|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With any time travel film it's hard to avoid any logic errors. At the start of this, Dr Emmett Brown approaches Marty in a panic: we have to go to the future to stop something happening NOW! Well as they're going to a fixed point in the future, they could go at any time, go in a years time. Of course there's many other anomalies, but that one struck me when I first saw it. out of the three, I prefer the second one, but I won't be watching any of them again. While that's generally true of time-travel stories, the "Back to the Future" franchise established in the first film that alterations to the timeline typically don't take effect immediately, using Marty's photos as gauges of whether his and Doc Brown's efforts to restore things to the way they were in 1985 are succeeding or not. It's every film's prerogative to establish an independent, internal logic -- but once that logic is in place, they can't deviate from it without its appearing, rightly, to be nothing but a convenient way for the writers to get around a story problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|