So, just got through watching the entire Back To The Future trilogy again -- terrific films, even by today's standards.  Athough Zemeckis admits that the second film was the one he had the least amount of time to work on (and many feel it's the weakest of the three), part 2 still remains to be my favorite.  That cross-shooting with the repeated 1955 sequences was always brilliant in my eyes, and the conclusion scene with the burning of the book is one of my most favorite movie moments of all time.

The 80s perception of our future is a kooky one to be sure; flying cars, hoverboards, lawyers completely abolished, inside-out hip clothing fashion..... I only hope I live to see Jaws 19 myself.

And how many folks here HAVEN'T had the pleasure of experiencing the Universal Studios theme park ride?  Damn, that was some awesome shit back when I was twelve.  I wonder if it still stands the test of time?  Maybe I should go down to Orlando again someday....

Alan Silvestri's "Burn The Book"

I think I love all three equally, they're so different (yet obviously similar). I do remember part 2 getting a lot of stick for being 'dark' and complicated, but I thought it was superbly constructed and I never had any trouble following the plot.

Yeah, the BTTF trilogy is one set of films that has a permanent place in my collection

Don't get me started. I think I've seen each movie over a million times since I was in 2nd grade. They are my favorite movies of all time.

Hmmm.  At 5 hours and 37 minutes for the whole trilogy, it would take more than 641 years to watch a million times.  : )  But yeah, I like the Back to the Future trilogy a lot myself.  I got the DVD set for my birthday, but I still haven't had a chance to watch them all back-to-back yet.  I guess I'll have to do that soon with this semester ending in two weeks…

As I remember, I liked the first movie a lot, the second not as much, but the third was the best.  Oddly, that's how I usually feel about trilogies -- Star Wars for example, and Indiana Jones even more so.  Although I guess Indiana Jones won't count if they ever actually make the fourth movie, huh?  I haven't been to Florida since I was 4 years old, so I haven't gone on the Indiana Jones or Back to the Future rides yet.  One day, though…

By the way, inside-out clothing could totally still happen.  No, really.

I scarcely remember part 2 and have even poorer memories of what happened in part 3 (I remember a train and the old west). I've seen the original many times. The movie itself is an interesting paradox. For instance, where did the time machine come from? Doc found it in 1955. Sure, he already had the idea for the flux capacitor prior to seeing what he made in 1985, but he knew what to build since he found it. It'd be like finding your novel that you hadn't written yet. Since you have it, you're sure as hell going to "write it" and get it published. But where did it come from? I once read that this type of science fiction is a "neat trick". Yes, I must agree.

According to relativity time travel is impossible.
Not that relativity is 100% correct.  But basically, you're asking the "Grandfather Paradox" -what if you go back in time and kill your grandfather or grandmother?  In that case you would never have been born, then how could you possibly go back in time? 

Pretty much anything that deals with time travel suffers from this...but it doesn't mean they're not fun

cheers,

-avatar!

Robert Heinlein handled the time travel paradox with logic I've never seen anyone else propound. I forget which novel it was, so I can't quote it. But it was interesting. There was a situation with a guy and he was talking about the impossibility of time travel, the fact that if he went back, then he wouldn't exist. So the fact that he exists is absolute proof that he never went back. Therefore, there is no issue with time travel. It's a moot problem.

  It seems to me that one could argue they exist because they have not gone back in time. I think it was Larry Niven that wrote a story about a future society that invented a time machine. They ceased to exist, since they screwed everything up. I bet we'd do the same thing. But we didn't and won't. We're here right now. You could also argue that the existence of the human race is proof that a time machine will never be invented.

Hmmm...I haven't read the story you are referring to but I don't quite get the point. You seem to be saying he handled the paradox well by just avoiding it. It doesn't explore the paradox at all. Bear in mind I'm only getting that from your post and not the source - is there more to it than that?

Even the most basic - if you go back in time, you cease to exist. Why? What's the logic there?

Ah, I found it. Now I remember (I was a bit off - I did read this 5 years ago). Well, you can see it too:

   Ira blinked. "Run a chance of running into yourself?"
   "Why not?"
   "Well...there are paradoxes, are there not?"
   "How? If I'm going to, then I did. That old cliche about shooting your grandfather before he sires your father, then going fuff! like a soap bubble - and all descendants, too, meaning both of you among others - is nonsense. The fact that I'm here and you're here means that I didn't do it - or won't do it; the tenses of grammar aren't built for time travel - but it does not mean that I never went back and poked around. I haven't any yen to look at myself when I was a snot-nose; it's the era that interests me. If I ran across myself as a young kid, he - I - wouldn't recognize me; I would be a stranger to that brat. He wouldn't give me a passing glance; I know, I was he."
   "Lazarus," put in Justin Foote, "if you intend to visit that era, I'd like to invite your attention to one thing. Madam Chairman Pro Tem is interested in - because I am interested. A recording of exactly what was said and done at the Families' Meeting in 2012 A.D."
   "Impossible."
    "Just a moment, Justin," Ira put in. "Lazarus, you have refused to talk about that meeting on the grounds that the others who were there can't dispute your version. But a recording would be fair to everyone."
   "Ira, I didn't say that I would not; I said it was impossible."
   "I don't follow you."
   "I can't make a recording of that meeting because I was not there."
   "You lost me again. All the records - and your own statement - show that you were there."
   "Again we don't have adequate language for time travel.."

   I'm not typing anymore, but you get the idea.

Right.  Heinlein was a great writer, and he could certainly confuse people in clever ways, however what Jay said remains true.  In fact, what Heinlein said is still the Grandfather Paradox (both directly and indirectly) only with various words, and ultimately he did handle the paradox by hand-waving (ie he avoided a logical answer).  There is no logical answer to the paradox that I know of.  If one would be able to go back in time, why would one cease to exist?  The whole notion of time travel simply has no answer, as far as I can tell, which is probably the most telltale reason why it's not possible.  Still, I do enjoy the science fiction

cheers,

-avatar!

YES! That's what I'm trying to explain (although with difficulty). There is no logical answer. The best one can possibly do is admit it and accept it.
That's what Heinlein did. A paradox is a mind jolting contradiction and has no logical explanation. NEVER. Ok, time to for me to be quiet.

Maybe I'm not getting everything that's been said, but my question is, if time travel has no logical explanation, then where does this "if you go back in time, you cease to exist" notion even come from?

There's only one person who can go back in time, and that's Superman.

Ah okay, I get what he is saying - thanks for the explanation guys (and taking the trouble to transcribe that!). He seems to be saying you can go back in time but the fact that you exist means that you won't create a paradox in the process. It doesn't seem to allow for the possibility of forcing the issue - like deliberately going back and killing your own ancestor - but I get what he is saying and he's right.

Hey Jodo, that's not really true you know!  There have been quite a few paradox in physics which have been explained.  Example: the twin paradox.  Two people are born at nearly the same time (say 5 minutes apart).  One stays on Earth and the other travels in a rocketship at near the speed of light (v > 10%c).  When the ship returns, the twin on the jet has aged 5 years.  The twin on the Earth 25 years...how is this possible?  This paradox has an answer!  The paradox of time travel does not have a logical answer as far as anyone can tell. 

cheers,

-avatar!

Yeah Part 2 was definitely the best one, although I don't understand how he can say that he had the least time with that one. Don't you remember how long the wait was for Part II to come out? It must've been at least three years, and then Part 3 came out what seemed like only a few months later..

good ol' Back to the Future trilogy....in my opinion still remains as one of the best movies ever created.
I'm watching them every now and them, dvd collection has additional audio with ideas, comments - how everything started and its an interesting commentary.
I think I like all three may say equally.
great acting(main actors were basically a kids back then - marty and his family), well directed by spielberg, awesome ost - a total blast to watch ^^

Well, thing of it was, part 3 was conceived as being part of the trilogy only when part 2 came into existence; part 2 wasn't even originally planned.  As a result, both 2 and 3 were shot simultaneously, and it seemed that at the time, they were really frontloading a lot of the production into part 3 before even wrapping up part 2.  That would explain, at least, the short release gap between 2 and 3.

Yes, they did both at the same time. In fact, they had the trailer for part III at the end of II.

-Joshua

And now he doesn't exist... time travel is possible!  The proof is in Superman's nonexistence!

By an odd coincidence, I happened to go on the Back to the Future ride at Universal Studios in LA when I went to E³ less than two weeks after you posted this topic, Angela.  Was the ride you mentioned a four person DeLorean that tilted or shook in tandem to a big video that made it look like you were flying around?  It was pretty fun and it was especially cool to see Christopher Lloyd reprising his role in what was basically a short film.  Of course they may have something completely different in Florida.  Still, it was a very fun coincidence.

That sounds like the same one, yes.  Lloyd was great during the ride, and I also loved Thomas Wilson's Biff; two of the very best characters from the trilogy anyway. :)

Alex, were you sitting in the back seat or front?  Personally, I felt the experience was greatly diminished when seated in the back; it should be front or nothing. ;)

I often wonder how well the ride holds up today, but man, when I was twelve, crashing into that Texaco sign was one hell of a thrill.

While we're on the topic, has anyone ever actually seen an actual DeLorean? They're rare, but apparently really great cars. I'd kill a small animal with my teeth to drive one!

Since I was by myself that day, I got stuck on the ride with two old people and a small child.  I tried to get in the front passenger's seat, but the person in the "driver's" seat changed seats just as I got there.  So I went around the other side, and the others were trying to jam themselves in there already.  So I went back to the passenger's side, and the kid in back changed sides too.  So I ended up in the left rear seat.  It might have been more enjoyable if I had been in front (or if I had been 12, for that matter), but I still found it a fun and entertaining ride.

And yes, I've seen a real DeLorean once or twice in person.  I know the Henry Ford Museum has one (which is probably where I saw one), but there are some scattered all around the country in other car museums.  Also, when I was a kid I had a diecast Hot Wheels or Matchbox DeLorean with doors that opened, and I thought it was the coolest thing ever.  I'm not much of a car person, but I'd be pretty thrilled to drive one myself if the opportunity ever presented itself.

Someone owned one in my hometown and I saw it occasionally.  I also specifically remember seeing one at a collection of cars in one of the casinos in Laughlin, NV.

I just watched the BTTF trilogy within the last few days.  Great stuff.

Hello!!!!!
Sitting in Prague in Czech and watched BTTF for the 10000th tme, still amazing!

Taste Czech!

Missed this thread the first time around.

Anyway, I've ridden Back to the Future a few times now, once about ten years ago in Florida and then a couple times at Universal Studios Japan over the past several years.  It was still the most fun ride at USJ until they finally got Spiderman, which with the 3D and extra movement takes things to a whole 'nother level.

I quite enjoyed BttF 2 in the theater back in the day, but I was just in junior high school at the time so perhaps easily impressed.  I remember the rumor going around at the time that Mattel had actually made working hoverboards but they couldn't bring them to market because of safety considerations