MovieChat Forums > Back to the Future (1985) Discussion > Would Marty really disappear?

Would Marty really disappear?

posted 4 years ago by MovieChatUser497 (18943)
15 replies | jump to latest

As was determined in Part II, when you time travel into the past you create an alternate tangent (new universe) which now has you in that previous date, so if Marty time traveled back to 1955 he is now in the alternate tangent and even if Lorraine and George didn't get together all that means is that they wouldn't have Marty in the new timeline so if Marty returned to 1985 before getting his parents together wouldn't he just return to alternate tangent 1985 where his parents weren't together? (he'd probably have to live with Doc since George and Lorraine wouldn't know who he was). Since the George and Lorraine he was interacting with would now exist in alternate 1985 his existence wouldn't be dependent upon what happens between 1955 and 1985 because it wouldn't be the same universe he came from. The film is saying if you go back in time then how you interact in that timeline could change who you are (or erase you from existence) yet if that were really true then Marty would gain the memories that alternate Marty would have had from 1968 - 1985. If that rule were consistent then he would start turning into the new Marty who was the son of the confident George that Marty interacted with in 1955.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4096) 4 years ago

True and given that George was completely different he may not have even met Doc as the new Marty to have gone back in time in the first place. The movie is full of paradoxes but that is standard for a time travel movie.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

Yes and in the alternate 1985 in Part II Doc didn’t create the time machine because he was committed therefore that should have impacted Marty and Doc yet it doesn’t. Also Biff should not have had the almanac because the time machine was now never invented and the time machine itself should have disappeared just like Marty was about to. So therefore it seems the rule is if you time travel your actions can affect the you that does the time traveling (which is why Marty started disappearing) but then the film throws that rule out when the plot demands it.

I’m fine with the rule that someone who time travels is basically still on a linear path where they do not change if the universe is altered but that would have removed the tension of the first film so now we just have a contradiction

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 4 years ago

True and given that George was completely different he may not have even met Doc as the new Marty to have gone back in time in the first place.
^^^^
Except he did because we see Marty 2 going back in time from Lone Pine shopping mall.
What one wonders is what was Marty 2's mission....was it just to get his parents together or to build his dads self belief too?

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

The Marty that Marty saw go back in time to 1955 is a different person because he was raised by two loving parents. Therefore when he goes back to 1955 things are going to play out differently than what we witnessed during the course of the film. Maybe this Marty won't interact with George and Lorraine? Maybe he won't be able to get them back together?

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 4 years ago

That wasn't what billyslater suggested. He suggested that maybe this Marty didn't meet Doc. But we know he did because we see the scene play out at Lone Pine shopping mall.

reply

[–] mcp7 (142) 4 years ago

Yes, Marty would disappear, just like old Biff disappears in a deleted scene in part II.

According to BTTF's time travel rules, when an alternate timeline is created by traveling into the past, it replaces the original or previous one. It's not a case of alternate universes coexisting, but of a single timeline that can be altered. If Marty's parents don't get together and Marty is never born, Marty's existence is a paradox that the Universe solves by erasing him.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

Then why didn't the time machine disappear in the alternate 1985?

Also Marty was not the son of the Lorraine and George that he interacted with, he was the son of the previous Lorraine and George in the other timeline so his existence wasn't based on them getting together.

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 4 years ago

It has been said by the movie makers that the reason Marty was disappearing was because Lorraine and George were not getting together, so his existence in all the timelines is based on George and Lorraine getting together.
The reason Biff disappears (deleted scene) is because after altering the timeline he gets shot by Lorraine sometime after the altered 1985.
Marty, Doc and Jennifer are somehow outside of these events a bit like Marty doesn't automatically become Marty 2 with all the different memories he should have after originally altering the timeline.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

Then Therefore Marty should have gained all the memories of Marty 2.0 and the time machine should have disappeared after Biff stole it

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 4 years ago

Well you could argue that if Biff disappeared from existence then how was he able to steal the DeLorean and go back and alter things anyway.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

Exactly the film changes the rules of time travel whenever it needs to so the plot can move forward. Just like how Marty and Jennifer were somehow in 2015 even though they disappeared in 1985

reply

[–] wearsalan (5554) 4 years ago

You're not thinking 4th dimensionally on that one.

reply

[–] Zilkin (401) 4 years ago

If time travel was possible it would probably work with multiple timelines which solves every timetravel paradox. Bttf doesnt use this principle consistently as the op suggested, since some people and things sometimes exist independently by paralel timeline principles and sometimes not. That is just the story that is not consistent for dramatic effect.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 4 years ago

Exactly I have no problem with made up science rules in a science fiction movie, just the established rules should stay consistent and not change whenever the plot demands it.

reply

[–] avortac4 (3443) 3 years ago

"As was determined in Part II, "

Wrong board.

This is about "Back to the Future", not any movie that has words 'Part' or 'II' as a part of their title or name.

Go back to where this kind of threads belong to, thank you.

reply