A 1938 screwball comedy set in the far future year of 2018.A 1938 screwball comedy set in the far future year of 2018.A 1938 screwball comedy set in the far future year of 2018.
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I have watched this movie at least four times, and every time I catch something I didn't see before. There's always a nice surprise waiting.
Time travel (or time displacement, such as "Demolition Man") is one of my favorite genres, whether it's drama or comedy. But, despite watching every time travel flick I come across, I can think of nothing to compare this with. It isn't "Back to the Future," but it doesn't try to be. Great sight gags, sly references, slapstick, puns ... this movie isn't afraid to try anything. And it succeeds when maybe it probably shouldn't. Yes, there's some "BTTF" here, but there's also some "Airplane!" and hints of Mel Brooks.
I went into my first viewing not knowing anything about it, and for two seconds I thought it was, truly, a resurfaced lost movie. Alas, Neil de Grasse Tyson giving an introduction with a tub of popcorn the size of washing machine pretty much dispelled any idea that something old had been unearthed. But 10 minutes in, I didn't care one bit. The quick word punches, vibrant background gags, and a sincere commitment to the premise made this enormously enthralling. And - dare I say it? - Betty Gilpin struck me as someone who is going to make a strong and serious dramatic turn one day.
There's really no way this movie should have worked, and it amazes me that it did. It's B-movie escapism with a complete lack of self-importance while maintaining respect for the audience. In other words, "let's just have some fun." If there's a message here, it got lost on me. And I don't have a problem with that.
Time travel (or time displacement, such as "Demolition Man") is one of my favorite genres, whether it's drama or comedy. But, despite watching every time travel flick I come across, I can think of nothing to compare this with. It isn't "Back to the Future," but it doesn't try to be. Great sight gags, sly references, slapstick, puns ... this movie isn't afraid to try anything. And it succeeds when maybe it probably shouldn't. Yes, there's some "BTTF" here, but there's also some "Airplane!" and hints of Mel Brooks.
I went into my first viewing not knowing anything about it, and for two seconds I thought it was, truly, a resurfaced lost movie. Alas, Neil de Grasse Tyson giving an introduction with a tub of popcorn the size of washing machine pretty much dispelled any idea that something old had been unearthed. But 10 minutes in, I didn't care one bit. The quick word punches, vibrant background gags, and a sincere commitment to the premise made this enormously enthralling. And - dare I say it? - Betty Gilpin struck me as someone who is going to make a strong and serious dramatic turn one day.
There's really no way this movie should have worked, and it amazes me that it did. It's B-movie escapism with a complete lack of self-importance while maintaining respect for the audience. In other words, "let's just have some fun." If there's a message here, it got lost on me. And I don't have a problem with that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Did you know
- TriviaThere is a map of Europe on the wall of General Sportwood's office. On it, Romania is labeled as "Rumania". In English, the name of Romania was originally borrowed from French "Roumania" in the 1840s, then evolved into "Rumania". It progressively fell out of use after World War II in favor of the name used officially: "Romania". The "u" form, though, saw use in English-language material at least as late as 2009. With a few exceptions such as English and Hungarian ("Románia"), in most languages, the "u" form is still used (German and Swedish: Rumänien; Serbian: Rumunija, Polish: Rumunia, etc.).
- Crazy creditsThere is a brief post-credits scene.
- SoundtracksAre You Sure
Composed by John Altman
Courtesy of De Wolfe Music
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 15m(75 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content