Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax2.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!moriarty
From: moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: BACK TO THE FUTURE (Spoilers)
Message-ID: <790@vax2.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 5-Jul-85 20:34:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: vax2.790
Posted: Fri Jul  5 20:34:38 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Jul-85 05:10:10 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 58

BACK TO THE FUTURE is one of those films, which, on reflection, makes me
wonder just why it left me with such a good feeling.  As you probably know,
it's the story of a young man (Michael J. Fox of the Family Ties television
show) who accidently travels thirty years into the past, with the aid of a
scientist friend's (Christopher Lloyd, who has been in about 8 films during
the last two years (Sorry, Mark)) time machine.  The plot centers around
Fox's attempt to return to the future (the time machine, which is built out
of a Delorean automobile, needs plutonium to run on, and a substitute power
source must be found), and also with the time paradoxes which follow in
Fox's wake, mainly the disruption of the incident which brings his mother
and father together.  For people who haven't considered the premise before,
I imagine this is quite entertaining in itself; for those of us who have
seen the "gotta fix up the time line irregularities" plot in science fiction
novels for the last millenia, it's old hat.  So I can't say I found the plot
too interesting (though the resolution of Lloyd's fate is shuffled around
well enough that it is not apparent (though the plot twist is foreseen)).

Well, how about the laughs?  Pretty sit-com stuff, in terms of getting Mom
and Pop back together again, and also with a lot of slapstick.  The acting
is also sitcom-like; nothing too interesting in that.  The special effects
are limited, but well-done (apparently ILM must have been pretty busy this
year -- they are getting to be the SPX 'R US of the American film industry).

So why did I enjoy this?  Well, basically the one time the actors seem to
come alive is when Fox and Lloyd are together.  Lloyd's Doc character is
eccentric, but not nutty enough to be a comedy character.  He obviously
likes Marty (Fox's character), and his willingness to risk his own life to
insure Marty returns to 1985 one of the most touching parts of the film.  In
essence, when Fox & Lloyd are on the screen, the movie is quite watchable;
when it's only Fox, it tends to grind down to HAPPY DAYS revisited.
Frankly, I'd like to see another movie with Doc and Marty doing some time
travelling on their own, sans the relatives.  That, I think, would be a film
worth paying full price for (this is a $2.50 movie, which is what I paid for
it).

A few questions:

1) Where have I seen (or heard) the person who played Marty's Dad before?
   The voice is amazingly familiar.

2) Are we supposed to imagine that Marty's parents' transformation into
   Yuppies makes everything OK?  Is it implying that the answer to family
   happiness is rich, cool (rather sexually active) parents?

3) Why don't they stick up a lightening rod to get power for the car's Time
   Flux Do-Dad?  They could drive around at 88 miles/hour with a grounded
   leash attached to the car....  Whoops, sorry, trying to insert logic...

		"Roads?  Where we're going, they don't NEED roads!"

        If he's not one thing,
           he's another. --->           Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
                                        John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
 {cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsri}!uw-beaver \
    {allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
        fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA