas weaponry has always flummoxed historians, who have struggled to explain why the ultimate embodiment of evil would take such a principled – indeed, humanitarian — stance on the use of poison gas. Things to Come includes a scene showing enemy planes gassing English cities.
Things to Come then fast-forwards to Everytown in 1966. There are no miniskirts or pudding-bowl haircuts, and no rockers and mods duking it out in the streets. Everytown is not swinging at all. Rather, it is a wasteland of rubble and bombed-out buildings, stuck in a semi-Medieval condition and led by a petty warlord named Rudolph. The hapless Everytownians couldn’t even get a warlord with a cool-sounding name.
Worse still, there is a plague happening. Since he believed that the next war was going to be like the previous war, only more so, Wells predicted that there would be another Spanish Flu, only worse. In the movie, the plague is “wandering sickness,” a highly contagious disease which causes those afflicted to wander around mindlessly like zombies. People found to be under the spell of “wandering sickness” have to be shot on sight.
The world is still at war, and Lord Rudolph is obsessed with getting his fleet of ten broken-down airplanes working again so that he can bomb the Hill People and annex their coal mines. However, the town mechanic lacks the tools necessary to make the repairs, and even if he did have the tools, there is no fuel for them.
One day, an airplane appears over Everytown. The citizens of Everytown are shocked, because they hadn’t seen an operational plane in a long time, and the one flying overhead looks new and futuristic.
The plane lands and out comes out John Cabal, now with grey hair and wearing an absurd-looking flight suit. It turns out that a group of engineers and scientists hid themselves away in Iraq during the war and formed their own secret community, Wings Over the World, which Cabal describes as “the brotherhood of efficiency, the freemasonry of science. We are the last trustees of civilization when everything else has failed.”
While the nations of the world were blasting each other back into the Stone Age, this commune of engineers spent their time developing advanced technology. Now that all the armies of the world have been obliterated, Wings Over the World has decided to emerge and rebuild civilization — but this time, civilization will be led by the engineers and based on reason and science. The people of the world are in no position to resist, as their puny weapons are no match for these men who have the most advanced technology.
Rudolph resists regardless and has Cabal arrested. When he learns of the engineers’ plan to “restore order,” he tells Cabal that he wants none of it:
RUDOLPH: We’ve got order here, the old order, and we don’t want anybody else restoring it, thank you. This is an independent, sovereign state.
CABAL: We’ve got to talk about that.
RUDOLPH: We won’t discuss it.
CABAL: We don’t approve of these independent sovereign states.
RUDOLPH: You don’t approve!
CABAL: We mean to stop them.
RUDOLPH: That’s — war.
CABAL: As you will. My people know I’m prospecting. When they find I don’t come back, they’ll send a force to look for me.
By Jove, he’s talking about a one-world government! To Wells, the existence of nation-states inevitably leads to competition, which inevitably leads to war, so to get to his socialist utopia, nation-states have to go. In The Shape of Things to Come, Wings Over the World also abolishes religion, although that element is left out of the movie. However, in the extended version, there is a scene in the future where someone references the fact that religion no longer exists.
It’s Communism, but it’s not the Communism of Marx. Wells’ socialist utopia is not a dictatorship of the proletariat, but a dictatorship of the STEM majors. If you absolutely have to have Communism, that’s probably a smarter way to go about it, but Wells’ vision still contains much of Communism’s soul-destroying aspects: the hostility to tribal bonds and the eradication of spiritual life.
Rudolph has a wife, or a girlfriend, or a gun moll. I’m not sure what her official status is. She describes herself as “sort of Queen around here.” Her name is Roxana, and she’s something of a scheming vixen. She is a relatively minor character in the theatrical version, but is much more prominent in the extended one. I don’t know why they cut out so much of her, because she is actually the most interesting character in the movie.
Whereas John Cabal represents cold, hard reason, Roxana represents the romanticism of the human spirit and mankind’s animal passions. She makes the argument that there is something inhuman about John Cabal’s utopia of reason.
In the extended version, there is a scene where Roxana is speaking to her friend Mary about Cabal’s plans for a new society. Mary is quite keen on the prospect, but Roxana thinks Cabal’s vision of utopia is, well, utopian. She says of it:
They won’t bother to bring it about. You are asking them to want unnatural things. What do we want, we women? Knowledge, civilization, the good of mankind? Nonsense, nonsense. We want glorification. We want satisfaction. We want glory. The glory of being loved and the glory of being wanted, desired. Splendidly desired and the glory of feeling and looking splendid. Do you want anything different? Of course you don’t. But you haven’t learned to look things in the face yet. I know men. Every man wants the same thing: glory. Glory in some form. The glory of being loved, don’t I know it! The glory they love most of all. The glory of bossing things here. The glory of war and victory. This brave new world of yours will never come. This wonderful world of reason, and it wouldn’t be worth having if it does come. It would be dull and safe, and oh, dreary. No lovers, no warriors, no danger, no adventure.
You can buy Trevor Lynch’s Part Four of the Trilogy here.
Wings Over the World finally shows up in Everytown in their futuristic-looking, art deco airplanes, and drop sleeping gas on the town. Everyone falls asleep — except for Rudolph, who dies for some reason — and the engineers are able to conquer Everytown bloodlessly.
In the extended version, there is an additional scene where John Cabal walks over to the still-sleeping Roxana and starts talking to her:
Mary and Mademoiselle Roxana. Queer contrast. A pretty thing and a very pretty thing, and what’s to be done with this very pretty thing? The eternal adventuress! You’ve pluck and charm and brains for infinite mischief! Where power is, you’ll follow. You’ll play your eyes at men till the end of your time. Now that the bosses have gone the way of the money-grubbers, I suppose it will be our turn. Wherever power is, she will follow. And let me confess to you, young woman, now that you can’t hear me or take any advantage of me, that considering my high responsibilities and my dignified years, I find you a lot more interesting and disturbing than I ought to do. Men are men, you said, to the end of their days. You get at us. I wish we could keep you under gas always. There is much to be said for the harem idea. Must you still be up to your tricks in our new world? A new world, with the old stuff. Our job is only beginning.
Here, H. G. Wells is conceding that there is some truth to the romanticist argument. He can strive for a world of reason, but there will always be people like Roxana around sowing discord by manipulating people’s base animal instincts. There are some parts of the human spirit that they will never be able to socially-engineer away. Even John Cabal, the avatar of reason, finds part of himself irrationally drawn, against all logic, to the snaky Roxana. Not even he is immune.
After a montage of scenes showing the rebuilding and transformation of Everytown, we are dropped off in the twenty-first century. Everytown is now a futuristic technological wonderland. All disease has been eradicated and people’s material needs are more than satisfied. John Cabal is gone and the new protagonist is his grandson, Oswald Cabal, who is played by the same actor. Oswald’s wife is a woman named Rowena, who is played by the same woman who played Roxana. As predicted, despite all the reason and progress, the beautiful, scheming adventuresses of the world are still drawn to powerful men, and powerful men are still falling for beautiful scheming adventuresses.
Discontent is growing among the people of Everytown, however, as Oswald Cabal is planning to send people into space using a giant space cannon. The theatrical version does not make very clear what the people’s objections to this are, but in the extended version, it is more fleshed out.
After centuries of struggle and hardship, mankind has finally created paradise on Earth, where there is no suffering. Oswald Cabal wants to move on to the next step: the conquest of space. However, this will be dangerous and difficult work, and mankind will once again know hardship and struggle. People will die. A faction of the people doesn’t understand why Cabal cannot simply be satisfied with paradise. Why keep going if everyone is happy? They don’t see why Cabal wants to fix something that is not broken.
The leader of the revolt against Cabal is an artist named Theotocopulos. The symbolism is quite obvious. An artist is, of course, the opposite of an engineer. The engineer creates through reason and science, and the artist creates through passion and romanticism. At heart, the coming revolt is another conflict of mind versus spirit.
Theotocopulos makes a televised speech urging the people of Everytown to halt the march of progress because, while the engineers may only be asking for volunteer astronauts, eventually they will not be asking anymore. He continues:
A time will come when they will want more cannon fodder for their Space Guns — when you in your turn will be forced away to take your chance upon strange planets and in dreary and abominable places beyond the friendly stars. I tell you we must stop this insensate straining towards strange and inhuman experiences — and we must stop it now. I say, an end to this Progress. Make an end to Progress now. We are content with the simple sensuous, limited, lovable life of man, and we want no other. Between the dark past of history and the incalculable future, let us snatch today — and live. What is the future to us? Give the Earth peace, and leave our human lives alone.
Then there is an uprising, and the people of Everytown march to destroy the space cannon. Cabal is forced to launch the astronauts into space ahead of time.
![Things to Come [1936] H.G. Wells [720p] - the Ending *Spoilers*](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KRRXtymX50U/maxresdefault.jpg)
The final scene takes place in Everytown’s space observatory as abal and Passworthy are looking for the rocket that they had just shot into space through a telescope. It is crewed with volunteer astronauts: Cabal’s daughter and Passworthy’s son. Cabal then spots the rocket, and the two have an exchange in which Cabal addresses Theotocopulos’s arguments:
CABAL: There! There they go! That faint gleam of light.
PASSWORTHY: I feel — what we have done is — monstrous.
CABAL: What they have done is magnificent.
PASSWORTHY: Will they return?
CABAL: Yes. And go again. And again — until the landing can be made and the Moon is conquered. This is only a beginning.
PASSWORTHY: “And if they don’t return — my son, and your daughter? What of that, Cabal?
CABAL: Then presently, others will go.
PASSWORTHY: My God! Is there never to be an age of happiness? Is there never to be rest?
CABAL: Rest enough for the individual man. Too much of it and too soon, and we call it death. But for man, no rest and no ending. He must go on — conquest beyond conquest. This little planet and its winds and ways, and all the laws of mind and matter that restrain him. Then the planets about him, and at last out across immensity to the stars. And when he has conquered all the deeps of space and all the mysteries of time – still, he will be beginning.
PASSWORTHY: But we are such little creatures. Poor humanity. So fragile, so weak. Little animals.
CABAL: Little animals, eh? If we are no more than animals, we must snatch at our little scraps of happiness and live and suffer and pass, mattering no more than all the other animals do or have done. [He points to the stars.] It is that — or this? All the universe, or nothingness . . . Which shall it be? Which shall it be?
H. G. Wells’ short-term predictions were quite accurate. He correctly predicted the beginning of the Second World War to within a year of its actual starting date, and guessed the participants fairly well. His medium-term predictions of a 1960s stone age were far too pessimistic. His long-term predictions for the twenty-first century were wildly optimistic. It would be nice if the great question of our age was, “Should we conquer the universe, or remain in a perpetual state of utopia?” Neither of those two options appear to be on the table at the moment.
Still, Things to Come is a fascinating movie and a nifty time capsule of the interwar period, when the future appeared dark and uncertain and yet still full of bright and limitless possibilities. It also a reminder of an age when there were still minds such as H. G. Wells’ asking great questions about the ultimate destiny of mankind — rather than contemplating whether breakfast cereal is racist.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
11 comments
Wells, like his pal Shaw, is one of the last Complete Men, who had lots of ideas, not all of them good or even compatible., like a Shakespearian character. The sort of intelligent people who’d promote both vegetarianism and exterminating the “unfit.” Today, we’ve regressed to the Mediaeval level, and everyone is a “type”: for example, a Dr. Fauci is totally brilliant and moral, anyone questioning him is evil and stupid. It’s on the Right too: innumerable websites promote Shaw or Wells as the “mastermind” behind the NWO or Davos World. We may not see their like again.
Truth be told, I consider this a Globalist-Faustian film. The film (and book) has a world state, a single language, and no nations, but at the same time, the last line of the is something Spengler probably would have said, “All the universe or nothing? Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?”
I like how Mr. O’Mera put it: Welles was a complete man.
That said, I think this film would have been better as one of those pseudo-documentary films. Also if any of you own the Criterion Collection edition of Things to Come, listen to the David Kalat commentary track, great stuff.
I haven’t seen the film but I read the story a long time ago. I’d have to say that the gun moll has a point.
It’s a lot of fun to read this, as I was fascinated with Wells when I was a teenager. I didn’t see the movie until I was 18, but did read the screenplay and, of all things, did a book report on it in my English literature class in high school; Things to Come a very odd fish competing with the girls doing Jane Eyre and Rebecca; high school favorites.
So, having the original screenplay, I was able to read the film before the cuts were made. I found it intriguing, but I was a high school egghead. Also, there was an argument Theotocopulos makes that human imperfection is better than improving man, even to the point of rejecting medical advances. There’s a ditty where this is praised, a world of ‘gout and rhemeutic, and toothless jaws.’ To Wells, the call for natural man is ridiculous; Anthony Burgess’s theme in A Clockwork Orange against conditioning to make people better would probably be scoffed at by Wells.
One scene Cabal is walking outside and admits that, from time to time, he enjoys cold air and being away from the happy, modern Everytown and its hermetic world…once in a while.
I also liked Roxana, and liked Rudolph. He was played very cunningly by Ralph Richardson. When I was younger, I didn’t want to be Robert Redford; I wanted to be Ralph Richardson.
George Orwell considered Wells one of his favorite childhood authors, and loved Well’s world that was so far removed from his middle class, public school life. Here was someone who was on his side. Later, Orwell came to dislike Wells, if you read his essay Wells, Hitler, and the World State. Well worth reading.
Wells considered Hitler “A screaming little defective in Berlin” stopping the world of progress and rationality. Wells demanded a world state and international control of air power.
Orwell said, first of all, no government anywhere would submit to this, and the irony is that men will not sacrifice and offer one pint of blood for a rational state. As he put it:”The energy that actually shapes the world springs from emotions-racial pride, leader-worship, religious belief, love of war-which liberal intellectuals mechanically write off as anachronisms, and which they have actually destroyed so completely in themselves as to have lost all power of action.”
Shall we say ‘woke’ culture?
Like Orwell said, children like to play with tin soldiers. Tin pacifists somehow won’t do.
He considered Wells, like Dickens, a product of English civilization that protected its people from wars and foreign invasion and made a middle class and intellectual class incapable of necessary defensive action. Wells supported the Bolsheviks, since they would bring a new, modern, scientific, SENSIBLE world. Orwell countered that:
“The early Bolsheviks may have been angels or demons, according as one chooses to regard them, but at any rate they were not sensible men. They were not introducing a Wellsian Utopia but a Rule of the Saints, which like the English Rule of the Saints, was a military despotism enlivened by witchcraft trials.”
This is perhaps the shadow that creeps across Well’s hopes and writings, that the reality of things will override reason. And really, can’t you say our efforts in Afghanistan were seen as an attempt to introduce a ‘sensible’ state as opposed to barbarous Islam?
The above by Orwell seems to score a point for Roxana.
And we see what has happened. Are the Afghanis really savages fighting reason? Or is our attempt to impose a ‘sensible’ state itself a kind of monstrosity? Especially if it involves occupation, killing civilians, and making numerous deals and military contracts? And, as Andrew Anglin said, forcefully impose trannies and anal sex and feminist domination. Are these ‘sensible?” But Wells wouldn’t have anything to do with this.
Orwell also thought Jack London’s The Iron Heel much more prophetic of the future than Things to Come.
It is thoughtful Wells considers the domination of air power a crucial factor in imposing a world state. In Brave New World, it’s hinted that if the lesser peoples try to revolt, then air power will reduce them. Certainly America’s claims to strength is dominant air power. When we ‘retaliate’ against someone, send out forty jets and only four of them return, our domination will be over.
As for Hitler not using poison gas…maybe he isn’t quite the monster we are taught. Churchill, on the other hand, was very anxious to drop poison gas on Germans, but was strongly opposed by the RAF command on this. He also would have used it indiscriminately were Britain invaded…on British soil.
there will always be people like Roxana around sowing discord by manipulating people’s base animal instincts
To be fair – and as you yourself say – she also represents the romanticism of the human spirit. Not at all the same thing.
Raymond Massey: always a scarily intense actor.
On H. G. Wells not contemplating whether breakfast cereal is racist, see this quote (from 1901) that today would get him instantly cancelled on Facebook and Twitter:
“And how will the new republic treat the inferior races? How will it deal with the black? how will it deal with the yellow man? how will it tackle that alleged termite in the civilized woodwork, the Jew? … And for the rest, those swarms of black, and brown, and dirty-white, and yellow people, who do not come into the new needs of efficiency? Well, the world is a world, not a charitable institution, and I take it they will have to go.”
H.G. Wells, supposedly, was one of the first to utilize the term New World Order, actually the title of a book he published in 1940 describing his desired post-World War II global setup.
The (1936) move Things to Come can be seen as a sort of “revelation of the method” (to borrow a term from conspiratology). Another world war leads to the disintegration of civilization; a cabal (literally and figuratively) of technocrats (engineers, scientists, aviators) takes over; they proceed to undo all national boundaries and set up a new and rationalized global order; the last remnants of the old romantic spirit are crushed in a futile rebellion against technology; and then mankind heads out to some higher plane. A sort of Great Reset, 1930s style, with speechifying at designated plot points.
One thing is to compare Things to Come with George Lucas’ first Star Wars movie (officially designated Episode IV: A New Hope). But Lucas turns the story around. The Empire is Well’s technocracy with the Death Star as the artificial city built unto vast metallic towers, bottomless chasms and great big viewscreens, science run amok; the Rebels are the believers in the old order of a defunct Republic and a long dead quasi-religion; and Peter Cushing’s Grand Moff Tarkin is evocative of John Cabal in severe German general staff uniform. Only this time around, the Rebel fighter spaceplanes (akin to the Boss’ biplanes) win the battle against the great big Imperial fleet owing to a belief in a superliminal Force.
There’s a message in there, somewhere, for the Dissident Right.
Some, like Jay Dyer in Jay’s Analysis, have asked if people like Wells, Huxley, etc., are not describing what might happen, but what they have planned TO happen. That Brave new World is actually the ruling class’s blueprint, and they have announced what they intend to do, and the various sci-fi novels, movies, etc., are simply ideas from the leadership of what they tend to implement.
An example is the movie Contagion, which shows a deadly virus beginning in China from unhealthy animals slaughtered in the market. Was this perhaps a way to make Covid plausible, and put the idea in people’s minds through subliminal suggestion?
The intelligence agencies have long been a part of Hollywood, and know the power of film to mass suggestion.
Remember Wag the Dog? Didn’t that film really give away the game?
Certainly, if they study the market for selling people things like fluffy toilet seats, why not study the market for mass indoctrination?
Was Things to Come not so much prophesy, but how the new world order was going to plan things, and showing what they think of the resistance, as being outdated barbarians and hopeless antiquarians?
Roxana is looking better and better.
Lord Snooty: Rather a shame Well’s views on lesser breeds was not maintained, but even progressive, sensible views of rationality (or maybe especially such views) can be co-opted.
Really excellent. It’s from the era when Stanley Baldwin said, “the bomber will always get through,” which presumably accounts for the film’s strange crossover between science-fiction and serious mid-30s dread. Things to Come didn’t “foresee” Guernica, it just portrayed a common awareness. That dread also permeates Orwell’s novels of the mid-to-late 30s.
Anothing thing notable about the film is that it’s one of the few directed by William Cameron Menzies, who did assistant direction and production design on many others (e.g., GWTW). The painstaking attention to set detail is a hallmark of Menzies. It may be why he never broke out as a director. He was a designer, first and foremost.
Margot, Read my review Invaders From Mars. William Cameron Menzies directed that one, and has excelled t design and artistic effects.
The RAF was obsessed with bombers in the 1920’s-30’s, and considered them the ultimate weapon. It was even said fighters would be obsolete, and a future war was expected to have waves of bombers.
Strangely enough, the RAF had troubles making first rate bombers, and their accuracy wasn’t good. The British also ignored developing military transports, odd since a world empire would need a lot of these, and when WWII broke out, Britain had to commandeer most of the civil air transports for their military.
“Wells also predicted that poison gas would be used extensively in the next war, which did not happen. Hitler’s refusal to use gas weaponry has always flummoxed historians, who have struggled to explain why the ultimate embodiment of evil would take such a principled – indeed, humanitarian — stance on the use of poison gas. Things to Come includes a scene showing enemy planes gassing English cities.”
The Soviet Union’s war plans, in the event of wwIII, included the mass gassing of West German cities with long range artillery, undoubtedly they would have done it, in the case of a non-nuclear war.
I liked this movie quite a bit, but over the years, my vison of who the hero and villain are has reversed.
Sir Boss fought to the end for what he believed in (Family, Home, Country) and conveniently died from a heart attack. Cabal, a member of the dissident Airmen who took over North Africa (no word on what happened to the inhabitants -perhaps they conveniently had heart attacks as well), brooks no discussion, no deviation from the plan he is following.
You cannot fight the gas, the Airmen will rule over you, and they will build a perfect world, which you will really, really like.
I wonder where the people who think differently are kept in this perfect world. The implication is that there is no different thought, that everybody is happy with their lot, yet a lone artist rouses the population to riot with a single short speech.
The perfect society seems to be composed of only two classes of people: those who run things and those who do not (for some reason they seem to be the angry ones)
I wonder what they call their Secret Police in their Perfect World (the ones that are ‘preparing the Peace Gas’ according to Cabal).
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment