leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (07/02/85)
BACK TO THE FUTURE
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
The last film that came out with Stephen Spielberg's name on it was
GOONIES. After seeing that I decided that these Spielberg-produced films
were on a downward spiral. I told myself that I would avoid them in the
future. Then a local theater had a sneak preview of BACK TO THE FUTURE and
hope sprang eternal. For the first ten minutes of the film I was asking
myself why I didn't listen to my advice to myself and stay away. After all,
why do I need a film about a cute kid on a skateboard and a horribly over-
acted mad scientist? The remaining 106 minutes answered that question
rather nicely.
In fact, BACK TO THE FUTURE has few or none of the script problems that
I saw in GOONIES. Instead, we have a tightly written science fiction story
with likable characters, a fair amount of wit that really *is* funny, and a
great collection of time paradoxes presented in a witty fashion. Nobody who
has read the basics of science fiction or seen much of science fiction
cinema will find much in the way of real ideas, but the old ideas are tied
together in a way as entertaining as they have ever been in the past.
The story deals with Marty McFly, whose father is a life-long nerd and
whose life is in a shambles. Marty has somehow acquired the friendship of a
really weird scientist (Christopher Lloyd), who one night reveals that he
has made a few special modifications to a DeLorean car. When it is powered
with plutonium and is moving at precisely 88mph, it becomes a time machine.
It isn't too long before our hero finds himself trapped in 1955 and madly
trying to repair changes he has made in history.
The script (by director Robert Zemeckis and producer Bob Gale), after a
shaky start, is remarkable for clever lines and for attention to technical
detail. In spite of a few bizarre touches, this film works as a piece of
science fiction.
The cast is made up almost exclusively of unknowns. The minor
exceptions are Lloyd, whose face is familiar from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S
NEST--he played a belligerent inmate--and from TO BE OR NOR TO BE. Also
familiar-looking is James Tolkan as the vice-principal of the local high
school.
This is a +2 film (on the -4 to +4 scale) and I consider it to be the
best thing with Spielberg's name on it since E. T.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeperbarnett@ut-sally.UUCP (Lewis Barnett) (07/06/85)
> > BACK TO THE FUTURE > A film review by Mark R. Leeper > > really weird scientist (Christopher Lloyd), who one night reveals that he > > The cast is made up almost exclusively of unknowns. The minor > exceptions are Lloyd, whose face is familiar from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S > NEST--he played a belligerent inmate--and from TO BE OR NOR TO BE. Lest we forget, Rev. Jim (Taxi) also played the Klingon Commander in THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK, John Bigbuti in BUCKAROO BANZAI, and has been showing up in lots of other things that I can't remember at the moment. I enjoy Lloyd's performances, though he does seem to have been typecast in roles that display a certain detachment from reality! Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 -- barnett@ut-sally.ARPA, barnett@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!barnett
JAFFE@RUTGERS.ARPA (07/08/85)
From: mtgzz!leeper (m.r.leeper)
BACK TO THE FUTURE
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
The last film that came out with Stephen Spielberg's name on it was
GOONIES. After seeing that I decided that these Spielberg-produced films
were on a downward spiral. I told myself that I would avoid them in the
future. Then a local theater had a sneak preview of BACK TO THE FUTURE and
hope sprang eternal. For the first ten minutes of the film I was asking
myself why I didn't listen to my advice to myself and stay away. After all,
why do I need a film about a cute kid on a skateboard and a horribly over-
acted mad scientist? The remaining 106 minutes answered that question
rather nicely.
In fact, BACK TO THE FUTURE has few or none of the script problems that
I saw in GOONIES. Instead, we have a tightly written science fiction story
with likable characters, a fair amount of wit that really *is* funny, and a
great collection of time paradoxes presented in a witty fashion. Nobody who
has read the basics of science fiction or seen much of science fiction
cinema will find much in the way of real ideas, but the old ideas are tied
together in a way as entertaining as they have ever been in the past.
The story deals with Marty McFly, whose father is a life-long nerd and
whose life is in a shambles. Marty has somehow acquired the friendship of a
really weird scientist (Christopher Lloyd), who one night reveals that he
has made a few special modifications to a DeLorean car. When it is powered
with plutonium and is moving at precisely 88mph, it becomes a time machine.
It isn't too long before our hero finds himself trapped in 1955 and madly
trying to repair changes he has made in history.
The script (by director Robert Zemeckis and producer Bob Gale), after a
shaky start, is remarkable for clever lines and for attention to technical
detail. In spite of a few bizarre touches, this film works as a piece of
science fiction.
The cast is made up almost exclusively of unknowns. The minor
exceptions are Lloyd, whose face is familiar from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S
NEST--he played a belligerent inmate--and from TO BE OR NOR TO BE. Also
familiar-looking is James Tolkan as the vice-principal of the local high
school.
This is a +2 film (on the -4 to +4 scale) and I consider it to be the
best thing with Spielberg's name on it since E. T.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeperJAFFE@RUTGERS.ARPA (07/08/85)
From: ut-sally!barnett (Lewis Barnett) > > BACK TO THE FUTURE > A film review by Mark R. Leeper > > really weird scientist (Christopher Lloyd), who one night reveals that he > > The cast is made up almost exclusively of unknowns. The minor > exceptions are Lloyd, whose face is familiar from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S > NEST--he played a belligerent inmate--and from TO BE OR NOR TO BE. Lest we forget, Rev. Jim (Taxi) also played the Klingon Commander in THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK, John Bigbuti in BUCKAROO BANZAI, and has been showing up in lots of other things that I can't remember at the moment. I enjoy Lloyd's performances, though he does seem to have been typecast in roles that display a certain detachment from reality! Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 -- barnett@ut-sally.ARPA, barnett@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!barnett
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (07/09/85)
In article <2265@ut-sally.UUCP> barnett@ut-sally.UUCP (Lewis Barnett) writes: >> >> BACK TO THE FUTURE >> A film review by Mark R. Leeper >> >> really weird scientist (Christopher Lloyd), who one night reveals that he >> >> The cast is made up almost exclusively of unknowns. The minor >> exceptions are Lloyd, whose face is familiar from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S >> NEST--he played a belligerent inmate--and from TO BE OR NOR TO BE. > >Lest we forget, Rev. Jim (Taxi) also played the Klingon Commander in >THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK, John Bigbuti in BUCKAROO BANZAI, and has been > .... > >Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 That's BigbooTE'! TE'! as in, TAY! Get it right, monkey boy!
dm@BBN-VAX.ARPA (07/11/85)
From: dm@BBN-VAX.ARPA SPOILER Well, not really, we all know he's gonna make it back, but if you watch really carefully, just before Marty gets back to the future, the future (his present) is different: he lives in a Moral-Majority ruled state, with police helicopters shining search-lights on the citizenry below (or maybe that's just the way California really is...) The triple-X theater advertises a revival meeting instead of ``Orgy, American Style'', the streets are littered, but the same old wino is sleeping on the park bench. Then he returns, and the theater marquee reverts to advertising an X-rated movie, and all is normal (more or less). Watch real carefully, it's over in just a few seconds. God, I wonder how many things like this I MISSED... (And who's Mary, anyway?)
pfeiffer@uwvax.UUCP (Phil Pfeiffer) (07/11/85)
> SPOILER > > Well, not really, we all know he's gonna make it back, but if you watch really > carefully, just before Marty gets back to the future, the future (his present) > is different: he lives in a Moral-Majority ruled state, with police > helicopters shining search-lights on the citizenry below (or maybe that's just > the way California really is...) The triple-X theater advertises a revival > meeting instead of ``Orgy, American Style'', the streets are littered, but the > same old wino is sleeping on the park bench. > > Then he returns, and the theater marquee reverts to advertising an X-rated > movie, and all is normal (more or less). > wrong wrong wrong. There are TWO theatres, one in his direction of travel, and one on the right side of the square as you are facing the clock. sorry.
Daniel.Zigmond@CMU-CS-SPICE.ARPA (07/12/85)
From: Daniel.Zigmond@CMU-CS-SPICE ***SPOILER*** The one thing that bothered me about Back to the Future wasn't that it made use of parallel universes but that it seemed to use them wrong. Marty changed both universes. The changes to the universe he returned to were obvious: his parents had dfferent personalities, he had a new truck, etc... However, he also changed the universe he left. He invented rock and roll (essentially). While he is playing Jonny B Goode at the dance (in 1955), the guitarist with the broken arm (whose name was something Berry) calls his brother "Chuck" to tell him about this great new style of music that Marty is playing. This means that universe 1 (where Marty started) shouldn't have had any rock music in it because Marty wasn't around in 1955 to let Chuck know about it. Of course, it did because otherwise Marty wouldn't have known the song (or have been in a rock band). Dan (djz@cmu-cs-spice)
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (07/13/85)
I haven't read the book, but you didn't say anything about "book", so... > The one thing that bothered me about Back to the Future wasn't that it > made use of parallel universes but that it seemed to use them wrong. What makes you say that it was supposed to be parallel universes? (Personally, I like applying Hogan's theory from Thrice Upon A Time.) -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 4251) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@maryland
chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) (07/15/85)
In article <2694@topaz.ARPA> Daniel.Zigmond@CMU-CS-SPICE.ARPA writes: >From: Daniel.Zigmond@CMU-CS-SPICE > > >***SPOILER*** > >The one thing that bothered me about Back to the Future wasn't that it >made use of parallel universes but that it seemed to use them wrong. Marty >changed both universes. The changes to the universe he returned to >were obvious: his parents had dfferent personalities, he had a new truck, >etc... However, he also changed the universe he left. He invented >rock and roll (essentially). While he is playing Jonny B Goode at the >dance (in 1955), the guitarist with the broken arm (whose name was >something Berry) calls his brother "Chuck" to tell him about this great new >style of music that Marty is playing. This means that universe 1 (where >Marty started) shouldn't have had any rock music in it because Marty wasn't >around in 1955 to let Chuck know about it. Of course, it did because >otherwise Marty wouldn't have known the song (or have been in a rock >band). > > Dan (djz@cmu-cs-spice) Huh? Where in the movie is there a mention of parallel universes. Marty doesn't change two universes. He changes the original universe into another one. Perhaps in the original Universe Chuck Berry did discover the new sound on his own. But in the changed universe, he had some help from Marty. Where's the problem? Chris Andersen -- "Roads? Where we're going we don't need any roads!"
brenda@rocksvax.UUCP (Brenda K. Joseph) (07/16/85)
**********This is a spoiler*********** (sorry I forgot to put this on my subject line. This is my first posting to the net.) If you look closely at the letter that the doc shows Marty in this future, you can easily see the yellowed tape and where the tears don't quite meet from him putting it back together after he tore it apart. I watched (twice) and he does put the letter in his pocket thirty years ago after tearing it up. He does NOT have the vest on before Marty goes back to the future. I sat through it twice the other day, after seeing it once previously. REgarding paradoxes: This movie traces a line, not a loop. The line is Marty's existence and his knowlede of events around him. Before he goes back in time, the world is as we know it and his world is as shown in the movie. While back in time, he changes certain events. For instance, Chuck Berry hears him playing Johnny B Goode. Had Marty never gone back in time, he would have learned it the same way he did in our own past. I believe the same logic resolves Doc and Marty meeting. They met without Marty going back, they will meet again (esp. since Doc now knows Marty). When Marty comes "back", the people around him are aware of the changes he has "caused" to the timeline, but he isn't. He hasn't lived through them. ***My only problem is -- what happens to the Marty that lived in this new universe up until the time the "original" Marty came back from the future? A friend recommended I read "Thrice Upon A Time". Apparently this has similar views and puts forth the theory that when Marty comes back from the past, the Marty that has been living in the "altered universe" ceases to exist. (I forget the author's name -- haven't had a chance to read it yet.) Brenda Joseph Xerox Corporation Arpanet: Joseph.Henr@Xerox.ARPA CSNet: Not sure "He's a peeping Tom....."
rwl@uvacs.UUCP (Ray Lubinsky) (07/21/85)
*** SPOLIER SPOILER SPOILER *** > The one thing that bothered me about Back to the Future wasn't that it > made use of parallel universes but that it seemed to use them wrong. Marty > changed both universes. The changes to the universe he returned to > were obvious: his parents had dfferent personalities, he had a new truck, > etc... However, he also changed the universe he left. He invented > rock and roll (essentially). While he is playing Jonny B Goode at the > dance (in 1955), the guitarist with the broken arm (whose name was > something Berry) calls his brother "Chuck" to tell him about this great new > style of music that Marty is playing. This means that universe 1 (where > Marty started) shouldn't have had any rock music in it because Marty wasn't > around in 1955 to let Chuck know about it. Of course, it did because > otherwise Marty wouldn't have known the song (or have been in a rock > band). -- Nah, Marty I going back in time is actually Marty I going to the 1950's in the-universe-in-which-Marty-I-goes-to-the-50's (ie, universe II). This is the same universe that will contain the ``Lone Pine Mall'', etc. In universe II, Marty I is the inventor of rock. Back in universe I, in its own 1950's, events proceeded as we know them. My question is, what happens to Marty II when he takes off in the DeLorean for the ``past?'' Does he go to the 1950's of universe I -- or somewhen else entirely? Off hand, I'd have to vote for the latter; a closed loop in the multiverse seems to be a pretty nasty violation of causality in the system. -- Ray Lubinsky University of Virginia, Dept. of Computer Science uucp: decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!rwl
muffy@lll-crg.ARPA (Muffy Barkocy) (07/28/85)
First, since the original Marty, who we are following, goes back to the changed future, I assume that Doc's time machine does not care what time-line it came from, it just translates n years forward or back from its current time. Given this assumption, Marty 1 goes back, changes the future, then returns. We can assume a divergence (or not, but I will) such that there are now two time lines. On the first one, they never see Marty again, since he left that time line and returned on the other one. On the second one, Marty 1 returns, Marty 2 travels back. Now we encounter the problem. Regardless of whatever else happened, the two of them would travel back to approximately the same time and place, if we carry along with the assumption that the time machine does not leave its current time-line. However, since we did *not* see Marty 2 when Marty 1 arrived, it is likely that Doc 2 remembered seeing Marty 1 (the letter, etc) and sent Marty 2 back to some *other* time, realizing that otherwise they would encounter each other. (Or, rather, that he (Doc 2) would run into Marty 1, if he is assuming that he will make the trip back on the second go-round.) Eithr way, I expect that he would have set the clock for some other date in the past. What happens to Marty 2 at this point is impossible to tell. Probably, each one changes their future, and ends up on time-line n+1. Muffy
morris@Shasta.ARPA (07/29/85)
I've got it! Marty 2 goes back to some other time. But he won't have the plutonium to get back to '85, so he's stuck in the past. The alternative is that he *doesn't* go back in time at all, he goes forward. Why would Doc want to go back in time, since he knew that his '55 self sees Marty anyway? No, Doc would be planning to go to the future, so Marty 2 never goes back in time Does anyone really care about this? Kathy Morris (.. ucbvax!Glacier!diablo!morris, decvax!decwrl!Glacier!diablo!morris morris@diablo.ARPA)
franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (07/31/85)
A number of articles have appeared recently trying to explain BttF in terms of multiple timelines. THIS DOESN'T WORK. When Marty starts changing the past, the effect is immediate (although slow) on what has been brought back -- initially the picture, and eventually Marty himself. The only way I can see to reconcile this with the ending is to assume that the Marty who remembers his father being a wimp, etc., will fade into the one who is the result of his intervention. This process simply hasn't become noticeable yet at the end of the movie.
Mary_Couse.osbunorth@Xerox.ARPA (08/05/85)
From: Couse.osbunorth@Xerox.ARPA Bruce Leban writes: >>>"One thing I don't understand in either interpretation is the clock in the Professor's house (at the beginning of the movie) which has a man hanging off the face of a clock. Where did he get that clock?"<<< The man hanging off the clock was Harold Lloyd, not the Professor. There was a scene in one of HL's classic silent movies from the '20s (I don't recall the name or exact year) where he gets stuck hanging from the hands of a clock.
arl@utastro.UUCP (George Koehler) (08/07/85)
> From: Couse.osbunorth@Xerox.ARPA > > > Bruce Leban writes: > > >>>"One thing I don't understand in either interpretation is the clock > in the Professor's house (at the beginning of the movie) which has a > man hanging off the face of a clock. Where did he get that clock?"<<< > > The man hanging off the clock was Harold Lloyd, not the Professor. > There was a scene in one of HL's classic silent movies from the '20s (I > don't recall the name or exact year) where he gets stuck hanging from > the hands of a clock. The movie was "Safety Last".