moriarty@tc.fluke.com (Jeff Meyer) (12/09/89)
BACK TO THE FUTURE, PART II
A film review by Jeff Meyer
Copyright 1989 Jeff Meyer
[Don't worry, kids, no real spoilers lurk within]
Actually, about the only spoiler that I will reveal about BACK TO THE
FUTURE PART II is the fact that the story is left with a cliff-hanger of an
ending, and is continued in BACK TO THE FUTURE PART III, coming to a Sequel
Auditorium near you next summer. I remember people walking out of the LORD OF
THE RINGS in an extremely peeved mood due to the annoying surprise that the
film only covered half of Tolkien's trilogy; I wouldn't have that on my
snow-white conscience, so, Happy Holidays. Now you can go prepared. (I must
admit that I didn't hear too much grumbling on leaving BACK TO THE FUTURE PART
II; I assume the knowledge of it being continued is either fairly common
knowledge, or the film is more satisfying that LORD OF THE RINGS, installment
or no. (A rather back-handed compliment...))
So, how is it? And, of course, the really *original* question: how does
is stand up to its predecessor? Well, first of all, the high points of BACK TO
THE FUTURE were a) a clever use of time-travel machinations (many already
familiar to me through the wonders of science fiction and comix), b)
Christopher Lloyd's Doc Brown, c) some cute humor, and d) Alan Silvestri's
charged-up theme music. And I liked the car. However, the characters were
mostly pastiches, keeping it at the level of an above-average exercise in comic
plotting with an under-used plot device -- time-travel. A satisfying movie,
but not something I was anxious to see over and over.
Thus, I have to say that BACK TO THE FUTURE II pretty well meets up to my
expectations, because they weren't abnormally high in the first place. The
cleverness and time-related in-jokes are pretty good, and the time-travel theme
holds together if you don't think about it *too* closely. (See assorted heaps
of rec.arts.movies articles for examples of intense chrono-temporal
reflection.) No real plot shocks or surprises There's a sense of rushed
urgency in this film that was absent in the first BACK TO THE FUTURE film, and
this gives the film an edge (or at least becomes reminiscent enough of IT'S A
WONDERFUL LIFE to simulate one); however, what it adds in suspense, in takes
away from the one enjoyable friendship in the first film, the one between Doc
Brown and Marty. Doc seems to be in the picture merely to hustle Marty from
time-period to time-period, and (except for one pleasant sequence where Brown
bumps into himself), gets to show very little personality; his main
contributions to the film are the better historical jokes. (From the previews
of Part III at the end of the film, this may be remedied in the concluding
film.) Michael J. Fox seems to be trying to beat Cary Grant's record of
double-takes in ARSENIC AND OLD LACE, and while he's adequate, he's no Archie
Leech. (The idea of Cary Grant as the protagonist in a slightly-altered
version of these films really appeals to me...) Everyone else is a
cookie-cutout character (Biff especially); they also toil who only serve the
plot, etc.
So, is it worth seeing? Depends how well you liked the original BACK TO
THE FUTURE PART II is more of the same; the good news, in these sequel-riddled
days, is it's not worse than the same.
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP: {uw-beaver, sun, microsoft, hplsla, uiucuxc}!fluke!moriarty