MovieChat Forums > Back to the Future (1985) Discussion > The title makes no sense

The title makes no sense

posted 8 months ago by avortac4 (3504)
10 replies | jump to latest

These classic movies are always interesting to talk about, but then you start thinking about some details, and realize people were out of their minds when they came up with them.

Take this movie's title - "Back to the Future". Which future? Oh, THE future?

What kind of sense does that make? Marty doesn't have to get 'back to the FUTURE', he needs to go 'back to the PRESENT time', because from his perspective, it's _NOT_ future, it's his normal time, the present!

It's only 'future' from the PAST people's perspective, but past isn't even real to the people that live in the present, so it's a peculiar 'non-time' he is visiting, and 1985 isn't REALLY the 'future', even if people in the 1950s might see it that way (though only the Doc (of the 1950s people) knows about any of this anyway, so it shouldn't even matter).

My point is, it ISN'T 'future' from ANYONE else's point of view, besides 1955 Doc's. So the title conforms to not only Doc's viewpoint, but the version of him that doesn't really exist!

This means, the title doesn't make any sense.. it should be "Back to the Present (time)" or something. Of course that wouldn't be so catchy, iconic and paradoxical-sounding (usually you go FORWARD to the future, not BACK), and 'present' can mean other things than a time, plus the word 'future' always seems more interesting than 'present' as an idea, and so on.

I guess it would still be better than "Spaceman from Pluto" or whatever it was originally called, the same way a DeLorean is a more fascinating and exciting choice for a time machine than a refridgerator or whatever the original plan was.

In any case, it makes no sense to call this 'Back to the Future', as they never visit the future in this movie.

Yes, I know about the ending, but the movie ends BEFORE the movie shows them visiting the future - it ends about the exact moment when they LEAVE the present, way before they ARRIVE the future, so my statement stands. I also know DOC visits the future, but we aren't still shown any of that, only the beforemath-and-aftermath (is there such a word as 'beforemath'?) of it, and 'Doc' doesn't qualify as 'they', even if he took Einstein with him (not sure if he did or not), as the 'they' I am talking about includes Marty.

[–] xanthas (3215) 8 months ago

You're not making sense.

[–] ByTheVineyard (449) 7 months ago

I read few lines of his comment and ended up to the same conclusion

[–] RoboReCop (2746) 8 months ago

You're simply not thinking fourth-dimensionally.

[–] johnral (138) 7 months ago

Umm yea -- the title really makes no sense. Perhaps it's catchy, but should be "back to the present." Marty went to the future, but he did not go "back to the future." And then Marty wanted to go back to the past (or present), but not into any future.

[–] TinaKimo (870) 7 months ago

But Doc went to the future. HE was telling Marty about it in the beginning of the film. So, the car went back to the future. Am I right? Or did the dog go to the future in the car? Please someone help, its been years since I've watched this.

[–] hurricane (1910) 3 months ago

It was only the present from Marty's perspective. It was the future from 1955 Doc's perspective, and he was the one who originally said; "Next Saturday night, we're sending you back to the future...." Hence the title of the movie.

Besides, Back To The Future is a more catchy, exciting sounding title than Back To The Present.

[–] pjl69 (2438) 3 months ago

Thank you!

[–] ByTheVineyard (449) 3 months ago

Get a life

[–] moviechatterer (13449) 3 months ago

I didnt read any of it , I just took a guess about what problem you would have with the title,
then i evaluated it , and it turns out you're wrong there is nothing wrong with the title .

[–] aavfreak (2886) 3 months ago

Thank you for this wonderful gift.

This is absolute confirmation that you, avortec4, are completely incapable of appreciating the clever twist of a word. Art is completely lost on you.

"Back to the Future" is intentionally worded that way to be a play on words. It works perfectly well in the context of this movie.

Perhaps you should stick to watching video footage from random security cameras. That would more likely meet your expectations of what makes sense or not.