User Avatar Image

Movie plotholes/ The only thing that doesn't add up

posted by Dangeresque on - last edited - Viewed by 7.9K users

This is the greatest trilogy ever made (i dont consider the godfather a trilogy cause 3 sucked). everything in this movie was well thought out, all the events and the going back and forth were perfect (especially if you watch them around 15 times each and pick up all the small details :p )

the only thing that think didnt add up in this movie was the fact that Marty's parents doent remember him. i mean sure its 30 years later (speaking of the 1st movie) but even if for only a week he was still a huge influence in both their lives right? when he started getting older wouldnt they start saying, hey wait a minute, this guy looks really familiar.

Worse yet wouldn't george suspect loraine of cheating on her with marty? i mean calvin marty in the late 60s?

just a stupid point. it might make no sence but its something that popped to my head and figure i'd share it. of course dont mean no offence to the trilogy

364 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Sinaz20 said: Your 1955 Doc there is in a different timeline in which it is Clayton Ravine.

    When Marty finally returns to 1985 from 1885, he is in a new timeline in which it is called Eastwood Ravine. And if he had decided to return to 1985 a day before the original time travel from the first movie, he would have encountered a 1985 Doc Brown who knew the ravine as Eastwood Ravine.

    Though there are plotholes-- especially with the Biff returning to 2010 bit... a lot of the confusion about what to expect boils down to understanding the notion of each trip to the past creating a new divergent timeline.

    http://bttf.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline

    This whole thread is giving me a headache! :) Say for instance Marty did return back to 1985 a day before the original time travel, and continued to live there. What happens the next day? Does the Doc's memory of the ravine change to Eastwood Ravine? Or is he living in a completely different timeline which will be new from then forward?

  • @Javi-Wan Kenobi said: Wait, wait... Are you saying that, in the original version of BttF, Marty McFly is mis-called Calvin Klein?
    I have to watch the movies without the Spanish dubbing, then. I suppose that, in the 80's, the Calvin Klein brand wasn't as well known in Spain as it is now, and the translators thought that the Spanish people won't get the joke, so they changed the name. In Spain, he's mis-called "Levi Strauss".

    You spanish and your dubbing. I lived in Spain for a while and was blown away by Arnold Schwarzenegger saying "Sayonara, baby" in Terminator 2.

  • @LuigiHann said: The gravestone in the photo fades and disappears, but logically, the photo itself should vanish as well, since why would anybody take a picture of an empty space? :p

    In that case, why would anybody need to go back to 1885 to prevent a non-existent gravestone from appearing? Time paradox.

  • @Wile_E said: Say for instance Marty did return back to 1985 a day before the original time travel, and continued to live there. What happens the next day?


    Well, first of all his other self would be there too, because that Marty doesn't leave until the next day. Actually something like that happened in film 1, where he travels back to a few minutes before the original time travel, and witnesses himself being chased by the Lybians and then making the time-jump.
    @Wile_E said: Does the Doc's memory of the ravine change to Eastwood Ravine?
    Precisely!
    Again, it's similar to above mentioned scene in film 1. Marty has given Doc the letter about his death in the past, so his memory has been changed, and he knows about being shot... hence wearing a bullet-proof vest.
    @Wile_E said: Or is he living in a completely different timeline which will be new from then forward?That Doc is living in a "new" timeline that branched off back in 1885, when Marty "fell" into the Ravine. Although that branch-off took place way before Doc was born (and even before his ancestors had moved to America), so it had no real influence on his life, other than the fact, that he knows the Ravine as the Eastwood Ravine now. The same goes for the McFlys.

  • It seems the only film that had the least debateable things was part one. Cause in both 1985 Marty sees Doc get shot before he leaves to 1955 so even if doc knows about the libyans, Marty still thinks he has to warn him in 1955.

    The second one always had me wondering why biff returns to the original 2015 with the delorean if he changed it instead of going to his rich 2015, but a cut scene on the dvd shows the old man fading out of existence (maybe to wealthy Biff's 2015?)

    I agree about the tombstone photo in the third. Who would Marty travel back to 1885 to save doc if he doesn't see the tombstone?

  • @techie775 said: Cause in both 1985 Marty sees Doc get shot before he leaves to 1955 so even if doc knows about the libyans, Marty still thinks he has to warn him in 1955.

    But Marty HAS to go back... otherwise he wouldn't warn Doc back in 1955, and the 1985-Doc would just lose the memory of being warned ;) It would've caused a paradox, and we all know that those aren't always good.

    But it would've been nice of Doc to say "Meet me at 1:00 at the Lone Pine Mall, bring my video camera and a bullet-proof vest"... now that he knows. :D

  • @Laserschwert said: But Marty HAS to go back... otherwise he wouldn't warn Doc back in 1955, and the 1985-Doc would just lose the memory of being warned ;) It would've caused a paradox, and we all know that those aren't always good.

    But it would've been nice of Doc to say "Meet me at 1:00 at the Lone Pine Mall, bring my video camera and a bullet-proof vest"... now that he knows. :D

    Yeah I meant something like that. If Doc had told Marty his plan with preventing his death before hand with vest and taping together the shreds of the note and then says "Oh put a note in my pocket so I know not to get killed." it would make you wonder, who told Doc beforehand and would have made no sense. Doc has to make Marty in think he's dead in the end of part 1 or else marty will have no reason to warn him in 1955 and as you said that leads to a paradox or death. I've seen people warning themselves before in time traveling stories and it's annoying.

  • Another thing that bothers me is the fact that when Marty and Jennifer goes to 2015 at the begining of the 2nd movie, they arrive in a future in which they are still there, 30 years older.
    They should have gone to a future in which they mysteriously disapeared in 1985, the morning they were supposed to go to the lake, and were never seen again.

    Think about it. It really doesn't make sense otherwise.

    And by the way, Calvin Klein Marty is called Pierre Cardin in France...

  • @Billy said: Another thing that bothers me is the fact that when Marty and Jennifer goes to 2015 at the begining of the 2nd movie, they arrive in a future in which they are still there, 30 years older.
    They should have gone to a future in which they mysteriously disapeared in 1985, the morning they were supposed to go to the lake, and were never seen again.

    Think about it. It really doesn't make sense otherwise.

    Taken from the trilogy's bonus DVD FAQ:

    Q: At the beginning of Part II, when Doc takes Marty and Jennifer out of 1985 and takes them to the future, how can Old Marty and Old Jennifer (and their family) even be in the future? Wouldn't their disappearance from 1985 instantaneously erase their future?

    A: To be honest, yes, it very well should erase their existence from the future. This is, in fact, the ultimate paradox of BTTF Part II. We really thought about this one for a long time, but we finally decided that after the setup of Doc's saying "something's gotta be done about your kids," the audience would feel cheated if we went to the future and found out they didn't exist.

    You could, however, argue that the existence of Old Marty, Old Jennifer and their kids in the future automatically proves that Young Marty and Jennifer will eventually get back to 1985. The flaw in this reasoning is that Doc repeatedly tells us that the future isn't written, so why would this part of the future be "written"?

    Ah, but Part III may contain the answer to this question after all. When Doc spots the tombstone in 1885 and sees that the name on the photograph of the tombstone has vanished but the date remains, he says "We know this photograph represents what will happen if the events of today continue to run their course into tomorrow." That's a pretty big "if", and it suggests that time travel to the future always takes you to a future based on the events of the time you left - a logical extrapolation of what the future of that moment holds. Of course, the existence of free will allows for the possibility of infinite futures, which is what Doc says at the end of Part III: "Your future is whatever you make it." But time travel into the future takes you to the most likely future of the moment you left.

  • User Avatar Image
    Jennifer Moderator

    My favorite theory from the extras on the DVD is the explanation as to why Doc doesn't remember things he should, such as the fact that he is the one who dresses Marty up in the ridiculous cowboy outfit.

    They said Doc doesn't remember things because of all the drugs he did as Reverend Jim in the late 70's. :D

Add Comment