Future '38

To begin, this movie is not for everyone.

It creates and inhabits its own world. You'll either go along for the ride...or not.

For one thing, it's hard to categorize. Sci-fi? Well... sort of. Comedy? Hopefully. Romance? I think so. Satire? I sure hope so.

But if you do hop aboard, you'll be rewarded with more cleverness and originality than any ten other movies I've seen recently...combined.

I won't describe the plot. It's too weird, and doesn't matter that much anyway.

Just sit back, watch, enjoy, try to get all the hilarious details, and watch it again to see how much you missed the first time.

I'm a big fan of filmmaker Larry Blamire's work, starting with "The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra". This film is made in a similar style, showing a great appreciation and love for its genre (although, not the SAME genre). Mostly unfamiliar actors accompany Betty Gilpin in this homage, and she may be unfamiliar to most, unless you've seen GLOW or the Margaret Mitchell series from earlier this year (I haven't yet, but I will). Loved the spiffy period jargon, and the predictions of future science wonders. (Missed smartphones by THAT much!) It was also great seeing Sean Young in a small but very prominent role. As a plus, it's pleasantly short, not that it couldn't have been longer, but sometimes you don't want a 2+ hour commitment to a movie.

This film sets out to do its thing and then sticks with it. In terms of a film experience, most of what I didn't like was almost certainly intentional in its mimicking of films from that era. I'm not a fan of those but I can't fault Future '38 for having the integrity to stick with them. Most of the obvious visual comedy fell flat for me but the film more than makes up for it and is worth watching alone simply for the wonderfully 1940s banter, especially that as delivered by the two leads.

I came across this movie while looking at what else Betty Gilpin (GLOW) has been in. The described plot seemed so odd, I had to watch it. Bonus: For old Blade Runner fans, Sean Young had a very odd but appropriate presence in this story as the "telephone" operator, Mabel.

First thing to note, this movie is most obviously not from 1938. Instead, it's a humorous parody of movies from the past and how they pictured the future. Think of old 1930s and 40s films and comic stips that showed flying cars, and wrist watch phones (errr... they were right on that count). They also combine real 2018 objects, business names, and slang but used in completely different "old fashioned" ways. The thug with a "strap on" (shoulder holster with a gun) who is "gonna nail ya" (shoot you) is a striking example.

Recently I saw the film "Movie, Movie" (1978) which was more of an homage/parody of old 1930s cinema. Future '38 is kind of cut from the same cloth but with less homage and a lot more parody. The production itself is low quality in that once things go in color, it really doesn't try to emulate the look and feel of early color films like The Wizard of Oz. Instead it is digital video run through generic filters. That's OK, because I believe the story and parody are the primary reasons this movie exists.

As interesting as the idea of this movie is, and the pretty well concealed and somewhat anticlimactic twist, it still was hard to watch. The intentionally hammy acting was funny, but also distracting. The occasional insertion of real 21st century business names, slang and the like was a continual reminder that this is fully a 21st century film. "Movie, Movie" actually managed to lure me into feeling like I was watching a movie from cinema's golden age. But that only points more to the fact that this movie was less about honoring old cinema than poking fun at it as well as the 21st century itself.

If you're a fan of offbeat and unusual movies, this would definitely be worth a watch. But don't expect a movie with high production values. Expect an interesting/entertaining story more akin to watching an absurdist play. Additionally, Ethan Phillips (Neelix from Star Trek Voyager) has a role at the start of the film as well. And... Neil DeGrasse Tyson (obviously in on the joke). Don't let other reviews dissuade you from watching it. They're either trolling or just can't cope with absurdist parody.

It does a great job of capturing the pace, rhythm and snappy dialog of a genuine 1930s-era film, with plenty of satire and just good-old fashioned funny dialog.

Another reviewer compared it to Airplane, and I see what they mean. Both take a genre of film that has a very specific style, and honors that style while still doing a parody of it.

The short 75 minute runtime is similar to that of many films from the 1930s, back before two and a half hours become the norm. It also allows them to keep the pace up, which is a key element to this kind of film.

The twist near the end actually caught me by surprise!

All in all, a very enjoyable film. Might watch it again with friends, especially if they're movie buffs.