It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:26 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:37 am 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
I thought Elisabeth Shue's crazed double-takes and winsome whining were a riot and I was pretty disappointed that she was mostly discarded for the rest of the series after the first forty-five minutes of the second part-- I mean, she manages to upstage Christopher Lloyd's theatrics! I'll concede that the first film has a great premise and execution, but the sequel is such a strange and complicated riff on the first that the audacity of its existence looms large.


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:27 am
No Crispin Glover = No Sale


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:20 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
Crispin Glover was surprisingly also able to make something of his victim role in Friday The 13th Part IV (ironic final line: "Where's the corkscrew?"), mostly by virtue of his bizarre dance scene!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:14 pm 
Not PETA approved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada
I might be the only person who's seen parts 2 and 3 of the trilogy but has never seen part 1. I'm still not quite sure how that happened.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC
domino harvey wrote:
I thought Elisabeth Shue's crazed double-takes and winsome whining were a riot and I was pretty disappointed that she was mostly discarded for the rest of the series after the first forty-five minutes of the second part-- I mean, she manages to upstage Christopher Lloyd's theatrics! I'll concede that the first film has a great premise and execution, but the sequel is such a strange and complicated riff on the first that the audacity of its existence looms large.

The whole scene with Shue in the car early on is a riot.

Part II is definitely the finest of the three for me as well. For one thing, I love the way that it doesn't linger on its own effects shots; the domesticated scenes in 2015 are so silly and breezy and story-driven you barely notice how expensive everything must have been. Not only do I greatly enjoy the oddball surrealism of the future segment and the ingenuity of the paradox material (and I think Zemeckis is right about it being a unique comment on sequels -- the audience comes for more of the same, and in this case they literally get it in the 1955 sequences), I think the cliffhanger that closes it is one of the best endings in a Hollywood movie, at least of the last few decades.

I differ with Domino on Part III, though, as I think it's a compelling story that splices back in a lot of the emotional depth hinted at in Part I. Zemeckis said something years ago about being troubled that the original film implies that the people in your life should change in order to deserve your love. I don't quite see it that way, but the Mary Steenburgen / Christopher Lloyd relationship in III feels a bit like he and Gale are trying to compensate for that, since at bottom it's a story about acceptance of a loved one or partner's sheer outlandishness. But I can see how someone could feel that the love story is tacked on and the western elements are too conventional, etc.

For me, though I do love it, the first film hasn't aged as well as the sequels -- though I suppose you could make an argument that by steeping the first scenes in the 1980s, the movie establishes its period the same way it later establishes the 1950s, 2010s, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 12:35 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
All I know is that we are now less than four years away from October 21, 2015, and I still don't own a goddamn hoverboard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
Mr Sausage wrote:
I might be the only person who's seen parts 2 and 3 of the trilogy but has never seen part 1. I'm still not quite sure how that happened.

It is still worth seeing, although you've probably seen most of the big events from the repetition in Part 2! Still great though if only for the "Who's the President?...Ronald Reagan?! The actor!?!" line and to join in on the debate of which 1985 film used the mechanical breakfast making machine idea first: Pee Wee's Big Adventure, Brazil or Back To The Future!

Although of course the Libyan terrorist subplot plays a little differently these days, now that Libya has apparently just become a new cradle of democracy and does not appear likely to have had access to Plutonium that Doc could have stolen in the first place!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Mr Sausage wrote:
I might be the only person who's seen parts 2 and 3 of the trilogy but has never seen part 1. I'm still not quite sure how that happened.

That happened to me too until I was forced into seeing it by friends. Glover has a few good moments (his fear of Darth Vadar is great), but it's a fairly average experience otherwise and kind of what Domino has diagnosed (though I do prefer it to the abysmal sequels).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc
The second one is still my favorite, and despite the seemingly forced love story of III I like it as well. However, rewatching part one as an adult really brings me full circle into understanding just how intelligent the screenplay was, and I am really shocked it didn't win the Oscar that year (not that a trivial award matters). It was nominated and lost to Witness. BttF seems like something they would have gushed over during this period. It's a rare feat to tap into current events and yet remain so timeless (no pun intended). Additionally, and maybe it was because I was seeing it on BD, and the clearest I have ever seen it, but I can think of few films that have so much attention to detail even in the far background. The latter is again carried on in the second film as Dustybooks above alludes to with:

Quote:
it doesn't linger on its own effects shots; the domesticated scenes in 2015 are so silly and breezy and story-driven you barely notice how expensive everything must have been

And to think, this film could have easily been shelved and never heard from. How many films get a second chance the same way that the first one did after having filmed almost half of it and then having to start over from scratch? it certainly isn't apparent if the budget took a serious hit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 7:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
That's a textbook example of the kind of pull Spielberg had. My favorite anecdote is how Sid Sheinberg wanted the title to be Space Man From Pluto, and how serious he was in suggesting that it be the title until Steven wrote a note saying how everyone is getting a big kick out of this joke he was playing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:59 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Today is of course the anniversary of that red-letter day in the history of science...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 7:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm
domino harvey wrote:
I thought Elisabeth Shue's crazed double-takes and winsome whining were a riot and I was pretty disappointed that she was mostly discarded for the rest of the series after the first forty-five minutes of the second part-- I mean, she manages to upstage Christopher Lloyd's theatrics! I'll concede that the first film has a great premise and execution, but the sequel is such a strange and complicated riff on the first that the audacity of its existence looms large.

Frankly, I thought she was almost like a different character in the sequels. Jennifer was never that shrill or clueless in the first movie. I don't know if that was Zemeckis & Gale's choice or Shue's. Too bad Claudia Wells had to leave the biz to tend to her sick mother. It's pretty telling, though, that Zemeckis has said that if he knew in advance they'd end up making a trilogy, he never would've put Jennifer in the time machine with Doc and Marty at the end of the first one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 7:51 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
My past self came by earlier to remind me of today's importance:

Image

He also informed me, disappointingly, that the movies were wrong, and that hoverboard technology is at least another eight years away. [-(

EDIT: Apparently this was all a hoax (and, um, it being a hoax was news). Is nothing sacred anymore?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
I think I'm a little embarrassed that my first reaction was "No, it was October-something, 2015, right?" Why can't I remember important things?!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm
Roger Ryan wrote:
I think I'm a little embarrassed that my first reaction was "No, it was October-something, 2015, right?" Why can't I remember important things?!

I watched the Back to the Future sequel over a dozen times before I turned ten years-old and it didn't take me 1/10 of one second after looking at that picture to blurt out, "wait, wait, it was 2015." The mild embarrassment for me is being surprised that more people didn't call it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
First thing that struck me is that the 2012 read-out doesn't match with the others, then the 2015 part came to mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:59 pm
Location: Upstate NY
Somewhere in the decision-making process was the phrase "you know what would be funny?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
I wish this was a hoax. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Why?! That's so cool.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 6:54 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
I have to admit I changed my mind once I realized this would be perfect for 80's themed parties.

By the way, did anybody else notice the very clear parallels to the 1st and 2nd movies (not to mention also Quantum Leap) in Stephen King's last book?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 4:05 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
III holds up much better (for me anyway) for having been shot simultaneously with II, especially against other 3-film franchises. I hold them both in some measure of esteem and would be very hard for me to say which one is better because they both feel like two parts of the same movie (though slightly apart from the first, which is naturally the best). The only franchise I can think of where the third was better than the second would be Die Hard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 9:50 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Tokyo, Japan
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
III holds up much better (for me anyway) for having been shot simultaneously with II, especially against other 3-film franchises. I hold them both in some measure of esteem and would be very hard for me to say which one is better because they both feel like two parts of the same movie (though slightly apart from the first, which is naturally the best). The only franchise I can think of where the third was better than the second would be Die Hard.

Bourne Ultimatum? Goldfinger? (Although "From Russia With Love" is excellent) Men In Black 3? (Since the second was quite bad, anything would've been better) There must be some others.

Speaking of Time Travel, this series was my first real introduction to time travel. Sure I watched things like "Doraemon" in the past, but time travel is not mentioned all that much. My friend has a 7-year old and said he'd love to show "Back to the Future" one day to her, and so I gave him my old DVD set and told him that he could show it to her at any age and not worry about returning it. He said he watched the first one with his kid that evening.

He said his child was fascinated by the thought of traveling in time, and just opened the mind completely. I'm sure I had the same reaction when I saw Part 1 at around that age as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 5:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Ocean's Thirteen would be one as well, though the previous one was just fine.

The fascination with time travel was the big draw to me for these films when I was a kid, even more than the humor. And watching them now, it's more the opposite but I can't think of many films that did it better. Especially with regard to paradoxes and such.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 8:36 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Ocean's Twelve is the only great one in the series and one of Soderbergh's best. The sooner people realize this the better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 11:30 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
You can't debate matters of taste with someone who thinks Back to the Future Part III is better than Part II [-X


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection