upstill@ucbvax.ARPA (Steve Upstill) (07/01/85)
Let me be the first to recommend Back to the Future. There's life yet in the Steven Spielberg's little world, which had started to get a little shopworn with Goonies. All the familiar Spielberg elements are there: popular non-science, whacky nuclear family, small-town America, heartwarming twists of plot, even [.......spoiler deleted ....] and [.........ditto.....]. Yet three things save this one, in high style: 1) Robert Zemeckis' direction. I don't know how he does it, but somehow, without any particular style you can point your finger at, he has developed the lightest touch in movies, and I now believe that this man can put ANYTHING over on you, and make you love it. 2) The performance of the lead actor, whose name I don't even know. He now joins Tom (Risky Business) Cruise and ...(The Sure Thing) ... as the most appealling young comic actors in America. 2a) The performance of Christopher Lloyd as the Mad Scientist (benevelant). 3) The script, by director Zemeckis and Bob Gale. Believe me, if you know the premise of the movie, you can predict just about everything that's going to happen after about 20 minutes. Yet you enjoy seeing it happen anyway, because the dialogue is so good and the sense of comic detail so keen. Now I have to see Used Cars and I Wanna Hold Your Hand. The only faults I would warn you about are mentioned above: It's too Spielberg-esque in the windup and somewhat pat neatness of it all. But the ride is a real joy. ***-1/2 out of ****. Take your mother to see it. You won't be sorry, and neither will she. Steve Upstill
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!leepermoriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (07/06/85)
BACK TO THE FUTURE is one of those films, which, on reflection, makes me
wonder just why it left me with such a good feeling. As you probably know,
it's the story of a young man (Michael J. Fox of the Family Ties television
show) who accidently travels thirty years into the past, with the aid of a
scientist friend's (Christopher Lloyd, who has been in about 8 films during
the last two years (Sorry, Mark)) time machine. The plot centers around
Fox's attempt to return to the future (the time machine, which is built out
of a Delorean automobile, needs plutonium to run on, and a substitute power
source must be found), and also with the time paradoxes which follow in
Fox's wake, mainly the disruption of the incident which brings his mother
and father together. For people who haven't considered the premise before,
I imagine this is quite entertaining in itself; for those of us who have
seen the "gotta fix up the time line irregularities" plot in science fiction
novels for the last millenia, it's old hat. So I can't say I found the plot
too interesting (though the resolution of Lloyd's fate is shuffled around
well enough that it is not apparent (though the plot twist is foreseen)).
Well, how about the laughs? Pretty sit-com stuff, in terms of getting Mom
and Pop back together again, and also with a lot of slapstick. The acting
is also sitcom-like; nothing too interesting in that. The special effects
are limited, but well-done (apparently ILM must have been pretty busy this
year -- they are getting to be the SPX 'R US of the American film industry).
So why did I enjoy this? Well, basically the one time the actors seem to
come alive is when Fox and Lloyd are together. Lloyd's Doc character is
eccentric, but not nutty enough to be a comedy character. He obviously
likes Marty (Fox's character), and his willingness to risk his own life to
insure Marty returns to 1985 one of the most touching parts of the film. In
essence, when Fox & Lloyd are on the screen, the movie is quite watchable;
when it's only Fox, it tends to grind down to HAPPY DAYS revisited.
Frankly, I'd like to see another movie with Doc and Marty doing some time
travelling on their own, sans the relatives. That, I think, would be a film
worth paying full price for (this is a $2.50 movie, which is what I paid for
it).
A few questions:
1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before?
The voice is amazingly familiar.
2) Are we supposed to imagine that Marty's parents' transformation into
Yuppies makes everything OK? Is it implying that the answer to family
happiness is rich, cool (rather sexually active) parents?
3) Why don't they stick up a lightening rod to get power for the car's Time
Flux Do-Dad? They could drive around at 88 miles/hour with a grounded
leash attached to the car.... Whoops, sorry, trying to insert logic...
"Roads? Where we're going, they don't NEED roads!"
If he's not one thing,
he's another. ---> Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsri}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPAbarnett@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
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/08/85)
I really liked this movie, even though, given the subject matter, you can guess a lot of the consequences along the way. It plays with a number of claasic time travel paradoxes, as wel as some classic dramatic themes, but somehow the familiarity didn't hurt at all; even though I figured out most of what was going to happen at the end, it was still very funny. Michael Fox and Christopher Lloyd work great together; so does Fox with the people he runs into along the way. The beginning sags a bit, though, because the situation around the father is a lot too charicatured. ---------------Danger, Danger! Spoiler ahead!----------------------- I have to disagree with Jeff on one point though. It seems pretty clear from the beginning that Marty could definitely use a more assertive father-- something he causes himself. Yuppieness just serves as a convenient charicature to show this. And his mother was no exactly a "nice" girl before. Oh, yeah, the lightning rod. It's real convenient to know where the lightning is going to strike, and it's rather clear that the hook is meant to come out immediately; it's hanging on the wire at the end.
mupmalis@watarts.UUCP (M. A. Upmalis) (07/08/85)
In article <790@vax2.fluke.UUCP> moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) writes: >A few questions: > >1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before? > The voice is amazingly familiar. The actor played a nerd part on TV recently, I didn't see the whole show, and can't name it, I did love the work of the actor in the movie, nerdish and loveable, one didn't feel alienated.. >2) Are we supposed to imagine that Marty's parents' transformation into > Yuppies makes everything OK? Is it implying that the answer to family > happiness is rich, cool (rather sexually active) parents? This was the quickest resolution, if you want to show success, then do it materially, vanquish the villian. The fact that his dad had written a book was a touch more human oriented success, he wasn't afraid to to reach out and show the world something... >3) Why don't they stick up a lightening rod to get power for the car's Time > Flux Do-Dad? They could drive around at 88 miles/hour with a grounded > leash attached to the car.... Whoops, sorry, trying to insert logic... > To quote the good Dr. (Brown, not Asimov), lightening would be enough, but we never know where it will strike, to which our hero replied......We do now ( or something like that) My own comments, the movie was predictable, but the maxim about not where you go but how you get there .. I loved a lot of bits of schtick, the chase sequence on the skateboard, the Chuck Berry number etc, That the movie was continuously entertaining -- Mike Upmalis (mupmalis@watarts)<University of Waterloo> ihnp4!watmath!watarts!mupmalis
sas@leadsv.UUCP (Scott Stewart) (07/08/85)
In article <8649@ucbvax.ARPA>, upstill@ucbvax.ARPA (Steve Upstill) writes: > > 2) The performance of the lead actor, whose name I don't even know. His name is Michael J. Fox (sp?). Apparantly your not a big TV fan since he stars in 'Family Ties', one of the biggest and best shows on TV this year. (Thanks partially to its lead in - 'Bill Cosby') > 2a) The performance of Christopher Lloyd as the Mad Scientist (benevelant). I loved his performance > 3) The script, by director Zemeckis > and Bob Gale. Believe me, if you know the premise of the movie, you can > predict just about everything that's going to happen after about 20 minutes. > Yet you enjoy seeing it happen anyway, because the dialogue is so good and > the sense of comic detail so keen. I agree completely. This movie was great. I loved everything starting with the opening. There are a few suprises in the movie, but these are more in minor details than in plot development. This movie is good for the whole family. I would give it a 8 on a 1 - 10 scale. Scott A. Stewart LMSC "Order in organized Chaos."
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!
werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) (07/10/85)
There was only one paradox about the changes to the present that occurred in Back to the Future. His parents change, and that was a result of his time travel. However, he also indirectly teaches Chuck Berry how to play Johnny B. Goode. (Remember, "Chuck, this is your brother Marvin, remember that new sound you were looking for ...") Now the question is: "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode before time became out of joint?" [Perhaps some questions were not meant to be answered.] -- Craig Werner !philabs!aecom!werner "The world is just a straight man for you sometimes"
terryl@tekcrl.UUCP (07/10/85)
>1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before? > The voice is amazingly familiar. He played the insecure kid in "Teachers" who gets blown away by the cops in the school hallway after he pulls a gun out of his locker. >2) Are we supposed to imagine that Marty's parents' transformation into > Yuppies makes everything OK? Is it implying that the answer to family > happiness is rich, cool (rather sexually active) parents? Standard 1980's thinking. >3) Why don't they stick up a lightening rod to get power for the car's Time > Flux Do-Dad? They could drive around at 88 miles/hour with a grounded > leash attached to the car.... Whoops, sorry, trying to insert logic... Then they woudln't have a two-hour movie.
clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (07/11/85)
In article <1786@aecom.UUCP> werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) writes: > > There was only one paradox about the changes to the present that >occurred in Back to the Future. >... > Now the question is: "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode >before time became out of joint?" > [Perhaps some questions were not meant to be answered.] Exactly. Ever read Heinlein's "All You Zombies"? The "hero" was his own father AND mother! (The closing line was "At least I know where I came from, do you?") -- Chris Lewis, UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321
boyce@daemen.UUCP (Doug Boyce) (07/11/85)
> > There was only one paradox about the changes to the present that > occurred in Back to the Future. Not true. > > His parents change, and that was a result of his time travel. By changing his parents he has also changed Biff's life, and his siblings, actually every one in contact with them. He also ends up changing his yet-to-be-born children's lives. > However, he also indirectly teaches Chuck Berry how to play Johnny > B. Goode. (Remember, "Chuck, this is your brother Marvin, remember that new > sound you were looking for ...") > > Now the question is: "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode > before time became out of joint?" Maybe Chuck Berry never got the inspiration for Johny B. Goode. He might have learned it from Marty before it ever became a hit and Chuck waited for the right time to release. Maybe it was predestined that Chuck would learn it from Marty who had in turn learned from Chuck. (confusing?) > [Perhaps some questions were not meant to be answered.] > > Craig Werner > !philabs!aecom!werner Don't forget he ends up saving Doc in the end. Although Marty tries so hard to warn Doc of his distant death Doc refuses to take it. He rips up a message Marty puts in his pocket. But the message ends up old but intact in the future. Why? Also when Doc was first riddled with bullets from the Libyans I don't remember any blood. Could it have been that Doc was already forwarned and had the bullet proof vest on already. To all you time travel experts, I have heard various premises about but wouldn't it be kind of distructive if you met future/past version of yourself. Also wouldn't Marty coming back to the future before he had/will go back to the past do as much damage to the time stream as his interaction with his parents? -- Doug Boyce Daemen College, Amherst NY UUCP : {decvax,dual,rocksanne,watmath,rocksvax}!sunybcs!daemen!boyce ARPA : boyce@buffalo.CSNET@csnet-relay or ARPA : boyce%daemen.uucp@buffalo.CSNET@csnet-relay "Who's that fellow outperforming everybody?" "That's Mr. Vax, code name 750. He's licensed to core dump and segmentation fault."
chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) (07/12/85)
In article <790@vax2.fluke.UUCP> moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) writes: > >1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before? > The voice is amazingly familiar. Ronald Reagan. Nope, I'm not joking. Listen to his voice. He even does Reagan's "well" perfectly. He even looks somewhat like him. Chris Andersen -- "Roads? Where we're going we don't need any roads!"
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (07/12/85)
In article <697@daemen.UUCP> boyce@daemen.UUCP (Doug Boyce) writes: >> >> Now the question is: "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode >> before time became out of joint?" > > Maybe Chuck Berry never got the inspiration for Johny B. Goode. He might > have learned it from Marty before it ever became a hit and Chuck waited for > > the right time to release. > Maybe it was predestined that Chuck would learn it from Marty who had in turn > learned from Chuck. (confusing?) That's a time paradox. How could they cyclically learn from each other? It might have been that Chuck learned the style and "sound" from Marty... but that also can get paradoxical. >Don't forget he ends up saving Doc in the end. Although Marty >tries so hard to warn Doc of his distant death Doc refuses to take it. >He rips up a message Marty puts in his pocket. But the message ends up old but >intact in the future. Why? I've wondered about this too. Remember he stuffed the letter back in his pocket after he tore it up so I assume he just pasted it back together later. >Also when Doc was first riddled with bullets from >the Libyans I don't remember any blood. Could it have been that Doc >was already forwarned and had the bullet proof vest on already. Irk.. you don't have much of a conception of time. "Already" had already happened the "first time." Thus he DID have the bullet-proof vest on because he already had the letter. >To all you time travel experts, I have heard various premises about but >wouldn't it be kind of distructive if you met future/past version of yourself. >Also wouldn't Marty coming back to the future before he had/will go back >to the past do as much damage to the time stream as his interaction with >his parents? Yeh ... just his very presence might well have changed things. But who would know? Only Marty in his frame of reference. -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO "There are none so blind as those that will not see"
knf@druxo.UUCP (FricklasK) (07/13/85)
--> "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode before..."?
We're in world 2, see. The question is how did the hero
learn Jonny B. Goode in world 1....
'`'`
Ken
'\'\'
"whu'd he say, Maude?"jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) (07/14/85)
I would think that Marty's trip to the past affected MANY aspects of the
present which are not mentioned in the film. I remember once reading a
short story about a time traveler who goes back to check out the dinosaurs.
All he does is step out of his machine, look around then get back in, but
doing so he accidentally kills a butterfly. When he gets back to the
"present" things are radically different. (Of course the farther back one
goes, the more drastic the effects of the visit.) Does anyone remember
this story, and the author/title? Thanks.
--
Joe Arceneaux
Lafayette, LA
{akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jlamangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/15/85)
>>> Now the question is: "How did Chuck Berry learn Johnny B. Goode >>> before time became out of joint?" >> Maybe Chuck Berry never got the inspiration for Johny B. Goode. He might >> have learned it from Marty before it ever became a hit and Chuck waited for >> the right time to release. >> Maybe it was predestined that Chuck would learn it from Marty who had in >> turn learned from Chuck. (confusing?) >That's a time paradox. How could they cyclically learn from each other? >It might have been that Chuck learned the style and "sound" from Marty... >but that also can get paradoxical. >>Don't forget he ends up saving Doc in the end. Although Marty >>tries so hard to warn Doc of his distant death Doc refuses to take it. >>He rips up a message Marty puts in his pocket. But the message ends up old >>but intact in the future. Why? >I've wondered about this too. Remember he stuffed the letter back in his >pocket after he tore it up so I assume he just pasted it back together later. >>Also when Doc was first riddled with bullets from >>the Libyans I don't remember any blood. Could it have been that Doc >>was already forwarned and had the bullet proof vest on already. >Irk.. you don't have much of a conception of time. "Already" had already >happened the "first time." Thus he DID have the bullet-proof vest on >because he already had the letter. >>To all you time travel experts, I have heard various premises about but >>wouldn't it be kind of distructive if you met future/past version of >>yourself. >>Also wouldn't Marty coming back to the future before he had/will go back >>to the past do as much damage to the time stream as his interaction with >>his parents? >Yeh ... just his very presence might well have changed things. But who would >know? Only Marty in his frame of reference. Actually, there's only one serious praradox you need to resolve to get all the others to go away: what happens to the "second" Marty? Marty has this picture, from future v1.0 which is disappearing because future v1.1 will be different. But when he gets back home, he remembers v1.0, even though he was making himself v1.0 disappear. Either his memory should somehow reflect 1.1 now instead of 1.0, or he couldn't cause himself not to exist. The only way I see out of this is to postulate that Marty v1.0 is distinct from Marty v1.1, but that their existences are somehow coupled (at least up to the point where they both go backwards. It's certainly clear that Doc is different; in v1.0 he is clearly NOT wearing the bullet-proof vest. But then you have to figure out where Marty v1.1 went to. This possibly gets rid of the Chuck Berry paradox, because Berry v1.1 is getting the sound from Berry v1.0. All the information about the future of v1.0 is coming from v1.1. Unless Marty v1.1 goes back to the past and interacts with v1.0, there's no loop. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe "You want me to make a donation to the Coast Guard Youth Auxiliary!"
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (07/15/85)
Oh good grief. Back to the Future, like most time travel stories, doesn't even try to avoid or explain paradox. Just ignore it and enjoy the film! (It's *very* enjoyable...) (Btw, to anyone who didn't realize it, I was kidding about applying Hogan's "Thrice Upon a Time" theory; the movie doesn't stick to any one recognizable explanation.) "I've still got my hair!" -- 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
russell@acf4.UUCP (Bill Russell) (07/15/85)
There are several items which are different when he goes back. Besides his family and the house, look at the sign outside of the mall. When he left is was "Twin Pines Mall" with two electric pine trees. When he comes back to the future it has changed to "Lone Pine Mall" with one electric pine tree.
jimc@haddock.UUCP (07/15/85)
Yes, I remember it. It is called "A Sound of Thunder", and it was
written by Ray Bradbury in the 1950's. It is one of his more famous
stories, and it is available in many anthologies.
Jim Campbell
..!{ihnp4, allegra, harvard}!ima!haddock!jimcbrenda@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....."
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (07/16/85)
Oh, you know how it is in real life. We drink Generic Cola and we shop
at Mr. Generic. We wear Generic shoes and drive Generic cars. Movies
should reflect that. Otherwise, they might lose touch with reality.
:-)
--
- Sean Casey UUCP: sean@ukma.UUCP or
- Department of Mathematics {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean
- University of Kentucky ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA smc@mit-vax.UUCP (Stewart M. Clamen) (07/16/85)
Probably the best way to think about a time travel film is as little as possible, ie. to enjoy the film and its paradoxes and not attempt to explain them. Of course, trying to come up with a consistent explanation of events only characterizes you as a human, and I am no exception... > Actually, there's only one serious praradox you need to resolve to get all > the others to go away: what happens to the "second" Marty? I agree. One solution to the Berry problem is to assume that the 'first' Chuck hears "the new sound" from someone else, but after November 10, 1955. All Marty does is teach it to him a bit earlier. Here is my attempt to resolve the "real" paradox: I tend to categorize the consistent time-travel stories I've read/seen into 2 groups, the "1-past model", and the "infinite-timeline model". The former ides suggests that a time traveler cannot travel back to the past and change it, because it has already happened and he has already been there. The latter assumes that there are an infinite number of possible futures, and by 'changing' the past, you are just following a different one. The other future still 'exists' (for lack of a better word), though, as do many other possible futures. The time-traveler, returning to the future, would find a different one, because he would be following a different line. On the other hand, if the traveler goes forward in time, everything reamins causal, as when the dog Einstein his propelled forward in the first test on the deLorean. > Marty has this picture, from future v1.0 which is disappearing because > future v1.1 will be different. But when he gets back home, he remembers > v1.0, even though he was making himself v1.0 disappear. Either his memory > should somehow reflect 1.1 now instead of 1.0, or he couldn't cause himself > not to exist. I view the BTTF as following the "infinite-timeline model" to some extent. When the instance of Marty that the movie concentrates on returns to his own time, he notices the changes because he grew up in another (original?) timeline. This new timeline differs from the other one in that, in November 1955, a teenager from the future arrives and confuses the lives of a number of contemporary figures. The appearance of Marty in the past, an event which DID NOT occur in the timeline in which our Marty was born, causes Marty's relative time/space to diverge from its previous path, ie. he doesn't return to the same place he came from. I think of the picture of himself and his siblings as a dramatic prop, a link to this new future timeline, that his presence in 1955 has led to. > The only way I see out of this is to postulate that Marty v1.0 is distinct > from Marty v1.1, but that their existences are somehow coupled (at least up > to the point where they both go backwards. It's certainly clear that Doc is > different; in v1.0 he is clearly NOT wearing the bullet-proof vest. But > then you have to figure out where Marty v1.1 went to. An interesting thought about the 'second' Marty just crossed my mind. We really have no idea as to what point in time he went. Remember in the 'first' timeline, Doc sets the clock to the day in which he discovered the flux-converter, the invention that began his work on the time machine. In this new timeline, Doc remembers Marty from 1955, and may not consider that a prime time to return to. Maybe this other Marty went to the future! Anyhow, we can assume that this other Marty traveled to some point in space/time, ad if he went to the past, that he spawned off yet another timeline, and if he went to the future, that he may meet his other instance one day. I apologize for being so long winded; I hope I didn't bore you too much. -- ---------------------------------------------------- ARPA: SMC%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA USENET: ...!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!smc%mit-oz
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (07/16/85)
In article <588@usl.UUCP> jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) writes: > > present which are not mentioned in the film. I remember once reading a > short story about a time traveler who goes back to check out the dinosaurs. > All he does is step out of his machine, look around then get back in, but > doing so he accidentally kills a butterfly. When he gets back to the > "present" things are radically different. (Of course the farther back one > goes, the more drastic the effects of the visit.) Does anyone remember > this story, and the author/title? Thanks. > -- > Joe Arceneaux Author is definately Ray Bradbury and the name is.... uh.... "Time Safari" I think. -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO "There is not a single McDonald's in Garrett County"
tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) (07/16/85)
Whew! Boy does this one bring back memories. The story you refer to is at least 35 years old. It was a short story in a collection by Heinlen(I think). The hero of the story left his time with everything running smoothly and everyone happy. When he returns, everything is in a mess - war, pestilence, etc.. All because he stepped on that butterfly. I read the story many years ago and have thought about it every time one of these back to the future stories comes up. Someday, when the weather cools, I will go up in the attic and see if I still have the collection the story came from. T. C. Wheeler
johnston@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA (07/16/85)
You'll probably get a million responses, but, it's a short story by
Ray Bradbury called "The Sound of Thunder". Actually, I can't remember
whether "The" is in the title or if it's really "A", or what.
I'm not sure which book it's in, but it might be in _The Illustrated Man_.
Boy, this sure turned out to be a worthless posting!
- Gary Johnston
USENET: ...!{pur_ee,ihnp4,convex}!uiucdcs!johnston
CSNET: johnston%uiuc@csnet-relay.arpa
ARPA: johnston@uiuc.arpamcdaniel@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA (07/17/85)
An answer to the Chuck Berry paradox: we're living in universe v1.1,
in which Chuck Berry was the first person to do "Johnny B. Goode".
In v1.0, someone else did it a little later. (Not too much later,
or rock wouldn't have advanced to where an "Edward Van Halen" could
perform his style of "music".)
------------------
Tim McDaniel; CSRD at the Silicon Prairie
(Center for Supercomputing Research and Development at the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Usenet: ...{pur-ee|ihnp4|convex}!uiucdcs!mcdaniel
Csnet: mcdaniel%uiuc@csnet-relay.arpa (really!)
Arpa: mcdaniel@Uiuc.arpa
Bitnet: MCDANIEL@UIUCVMDalle@ihuxb.UUCP (Marguerite Czajka) (07/17/85)
> There are several items which are different when he goes back. Besides > his family and the house, look at the sign outside of the mall. When he > left is was "Twin Pines Mall" with two electric pine trees. When he comes > back to the future it has changed to "Lone Pine Mall" with one electric > pine tree. The farmhouse that Michael J. Fox (forgot his movie name) was at was called Twin Pines. When he raced away - I think I remember one of the people saying "There goes one of the pines!". That must be where the mall got it`s name.
shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore) (07/17/85)
> From: tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) > It was a short story in a collection > by Heinlen(I think). The hero of the story left his time with > everything running smoothly and everyone happy. When he returns, > everything is in a mess - war, pestilence, etc.. All because he > stepped on that butterfly. It could have been by Heinlein, but methinks it was actually by Bradbury. At any rate, the time travellers return from their jaunt to the age of the dinosaurs , and one (the guide, I believe) notices that some words on a sign are spelled archaically. He looks at the other time traveller, sees a butterfly stuck to the bottom of his shoe, and shoots him. We're left with the sense that the oddly spelled sign is the tip of the iceberg, and that history might be a fragile thing. I don't remember war *or* pestilence appearing explicitly. -- Melinda Shore ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor University of Chicago Computation Center Staff.Melinda%chip@UChicago.Bitnet
williams@nacho.DEC (For office use only) (07/17/85)
David Cheason writes... >The truth of the matter is that the fifties was the most blackest periods of >American history. Many people's lives were ruined as a result of >institutionalized paranoia. Great talents were not allowed to flourish on >the stage, screen and in literature. Mutual hate and suspicion was the rule >of the day rather than the exception. "Blackest periods"?! "Mutual hate and suspicion"?! _Back to the Future_ is a COMEDY. It's supposed to be fun. Would you rather that Marty had gone back to 1955 to find that his parents were ruthlessly hunting "pinkos". Give me a break. You're missing the whole point. It makes an attempt, albiet a feeble one perhaps, to see to show that weaknesses can be overcome. And it lets you live a day dream where you wonder what your parents were really like when they were teenagers. Forget the heavy social message. It was a little day dreaming movie meant for entertainment and it does a good job. Try and have a good time. lowell williams
kaufman@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA (07/17/85)
/* Written 11:22 pm Jul 14,1985 by mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP in uiucdcs:net.movies */ Actually, there's only one serious praradox you need to resolve to get all the others to go away: what happens to the "second" Marty? Marty has this picture, from future v1.0 which is disappearing because future v1.1 will be different. But when he gets back home, he remembers v1.0, even though he was making himself v1.0 disappear. Either his memory should somehow reflect 1.1 now instead of 1.0, or he couldn't cause himself not to exist. /* End of text from uiucdcs:net.movies */ This isn't too hard to imagine. First of all, pre-1955 events should be identical in v1.0 and v1.1. From 1955 to 1985, there is some divergence, but one can assume that in v1.1 Marty still gets involved with Doc, who still develops his time machine and asks Marty to join him that fateful night. There are the same Libyans, and Marty reacts the same way under stress. Therefore, at the entry point and moment in 1955 v1.*, both Martys are occupying the same space. Somehow they merge. There are three possible resolutions: 1) Marty 1955 is Marty v1.0, with Marty v1.1 either suppressed in his mind or simply fizzled out of existence. Marty will behave as in the movie, thereby creating v1.1. 2) The other way around - Marty 1955 is Marty v1.1. Depending on how much he knows of his parents' past, he may be able to stumble through the events of the movie to preserve v1.1. Otherwise, he'll blot himself out of existence, in turn creating v1.0, which in turn generates v1.1 etc. in an unstable loop. 3) Marty 1955 holds the memories of both Martys and proceeds accordingly. I don't want to speculate on the effects of this, but the prospects are better than in case 2, since he'll have two data sets to assimilate. He may be able to figure out how to generate the desirable future. Then again, he might become a raving schizoid stuck in 1955. Since the first leads to the cleanest resolution, we can shave with Occam to suggest that this would have the best chance of occurring. Lo and behold, this is actually consistent with the film. But it doesn't matter. You see, they soon go back even further in the past and while there ... Ken Kaufman (uiucdcs!kaufman)
howard@sfmag.UUCP (H.M.Moskovitz) (07/17/85)
> Whew! Boy does this one bring back memories. The story you refer > to is at least 35 years old. It was a short story in a collection > by Heinlen(I think). The hero of the story left his time with > everything running smoothly and everyone happy. When he returns, > everything is in a mess - war, pestilence, etc.. All because he > stepped on that butterfly. I read the story many years ago and > have thought about it every time one of these back to the future > stories comes up. Someday, when the weather cools, I will go up > in the attic and see if I still have the collection the story > came from. > T. C. Wheeler Actually, Heinlein had a book called "Time Enough for Love" that has a similar flavor to Back To The Future but with a little Heinlein-type kick. A great book and a big one too! I highly reccommend it to anyone who like BTTF. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard Moskovitz AT&T Info. Systems attunix!howard
waltt@tekecs.UUCP (Walt Tucker) (07/18/85)
> > From: tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) > > It was a short story in a collection > > by Heinlen(I think). The hero of the story left his time with > > everything running smoothly and everyone happy. When he returns, > > everything is in a mess - war, pestilence, etc.. All because he > > stepped on that butterfly. > > It could have been by Heinlein, but methinks it was actually by > Bradbury. At any rate, the time travellers return from their jaunt to > the age of the dinosaurs , and one (the guide, I believe) notices that > some words on a sign are spelled archaically. He looks at the other > time traveller, sees a butterfly stuck to the bottom of his shoe, and > shoots him. We're left with the sense that the oddly spelled sign is > the tip of the iceberg, and that history might be a fragile thing. I > don't remember war *or* pestilence appearing explicitly. Actually, the story does give you a little more information than that. When the travelers leave, it is a time of national turmoil and right after a major national election. The heads of the two parties attempting to gain national power represent democracy and totalitarianism ideals (many parallels to pre WWII germany during late 1920s here). When the time travellers left, everyone was rejoicing because the democratic party had won over the "neo-nazi" totalitarian party, who was trying to gain power. When the time travellers return, the letters on the sign are oddly spelled . Then someone asks about the election. It seems the totalitarian party was elected over the other party, the head of the "neo-nazi" party had his former opposition put to death, and the county was now in a quasi-militaristic state. -- Walt Tucker Tektronix, Inc. The "time safari" takes you back in time to kill a dinosaur. This, of course, costs large sums of money, and only dinosaurs that were going to die in the next few minutes are actually killed. The time travellers must stay in a spec lets you
ronnie@mit-eddie.UUCP (Ronnie Schnell) (07/18/85)
Does it seem reasonable that when Marty was growing up that his parents would be kind of suprised by the striking resemblence between their child and that weirdo guitarist that played at their ``Enchantment under the sea dance''? I would think that Marty's father would definitely suspenct Marty's mother of cheating with Marty(?) ..mit-eddie!ronnie ronnie@mit-mc.arpa
jimc@ima.UUCP (07/18/85)
If you want to find it, don't look under Heinlen! It is called
"A Sound of Thunder", written by Ray Bradbury. It is a classic,
though, like _Back_to_the_Future_, it is premised on an assumption
about time travel which I feel is incorrect. At any rate, enjoy.
Jim Campbell
{ihnp4, allegra, harvard}!ima!haddock!jimccomstock@tymix.UUCP (Dave Comstock) (07/19/85)
>I remember once reading a > All he does is step out of his machine, look around then get back in, but > doing so he accidentally kills a butterfly. When he gets back to the > "present" things are radically different. (Of course the farther back one > goes, the more drastic the effects of the visit.) Does anyone remember > this story, and the author/title? Thanks. > -- > Joe Arceneaux > Lafayette, LA > {akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla
markb@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Mark Biggar) (07/19/85)
In article <1110020@acf4.UUCP> russell@acf4.UUCP (Bill Russell) writes: >There are several items which are different when he goes back. Besides >his family and the house, look at the sign outside of the mall. When he >left is was "Twin Pines Mall" with two electric pine trees. When he comes >back to the future it has changed to "Lone Pine Mall" with one electric >pine tree. This is because Marty ran over one of the pines when he left Mr. Peabody's farm. Mark Biggar {allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,akgua,sdcsvax}!sdcrdcf!markb
joel@peora.UUCP (Joel Upchurch) (07/19/85)
> Does it seem reasonable that when Marty was growing up that his > parents would be kind of suprised by the striking resemblence > between their child and that weirdo guitarist that played at their > ``Enchantment under the sea dance''? I would think that Marty's > father would definitely suspenct Marty's mother of cheating with > Marty(?) 1. Marty is not going to be born until 1967 or so. So is George going to suspect his wife of cheating with someone they haven't seen in 12 years? 2. By the time Marty gets old enough to resemble Marty in 1955 somewhat we're up to 1980. Would you remember what someone you saw a few times over a period of a week 25 years ago looks like? Now if they had took some photos of Marty from 1955 that might be different. 3. Assuming that Marty is actually their son there should be some family resemblence, so George shouldn't have any reason to get suspicious in the first place. From the comments in the movie I would suspect that Marty takes after his mother's side more. Think of the plot complications if Marty had looked just like his father! Of course he could have been adopted like Doc Brown suggested.
mupmalis@watarts.UUCP (M. A. Upmalis) (07/19/85)
In article <4727@mit-eddie.UUCP> ronnie@mit-eddie.UUCP (Ronnie Schnell) writes: >Does it seem reasonable that when Marty was growing up that his >parents would be kind of suprised by the striking resemblence >between their child and that weirdo guitarist that played at their >``Enchantment under the sea dance''? I would think that Marty's >father would definitely suspenct Marty's mother of cheating with >Marty(?) Marty was the second born though, there would be a problem, nice try.... Another comment about Back to the Future, did you notice that there was only one black with a speaking part, if not only one black in the movie, also the female roles in the film fell a little bit short of what one might call full human poetential. The comment about Spielberg involved films (I'll come back to goonies) is that they are suburban, the suburbs are white bread and mayo, but still there is space for some other representations that Harrison Ford or some variant of his younger brother. Goonies was an exception but in the case of a group instead of one against the world the mix seeemed appropriate, but they were not real people at least not for kids to identify with.... Things I hope are improving, but the occasional good interpratation of a role by somebody else is wanting, I mean all Latvians are represented on the screen by Gene Barry! Ta Ta Tinsel Town, signing off for now.... -- Mike Upmalis (mupmalis@watarts)<University of Waterloo> ihnp4!watmath!watarts!mupmalis
wws@whuxlm.UUCP (Stoll W William) (07/20/85)
> > /* Written 11:22 pm Jul 14,1985 by mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP in uiucdcs:net.movies */ > Actually, there's only one serious praradox you need to resolve to get all > the others to go away: what happens to the "second" Marty? > > Marty has this picture, from future v1.0 which is disappearing because > future v1.1 will be different. But when he gets back home, he remembers > v1.0, even though he was making himself v1.0 disappear. Either his memory > should somehow reflect 1.1 now instead of 1.0, or he couldn't cause himself > not to exist. > /* End of text from uiucdcs:net.movies */ > > This isn't too hard to imagine. First of all, pre-1955 events should be > identical in v1.0 and v1.1. From 1955 to 1985, there is some divergence, > but one can assume that in v1.1 Marty still gets involved with Doc, who still > develops his time machine and asks Marty to join him that fateful night. > There are the same Libyans, and Marty reacts the same way under stress. > Therefore, at the entry point and moment in 1955 v1.*, both Martys are > occupying the same space. Somehow they merge. > > There are three possible resolutions: > 1) Marty 1955 is Marty v1.0, with Marty v1.1 either suppressed in his mind > or simply fizzled out of existence. Marty will behave as in the movie, > thereby creating v1.1. > 2) The other way around - Marty 1955 is Marty v1.1. Depending on how much he > knows of his parents' past, he may be able to stumble through the events of > the movie to preserve v1.1. Otherwise, he'll blot himself out of existence, > in turn creating v1.0, which in turn generates v1.1 etc. in an unstable loop. > 3) Marty 1955 holds the memories of both Martys and proceeds accordingly. > I don't want to speculate on the effects of this, but the prospects are better > than in case 2, since he'll have two data sets to assimilate. He may be able > to figure out how to generate the desirable future. Then again, he might > become a raving schizoid stuck in 1955. > > Since the first leads to the cleanest resolution, we can shave with Occam > to suggest that this would have the best chance of occurring. Lo and behold, > this is actually consistent with the film. > > But it doesn't matter. You see, they soon go back even further in the past > and while there ... > > Ken Kaufman (uiucdcs!kaufman) I've been following this discussion for awhile, and I just had to comment that this is the only hypothesis that leaves me feeling as if the issue could possibly be resolved. BUT, of course, the issue can't be resolved. That's why they call it "paradox". Bill Stoll, ..!whuxlm!wws
comstock@tymix.UUCP (Dave Comstock) (07/20/85)
The disaster that occurred in the book was the election of a Hitler-like
dictator. As I recall, the time travellers left on their journey just before
an important election between a man that everyone felt would be a good leader
and the despot. The title, which I am sure was something like "A Sound Of
Thunder", was the last line of the story, and I still have a vivid
recollection of that final line.
David Comstock Tymnet, Inc.
...decvax!ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!tymix!comstockronnie@mit-eddie.UUCP (Ronnie Schnell) (07/21/85)
> Oh, you know how it is in real life. We drink Generic Cola and we shop > at Mr. Generic. We wear Generic shoes and drive Generic cars. Movies > should reflect that. Otherwise, they might lose touch with reality. > :-) Well, the producers/directors seemed to have no problem blurring out all of the other stores at the twin/lone pines mall, with the exception of one department store and a photography developing store, both of which shall remain nameless. #Ron
becker@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA (07/21/85)
>In article <588@usl.UUCP> jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) writes: >> >> present which are not mentioned in the film. I remember once reading a >> short story about a time traveler who goes back to check out the dinosaurs. >> All he does is step out of his machine, look around then get back in, but >> doing so he accidentally kills a butterfly. When he gets back to the >> "present" things are radically different. (Of course the farther back one >> goes, the more drastic the effects of the visit.) Does anyone remember >> this story, and the author/title? Thanks. >> -- >> Joe Arceneaux > >Author is definately Ray Bradbury and the name is.... uh.... "Time >Safari" I think. > >UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith >ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO Yes, it *is* Ray Bradbury, not Heinlein. The story was called "A Sound of Thunder" and I believe "Time Safari" was the name of the business that sent people back. Craig Becker ihnp4!uiucdcs!becker
chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) (07/21/85)
I think there may even be a better explanation for the two Marty's then so far suggested (and one with some strange consequences). First we have Marty v1.0 who grew up with his nerdy father and fat mother. In 1985, he is sent back in time to 1955 by the profesors time machine. While there he screws up time in such a way that he creates an alternate future (after 1955) with a different Marty (v1.1). When he finally returns to 1985, he actually returns to Marty (v1.1)'s timeline and not the original one. He gets there just in time to see Marty v1.1 head of into the past and Marty v1.0 now has to live in the Marty v1.1's timeline. However, when Marty v1.1 goes back in time, he too screws up the timelines to create (get this) Marty v1.2 This continues on and on, constantly creating new Marty's until one of them somehow prevents his next regeneration from going back in time, or until one of them screws up time so much that the next Marty down the line is never created (ie he failed to get his parents together). Chris Andersen -- tektronix!azure!chrisa
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/22/85)
In article <4745@mit-eddie.UUCP> Ronnie Schnell writes: >> Oh, you know how it is in real life. We drink Generic Cola and we shop >> at Mr. Generic. We wear Generic shoes and drive Generic cars. Movies >> should reflect that. Otherwise, they might lose touch with reality. >Well, the producers/directors seemed to have no problem blurring out all >of the other stores at the twin/lone pines mall, with the exception of >one department store and a photography developing store, both of which >shall remain nameless. I don't know, they DO lend an important air of verisimitude. Besides, shouldn't whoever gets used as props pay for the free publicity? Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe
training@rtech.UUCP (Training account) (07/22/85)
> > There are several items which are different when he goes back. Besides > > his family and the house, look at the sign outside of the mall. When he > > left is was "Twin Pines Mall" with two electric pine trees. When he comes > > back to the future it has changed to "Lone Pine Mall" with one electric > > pine tree. > The farmhouse that Michael J. Fox (forgot his movie name) was at was called > Twin Pines. When he raced away - I think I remember one of the people > saying "There goes one of the pines!". That must be where the mall got it`s > name. Before Marty goes into the past, the professor tells him that the mall was built on Peabody's farm, and that Peabody was trying to crossbreed two pine trees. At that point, the mall is "Twin Pines Mall". When Marty is escaping from the farmer and his family, he hits one of the two pines, and when he returns from the past, the mall is "Lone Pine Mall". Also, the Bradbury book that the butterfly story is in is "S is for Space". Robert Orenstein Relational Technology
jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) (07/22/85)
In article <13900047@haddock.UUCP> jimc@haddock.UUCP writes: > > Yes, I remember it. It is called "A Sound of Thunder", and it was > written by Ray Bradbury in the 1950's. It is one of his more famous > stories, and it is available in many anthologies. > As the original poster of this question, I thought I'd mention that the concensus as well as the strongest evidence (presented in my mail) is for "A Sound of Thunder" by Bradbury. -- Joe Arceneaux Lafayette, LA {akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla
ccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli) (07/23/85)
> In article <4727@mit-eddie.UUCP> ronnie@mit-eddie.UUCP (Ronnie Schnell) writes: > >Does it seem reasonable that when Marty was growing up that his > >parents would be kind of suprised by the striking resemblence > >between their child and that weirdo guitarist that played at their > >``Enchantment under the sea dance''? I would think that Marty's > >father would definitely suspenct Marty's mother of cheating with > >Marty(?) > > Marty was the second born though, there would be a problem, > nice try.... > > Another comment about Back to the Future, did you notice that there > was only one black with a speaking part, if not only one black in the > movie, also the female roles in the film fell a little bit short > of what one might call full human poetential. The comment about > Spielberg involved films (I'll come back to goonies) is that they > are suburban, the suburbs are white bread and mayo, but still > there is space for some other representations that Harrison Ford > or some variant of his younger brother. Goonies was an exception > but in the case of a group instead of one against the world > the mix seeemed appropriate, but they were not real people at least > not for kids to identify with.... How about the fact that all Spielberg movies seem to involve rebellion against parents and authority figures? At the very least, such people are often made out to be irrational meanies, e. g. the dean in Back to the Future. -- ----- "Rescue your DNPC from a horrifying menace today!" ----- --rick heli (... ucbvax!ucdavis!groucho!ccrrick)
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/24/85)
In article <8494@watarts.UUCP> mupmalis@watarts.UUCP (M. A. Upmalis) writes: >Another comment about Back to the Future, did you notice that there >was only one black with a speaking part, if not only one black in the >movie, also the female roles in the film fell a little bit short >of what one might call full human poetential. The comment about >Spielberg involved films (I'll come back to goonies) is that they >are suburban, the suburbs are white bread and mayo, but still >there is space for some other representations that Harrison Ford >or some variant of his younger brother. Goonies was an exception >but in the case of a group instead of one against the world >the mix seeemed appropriate, but they were not real people at least >not for kids to identify with.... This is both wrong and silly. There are a number of black speaking parts. Regardless of that, didja ever stop to consider that the positions of women and blacks in society (even California society) were just a wee bit different back then? I don't know how well integrated S. Cal. was back then, but the East Coast sure wasn't. Besides, this is comedy. A little characture isn't that grave a sin. This movie has put a wierd set of conflicting impulses in me. On the one hand, there's a part of me that would like to go back and visit the late 50s and early 60s. On the other hand, another part of me likes it just fine right here, and would prefer to be 10 years younger-- now. I guess it's freedom versus simplicity. Oh Well. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe "You want me to make a donation to the Coast Guard Youth Auxiliary!"
terryl@tekcrl.UUCP (07/24/85)
>>> Oh, you know how it is in real life. We drink Generic Cola and we shop >>> at Mr. Generic. We wear Generic shoes and drive Generic cars. Movies >>> should reflect that. Otherwise, they might lose touch with reality. >>Well, the producers/directors seemed to have no problem blurring out all >>of the other stores at the twin/lone pines mall, with the exception of >>one department store and a photography developing store, both of which >>shall remain nameless. >I don't know, they DO lend an important air of verisimitude. >Besides, shouldn't whoever gets used as props pay for the free publicity? But they do!!! Remember ET??? They originally wanted to use M & M's (*) candy when Elliot is trying to get ET to come out of the shed, but M & M's didn't think it was a wise choice, so they used Reese's Pieces (*) instead, and Reese's Pieces sold like hot cakes for a while after the movie opened. I vaguely remember whoever makes Reese's paying a tidy sum for "this honor". You think I'd sign my name to this??? (*) Reese's Pieces and M & M's are probably trademarks of two totally different companies and I really don't care.
boyce@daemen.UUCP (Doug Boyce) (07/25/85)
> > Does it seem reasonable that when Marty was growing up that his > parents would be kind of suprised by the striking resemblence > between their child and that weirdo guitarist that played at their > ``Enchantment under the sea dance''? I would think that Marty's > father would definitely suspenct Marty's mother of cheating with > Marty(?) > > ..mit-eddie!ronnie > ronnie@mit-mc.arpa That does seem resonable, but with the passing years they "wouldn't" remember exactly what he looks like since they only saw him off and on for about a week. That's not an awful amount of time to remember a face for the next *thirty* years now is it? The novelization does touch on it but not much. Marty asks what ever happened to the guy he was named after and his mother wonders how he knew about that and says that "he vanished into thin air." -- Doug Boyce Daemen College, Amherst NY UUCP : {decvax,dual,rocksanne,watmath,rocksvax}!sunybcs!daemen!boyce ARPA : boyce@buffalo.CSNET@csnet-relay or ARPA : boyce%daemen.uucp@buffalo.CSNET@csnet-relay "What a hypocrite, after all that lecturing about screwing up the space-time continuum..." "Yeah, well, I figured what the hell.."
mupmalis@watarts.UUCP (M. A. Upmalis) (07/25/85)
In article <972@umcp-cs.UUCP> mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) writes: > >This is both wrong and silly. There are a number of black speaking parts. >Regardless of that, didja ever stop to consider that the positions of women >and blacks in society (even California society) were just a wee bit >different back then? I don't know how well integrated S. Cal. was back >then, but the East Coast sure wasn't. Besides, this is comedy. A little >characture isn't that grave a sin. The point is that films while they can be instruments of social change, criticism etcetera do no have to be mobilising forces of change. However they should reflect change in society. After I posted I rembered the band, but they were in essence "brought in to entertain the suburb kids". I would let one movie go by or two, but if many movies that kids see don't provide the same message of what we would like western society to be and what it actually is, then something is going to get lost in the shuffle. Children can see that older people can relate to younger people, that our ecology is a precious thing that can be lost. The impact of movies like Cotton Club, Who has seen the wolf, Harry and Tonto each in their own way are representative of other values seperate from suburbia and yuppie dum... -- Mike Upmalis (mupmalis@watarts)<University of Waterloo> ihnp4!watmath!watarts!mupmalis
cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (07/25/85)
> In article <588@usl.UUCP> jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) writes: > > > > present which are not mentioned in the film. I remember once reading a > > short story about a time traveler who goes back to check out the dinosaurs. > > All he does is step out of his machine, look around then get back in, but > > doing so he accidentally kills a butterfly. When he gets back to the > > "present" things are radically different. (Of course the farther back one > > goes, the more drastic the effects of the visit.) Does anyone remember > > this story, and the author/title? Thanks. > > -- > > Joe Arceneaux > > Author is definately Ray Bradbury and the name is.... uh.... "Time > Safari" I think. > -- > > UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith > ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO > > "There is not a single McDonald's in Garrett County" Actually, there is a better story along these same lines. I don't remember the title, (I *think* Asimov wrote it), but it starts out in a classroom with a bunch of students watching the professor demonstrate that time travel *can't* alter anything; nothing relies so heavily on any one event for the future to be significantly changed. As demonstration, the professor starts a pendulum swinging back and forth through a time travel device which moves back a million years on every swing. Of course, by the end of the demonstration, a couple dozen swings later (with detailed descriptions of that caterpillar being killed, which causes A, then B, then C, then D, and so on), nothing has changed, at least that anyone realizes. It's just that all the students and the professor are now intelligent reptiles! The whole story is only a couple of pages.
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/26/85)
In article <384@ucdavis.UUCP> ccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli) writes: >How about the fact that all Spielberg movies seem to involve >rebellion against parents and authority figures? At the very least, >such people are often made out to be irrational meanies, e. g. the >dean in Back to the Future. Oh, come now.... you never had someone like that dean at YOUR school? Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe "Yeah, well, history's gonna change."
jims@hcrvax.UUCP (Jim Sullivan) (07/26/85)
> Another comment about Back to the Future, did you notice that there > was only one black with a speaking part, if not only one black in the > movie, also the female roles in the film fell a little bit short > of what one might call full human poetential. But did you notice that the One Black was the Mayor of the town ?? Times were different then, but times changes, sometime for the better. Jim Sullivan
ccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli) (07/27/85)
> In article <384@ucdavis.UUCP> ccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli) writes: > >How about the fact that all Spielberg movies seem to involve > >rebellion against parents and authority figures? At the very least, > >such people are often made out to be irrational meanies, e. g. the > >dean in Back to the Future. > > Oh, come now.... you never had someone like that dean at YOUR school? > > Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe > > "Yeah, well, history's gonna change." Whether I did or not, I wonder if all the parents sending their kiddies to such "cute" and "innocent" movies realize what their children are being shown... -- --rick heli (... ucbvax!ucdavis!groucho!ccrrick)
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (07/30/85)
In article <8500@watarts.UUCP> mupmalis@watarts.UUCP (M. A. Upmalis) writes: >The point is that films while they can be instruments of social change, >criticism etcetera do no have to be mobilising forces of change. However >they should reflect change in society. After I posted I rembered the >band, but they were in essence "brought in to entertain the suburb kids". >I would let one movie go by or two, but if many movies that kids see >don't provide the same message of what we would like western society to >be and what it actually is, then something is going to get lost in the >shuffle. >Children can see that older people can relate to younger people, that >our ecology is a precious thing that can be lost. The impact of >movies like Cotton Club, Who has seen the wolf, Harry and Tonto each in >their own way are representative of other values seperate from >suburbia and yuppie dum... Sure, movies can do this. But not all movies can do this. We've just spent a decade tearing apart the past. Why not, then, a movie that remembers some of what was good about the past, and that recalls what we share with our parents? One of the points of this film was that Marty's parents were once kids too. A lot of the appeal of the movie draws on this. Sure, there were a lot of bad things about the 50's. The movie points a lot of them out itself. But people need to remember that there were good things too, like Doc. Charley Wingate
wws@whuxlm.UUCP (Stoll W William) (08/02/85)
On the subject of blatant commercialism, the following article appeared In the Newark NJ paper, the Star Ledger (Thurs, 8-1-85): The raisins ended up on the cutting room floor rather than in the mouth of actor Michael J. Fox, so the California Raisin Advisory Board got a $25,000 refund. The film's producers were paid $50,000 to have Fox munch on raisins during the popular movie, "Back to the Future." That scene was cut, and advisory board members threatended to sue. But they were appeased when a $25,000 refund check arrived. After all, the movie shows California raisins advertised on a bus stop bench. Bill Stoll, ..!whuxlm!wws
petrick@lll-crg.ARPA (Jim Petrick) (08/04/85)
>>1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before? >> The voice is amazingly familiar. He was in 'My Tutor', as the best friend of the main character (the one who finally went down to Mexico to get laid).
steve@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Steve Holtsberg) (08/16/85)
OK, it the earth is moving and you are not, you'll end up somewhere else when you travel through time. I admit it- I wasn't thinking when I said you'd end up in the same place. I was wrong. Unfortunately a lot of netters are still sending me mail- no need to any more! Of course, Doc knew this- that's why he used a Delorean! Steven Holtsberg