DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => Movies and TV => Topic started by: MetalJunkie on March 28, 2013, 02:08:54 PM
-
...why?
Why not say "Oh, Marty, this should be a given, but if you ever have kids, don't let them hang out with Biff's kid."
What's the point of using a time machine to change the future when a time machine is not needed to change the future?
-
Because that makes for lame movie dialog.
-
Thing is, Bob Zemeckis put that thing at the end of BTTF I as a kinda joke in there. Sorta "It's never over once you have a time machine!".
When he had to put together BTTF II he absolutely resented that tiny thing, because it totally locked down the story. He especially hated that Jennifer entered the car; that's the reason why all they do with her is knock her out at the earliest moment possible. Good thing too, that new actress was not so nice to look at.
-
Thing is, Bob Zemeckis put that thing at the end of BTTF I as a kinda joke in there. Sorta "It's never over once you have a time machine!".
When he had to put together BTTF II he absolutely resented that tiny thing, because it totally locked down the story. He especially hated that Jennifer entered the car; that's the reason why all they do with her is knock her out at the earliest moment possible. Good thing too, that new actress was not so nice to look at.
So I take it he didn't write the whole trilogy at once and then chop ot into thirds?
-
BTTF I was written on its own. II / III were written together.
-
Agreed about the ending.
It was supposed to be a joke to finish the first film and that was that.
Bob Zemeckis said having jennifer there was like a shot in the foot.
Fun fact : BTTF 2&3 were filmed at the same time and MJ Fox had to do day shoots on Family Ties and night shoots on BTTF until Family Ties had wrapped for the season.
Fun ! :tup Must have been exhausting...
Also - some days he'd be filming part 2 and some days he'd be filming part 3 and it got really confusing apparently !
-
Your daughter marries a black man! (https://youtu.be/2gGVBe14MCo)
Biggest BTTF fan reporting that Doc. Brown is genius crazy and should be allowed to say crazy stuff, Biff's grandma said crazier things :lol
-
Good thing too, that new actress was not so nice to look at.
Wow, I can't agree. I thought the original Jennifer was okay, but nothing special. I've always liked Elisabeth Shue.
-
Damn, I've been a fan of BTTF for almost 20 years and I didn't even know there were 2 Jennifers.
-
(https://www.wildsound.ca/images/back_to_the_future_2_jennifer_recast.jpg)
Orbert, you lose.
-
Seriously? You think Claudia Wells is hotter than Elisabeth Shue?
By the way, both of those pictures are horrible. Compare their main bodies of work. Notice how Claudia doesn't really have one, while Elisabeth has been nominated for both and Oscar and a Golden Globe.
Whatever. Personal taste, I guess. I was happy when Elisabeth was cast as the "new" Jennifer, and bummed when they knocked her out and she basically wasn't in either II or III.
-
That photo doesn't do Elisabeth Shue any justice. She's pretty hot so I would tend to agree with Orbert. Definitely nice to look at.
-
The original Jennifer quit acting to take care of her family I heard..
-
Original Jennifer by a mile. The second one looked 10 years older than Marty in that movie.
...why?
Why not say "Oh, Marty, this should be a given, but if you ever have kids, don't let them hang out with Biff's kid."
What's the point of using a time machine to change the future when a time machine is not needed to change the future?
I'm kinda embarrassed to say I've watched BTTF hundreds of times and I've never thought about this before.
-
Interesting. I never thought about that either. The weirdest thing is that I never noticed that there were different actresses for Jennifer from 1 to 2/3 until very recently. Jennifer had such a miniscule role in 2/3 that I guess it just never occurred to me to even care. :lol
-
I noticed right away at the beginning of part 2. I just wasn't sure why at the time. It doesn't really matter since she didn't have a major role in the movies anyway.
-
The original Jennifer quit acting to take care of her family I heard..
Yeah, her mom got cancer and she quit for a while to take care of her.
Actually, I hadn't checked her IMDb listing in a while. I guess she's working again, after a 22-year break. Whoa.
-
I didn't notice until one day we were talking and my mom mentioned that they were different actresses. After I put my exploded brain back in my head, it made sense but not a whole lot of difference since she really didn't matter much in the movies as already said here.
Still the second movie is my favorite of the three in spite of the different Jennifer.
-
I like the second best of all, too. I like the way they revisit the first movie and a lot of it gets a different meaning, even if there are some paradoxes. It's a fun time. The third movie is fun, too, but they basically just go back to the old west and stay there the whole movie. Half the fun is the jumping around in time. I mean, that's the whole point.
-
I like the second best of all, too. I like the way they revisit the first movie and a lot of it gets a different meaning, even if there are some paradoxes. It's a fun time. The third movie is fun, too, but they basically just go back to the old west and stay there the whole movie. Half the fun is the jumping around in time. I mean, that's the whole point.
3 is like 1, following mostly the mold 1 made, for better or for worse for 3's legacy. 2 is definitely the unique one mostly, bringing its own thing to the series. But 2 does kind of break the title meaning of BTTF. While 3 has an additional time period jump compared to 1, it follows the same idea of Marty getting back to his original 1985 from a date in the past.
Then again, Marty was trying to get back to the future from 1955 before Doc got warped to 1885 in 2, it's just they jumped around once more. Ugh, too much thinking about time jumping is making me confused and now my view is clouded!
-
While 3 has an additional time period jump compared to 1, it follows the same idea of Marty getting back to his original 1985 from a date in the past.
That's what I mean. After the craziness of 2, with the alternate timelines and multiple jumps, 3 followed the same template as 1. That is, it was more of the same.
Don't get me wrong. I love all three, and 3 is still a good time. I just thought 2 had more going on, more going for it. It even gets a bit dark for a while, too.
-
While 3 has an additional time period jump compared to 1, it follows the same idea of Marty getting back to his original 1985 from a date in the past.
That's what I mean. After the craziness of 2, with the alternate timelines and multiple jumps, 3 followed the same template as 1. That is, it was more of the same.
Don't get me wrong. I love all three, and 3 is still a good time. I just thought 2 had more going on, more going for it. It even gets a bit dark for a while, too.
Gotcha. :coolio
I agree totally on the positive points of 2, and the Biif alternate 85 is dark indeed. Why I cannot pick 2 over 3 is I do enjoy Doc having his own story with Claire in 3, even with her annoying screaming of "Emmett" tainting that a lot of the time.
So I always go with 1 if I had to pick one.
To respond to MetalJunkie's OP, as 1 was intended to be a stand-alone film (and could be) before 2 & 3 were approved, I believe it would have just ended like that. Either with your conclusion, or them actually going to the future, but up to the audience.
-
I'm kinda embarrassed to say I've watched BTTF hundreds of times and I've never thought about this before.
Same here.
-
I guess it is kind of stupid if you think about it. Going to the future and changing an event won't stop it from happening again once you return to the past since the event you changed goes back to not happening yet. It was quite a waste of plutonium and garbage and very foolish on Doc's part.
-
The whole future scenario was just to set up Old Biff going back to 1955 anyway.
I've never liked the 2nd film as much as the other two. I seem to be in the minority that prefers 3 to 2.
Although I did see someone say they prefer 2 to 1 which is just : :o :o :o :o
-
Correct opinions stated in this thread-
-BTTF2 is the best them, despite the silliness of changing the future that hasn't happened yet, especially after the future is apparently entirely wiped according to the end of part 3.
-Claudia Wells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elisabeth Shue in those movies. Not even a comparison there between super hotty and dorky plainness. However, I'd say that Claudia Wells has aged badly, and Elisabeth Shue has aged really well, so as of 2013 Elisabeth Shue looks much better.
It really comes down to the fact that they never wrote BTTF with a sequel in mind. I guess once it's established, you kind of have to work with it. Luckily it made for my favourite movie scene of all time, so I don't care!
-
Another nerdy BTTF fan trivia I noticed back in the day is how much presence Michael Jackson had in BTTF II.
IF there's a more hardcore BTTF here name 2 different occasions with Michael in the movie :D
-
I know Beat It was played in the Cafe 80s when they went to 2015. Other than that I'm drawing a blank.
-
Hm there's singing/dancing Billy Jean in BTTF3. In part 2? There's the Cafe 80s with Beat It, and the fake MJ on the video screen giving the menu. I'd have to think about what else.
-
Although I did see someone say they prefer 2 to 1 which is just : :o :o :o :o
I don't know. I get that the first is a classic and all, and it certainly feels like it when watching the film, but I find myself enjoying the second more. All my opinion of course. I think I laugh more in the second one, and at the same time one of my favorite scenes in the entire series is when Doc is drawing the timelines on the chalkboard, which is not a funny scene at all.
Oh! Just remembered another scene with Michael Jackson in it besides the Cafe 80s. In the Alternate 1985, when Marty goes into his own house, he goes into his room that isn't his room and the walls are full of Michael Jackson posters. This is when the father is swinging the baseball bat at him.
-
Marty moonwalks for Mad Dog in III and sings Billie Jean.
-
Elisabeth Shue's hairdo didn't do her any favors in II and III, but she was still mighty fine. As was the original Jennifer.
I always thought Doc's "She's not essential to my plan" early on II was basically Zemeckis talking about the Jennifer character, hence knocking her out and having her be mostly a non-factor in both flicks.
Overall, amazing trilogy, and I don't care about the minor plot holes in regards to the time line.
-
Oh! Just remembered another scene with Michael Jackson in it besides the Cafe 80s. In the Alternate 1985, when Marty goes into his own house, he goes into his room that isn't his room and the walls are full of Michael Jackson posters. This is when the father is swinging the baseball bat at him.
That's the one I didn't expect anyone to know :lol, good job.
Everybody else got the other two from BTTF II right, Beat it and the restaurant guide video.
How many watches of BTTF II did it take you to realize the guy hanging upside down at dinner is not the same actor who plays George in the first movie? That one actually took longer for me to realize than Jennifer.
Crispin Glover, the original George McFly, sued them over using his likeness heh
-
I seem to remember noticing that Crispin Glover's name was not in the credits listed at the beginning of II, and I thought maybe I just missed it or something, but once it was clear how they were using the George character in II, I figured it was another actor. I do always wonder though how II and III would have gone had Glover agreed to be in them.
-
It doesn't make any sense why he wouldn't agree other than him being a douche nozzle.
-
Has anybody played the BTTF Telltale Games game? It was surprisingly good actually, I enjoyed it.
-
It doesn't make any sense why he wouldn't agree other than him being a douche nozzle.
He was. When they started approaching each of the original cast members about making the sequels, according to the story, Glover asked for a ridiculous amount of money. They tried to negotiate, but he was out of his mind (he's a pretty weird dude anyway) and I forget exactly how they worded it, but the figure he wanted was not consistent with his standing as an actor and his part in the movies, so they just got someone else.
First thing I thought of was how Marlon Brando got $3.7 million plus a percentage of Superman (the 1978 version) for being in the movie for ten minutes. The movie was huge and he ended up taking like $14 million. Ridiculous cash, but I guess when you're Marlon Brando, you can ask for that, and if they're willing to pay it, more power to you. Except that Crispin Glover is no Marlon Brando.
-
To be honest it was for the better anyway. Another actor would have had to run around with really bad makeup that is supposed to make them look old.
-
I think they were pretty good at pulling off the old make up in the BTTF movies. 1985 Doc. Brown, 1985 Loraine and 2015 Jennifer were the best, 2015 Biff was the only so-so.
-
Yeah, I was thinking of old Biff when I made that comment. The others were alright.
-
I'm always amused when actors overprice themselves out of movies. Robert Duvall asking too much for Godfather III is another example, although not having the Tom character in III really hurt what was already a weaker script anyway. And Glover was no Duvall either (just like he was no Brando).
-
I felt some loss without Glover in II & III, it would have definitely been better if at least 1885 Seamus McFly was played by him. Fox looked pretty silly in that, especially if Marty features are the product of Loraine and George mating, why would his McFly ancestors look like him and his mom who's not a McFly. Although I did like Lea Thompson as Maggie McFly.
Also Glover portrayl of George was erratic and cool, I enjoyed it a lot and I wonder how his goofiness would have been employed in BTTF II especially, I bet he would have played Marty's son in 2015 who characteristically behaves more like a young George than a young Marty.
-
Getting off-topic, but yes, sometimes these agents can't really have their client's best interests in mind sometimes. The guy that played Clemenza wanted a greater say in his dialogue for Godfather II. They found an easier solution that that: A black armband, a passing comment, and voila! Clemenza is dead, and we get a much more dynamic and interesting character and subplot with Pantangelli. And after that, that actor went on to do.... what, exactly?
On topic, I have seen BTTF several times, BTTF3 twice, but have never seen BTTF2.
-
On topic, I have seen BTTF several times, BTTF3 twice, but have never seen BTTF2.
WHAT THE FLYING FUCK. WATCH IT NOW. :getoffmylawn:
Sorry, this movie is something I feel very strongly about. :lol
-
Why watch the third before the second? Twice even.
-
To correct the paradox.
-
It doesn't make any sense why he wouldn't agree other than him being a douche nozzle.
He was. When they started approaching each of the original cast members about making the sequels, according to the story, Glover asked for a ridiculous amount of money. They tried to negotiate, but he was out of his mind (he's a pretty weird dude anyway) and I forget exactly how they worded it, but the figure he wanted was not consistent with his standing as an actor and his part in the movies, so they just got someone else.
First thing I thought of was how Marlon Brando got $3.7 million plus a percentage of Superman (the 1978 version) for being in the movie for ten minutes. The movie was huge and he ended up taking like $14 million. Ridiculous cash, but I guess when you're Marlon Brando, you can ask for that, and if they're willing to pay it, more power to you. Except that Crispin Glover is no Marlon Brando.
Glover was on Radio 5 some time ago and he said that he should have been paid the same as MJ Fox in the 1st film because " George Mcfly was more important in that film than Marty was. Marty was a supporting character. "
:lol
It's a real shame when people turn out to be like that. So many disputes boil down to money.
Slight tangent but it's the reason U2 are still the 4 same guys 30 + years later is because they have always split everything 25% each.
-
Correct opinions stated in this thread-
-BTTF2 is the WORST them.
FTFY.
There is no way on Earth that 2 is better than 1.
1 is the greatest movie ever made. I saw it in the cinema again for the 25th anniversary. It was like watching it again for the first time.
2 has the unnecessary future stuff which only exists to send Biff back to 1955 and then it's the 1st film again.
I much prefer 3 to 2 despite there not being a lot of Sci Fi in it.. I saw 3 in the cinema too.
-
When did BTTF2 come out ? 1991 ? 1992 ?
For arguments sake lets say it was 20 years ago and that would have made me about 14.
I remember people saying how confusing the film was and I understood it fine :p
I guess I must have been watching a lot of sci-fi. The UK started getting Star Trek TNG around that time too.
-
When did BTTF2 come out ? 1991 ? 1992 ?
For arguments sake lets say it was 20 years ago and that would have made me about 14.
I remember people saying how confusing the film was and I understood it fine :p
I guess I must have been watching a lot of sci-fi. The UK started getting Star Trek TNG around that time too.
1 was 1985, 2 was 1989, 3 was 1990.
-
Ok cool i would have been about 10 :P
And I still followed the plot. :lol
-
Glover was on Radio 5 some time ago and he said that he should have been paid the same as MJ Fox in the 1st film because " George Mcfly was more important in that film than Marty was. Marty was a supporting character. "
Well, it's true that George and Lorraine ending up together is what drives the bulk of the film, but the film is ultimately centered around the adventures of Marty and Doc and the time machine. George/Lorraine was ultimately a plot device, albeit the main one, in their adventures, but Glover sounds pretty delusional.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q7wGsVYydo
-
Maybe it's my age, and actually watching all 3 films in theaters on original release, but I can't fathom the possibility that anyone would prefer either of the sequels to the original.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
-
Maybe it's my age, and actually watching all 3 films in theaters on original release, but I can't fathom the possibility that anyone would prefer either of the sequels to the original.
I saw them in order as well. When the first one came out I was pretty obsessed with it for a long time.
I was proper excited when 2 and 3 came out.
25 years later - I went to see the Digitally Remastered cinema re-release and it was just perfect.
-
Maybe it's my age, and actually watching all 3 films in theaters on original release, but I can't fathom the possibility that anyone would prefer either of the sequels to the original.
Well, speaking as someone who saw the first two in the theater, and then the third as soon as it came out on VHS (as opposed to younger folks who probably saw all three in a short time span), the four-year gap between I and II means that many of us had seen I probably dozens of times before II came out, so we had possibly burned out on it, and getting not one, but two new BTTF's in a such time span made them seem that much more exciting, as they were new, and we finally had new Back to the Future movies to watch, instead of watching the original for the 84th, 85th, etc. time. :lol As much as I have watched them all over the years, I have still seen I way more than the other two, so I am more likely to watch II and III if I randomly feel like watching any of them.
-
I wish I knew about the remastered cinema re-release, I'd love to see any of the BTTF movies on the big screen.
The first movie is a classic, the second one is a masterful sequel that was incredibly enjoyable, I can't really pick one over the other. I think of the first two as one long movie and the third is more like a stand-alone sequel.
-
I wish I knew about the remastered cinema re-release, I'd love to see any of the BTTF movies on the big screen.
The first movie is a classic, the second one is a masterful sequel that was incredibly enjoyable, I can't really pick one over the other. I think of the first two as one long movie and the third is more like a stand-alone sequel.
Splicing them together would be cool except for the sudden change of Jennifers.
-
Although it does the proper trilogy thing of actually a story arc over the 3 films instead of two more films tacked on the end for the sake of it.
Too many films these days just get two sequels for the sake of it just so they can call it a trilogy.
-
For me, there is a drastic drop-off from the first to the sequels. It was obviously created to be a stand-alone film, and it works perfectly in that regard. I just can't see the greatness of the first in the sequels. For me, they practically don't exist. I only acknowledge the original.
-
I wish I knew about the remastered cinema re-release, I'd love to see any of the BTTF movies on the big screen.
The first movie is a classic, the second one is a masterful sequel that was incredibly enjoyable, I can't really pick one over the other. I think of the first two as one long movie and the third is more like a stand-alone sequel.
Splicing them together would be cool except for the sudden change of Jennifers.
I was thinking - apart from the very start of BTTF 1 - you don't see Jen again until the scene that starts part 2. If you cut out her scenes in part 1 then you could get away with it :P
-
But you'd also cut out major plot points.... And Roger Rabbit.... Oh wait, that was Part 2.
-
Chris Lloyd was Judge Doom in Back To The Future :p
-
Chris Lloyd was Judge Doom in Back To The Future :p
REMEMBER ME MARTY
WHEN I KILLED YOUR FATHER
-
I USED. THE.SAME.GUN !!!!
True Story - I watched Part 2 again recently and it was the first time ever I realised Biff said
" Two McFly's with the same gun. "
I never understod the line before because of how Tom Wilson delivers it.
-
???
"I suppose it's poetic justice: two McFlys...with the same gun."
He is gonna kill Marty with the same gun he killed younger George with in the alternate reality. I always thought it was obvious that that is what he meant.
-
I meant I didn't understand the actual words that he was saying.
He kinda mumbles it.
Of course I know he killed George. But i'm just talking about the way that Tom Wilson delivers the line as Biff.
I never *heard* what he said til recently..
:)
-
I don't think Biff is capable of mumbling.
-
Haha, right. Almost everything Biff said was at high volume and clear as day (or so I thought). He was basically your loud, obnoxious butthead. :p
-
I thought he was saying something like :
" So Mcfly ( talking to Marty ) Wanna save the gun ? "
As in : are you going to jump or am i going to shoot you.
You know how when you first hear something you assume that's what it is until you find out the actual line ?
That. :biggrin:
-
I thought he was saying something like :
" So Mcfly ( talking to Marty ) Wanna save the gun ? "
As in : are you going to jump or am i going to shoot you.
You know how when you first hear something you assume that's what it is until you find out the actual line ?
That. :biggrin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E781QE7ZQK8
-
My bro and I wanna overdub that scene in TDKR with the scene in monty Python with the guards.
When Bane says " They expect one of us in the wreckage brother ! "
It will be : No - i want you to stay here and make sure he doesn't leave !
:lol
-
For me, there is a drastic drop-off from the first to the sequels. It was obviously created to be a stand-alone film, and it works perfectly in that regard. I just can't see the greatness of the first in the sequels. For me, they practically don't exist. I only acknowledge the original.
I agree and that's how I feel about the Matrix films as well. The first movie works perfectly as a stand alone film, but then 2 and 3 are forced out (made both at the same time, just like the BTTF sequels) and they aren't up to par with the original.
-
Except that BTTF 2 & 3 are far far superior to Matrix 2 & 3.
-
Except that BTTF 2 & 3 are far far superior to Matrix 2 & 3.
Now that I definitely agree with.
-
I wish I knew about the remastered cinema re-release, I'd love to see any of the BTTF movies on the big screen.
The first movie is a classic, the second one is a masterful sequel that was incredibly enjoyable, I can't really pick one over the other. I think of the first two as one long movie and the third is more like a stand-alone sequel.
Splicing them together would be cool except for the sudden change of Jennifers.
My brother did that back in the day of VHS actually. All 3 movies, connected as one.
-
Anyone ever seen the Biff song??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdrIVAsz_HY
On another note...stupidest line/delivery in the entire series.... "I brought this message back from the future, and now it's erased....what does that mean???"
:facepalm:
She's a really good actress...but her delivery of this line (it doesn't help that the line is poorly written) just makes the character sound like a complete moron. It's right up there with..."FLASH! FLASH I LOVE YOU!! But we only have 14 hours to save the earth!"
-
It's a stupid line, but I allow it because it's just a set up for the line which follows.
"It mean the future hasn't been written yet!"
-
On a sidenote, Mary Steenburgen has aged better than Lea Thompson for sure.
-
True. Lea was super hot back in the day, but I've always liked Mary, too, and she's definitely aging better.
-
Speaking of noticing things really late, it took me a while to parse the information that Lorraine was hitting the Vodka several times during the early scene, connecting this scene with her hitting boozing it up in the car in 1955.
-
What, do we become assholes or something?
-
What, do we become assholes or something?
First thing that popped into my mind when I saw the title of this thread :lol
-
What, do we become assholes or something?
awesome, awesome line. This one had me rolling when he said it.
-
On a sidenote, Mary Steenburgen has aged better than Lea Thompson for sure.
I think they've both aged really well. Mary Steenburgen has actually improved with age though imo. Lea Thompson has held up very well though.
Actually, most of the cast has aged well. They're all right on the age they were with old age makeup, so it's funny comparing them now to what they looked like in the movies.
And BTTF1 wouldn't be as good without being part of the trilogy. Still an excellent movie, but 2 and 3 are what makes it incredible. There is no major dropoff at all with the sequels. Part 3 is the weakest of the three, but it's still great, and I actually enjoy it more each time I watch it now.
-
What, do we become assholes or something?
The best thing about that line for me is how it changed from the ending of I to the beginning of II. In I, after Marty says that, Doc comes back with "no no no" right away. In II he has to think about it for a second. :lol
-
I watched II yesterday, and totally remembered how giddy with excitement I was in the theater when I saw the reenactment of the end scene of I. Can't think of any other sequel I've been more excited to see.
-
You and me both. I remember me, my younger brother and two of our cousins going to see it on Thanksgiving Evening 1989 (that was sort of a tradition we did for a few years :tup :tup). We all loved the original and were all excited to see the sequel. And there were so many twists and turns in that second one that you it had you on the edge of your seat way more than you thought it would have. Good times. :coolio
-
It's kind of a tradition for me, my bro and my dad and maybe my grandad to go and see the latest Trek film in the cinema.
Dad loved ST 2009 as much as I did.
-
And BTTF1 wouldn't be as good without being part of the trilogy.
I believe it would be great if it was part of a trilogy or not.
-
One of my clearest memories of seeing the II one in theaters was when I realized that the guy who played Doc Brown was the same guy who played Judge Doom in Roger Rabbit. My mind was blown (just to put in context, I was just about 10 years old when Part II came out)
-
And he's also Commander Kruge in Star Trek III
-
I had some trouble with Commander Kruge. Christopher Lloyd's voice and mannerisms are so distinctive that I couldn't see Kruge as a Klingon. He really was just a guy in makeup and costume. Whenever he spoke or did anything, it was Doc Brown, or Judge Doom, or even Jim Ignatowski, who are really all the same character anyway. Kruge couldn't be them and be threatening.
When he and Kirk finally fight as the planet is crumbling and he shouts "Give me Genesis!" I was laughing. Kirk was fighting Doc Brown in makeup and a costume.
-
There was a comedian in the 80's named Maurice LaMarche (He does voices now on Futurama) who had a stand up routine about Christopher Lloyd sounding like his character Jim Ignatowski from Taxi as a Klingon.
"Captain Kirk, you won't give me the Genesis device?! Okey Doke!"
I laughed so damn hard. So Yead Bob, nobody can get that voice out of our minds. :lol
-
There was a comedian in the 80's named Maurice LaMarche (He does voices now on Futurama) who had a stand up routine about Christopher Lloyd sounding like his character Jim Ignatowski from Taxi as a Klingon.
"Captain Kirk, you won't give me the Genesis device?! Okey Doke!"
I laughed so damn hard. So Yead Bob, nobody can get that voice out of our minds. :lol
THIS was exactly the problem I had with the Star Trek film. lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk
-
There was a comedian in the 80's named Maurice LaMarche (He does voices now on Futurama) who had a stand up routine about Christopher Lloyd sounding like his character Jim Ignatowski from Taxi as a Klingon.
"Captain Kirk, you won't give me the Genesis device?! Okey Doke!"
I laughed so damn hard. So Yead Bob, nobody can get that voice out of our minds. :lol
THIS was exactly the problem I had with the Star Trek film. lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk
That was hilarious. :lol
-
There was a comedian in the 80's named Maurice LaMarche (He does voices now on Futurama) who had a stand up routine about Christopher Lloyd sounding like his character Jim Ignatowski from Taxi as a Klingon.
"Captain Kirk, you won't give me the Genesis device?! Okey Doke!"
I laughed so damn hard. So Yead Bob, nobody can get that voice out of our minds. :lol
I remember that routine! He started it by saying at first, you couldn't really tell who the actor was because everyone was speaking Klingon, but the second they switched to English, it was totally Reverend Jim. :rollin
-
THIS was exactly the problem I had with the Star Trek film. lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk)
:rollin :rollin :rollin
-
Exactly! :lol
-
I'm glad it wasn't just me.
-
But yeah - Doc shoulda known at the end of Back To The Future 1 that you can change the future in the past.
The ending was just a joke and then they were stuck with it.
Also :
NEVER EVER REBOOT OR REMAKE THIS FRANCHISE THANK YOU.
Let's all imagine how bad a "reboot" would be.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
According to the "rules" set by BTTF1, there is one timeline, that has a delay in updating due to changes. So that alternate 1985 is actually replacing/overwriting the original 1985, not creating a new and separate timeline branch as the chalk board would imply. Therefore it was fine to leave Jennifer there. And when Biff returns to the future, he hobbles away and dies and fades away as Marty almost did in pt 1 (partially in a deleted scene that is included with the DVD/Bluray), because he no longer exists in the new 2015 that is starting to update around them (let's ignore the paradox of him no longer existing to take the Delorean in the first place, which would self-cancel and create a loop).
There are of course several other major flaws and inconsistencies in the way they handle time travel in those movies, but that one wasn't really one of the bigger problems. Since I don't consider them hardcore scifi movies, it doesn't affect my enjoyment of them though.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
According to the "rules" set by BTTF1, there is one timeline, that has a delay in updating due to changes. So that alternate 1985 is actually replacing/overwriting the original 1985, not creating a new and separate timeline branch as the chalk board would imply. Therefore it was fine to leave Jennifer there. And when Biff returns to the future, he hobbles away and dies and fades away as Marty almost did in pt 1 (partially in a deleted scene that is included with the DVD/Bluray), because he no longer exists in the new 2015 that is starting to update around them (let's ignore the paradox of him no longer existing to take the Delorean in the first place, which would self-cancel and create a loop).
There are of course several other major flaws and inconsistencies in the way they handle time travel in those movies, but that one wasn't really one of the bigger problems. Since I don't consider them hardcore scifi movies, it doesn't affect my enjoyment of them though.
So then why doesn't the rest of 2015 change as fast as Biff died?
Speaking of Delorean. That reminds me of another problem I have with the third movie. Marty arrives in 1885 and rips a fuel line. Doc is freaking out like crazy. Why? Doc now has a back up Delorean (the one he arrived in) sitting in the cave, and it should have an in tact fuel line on it. He could have just left a note on the windshield for his 1955 self that read "FYI, needs fuel line". I'm sure in 1955 fuel lines were available on every corner drug store.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
Okay, but Marty, Doc and Jennifer were still in the original 2015, which would stay as it was until they traveled through time again and entered the alternate reality.
Of course, that leads to the question of old Biff returning to the original 2015, not the alternate, and you could argue that he was returning from the original 1955, so he would go back to the original 2015. The time line doesn't change from original to alternate until one of the key players involved travels through time, so once Biff returned to 2015, the alternate reality kicked in for him, but not for the others since they hadn't actually traveled through time again yet. Yes, it is a bit of a stretch, but I am okay with it, since it was for the greater good of the story.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
Okay, but Marty, Doc and Jennifer were still in the original 2015, which would stay as it was until they traveled through time again and entered the alternate reality.
Of course, that leads to the question of old Biff returning to the original 2015, not the alternate, and you could argue that he was returning from the original 1955, so he would go back to the original 2015. The time line doesn't change from original to alternate until one of the key players involved travels through time, so once Biff returned to 2015, the alternate reality kicked in, but you aren't actually gonna be in it until you travel through time again.
Wouldn't the Delorean itself be the key player, not the passengers on board? As soon as Biff handed himself the almanac, the future was set in motion. Wherever the Delorean went from that point on should have been subject to that alternate future.
-
Wouldn't the Delorean itself be the key player, not the passengers on board? As soon as Biff handed himself the almanac, the future was set in motion. Wherever the Delorean went from that point on should have been subject to that alternate future.
That could be argued, yes, and I get what you are saying. but again, I am okay with the liberties they took with regards to this.
-
I agree that Part 2 has the best scene of the series with Doc explaining the alternate timelines.
That's where the second movie fails MISERABLY. Doc explains that when Biff returned to 1955 with the almanac, the timeline skewed into another tangent creating an alternate 1985. So riddle me this. How then did Biff give himself the Almanac in 1955 and then have the ability to return to 2015 to drop off the Delorean? He would have ended up in the alternate 2015 and Marty, Doc, and Jennifer would have been left stranded in their alternate (original) 2015.
According to the "rules" set by BTTF1, there is one timeline, that has a delay in updating due to changes. So that alternate 1985 is actually replacing/overwriting the original 1985, not creating a new and separate timeline branch as the chalk board would imply. Therefore it was fine to leave Jennifer there. And when Biff returns to the future, he hobbles away and dies and fades away as Marty almost did in pt 1 (partially in a deleted scene that is included with the DVD/Bluray), because he no longer exists in the new 2015 that is starting to update around them (let's ignore the paradox of him no longer existing to take the Delorean in the first place, which would self-cancel and create a loop).
There are of course several other major flaws and inconsistencies in the way they handle time travel in those movies, but that one wasn't really one of the bigger problems. Since I don't consider them hardcore scifi movies, it doesn't affect my enjoyment of them though.
So then why doesn't the rest of 2015 change as fast as Biff died?
Speaking of Delorean. That reminds me of another problem I have with the third movie. Marty arrives in 1885 and rips a fuel line. Doc is freaking out like crazy. Why? Doc now has a back up Delorean (the one he arrived in) sitting in the cave, and it should have an in tact fuel line on it. He could have just left a note on the windshield for his 1955 self that read "FYI, needs fuel line". I'm sure in 1955 fuel lines were available on every corner drug store.
1. They get into the Delorean literally just as Biff gets out, so it may not have had time to change yet. And even if it was changing, it may not have changed noticeably. After all, it was just a generic street, and they weren't doing anything.
2. I believe the official answer is that they didn't want to disturb the Delorean, knowing that it has already been used to take Marty back, so they didn't want to risk changing anything and jeopardizing that.
Also, I heard from somewhere that the gas was taken out of it before putting it in storage to preserve the car (which is why it needed to be refueled in 1955, if I recall?), so they may not have still had that fuel available anyway. Do you really want that fuel sitting in a Delorean in a mine for 70 years? Doc may have used the fuel in 1885 for other things before Marty arrived too.
-
Right, let's assume that Biff did return to the alternate 2015. He obviously made a point to return to the same spot where he left, and since Marty, Doc and Jennifer were where they were, it was easy for them to just jump back in the time machine and go back to 1985. Even if it was the alternate 2015, their time in it would have been mere minutes, and nothing in the area where they were changed enough for them to notice, especially since their focus at that point was not their surroundings, but getting young Jennifer out of Old Marty and Old Jennifer's house and back down the street to the time machine.
-
As for 1885, yes, there should have been two Deloreans once Marty went there from 1955 (just like there were two Docs and two Martys in 1955 in II for a while), but again, there would have been no story in III had they just jumped back in the other Delorean and went back to 1985. How boring would that have been? ;)
-
Also, I heard from somewhere that the gas was taken out of it before putting it in storage to preserve the car (which is why it needed to be refueled in 1955, if I recall?), so they may not have still had that fuel available anyway. Do you really want that fuel sitting in a Delorean in a mine for 70 years? Doc may have used the fuel in 1885 for other things before Marty arrived too.
Not that it *really* matters what the explanation is (it's a fucking movie, after all), I like this explanation. Fuel does get stale over time, so naturally he would have emptied out the tank before hibernating the car. After all, the tires didn't survive either. He could have stolen the fuel injection manifold from the hibernated DeLorean, but that would have been seriously mucking with the future (and thus Marty).
-
Why on earth does anyone care about how the movie handles time travel? The paradoxes and logical missteps are well-known, but it's a feel-good comedy. Who cares?
-
Because we're geeks. It's what we do.
-
I get giddy every single time I see that scene in BTTF3 where the open up the mine and see the preserved Delorean that's been sitting there since 1885. At that point, the last thing on my mind is time paradoxes and fuel.
But I still enjoy discussing these things because I'm a huge nerd.
-
Because we're geeks. It's what we do.
You can't overthink these things. When Darth Vader comes down from the Planet Vulcan to play you a Van Halen tune, you don't overthink it, you just do what he says.
-
Why on earth does anyone care about how the movie handles time travel?
Because I don't follow any sports that I can bitch about with others.
-
Because we're geeks. It's what we do.
Pffft you call that geeky? Get back to me when you're recreating the entire BTTF2 2015 set in 3D....... :blob:
-
Because we're geeks. It's what we do.
Pffft you call that geeky? Get back to me when you're recreating the entire BTTF2 2015 set in 3D....... :blob:
Can you elaborate?
-
Because we're geeks. It's what we do.
You can't overthink these things. When Darth Vader comes down from the Planet Vulcan to play you a Van Halen tune, you don't overthink it, you just do what he says.
I don't know. I don't think I can take that kind of rejection.
-
You can't overthink these things. When Darth Vader comes down from the Planet Vulcan to play you a Van Halen tune, you don't overthink it, you just do what he says.
:rollin :clap: