Back to the Future (1985)

[Cobb Salad]

Damn that Sports Almanac! :-)

[AimingforYoko]

Some pundit theorized that the missing '94 WS threw everything off.

[MBJ]

Growing up I always thought 2nd movie, 1st movie, then 3rd movie in that order.  To be honest I never liked the third and never watched it. My brother enjoys it though.  Now that I'm older (and it's actually 2016) I guess I should try watching it again with an open heart.

About 5 or so years ago, I took my brother to a big theatre in Toronto see BTTF 1 on the big screen.  It was SUCH a treat.  The people who attended were all true BTTF nerds who were extremely well behaved and laughed at all the great jokes.  And everyone cheered and clapped when George punched Biff.  What stood out the most to me, I think, was that Crispin was so genius as George and pretty much everything George and Biff did made me laugh.

I realized how amazing and wonderful BTTF 1 is.  On a television screen, you really don't notice as much.  Blowing the movie back up to that size made me notice all the fine detail and made me really appreciate the film for what a great classic it is.  I wonder how I'd feel with BTTF 2 also shown on the big screen, but now I realize that BTTF 1 might be better.  Oh , if only there wasn't that conflict and they kept Crispin for the second movie I think it'd be a vast improvement.

[Traveller519]

On 11/8/2015 at 11:13 AM, Stacey1014 said:

I'm wondering what happened with Biff between 1985 and 2015. He seemed to have a bit of his 1955 personality in 2015 that was missing in the new 1985.

Got old and cantankerous. Happens to the best of 'em!

[stonehaven]

Netflix has all three movies now so I watched the First one last night. Still makes me laugh and provides great escape...and MJF had great physical comedy chops.

I do think the one line that I quote the most is "Is there something wrong with the Earth's gravitational pull?"

 

[scarynikki12]

I get way too much enjoyment out of everyone assuming Marty's wearing a life preserver.

[supposebly]

I will always crack up at: I am your density.

[Shannon L.]

1 hour ago, supposebly said:

I will always crack up at: I am your density.

That's the line my husband and I keep quoting.

There's a thing going around on  FB where you post 10 pictures over 10 days of a movie that was really meaningful to you in your lifetime so far. Most of them I've seen are really serious films, but, I'd I did it, I would include this one on my list.

[supposebly]

I just re-watched and I noticed something I've never noticed before. At the very beginning when the camera moves around Doc's house, one of the clocks has a guy hanging from the hands.

And I've seen the movie many times.

I don't know if it's particularly meaningful but it has great re-watch value and it's probably one of the very few movies I don't get tired of.

[VCRTracking]

1 hour ago, supposebly said:

I just re-watched and I noticed something I've never noticed before. At the very beginning when the camera moves around Doc's house, one of the clocks has a guy hanging from the hands.

And I've seen the movie many times.

I don't know if it's particularly meaningful but it has great re-watch value and it's probably one of the very few movies I don't get tired of.

It's based on the famous 1923 silent comedy SAFETY LAST starring comedian Harold Lloyd which also inspired the climax with Doc hanging off the clock tower:

[Giuseppe]

I love this trilogy (part 3 not as much as 1 and 2, but I still enjoy it). I remember loving and being slightly obsessed with all the "future" stuff and inventions in Part 2 when I first saw it. I must have been 10 or 11 at the time, and can't remember if I had even seen Part 1 yet. But one thing has always bugged me about Part 2, and I bring it up anytime I'm discussing it: I feel like Marty and Jennifer could never have encountered their future selves, because if they'd left 1985 and instantly appeared in 2015, people in 2015 would have thought Marty and Jennifer disappeared 30 years ago, as they would no longer be in the timeline that they traveled to! The argument I always get back is, well it's because they eventually came back to 1985, so they would have been there in 2015 to meet their future selves, but I still say that doesn't make sense because no way future Marty and Jennifer would've forgotten that their younger selves were arriving that day.  I know that seems like a trivial hill to die on, but die on it I will!

In any case, I still love Part 2, though I usually skip the alterna-1985 part and pick up again once they get back to 1955.

[Luckylyn]

Eric Stoltz vs Michael J Fox Footage

 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Luckylyn

[Cobb Salad]

@Giuseppe

My first time watching Part II in the theatre my thought was when Marty was watching his future self was “I guess he made it back to 1985 ok” then took the rest of the movie as entertainment, but yeah, I’ve been thinking the same thing as you describe.  I like Part II for the fun look at what “2015” looks like from the late 80s and that’s it.  Part III is a better movie IMO.  Realistically if time travel was possible, at the end of the original when Doc returns to 1985 and tells Marty while in a tizzy how his kids must be saved, the real solution is for Doc either solve the problem while initially in 2015 or find someone else to help him.  If he brings Marty and Jennifer with him to 2015 then the theme becomes where have they been for 30 years and how have they not aged.   I forget where I read it but some scientist also mentioned how what was depicted in Part II was impossible if someone travelled through time.  The filmmakers didn’t plan this as a trilogy initially but the success of the original forced a sequel so that last scene shoehorned them into the start of the next movie.  I suspect there may have been a different closing/opening scene if a trilogy was in the works from the start.  

[Guest]

On 6/15/2020 at 8:55 PM, Giuseppe said:

I love this trilogy (part 3 not as much as 1 and 2, but I still enjoy it). I remember loving and being slightly obsessed with all the "future" stuff and inventions in Part 2 when I first saw it. I must have been 10 or 11 at the time, and can't remember if I had even seen Part 1 yet. But one thing has always bugged me about Part 2, and I bring it up anytime I'm discussing it: I feel like Marty and Jennifer could never have encountered their future selves, because if they'd left 1985 and instantly appeared in 2015, people in 2015 would have thought Marty and Jennifer disappeared 30 years ago, as they would no longer be in the timeline that they traveled to! The argument I always get back is, well it's because they eventually came back to 1985, so they would have been there in 2015 to meet their future selves, but I still say that doesn't make sense because no way future Marty and Jennifer would've forgotten that their younger selves were arriving that day.  I know that seems like a trivial hill to die on, but die on it I will!

In any case, I still love Part 2, though I usually skip the alterna-1985 part and pick up again once they get back to 1955.

I can’t spend too much time thinking about how time travel works in the movies because it’s pretty inconsistent. Every solution I come up with is contradicted by another part of the movie.

Your post reminded me of the Big Bang Theory episode debate about it.

 

[Giuseppe]

22 hours ago, Cobb Salad said:

If he brings Marty and Jennifer with him to 2015 then the theme becomes where have they been for 30 years and how have they not aged.

Exactly. I always thought a better plot for the first half of part 2 would have been for Doc to get Marty and Jennifer to go to the future with him for some other reason not related to their family, then when they get there they realize that they've been "missing" for the past 30 years. Like, Doc could have come back and told Marty that the Cubs finally won the series, but 2015 Marty couldn't go to the game because he was sick or injured or something. 1985 Marty could've convinced Doc to take them to the future now so that Marty could be at the game, They still could've run afoul of Griff and done the whole courthouse hoverboard chase thing, which old Biff sees and starts wondering why the guy looks so much like Marty. Marty could still get the idea to buy the almanac. Jennifer could still have been put to sleep, but she's found by old Lorraine and old George instead of the police, and they freak out and take her home. Marty and Doc still witness this and realize their mistake, so they have to miss the game to rush to George and Lorraine's to rescue Jennifer while old Biff still overhears all this and puts it together, follows Marty and Doc, steals the time machine, and then the rest of the movie is set up the same way but the future part makes a bit more sense. I guess I put way too much thought into that, lol.

9 hours ago, Dani said:

Your post reminded me of the Big Bang Theory episode debate about it.

Ha, I've never watched Big Bang Theory, but I've wondered about that scenario too. I just fanwanked that as when old Biff got back to 2015, the world spontaneously DID change around them to match the new corrupt Biff timeline, but at that moment, Marty, Doc, and Jennifer were already outside the house running back to the car, so they didn't have time to notice anything changed. Big fanwank for sure, but it's all I got, lol.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Giuseppe said:

Ha, I've never watched Big Bang Theory, but I've wondered about that scenario too. I just fanwanked that as when old Biff got back to 2015, the world spontaneously DID change around them to match the new corrupt Biff timeline, but at that moment, Marty, Doc, and Jennifer were already outside the house running back to the car, so they didn't have time to notice anything changed. Big fanwank for sure, but it's all I got, lol.

After thinking about it for way too long I think that with future time travel in the movie the time traveler sees a world unaffected by their own time travel. Anything else would create a paradox. So once Marty and Jennifer leave 1985 their future becomes in flux and they can’t see a future that is the result of choices they haven’t made yet. So instead they travel to a future that would exist if nothing changes. 
 

Edited June 18, 2020 by Guest

[Cobb Salad]

1 hour ago, Dani said:

After thinking about it for way too long I think that with future time travel in the movie the time traveler sees a world unaffected by their own time travel anything else would create a paradox. So once Marty and Jennifer leave 1985 their future becomes in flux and they can’t see a future that is the result of choices they haven’t made yet. So instead they travel to a future that would exist if nothing changes. 
 

Exactly.  The only way that 1985 Jennifer would be able to learn she married Marty at the Chapel of Love is if someone else (like Doc Brown for example) brought back proof of that happening and she never travelled through time.   She can’t see it happening while in the future because she didn’t do it before she made the trip.  
The best movie IMO that I’ve seen future time travel illustrated well is The Time Machine (the 1960 version) - when George stops for a visit in the future he comes across the son of his friend that we met at the start of the movie.  The son mentions how his father looked after his friends property for years after the friend (George) disappeared, the son never knows he is talking to that person. 

[txhorns79]

On 6/18/2020 at 8:42 AM, Giuseppe said:

I just fanwanked that as when old Biff got back to 2015, the world spontaneously DID change around them to match the new corrupt Biff timeline, but at that moment, Marty, Doc, and Jennifer were already outside the house running back to the car, so they didn't have time to notice anything changed. Big fanwank for sure, but it's all I got, lol.

I think that's a decent theory.  You can say that old Biff returning to 2015 completed the circle, so that was what caused things to change instantaneously. 

The thing that always got me was how wildly unobservant Marty and Doc were upon returning to the alternate 1985.  I mean, Marty notices that there are now bars on the windows at Jennifer's house, but he doesn't question the junker smashed up car right next to the porch, or how his street at Lyon Estates suddenly has about a gazillion For Sale signs all over the place?   

[blueray]

My take on the time travel in the 2nd one is:

Marty, Jennifer and Doc travel to a future where they didn't leave or change any decisions. Let's call them group B, Group A being the timeline they didn't go to the future. Group B, goes to Group A's future, not their own. By doing this they created a new timeline for themselves one where they went to the future. This also applies to Group A Biff who went back to 1955 and created a C timeline. When Group B goes "back" to 1985, they are in C's timeline. The future would be of C's time not theirs or A's so they have to go back to 1955 to stop this timeline from existing. 

It's confusing but an enjoyable movie. As for them not noticing alternate 1985 they are pretty obvious. And than just leave Jennifer (and Einstein) there.

[VCRTracking]

Okay I get what everybody is talking about now. It's like in the Star Trek TNG episode "Yesterday's Enterprise" where they come on the time warp and the previous Enterprise (NCC 1701 C) comes through from 20 years in the past and that causes the whole present timeline to change where the Federation has been at war with the Klingons for years. The only way to turn things back to normal is to send the old Enterprise back through the timewarp to immediately  die in battle with the Romulans like they were supposed to.

[Spartan Girl]

Since Back to the Future is hitting a milestone of 40 years, I think it’s time that this classic and its sequels gets its own thread.

Theres so much I’d like to say. How Marty McFly/Michael J. Fox was my first (live action) movie crush. How George punching Biff in the face still gives me rush, even when we’re living in a world where bullies getting their comeuppance has become an impossible dream…

For now, I’ll limit it to saying I live all three movies, and I felt like it stuck the landing perfectly. I know some people thought Part II sucked, but I thought it was great that they took a deeper look at more consequences of time travel rather than just the looming threat of Marty never being born.

Edited March 7 by Spartan Girl

[tearknee]

I like how Doc Brown points out "WE CAN'T! If we travel into the future from *this* point in time, it will be the future of *this* reality!..."

 

And then you have a cold chill as you wonder... what would 2015-A look like even though Biff-A is dead (The Bobs confirm he's shot by Lorraine-A at some point in the 1990s-A).

Edited March 7 by tearknee

[tearknee]

"... We must succeed!":

https://youtu.be/rTq8mlGOsho

 

[Fool to cry]

 

[Sarah 103]

I love the first movie. I think it is close to cinematic perfection. There's rarely a wasted line, moment or shot. There is a payoff to even the smallest detail. Almost everything that is in there is there for a reason. The pacing is nearly flawless. (I'm keeping this short because I could gush about this movie for pages and pages). 

I absolutely hate the second one. (I know it has its fans and that's okay. People can like what they like) If I wanted to rewatch the first movie, I would rewatch the first movie. I thought I hated all the different timelines and hopping around through time, but then I read the first/an earlier draft, I realized my actual problem was that it spends too long in 1955 repeating the first movie. In the draft I read, Biff gets the Almanac in 1968, which means instead of reliving the first movie, Marty and the audience get to experience a new adventure in 1968, which absolutely improves the movie 1000% percent. 

The third movie is enjoyable. It's not as good as the first one, it isn't as bad as the second one. I absolutely adore how lovingly and faithfully they recreated the cinematic world of the "Old West."  When I saw the train station I was thinking, "that's where Frank Miller's gang waits for him in High Noon." The party in town for the clock tower was pure My Darling Clementine. The saloon was in everything. 

[Fool to cry]

21 minutes ago, Sarah 103 said:

I love the first movie. I think it is close to cinematic perfection. There's rarely a wasted line, moment or shot. There is a payoff to even the smallest detail. Almost everything that is in there is there for a reason. The pacing is nearly flawless. (I'm keeping this short because I could gush about this movie for pages and pages). 

I absolutely hate the second one. (I know it has its fans and that's okay. People can like what they like) If I wanted to rewatch the first movie, I would rewatch the first movie. I thought I hated all the different timelines and hopping around through time, but then I read the first/an earlier draft, I realized my actual problem was that it spends too long in 1955 repeating the first movie. In the draft I read, Biff gets the Almanac in 1968, which means instead of reliving the first movie, Marty and the audience get to experience a new adventure in 1968, which absolutely improves the movie 1000% percent. 

 I thought going back and seeing everything from a different angle was cool but I can see your point. In the commentary Zemeckis and Gale said if they had gotten Crispin back they could have done some real fun stuff with George and two Martys running around. They should have paid him what he wanted!

Edited March 7 by Fool to cry

[Shannon L.]

I didn't mind the second or third movies, but the first one was excellent.  Even today, it holds up really well.  I already loved Michael J. Fox from Family Ties and this just cemented it.  

A personal reason for me loving the movie is because of dad.  He's not a big movie person.  He's seen some that he likes, but overall, he just doesn't care about movies.  When this came out, we were on family vacation and we talked him into taking us to see it and to see him smiling and laughing through the whole thing just made my day.  

 

[tearknee]

3 hours ago, Fool to cry said:

 I thought going back and seeing everything from a different angle was cool but I can see your point. In the commentary Zemeckis and Gale said if they had gotten Crispin back they could have done some real fun stuff with George and two Martys running around. They should have paid him what he wanted!

The Bobs screwed Crispin. He was 100% right to take them to court.

[Spartan Girl]

George’s character arc is one of the best parts of the first movie. He starts out as this pathetic guy that’s too scared and insecure to stand up for himself. He winds up forming a friendship with Marty (who he doesn’t know is his future son), and is encouraged to start putting himself out there. Him trying to woo Lorraine is so endearingly adorkable — “I’m your density!” And his defining moment isn’t just the moment where he snaps and decks Biff, it’s the moment when he catches Biff trying to assault Lorraine, and instead of letting Biff scare him off, he holds his ground and tells Biff to leave her alone. It’s one thing to play act the hero, it’s quite another to actually put yourself in harms way and stand up for another person.

Then there’s the bit at the dance when that jerkass tries to cut in with Lorraine. He briefly regresses into his old self, but Lorraine calls after him, Marty’s words of encouragement have stayed with him. And with that, he regains his new spine, pushes jerkass aside, and we get the movie kiss to end them all as the score and “Earth Angel” crescendos just beautifully…

God, I love that movie.

[Fool to cry]

I wonder if the culture shock would be as great if a Gen Z in 2025 went back to 1995?

[baldryanr]

A Gen Z person would be catatonic if they were sent to 1995.  No smartphones, very few cellphones, the internet is still new (let's go Netscape!), no streaming, floppy hair, very few tattoos, and the US, at least, was in pretty good shape. 

[tearknee]

On the upside, WBS

11 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

George’s character arc is one of the best parts of the first movie. He starts out as this pathetic guy that’s too scared and insecure to stand up for himself. He winds up forming a friendship with Marty (who he doesn’t know is his future son), and is encouraged to start putting himself out there. Him trying to woo Lorraine is so endearingly adorkable — “I’m your density!” And his defining moment isn’t just the moment where he snaps and decks Biff, it’s the moment when he catches Biff trying to assault Lorraine, and instead of letting Biff scare him off, he holds his ground and tells Biff to leave her alone. It’s one thing to play act the hero, it’s quite another to actually put yourself in harms way and stand up for another person.

Then there’s the bit at the dance when that jerkass tries to cut in with Lorraine. He briefly regresses into his old self, but Lorraine calls after him, Marty’s words of encouragement have stayed with him. And with that, he regains his new spine, pushes jerkass aside, and we get the movie kiss to end them all as the score and “Earth Angel” crescendos just beautifully…

God, I love that movie.

And George could have easily just walked away and let Lorraine be raped (and worse given who Biff _is_ as a person, pregnant with Biff spawn). But, he doesn't.

[baldryanr]

1 hour ago, tearknee said:

And George could have easily just walked away and let Lorraine be raped (and worse given who Biff _is_ as a person, pregnant with Biff spawn). But, he doesn't.

And they're such forgiving people they don't press charges (to be fair, that's probably hard to do in the 50s) and even end up befriending (or at least be very cordial to) the guy over the ensuing decades.  You'd think that would be a deal breaker, but apparently not.

[tearknee]

6 minutes ago, baldryanr said:

And they're such forgiving people they don't press charges (to be fair, that's probably hard to do in the 50s) and even end up befriending (or at least be very cordial to) the guy over the ensuing decades.  You'd think that would be a deal breaker, but apparently not.

Depending on how long the SoL is - the possibility of charges can be used to keep Biff mellow and the media is always useful, too, given George is an author.

[AgathaC]

I didn’t see this one when it came out as I was still in the age range where my parents only took me to kid movies. But we went to a week-long family reunion at the beach every summer and that year, I remember my teen cousins went to see it and were absolutely raving about it. We rented it when it came out on VHS and I was obsessed.

As an adult, I have a lot more appreciation for the plot construction, character development and all the details. It’s just a perfect film.

I could watch George rescue Loraine and punch Biff over and over. In addition to his growth and bravery, I like that in that moment, Loraine tries to help George. She was no physical match for Biff, but instead of running away or just cowering, she jumps right in. (Leading to Biff shoving her and triggering George’s rage.)

They don’t show quite as much of her, but there are little moments and hints that Loraine is attracted to George even before he rescues her. She’s just blinded by “Calvin” and distracted by having to fend off Biff.

Can’t say I’m a fan of the other two. Three was ok, but not one I felt compelled to rewatch much. Two I just found frustrating.

[Giuseppe]

On 3/7/2025 at 9:56 AM, tearknee said:

I like how Doc Brown points out "WE CAN'T! If we travel into the future from *this* point in time, it will be the future of *this* reality!..."

Yes, they got this part right. But what will always annoy me about part 2 is - and I am going to die on this hill - Marty and Jennifer could NOT have met their future selves in 2015, because Doc took them out of that timeline! When Doc went to 2015 by himself, sure, he could see what was happening with future Marty and Jennifer and their kids because they had been left in 1985, but the moment Doc came back and then took them back to 2015, Marty and Jennifer ceased to exist in the timeline to which they were traveling. When they got there, Marty and Jennifer would have been missing for the past 30 years.

Whenever I make this point to anyone, I'm sometimes hit with the argument "well it's because they eventually came back". But no, that doesn't wash with me. An episode of Ducktales funnily enough titled "Duck to the Future" gets this concept right. Magica De Spell zaps Scrooge into the future, where Huey Dewey and Louie have taken over McDuck enterprises. When Scrooge confronts them, they don't believe it's him because, obviously to them, their Uncle Scrooge disappeared 30 years ago. I always thought it was funny that a cartoon got this right when the movie did not. 

That said, I actually like part 2...at least up until they get back to ALT 1985. I loved seeing all the concepts of future stuff, and at one point I even tried to design my own line of hoverboards (I was 11, lol). 

Edited March 8 by Giuseppe

[tearknee]

1 hour ago, AgathaC said:

I could watch George rescue Loraine and punch Biff over and over. In addition to his growth and bravery, I like that in that moment, Loraine tries to help George. She was no physical match for Biff, but instead of running away or just cowering, she jumps right in. (Leading to Biff shoving her and triggering George’s rage.)

 

Sadly, it's a movie :'(

(I'm thinking of the Tate-Folger-Sebring-Parent murders - Sharon's "George" got shot for protesting the Manson groupies' rough treatment of her.)

What happened to Isabelle Fuhrmann's character Tessa in that show happened to me (though the guy in this car used prick tease as in the show but got worse from there as he wasn't under the FCC's naughty words rules...)

[baldryanr]

51 minutes ago, tearknee said:

Sadly, it's a movie :'(

Yup - in real life Biff confronts George the next day and pounds him into paste.  George had no fighting skills (see his pathetic first attempt to punch Biff) and only landed his KO punch because Biff was distracted.   Newly acquired self confidence won't save you from a bigger and stronger asshole determined to beat you up.

[Fool to cry]

3 hours ago, Giuseppe said:

Yes, they got this part right. But what will always annoy me about part 2 is - and I am going to die on this hill - Marty and Jennifer could NOT have met their future selves in 2015, because Doc took them out of that timeline! When Doc went to 2015 by himself, sure, he could see what was happening with future Marty and Jennifer and their kids because they had been left in 1985, but the moment Doc came back and then took them back to 2015, Marty and Jennifer ceased to exist in the timeline to which they were traveling. When they got there, Marty and Jennifer would have been missing for the past 30 years.

Whenever I make this point to anyone, I'm sometimes hit with the argument "well it's because they eventually came back". But no, that doesn't wash with me. An episode of Ducktales funnily enough titled "Duck to the Future" gets this concept right. Magica De Spell zaps Scrooge into the future, where Huey Dewey and Louie have taken over McDuck enterprises. When Scrooge confronts them, they don't believe it's him because, obviously to them, their Uncle Scrooge disappeared 30 years ago. I always thought it was funny that a cartoon got this right when the movie did not. 

That said, I actually like part 2...at least up until they get back to ALT 1985. I loved seeing all the concepts of future stuff, and at one point I even tried to design my own line of hoverboards (I was 11, lol).

My theory is as long as the DeLorean was functional there was still a chance that Marty and Jennifer would return to 1985, so the ripple effect would be slow and old Marty and Jennifer would keep existing in 2015 for a time. Just like as long as there was still a chance that George and Lorraine could still fall in love at the dance and Marty would still be born he was able to last a week until then before he starts disappearing. If Marty and Jennifer were killed in 2015, or if the DeLorean was destroyed then their future selves would disappear instantly.

[Sarah 103]

19 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

And his defining moment isn’t just the moment where he snaps and decks Biff, it’s the moment when he catches Biff trying to assault Lorraine, and instead of letting Biff scare him off, he holds his ground and tells Biff to leave her alone.

This is the perfect example of set up and pay off that the movie excels in doing. When Marty is going over the plan with George, you can see how upset George gets at the thought of Marty trying to take advantage of Lorraine. Sexually assaulting a woman is pretty much his absolute red line/line in the sand/international enough line. It makes sense that George would react that way and try to come to Lorraine's defense even though it's Biff in the car; he knows he's outmatched and this could end very badly for him, but he does it anyway.   

3 hours ago, baldryanr said:

Yup - in real life Biff confronts George the next day and pounds him into paste. 

I'm not sure. At the dance, it seems everyone now views George with respect. With other people around him, he may not be as easy a target as he was before. 

[AgathaC]

7 minutes ago, Sarah 103 said:

I'm not sure. At the dance, it seems everyone now views George with respect. With other people around him, he may not be as easy a target as he was before. 

Besides, now the whole school knows the town “weenie” punched him out. Kind of takes away some of his intimidation power.

[Giuseppe]

55 minutes ago, Fool to cry said:

My theory is as long as the DeLorean was functional there was still a chance that Marty and Jennifer would return to 1985, so the ripple effect would be slow and old Marty and Jennifer would keep existing in 2015 for a time. Just like as long as there was still a chance that George and Lorraine could still fall in love at the dance and Marty would still be born he was able to last a week until then before he starts disappearing. If Marty and Jennifer were killed in 2015, or if the DeLorean was destroyed then their future selves would disappear instantly.

It's an interesting theory, actually. If I buy into a ripple effect, then Doc's initial solo trip to 2015 creates a timeline where M+J exist as their older selves. When he goes back to 1985 and grabs M+J and takes them right back to 2015, the ripple effect still has future M+J there, but had 1985 M+J stayed in 2015 for longer than a day, then 2015 M+J and their family may have started to disappear. I can almost see that, but still not quite buying it. This is why time travel is so sticky. Its' a concept that fascinates me, but it will invariably create plot holes in storytelling. I still feel the movie messed up. These things happen. I'm not mad about it...but as I said, I will die on this hill, lol.

Honestly, though, that whole excuse and plot for getting Marty to 2015 to save his kids was pretty poorly conceived. I wish they'd come up with a more plausible reason to get Marty to visit 2015. Hell, he could've just asked Doc to take him because he was curious to see what it was like. He still could've run afoul of Griff and his gang, dispensed of them, and bought the almanac. Old Biff still could have encountered Marty and been befuddled, thinking he'd seen a ghost, and followed him and Doc, eventually overhearing about the almanac and the time machine and devising his plan. Maybe after Old Biff overhears Doc admonish Marty about the almanac, Marty convinces Doc to go see his parents really quick before they return, and when he does he realizes that George and Lorraine are sad and depressed and have had a hard time because they think Marty went missing all those years ago, and he realizes he needs to get back to 1985, but in the time he was checking on his parents, old Biff stole the time machine with the almanac and came back, and then we're right back to alt 1985 and the rest of the movie proceeds as is. The way it was written though just seemed like an excuse to get the cast made up to look like old people, lol.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

4 hours ago, AgathaC said:

Besides, now the whole school knows the town “weenie” punched him out. Kind of takes away some of his intimidation power.

There's a piece where, like all bullies, Biff liked easy targets. He tries it with "Calvin" too, because Marty's first intervention is to tell Biff to back off and leave Lorraine alone, but a teacher or the principal shows up and Biff backs down. Later, when he's clearly going to assault Lorraine and George knocks his lights out, he was no longer the guy who wouldn't hit back. In the altered future, George has published his first book and Biff is the guy washing his car, so finding his self-confidence propels his life onto a much more positive path than just saving the day and getting the girl.

I'm gonna have to rewatch this now.

[baldryanr]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

There's a piece where, like all bullies, Biff liked easy targets. He tries it with "Calvin" too, because Marty's first intervention is to tell Biff to back off and leave Lorraine alone, but a teacher or the principal shows up and Biff backs down. Later, when he's clearly going to assault Lorraine and George knocks his lights out, he was no longer the guy who wouldn't hit back. In the altered future, George has published his first book and Biff is the guy washing his car, so finding his self-confidence propels his life onto a much more positive path than just saving the day and getting the girl.

Yup, which leads to the question of whether Marty has two sets of memories.  If all he has are the original timeline's then his parents and siblings are strangers to him and he'll have to bluff his way through every time they reminisce about old times. 

[DoctorAtomic]

On 3/7/2025 at 7:50 AM, Spartan Girl said:

How George punching Biff in the face still gives me rush, even when we’re living in a world where bullies getting their comeuppance has become an impossible dream…

Hey, man, get your damn hands off my social security!

On 3/7/2025 at 11:26 AM, Sarah 103 said:

I love the first movie. I think it is close to cinematic perfection. There's rarely a wasted line, moment or shot. There is a payoff to even the smallest detail. Almost everything that is in there is there for a reason.

I swear I heard somewhere on an NPR podcast, show, whatever, that the script is taught in film school as the perfect script because of all that. 

The thing I didn't like about the second movie was that half of it is still the first movie. So, yes, it's a good exercise in consequences of time travel, but you're still mining the first movie to do it. Time travel to the future just doesn't generally doesn't work because you can unravel it too easy. Unless you go to the future and are stuck there. 

 

[Sarah 103]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

The thing I didn't like about the second movie was that half of it is still the first movie. So, yes, it's a good exercise in consequences of time travel, but you're still mining the first movie to do it.

Exactly! 

[Spartan Girl]

9 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

The thing I didn't like about the second movie was that half of it is still the first movie. So, yes, it's a good exercise in consequences of time travel, but you're still mining the first movie to do it.

Valid point. But the stuff about the film version of 2015 and Biff taking over the town in the hell version of the present was still pretty good.

Someone on Tumblr thought the 1955 rehash might have worked better if it had Jennifer not Marty that tried to grab Biff’s book. At least then it would be a different character experiencing the first movie and not just a straight-up redo.

[Fool to cry]

I understand all the criticisms of them going back to 1955 again and they could have done something else but then we wouldn't have:

[dewelar]

20 hours ago, Giuseppe said:

Honestly, though, that whole excuse and plot for getting Marty to 2015 to save his kids was pretty poorly conceived. I wish they'd come up with a more plausible reason to get Marty to visit 2015.

IIRC, at the time they weren't expecting to do a sequel, and that when it happened they realized that the throwaway line about kids at the end of the original meant they had to write the sequel around that, and regretted it heavily.

[Sarah 103]

11 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Someone on Tumblr thought the 1955 rehash might have worked better if it had Jennifer not Marty that tried to grab Biff’s book. At least then it would be a different character experiencing the first movie and not just a straight-up redo.

I would still have the same problem of the sequel rehashing the first movie and showing me the first movie again. If I wanted to see the first movie again, I'd watch the first movie again. I want to see something slightly different in the sequel. 

6 hours ago, dewelar said:

IIRC, at the time they weren't expecting to do a sequel, and that when it happened they realized that the throwaway line about kids at the end of the original meant they had to write the sequel around that, and regretted it heavily.

I actually wish that had been the focus of the movie. Instead of saving the kids being accomplished in what feels like the first half hour of the movie, make that the majority of the movie. You have one week to prevent Horrible Event X from happening. Doc could use some futuristic harmless high tech gizmo/process to sideline characters. 

This the version of the screenplay where they go back to 1967 to set things right.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130313050244/http://www.bttf.com/scripts/Number_Two.pdf

Edited March 10 by Sarah 103