Coughs… Godfather II, perchance?
It’s almost 2015 and I still don’t have a fax machine in every room of my house!
See, the thing is that I was in college – actually, graduate school – when BttF 1 came out. I wasn’t a kid. So for me the relationship stuff was an aspect that put it a cut above most science fiction movies of the time.
Back in the day, I never saw the whole third movie. Recently, I watched the whole trilogy as background for the video game from Telltale. Number 2 was painful to watch – all the more uncomfortable because I knew what was coming. The third movie was cute, with the only eyebrow raiser being that Marty’s look-alike was married to Marty’s mom’s look-alike.
The game, by the way, continues what is the binding theme of the movies – that the Tannens and the McFlys have been locked in an inter-generational struggle in a town with an peculiar trans-temporal synchronicity, which the McFlys would not be winning except that the only one of them who was born with a pair of balls happened to make friends with a guy who has a time machine.
I’m still waiting for Comcast to put a window channel on my TV!
But you have all scheduled your cars for the hover conversion, right?
I want the TV that shows you six channels at once!
I think we’re almost at the point of barcode license plates.
And Mr. Fusion!
Of course, it was so easy that I was able to do it while my small frozen Pizza Hut pizza was hydrating into a full size large pizza.
I just got these on Blu Ray so I watched them recently. Three was always my least favorite and after rewatching, it still is but I still like it. That is probably because it is less a time travel fantasy and more a western but it still has its moments.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard the BTTF sequels called “bad” before. Usually the arguments I hear about them are whether 2 is the best or worst of the series.
The first is clearly the best, but I’ve always liked the sequals. The second is the cheesiest, but also plays with time the most.
The third is perfectly decent, but it always strikes me as oddly standalone. The setting doesn’t feel related, the characters are all new…the whole thing is just it’s own duck. Not a bad duck, but I always one it odd that they’d make 1 and 2 so tightly entwined, then ignore that for 3.
I’ve already cast my vote for enjoying all three films, but this is also a good thread to point out the brilliance of Saturday Night Live’s amazingly accurate impressions, found on the “never-before-seen screen tests” for BTTF.
Also, (spoiled for those who haven’t seen Part III):
The poor kid playing Doc’s son (Verne) apparently had to use the bathroom during filming…
The first is the best because it was new at the time, and the 80s/50s clash was fun.
PART II was good because we got to see the future for a bit, and it had alot going on. Probably the second best in the trilogy.
PART III wasn’t as popular probably because not everyone is a fan of old west settings.
I liked two because it showed how things can go bad if you aren’t careful, and introduced the concept of parallel universes. But it did have some big plot holes.
I liked three because Doc seemed to be completely in his element. Plus, I love that ZZ Top played at the hoe-down.
“Let’s make like a tree and get out of here!”
The first is fantastic, the second sucks, and the third is marginally better than the second IMHO.
I’m with you in liking Part II. In fact, I loved it; it’s far superior to its predecessor.
The third bores me sufficiently that I’ve never watched it start to finish.
Out of curiosity, for those who like Part 3, what do you like about it?
It’s just a movie set in the old West. Not much to do with smart time travel paradoxes and predictions of cool future gadgets/lifestyle.
Of course, a lot of people like Westerns, but if you’re the kind of person that liked 1, what aspect of 1 does 3 share that makes it appealing?
Ha Ha. That’s as funny as a screen door on a battleship.
The characters.