I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Lack of good storyline.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

Makes a great double feature of bad films paired with Space Mutiny(1988)or Starship Invasions(1977). I remember there being some hype for this film in Starlog and other genre mags of the time, and that Barry Morse was headlining it(along with Jack Palance and Carol Lynley) and that Sylvia Anderson(Space:1999, UFO) was producing it and involved in aspects of the design. Well, Anderson walked early on, signing herself off it, but not after signing on Barry Morse from her Space:1999 haunts, to star in this. The film was to be made in Canada and, to feature some "top line" visual effects and miniatures by Brick Price.It's ghastly from the get-go. A disco-inspired theme song opening the show(this was 1979) and we go to a moon base which just happens to be a futuristic(then)office building outside of Toronto and we're told in that casual, expository way, that the "earth-like" conditions outside the windows, complete with clouds and trees, are all inside a dome with a "sunsphere" providing a familiar view for the people inside. How convenient. Barry Morse puts on an American accent for this, not his familiar grandfatherly British accent. Jack Palance plays "Omus" an evil kind of guy(he played the same kind of "evil guy" in an episode of Buck Rogers about the same time) who has these walking-garbage can robots who look totally ridiculous and awkward. He also laughs, for no apparent reason only that he's amazed himself, which isn't hard. All of the costumes of the young people look like they just roller boogied to the moon. The same corridor is used again and again for "chase" scenes-they just change directions. The miniatures are pretty bad-fighters that have model parts of the "K-7 Space Station" on the front end. The FX work is largely some glitzy animation that's passable at first, but just gets more annoying. Landing on another planet, it looks just like some empty lot or tract of land in Canada. Supposedly this was to be a much more ambitious production, with Mike Trim having done some production drawings and miniatures made in England-that all went when Sylvia Anderson walked off it. In fact, that's what Morse was led to believe when he signed on. (I read where he said he was taken aback at the cheapness of everything, but honored his professional commitment and did his job and finished it, as he agreed to do.) Harry Allan Towers (no slouch at cheap films)came in and the quality was replaced by the thrift of just getting the film done. I admit I was pretty shocked it was so low-budget. I'd accepted that it was a Canadian film, for the time, and figured it would be lower end, but this took the cake.

With the names Jack Palance and Carol Lynley above the title, you would think that The Shape of Things to Come (purportedly from the book by HG Wells, although I see little similarity) would be a sci-fi adventure to die for.Well, it is...after watching this for half an hour you realise that yes, you have actually died and gone to hell. The special effects are below average for their time and the cast performs VERY badly. Palance has some interesting moments playing one of his typical evil characters but on the whole is fairly bland. As for Carol Lynley, who I usually adore, Niki is by far her worst performance, mainly due to her monosyllabic delivery.However there are some laugh-out loud moments (unintentional), mainly caused by the cast's feigned fear of the "robots" which are obviously stunt men in cardboard looking costumes who look about as fearsome as a newborn.Don't waste your time with this tripe, watch Star Wars instead.

What's most striking about this hilariously awful film is that someone actually thought that it was worth putting up money to make it. Two years after Star Wars and Close Encounters, someone actually felt that terrible dialogue and direction foisted upon decent actors like Jack Palance and Barry Morse, special effects out of a high school film class, a cheesily overwrought synthesizer score, and clunky 50's toy-robot villains would make for a worthwhile movie.I recently saw it with the benefit of fast forward (as another commenter said, the only way to watch this film) and have to wonder if it's really a parody. Everything about it is so stereotypically and perfectly awful, one wonders if the director was pulling a stunt like Princeton physicist Alan Sokal's hoax "postmodern physics" article in a doofy po-mo "science" journal.But Carol Lynley looks great, as does the Canadian National Exhibition complex in Toronto lit from behind.

This should be in the top 100 worst movies of all time. Like many cult classics it improves with age as its unintentional hilarity increases with time. I saw Shape of Things to Come on opening night without the benefit of any advance reviews. At the time I felt that my hard earned part-time summer job savings had never been so wasted. However, now I split a gut in Plan 9 fashion with the added benefit of fast forward. Only if bad SciFi amuses you should you give this a try. The special effects are stunningly bad at times. Palance and Lynley mail in their performances (and for Lynley, think worse than Poseidon Adventure - yikes!). I don't know if this was ever on Mystery Science Theater 3000; but that would be the perfect venue for viewing this space junk.