Movie Paradox that nobody mentions

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

I love Frequency, and never really had a problem with the two memories plot line. The way I see it, the atmospheric interference that gave him the ability to communicate with his dad via HAM radio in the past is very localized since only that particular radio that seems to be affected. So it's the localized atmospheric interference around the radio that created the bubble effect for him. No one else was in the vicinity of the radio, so they retained only new memories.

Hey, now that you put it that way...it makes a bit of sense

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

I love Frequency, and never really had a problem with the two memories plot line. The way I see it, the atmospheric interference that gave him the ability to communicate with his dad via HAM radio in the past is very localized since only that particular radio that seems to be affected. So it's the localized atmospheric interference around the radio that created the bubble effect for him. No one else was in the vicinity of the radio, so they retained only new memories.

I agree. In a sense those radio waves are traveling through time and Jim Caviezels character (named John) is the one sending them.

[LuigiHann]

http://www.mjyoung.net/time/ this is a great site for that sort of thing. Essays exist for most of the things discussed in this thread. Some may argue that it's unfair for him to enforce his own "rules" on all time travel movies, even though different movies seem to present different models of time travel, but he does a good job justifying it for the most part.

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by LuigiHann

http://www.mjyoung.net/time/ this is a great site for that sort of thing. Essays exist for most of the things discussed in this thread. Some may argue that it's unfair for him to enforce his own "rules" on all time travel movies, even though different movies seem to present different models of time travel, but he does a good job justifying it for the most part.

Sorry to dismiss it this early dude but I haven't even read it. There's basically 2 main time travel theories; pre destination and post destination
pre destination implies there's only been one timeline (see the 12 monkeys, terminator 1, or the time travelers wife) which has already had all time travel entrenched in it and thus makes it impossible to change the timeline.
post desitnation implies that the timeline CAN be changed as time travel is not entrenched in the timeline as we see in BTTF.

[LuigiHann]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

Sorry to dismiss it this early dude but I haven't even read it. There's basically 2 main time travel theories; pre destination and post destination
pre destination implies there's only been one timeline (see the 12 monkeys, terminator 1, or the time travelers wife) which has already had all time travel entrenched in it and thus makes it impossible to change the timeline.
post desitnation implies that the timeline CAN be changed as time travel is not entrenched in the timeline as we see in BTTF.

He analyzes both the Terminator and 12 Monkeys, you should check those articles out. In his model, the "predestination" model is effectively an illusion created when the timeline resolves into a self-consistent loop. Basically, every time travel story must have an original timeline that leads up to the initial time travel departure, and most stories do end up in a consistent self-resolving loop, and so the main difference between the apparently different models is just, which iteration is the movie showing us? BTTF-style movies tend to show the first iteration with more drastic changes, and Terminator-style movies tend to show a late iteration with more self-consistency, but every story must have an alpha timeline in its past, and the fascinating parts of his articles are his attempts to piece those alpha timelines together.

[sn939]

Originally Posted by LuigiHann

He analyzes both the Terminator and 12 Monkeys, you should check those articles out. In his model, the "predestination" model is effectively an illusion created when the timeline resolves into a self-consistent loop. Basically, every time travel story must have an original timeline that leads up to the initial time travel departure, and most stories do end up in a consistent self-resolving loop, and so the main difference between the apparently different models is just, which iteration is the movie showing us? BTTF-style movies tend to show the first iteration with more drastic changes, and Terminator-style movies tend to show a late iteration with more self-consistency, but every story must have an alpha timeline in its past, and the fascinating parts of his articles are his attempts to piece those alpha timelines together.

I'm a great admirer of MJ Young's site, though I agree that he is a bit TOO rigid in his analysis-applying his own 'replacement theory' on every movie analyzed. Then again, that's his prerogative.

MJ Young's analysis of the BTTF movies is quiet interesting insofar as it highlights most of the logical paradoxes in the movies, BTTF2 and 3 in particular. According to Young, BTTF1 is more or less plausible as per his theory, as he believes that the timeline will eventually resolve into a self-consistent loop indistinguishable from a predestination paradox (basically, we'd end with Marty going back to 1955 and becoming the 'Calvin Klien' he'd heard about all his life!) This even answers thew age-old TP/LP argument by simply stating that Twin Pines Marty would simply cease to exist in the next iteration of the timeline and would be completely replaced by Lone Pine Marty.

BTTF2 and 3 understandably fall apart in his analysis. He points out no less than TWO anomalies associated with Marty and Jennifer's initial trip to the future, and dismisses the whole Almanac and 1985-A subplot as being paradoxical enough to destroy time completely. And he believes the tombstone paradox would simply kill the logic of BTTF3.

So obviously, his theory is not the best theory around to explain the logic of most time travel movies like BTTF, but it IS an interesting explanation for the creation of stable time loops.

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Some people who are wondering "which Marty is the other one in 1955 in part II and when did he come from" should consider the following;
This Marty seems to go through the exact same tribulations as our marty did in the first film;
Remember when Marty sees George punch out biff in part one, he likely would have left the school and go to the clocktower immediately if not for the picture fading. Because his siblings are still faded he realizes he needs to ensure music is played to dance to. And we do see 'Marty I' still looking at the picture several times in part II. So this likely explains the so-called 'tombstomb paradox'

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

Some people who are wondering "which Marty is the other one in 1955 in part II and when did he come from" should consider the following;
This Marty seems to go through the exact same tribulations as our marty did in the first film;
Remember when Marty sees George punch out biff in part one, he likely would have left the school and go to the clocktower immediately if not for the picture fading. Because his siblings are still faded he realizes he needs to ensure music is played to dance to. And we do see 'Marty I' still looking at the picture several times in part II. So this likely explains the so-called 'tombstomb paradox'

Agreed. I've often believed that the fact that BTTF1 Marty's photograph of his siblings was ALSO obviously fading in BTTF2 indicates that he is Twin Pines Marty.

In fact, the way I rationalize it, in BTTF2, 'our' Marty is Lone Pine Marty and the other Marty is still Twin Pines Marty. Because our Marty is Lone Pine Marty, he doesn't start fading when George and Lorraine almost don't kiss, because their almost not kissing before they finally do owing to Twin Pines Marty is the way HIS personal timeline is supposed to be! Whereas George and Lorraine almost not kissing is NOT part of Twin Pines Marty's personal timeline, and so his existence is endangered. The moment George and Lorraine DO kiss, Twin Pines Marty essentially becomes Lone Pine Marty in terms of causality. But the 'original' Marty in 1955 in BTTF2 is definetly Twin Pines Marty in terms of memory.

MJ Young doesn't factor this into his discussion because he simply dismisses the fading photographs/newspapers as being too 'unrealistic' (well, he's right...but they're damn realistic when it comes to BTTF's own 'rules')

[BttF_LttP]

In the Citizen Brown timeline, Artie stood up to Kid, but George did not stand up to Biff.

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by BttF_LttP

In the Citizen Brown timeline, Artie stood up to Kid, but George did not stand up to Biff.

Not sure the relevance of that here lol but yes you are right, George claims he does not stand up to Biff in episode 3. And it does make sense as george and lorraine act more like they did in the first timeline. Lorraines drinking, she doesn't get along with George, he's a peeping tom (to a different extent though).

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

Not sure the relevance of that here lol but yes you are right, George claims he does not stand up to Biff in episode 3. And it does make sense as george and lorraine act more like they did in the first timeline. Lorraines drinking, she doesn't get along with George, he's a peeping tom (to a different extent though).

The real reason George and Lorraine reverted back to their TP versions is because Marty's original 1955 trip was erased from the timeline. This is explicitly stated by Marty in Episode 3.

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by sn939

The real reason George and Lorraine reverted back to their TP versions is because Marty's original 1955 trip was erased from the timeline. This is explicitly stated by Marty in Episode 3.

One thing i forgot is what happened to the clocktower itself in 1955? We know it's docs office in 1986, i remember edna has a recording on the history of the clock tower including it being constructed in 1885. Obviously the lightning strike still happens but is that when they constructed it to an office?

[amrith777]

Hi all--First post for me here.This subject has always fascinated me and reading through this thread made me think about a few things.
I am a layman (woman),therefore I might not understand the finer points and nuances of quantum physics/mechanics.
According to what I understand regarding Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle (Many-Worlds Uncertainty)and Schrodinger's Cat Paradox,nothing in the movie(s) BTTF is paradoxical because all possible futures/iterations exist simultaneously and every outcome is possible because there isn't just one singular timeline.
According to the many-worlds theory--once a decision is made and an action is employed--all the events play out in a certain way on that particular timeline and the 'observer' there has no knowledge or memory regarding what goes on in any of the alternate/other universes.
The BTTF movies are among my favorites and I have found that if I question things too much that it interferes with my immersion to some extent so I just have to allow for a certain suspension of disbelief.
Having said that--all of this may possibly be moot in the first place,as from what I understand--time travel into the past is not possible/viable,as nothing can exceed the speed of light (yes--I know about neutrinos possibly refuting that,as well as even MORE theoretical tachyons).It's also my understanding that travelling to the past would set up an infinite feedback,which would have dire consequences.
So,there's my two cents.

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

One thing i forgot is what happened to the clocktower itself in 1955? We know it's docs office in 1986, i remember edna has a recording on the history of the clock tower including it being constructed in 1885. Obviously the lightning strike still happens but is that when they constructed it to an office?

Probably.

Actually we have no idea how 1955 turned out in this reality. All we know is that Marty didn't show up to play matchmaker for his parents.

It really depends on how much influence Edna and Emmett had been able to exert on the city by this point.

We DO know that on November 5th, Doc had the vision for the Flux Capacitor, though he didn't realize it was the key to time travel...he adapted it into his symbol instead.

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by sn939

Probably.

Actually we have no idea how 1955 turned out in this reality. All we know is that Marty didn't show up to play matchmaker for his parents.

It really depends on how much influence Edna and Emmett had been able to exert on the city by this point.

We DO know that on November 5th, Doc had the vision for the Flux Capacitor, though he didn't realize it was the key to time travel...he adapted it into his symbol instead.

well i'm assuming the timeline wouldnt be that different that the weather could have changed I just dont' remember if Edna mentions anything about it getting struck by lightning in 1955.

This is a good indication of the 'self preservation theory'; that the space time continuum avoids paradoxes and has similar events happening in different timelines.

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

well i'm assuming the timeline wouldnt be that different that the weather could have changed I just dont' remember if Edna mentions anything about it getting struck by lightning in 1955.

This is a good indication of the 'self preservation theory'; that the space time continuum avoids paradoxes and has similar events happening in different timelines.

Well, I'm not sure about the 'avoiding paradoxes' parts-since time travel not being invented is a HUGE paradox...but you're right about the 'similar events' part.

We can be certain though that even in this timeline, George got hit by Lorraine's dad's car...since that's the only way she would fall in love with him (without Marty playing matchmaker).

[Michael J Fox is Canadian]

Originally Posted by sn939

Well, I'm not sure about the 'avoiding paradoxes' parts-since time travel not being invented is a HUGE paradox...but you're right about the 'similar events' part.

We can be certain though that even in this timeline, George got hit by Lorraine's dad's car...since that's the only way she would fall in love with him (without Marty playing matchmaker).

its sketchy about 1955 all we can assume is there was no marty, like you previously stated we dont know whether edna and Emmett were in power. If they were (lets say it was run the same way as they ran 1986) george wouldn't have been a peeping tom, that sort of thing would have been punished.

Even with time travel not being invented, you could argue the space time continuum still provided the avenue for that to happen. For instance some of docs notebook gets erased but not all did (though you could argue doc still invents the flux capacitor).

[sn939]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

its sketchy about 1955 all we can assume is there was no marty, like you previously stated we dont know whether edna and Emmett were in power. If they were (lets say it was run the same way as they ran 1986) george wouldn't have been a peeping tom, that sort of thing would have been punished.

Even with time travel not being invented, you could argue the space time continuum still provided the avenue for that to happen. For instance some of docs notebook gets erased but not all did (though you could argue doc still invents the flux capacitor).

Maybe they were just starting to gain power and influence, but they hadn't taken over the city yet completely and established their police state. Obviously the process of establishing the 'Citizen Brown' state was a gradual one spanning decades...it didn't happen overnight!

[BttF_LttP]

Originally Posted by Michael J Fox is Canadian

Not sure the relevance of that here lol but yes you are right, George claims he does not stand up to Biff in episode 3. And it does make sense as george and lorraine act more like they did in the first timeline. Lorraines drinking, she doesn't get along with George, he's a peeping tom (to a different extent though).

What I'm saying is that it shows that just because one McFly learns to stand up for himself, does not mean that his son does. So, Marty standing up to Needles has no effect on Marty Jr.'s relationship with Griff.

[sn939]

Originally Posted by BttF_LttP

What I'm saying is that it shows that just because one McFly learns to stand up for himself, does not mean that his son does. So, Marty standing up to Needles has no effect on Marty Jr.'s relationship with Griff.

True enough. Still I feel that since Marty, in the Eastwood timeline, has seen what his son ended up being in Lone Pine 2015, may well make efforts to ensure he turns out differently, and stands up to Griff. If he had the will to change his own future, you can be damned sure he will at least try to change his son's!