The strange double-dipped nostalgia of "Back to the Future" (open spoilers)

[Aeschines]

Open spoilers! If you haven’t seen this movie, then get in your time machine and watch it in the theater in 1985!

Soon it will be 30 years after this movie came out. Does it still hold up? Well, I watched it today and I would say: yes, it absolutely does. Some things seem better, a few seem worse than when I first saw it in the theater, but it’s still a great movie (I actually have not seen it many times since I first saw it, perhaps only once, so it was indeed a big refresher for me).

Pros:

1. The acting in this is fantastic. Scott, Lloyd, and Crispin put in performances that are, well, classic. Thompson and Wilson (as Biff) are also fabulous.

2. The movie creates real excitement. I of course knew what was going to happen, but I was still on the edge of my couch. I had kind of forgotten what that feeling was like, really. Few movies deliver that. And this one does again and again.

3. The movie delivers the time travel experience as few have ever done (one that equals it, IMO, is “Peggy Sue Got Married,” which came out one year later).

4. There is real satisfaction in seeing the bully get beaten in this. Again, few movies have delivered this well IMO.

5. The plot is intricately crafted and all the pieces fit together beautifully. This is a movie to emulate when it comes to plot and flow. One of the all-time best.

Cons:

1. There is a lot of ham-fisted Hollywood-style foreshadowing. I understand the point, but it could have been done a bit more subtly.

2. Characters react a bit too forcefully to McFly not making sense to them. For example, he mentions John F. Kennedy Drive, and Lorraine’s dad says, “Who the hell is John F. Kennedy?” Haw haw, future president. In reality, a person would say, “Who’s that?” or, “I don’t know that street,” or just not notice he had said it in the first place. Again, more subtlety would have been better.

3. One un-PC thing that I’ve read about elsewhere and agree with is showing McFly play a Chuck Berry tune and thus influence Chuck Berry. I.e., showing a white guy schooling the black guy who actually wrote the music. Now since McFly learned from Berry himself, one can argue he wasn’t really doing that. But it had been better just to leave this out.

One interesting thing is that this movie is now double-dipped nostalgia. It is a movie that inspires nostalgia for seeing this movie in the theater, that era, while being nostalgic about the 50s.

Here is an article that gets this nostalgia and some things about BttF wrong:

This works on smaller scales too. The movie Back to the Future came out in 1985, and “the past” took place in 1955. In the movie, when Michael J. Fox went back to 1955, he was caught off-guard by the newness of TVs, the prices of soda, the lack of love for shrill electric guitar, and the variation in slang. It was a different world, yes—but if the movie were made today and the past took place in 1985, the movie could have had much more fun with muchbigger differences. The character would be in a time before personal computers, internet, or cell phones—today’s Marty McFly, a teenager born in the late 90s, would be much more out of place in 1985 than the movie’s Marty McFly was in 1955.

This is laughably wrong, but the person believes that the technological Singularity is coming soon, so… But the interesting question is, “Why is it wrong?” I think there are two reasons:

1. There is not nostalgia for the 80s in the same way there was and still is nostalgia for the 1950s and early 1960s.

2. The world has actually changed a lot less 1985-2015 than 1955-1985.

A related thread is one I started about a year ago but before I read the above article:

Why are the 50s and 60s a unique target of nostalgia, and is it justified?

I was 14 in 1985 and am not nostalgic for that period beyond liking some pop culture from the time. I think very few people want to go back and live there, whereas the world of the 1950s still is attractive to many in this regard. Moreover, the 80s don’t seem that long ago. They seem like today but without cell phones and the Internet (actually, my dad had Prodigy in the 80s, so technically we did have the Internet, though I wasn’t interested in going online at that point… And my mom had a phone in her car…)

What was different about the 80s was that there was still unironic pop culture, and I think people look back on that with nostalgia. BttF is a very sincere movie. The Breakfast Club was a very sincere movie. Music was pretty earnest in general. In contrast, I saw a couple days ago the movie, Easy A which desperately wants to be a John Hughes movie but is all ironic, referential (to John Hughes movies, etc.), fatigued (no, I didn’t like it). (FWIW, right after that I watched Pitch Perfect, a fairly entertaining movie that also references The Breakfast Club.)

BttF is entirely predicated on the world in 1985 feeling a lot different than in 1955. It was just 30 years, but it felt like forever. If someone tried to remake BttF now with someone going back to 1985, people would go, “Huh?!” It wouldn’t work at all. But if you had someone going from 2015 to 1955, yep, that would still work!

So the double-dip nostalgia is not wanting to go back to 1955 and also wanting to go back to 1985. Rather, we see 1955 as a wonderfully different world and BttF as a wonderfully different type of movie.

[UltraVires]

@Aeschines

Cons:

1. There is a lot of ham-fisted Hollywood-style foreshadowing. I understand the point, but it could have been done a bit more subtly.

2. Characters react a bit too forcefully to McFly not making sense to them. For example, he mentions John F. Kennedy Drive, and Lorraine’s dad says, “Who the hell is John F. Kennedy?” Haw haw, future president. In reality, a person would say, “Who’s that?” or, “I don’t know that street,” or just not notice he had said it in the first place. Again, more subtlety would have been better.

3. One un-PC thing that I’ve read about elsewhere and agree with is showing McFly play a Chuck Berry tune and thus influence Chuck Berry. I.e., showing a white guy schooling the black guy who actually wrote the music. Now since McFly learned from Berry himself, one can argue he wasn’t really doing that. But it had been better just to leave this out.

One interesting thing is that this movie is now double-dipped nostalgia. It is a movie that inspires nostalgia for seeing this movie in the theater, that era, while being nostalgic about the 50s.

I agree with all of your “Pros” and there have been many threads on this board about how a 2015 teenager would act in 1985. I think you are understating the difference. Just take the moment when Marty first walks into town in 1955. He sees someone throw away the newspaper and picks it out of the trashcan to verify the date.

Would teens today even think to get a date from a newspaper? They would probably still be looking at their IPhones. Then he walks into the diner to make a phone call. Would teens today know to use the phone book and how to place a pay phone call?

But as to your Cons:

1. Agreed. That was, however, typical of 80s movies.

2. Disagree. It was a pretty small town with the streets having typical names: Main, Ash, Poplar, Maple, etc. If someone came to your small town and was looking for Marvin C. Hammersmith Drive, you might very well ask “Who the hell is Marvin C. Hammersmith?”

3. Nah, you are reading too much into that, especially the racial part. It was meant to be a funny bit about Chuck Berry. Nothing more.

I also think that people could be nostalgic for the 80s, but I agree with your point that it probably isn’t to the magnitude of people in the 80s being nostalgic for the 50s.

[Aeschines]

@jtgain

I agree with all of your “Pros” and there have been many threads on this board about how a 2015 teenager would act in 1985. I think you are understating the difference. Just take the moment when Marty first walks into town in 1955. He sees someone throw away the newspaper and picks it out of the trashcan to verify the date.

Would teens today even think to get a date from a newspaper? They would probably still be looking at their IPhones. Then he walks into the diner to make a phone call. Would teens today know to use the phone book and how to place a pay phone call?

Well, I agree that someone really traveling back in time would freak out, and that could make for a cool movie scene. Even if the time difference was just five years.

I don’t think the fun of McFly going back from 1985 to 1955 is really based on technological change. It’s based on social and aesthetic change. There is a thrill of seeing him go back “that really different and cool in its own way” time. I felt it too in the theater, even though I hadn’t lived through that time. I don’t think that works with going back to 1985. It would be like, “Ugh, mall hair and hair metal and ugh.” Personally, I hated pop culture in general in the late 80s and idolized the 70s (not so much as nostalgia but as a better time I had actually lived through quite recently).

[UltraVires]

We seem to be about the same age. Neither was born in 1955 and were children in 1985. We have experienced incremental, daily change from 1985 to the present. It is easy to think that not much has changed, when it really has changed dramatically. However, the year 1955 has always seemed like a magical time that has never existed for us. I can see how a kid born in 1998 would view 1985 the same way.

[Aeschines]

@jtgain

We seem to be about the same age. Neither was born in 1955 and were children in 1985. We have experienced incremental, daily change from 1985 to the present. It is easy to think that not much has changed, when it really has changed dramatically. However, the year 1955 has always seemed like a magical time that has never existed for us. I can see how a kid born in 1998 would view 1985 the same way.

That doesn’t fit. People in 1985 were nostalgic for 1955 because they had lived through it and thought of it as a better time. There was also, as you say, nostalgia on the part of those who had not lived through it. But according to your argument, someone who had been around in 1955 would have experienced “incremental, daily change from 1955 to the present.” That wasn’t the case; people felt (and still feel) there was a big gap between those two periods.

I personally do not feel a big gap between 1985 and 2015. I’m sure there are some people who look back on 1985 with the level of nostalgia people feel for the 50s and early 60s, but I haven’t met them.

[cochrane]

@Aeschines

1. The acting in this is fantastic. Scott, Lloyd, and Crispin put in performances that are, well, classic. Thompson and Wilson (as Biff) are also fabulous.

Scott?

[Aeschines]

@cochrane

Scott?

Lol, Fox.

[cochrane]

@Aeschines

Lol, Fox.

Great Scott!

At least you didn’t call him Alex P. Keaton or Mike Flaherty.

[Aeschines]

@cochrane

Great Scott!

At least you didn’t call him Alex P. Keaton or Mike Flaherty.

lol

[Tangent]

@Aeschines

Soon it will be 30 years after this movie came out. Does it still hold up? Well, I watched it today and I would say: yes, it absolutely does.

I just wanted to comment that BTTF is somewhat rare in that it is a 30 year old movie that is actually still fairly popular among today’s kids and teens. Many of whom have never seen the original Star Wars trilogy, or ET, or Ghostbusters–but they love Back To The Future!

[bucketybuck]

@Aeschines

3. One un-PC thing that I’ve read about elsewhere and agree with is showing McFly play a Chuck Berry tune and thus influence Chuck Berry. I.e., showing a white guy schooling the black guy who actually wrote the music. Now since McFly learned from Berry himself, one can argue he wasn’t really doing that. But it had been better just to leave this out.

This really seems to be a reach.

[Les_Espaces_Du_Sommeil]

@Tangent

I just wanted to comment that BTTF is somewhat rare in that it is a 30 year old movie that is actually still fairly popular among today’s kids and teens. Many of whom have never seen the original Star Wars trilogy, or ET, or Ghostbusters–but they love Back To The Future!

Data point: my daughters, ages 5 and 8, loved ET and the original Star Wars trilogy although they saw the latter when they were a bit young (three years ago).

I’ll probably watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail with them next week.I haven’t had the opportunity to show them Ghostbusters and Back To The Future but they’re definitely on the short list. So is The Exorcist but my wife insists that it’ll have to wait for some time :D.

[foolsguinea]

@cochrane

Scott?

Mike Fox played a ‘Scott’ in another 1980’s teen movie. I guess the OP was unconsciously remembering that.

[Aeschines]

@foolsguinea

Mike Fox played a ‘Scott’ in another 1980’s teen movie. I guess the OP was unconsciously remembering that.

Teen Wolf!

[Urbanredneck]

Alot of us around age 20 in 1985 had grown up watching “Happy Days” which was based on the 50’s so we knew alot about that era.

And the 50’s, its never explored but it would suck to be black since in reality, if McFly had been black he might not have been allowed into that 1950’s restaurant.

[RealityChuck]

The Chuck Berry issue is really just a joke; no one seriously believes the movie is making a point about who wrote Johnny B. Goode. The entire reason it’s funny is that it’s absurd.

I don’t think it’s a con that people react the way they do to Calvin. It’s really a dramatic necessity: if you show people reacting subtly, the audience might miss the point. A “where’s that?” reaction to JFK drive would hide the joke; saying “Who’s John F. Kennedy?” is how you need to write the scene to make it work (JFK was a senator at the time of the film, BTW, and could easily have been known, especially since his marriage to Jackie was in the news a few years earlier). I do love subtle jokes, but you can’t write a movie with Arrested Developmentsubtlety in all cases.

[Aeschines]

@RealityChuck

The Chuck Berry issue is really just a joke; no one seriously believes the movie is making a point about who wrote Johnny B. Goode. The entire reason it’s funny is that it’s absurd.

The movie has many funny jokes, but this one is ham-fisted. “Chuck, it’s your cousin, Marvin. Marvin Berry,” says the guy on the phone. And I think it’s in poor taste, considering how black musicians often languished while white and safe versions like Pat Boone lapped up the dough. I don’t personally take great offense to it, but it wasn’t necessary or all that clever.

I don’t think it’s a con that people react the way they do to Calvin. It’s really a dramatic necessity: if you show people reacting subtly, the audience might miss the point. A “where’s that?” reaction to JFK drive would hide the joke; saying “Who’s John F. Kennedy?” is how you need to write the scene to make it work (JFK was a senator at the time of the film, BTW, and could easily have been known, especially since his marriage to Jackie was in the news a few years earlier). I do love subtle jokes, but you can’t write a movie with Arrested Developmentsubtlety in all cases.

There is a certainly a range where some reactions are totally believable and some are over the top. It’s a nitpick, more or less. The pros of this film far, far outweigh the cons.

[Hypno-Toad]

Chuck Berry and in particular Johnny B. Goode are really the only choice for the Awesome Song scene. Marty played guitar and needed a hot song that he could shred, 50’s style, for the kids of the day. What other song of that era had such a reach out and grab you opening?

[Skammer]

I’m right in that age demo - I was 16 when the movie came out in 1985. My teen years neatly spanned the decade of the 1980’s, and I certainly do feel a bit of nostalgia for those times. Not because times were better; but aren’t most people or at least those with happy childhoods a little nostalgic about their teens?

I remember the '50’s nostalgia: American Graffiti and Happy Days and the oldies radio my parents listened to. In general we don’t have that same level or retro-fondness for the 80s today but we still have '80s radio stations and the occasional movie set in the 80s.

I strongly disagree with the OP about the level of change - the difference between 1985 and 2015 is MUCH greater than between '55 and '85. Most of the differences explored in the movie were just cultural references - Ronald Reagan and Kennedy being unknown; a black man dreaming about becoming mayor and told to get back to sweeping the floor; the unavailability of diet cola.

But contrast what a teenager going back from today would discover: no mobile phones, let alone smart phones. If you want to talk to someone on the phone you have to find a phone book and look up their name - and if it’s a common name, you’d better know their address already. If they’re not home, you’ve got no way to reach them unless you go out and find them. Want to do some research in old newspapers? What teenagers today know how to use library microfilm or card catalogues?

On top of all those tech changes, you still have all the jokes from the movie. Who ever heard of a black President? Arnold Schwarzenegger the action movie star was the governor of California? Can I get an energy drink in this place?

[Quimby]

@Urbanredneck

Alot of us around age 20 in 1985 had grown up watching “Happy Days” which was based on the 50’s so we knew alot about that era.

And the 50’s, its never explored but it would suck to be black since in reality, if McFly had been black he might not have been allowed into that 1950’s restaurant.

What’s funny is Happy Days was created as 1950s nostalgia but today it feels more like 1970s nostalgia. The 50s-ish of it really disappeared after the first couple seasons.