Why this movie is weak - Back to the Future Part III (1990) Discussion

Its a terrible film. Just a retread of the first one basically.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 5 years ago

Yes, axactly, just another "adventure in time" where they even removed the "he has to put things the way they were" factor.+
They are just trying to get back in time pretty much. What a waste of an opportunity!

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

They are just trying to get back in time pretty much
well , that *is* the title of the franchise :p

reply

[–] TheMouseShadow (414) 5 years ago

at least in part 2 they came up with a different storyline, part 3 was basically the same storyline as part 1.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 5 years ago

"at least in part 2 they came up with a different storyline, part 3 was basically the same storyline as part 1."

How???

Actually... I agree to a degree... but the same could be said about the second movie as well.

reply

[–] TheMouseShadow (414) 5 years ago

How?!?! if you strip away the western theme its the exact same film as the first one.

reply

[–] SisterSuzy101 (349) 4 years ago

Sure, in Part II the main characters do ultimately have different goals and it focuses more the concept of disrupting the space time continuum etc., but there are a lot of elements of the first film that are rehashed (relentless callbacks, reintroducing Biff as a central villain, going back to the 50's with re-shot/recycled scenes etc.) to the point that it becomes tedious.
Plus, after repeated viewings I've found the depiction of the future (2015) in the first act has become less awe-inspiring and more outright ugly (not helped by young actors caked in obvious makeup and ridiculous costumes to make themselves looks older, or Michael J. Fox playing his future daughter (they were really pushing it there)), and Griff was a lame side villain - I get that he's supposed to be a more intimidating version of Biff, but just came off as comically annoying.

In Part III, the only elements that are really rehashed from the first movie are being stuck in the past with the goal of getting back to the present (this time though, it's problems with the DeLorean's engine and getting up to speed instead of powering the Flux Capacitor), and the inclusion of an intimidating villain (Buford definitely makes up for Griff's shortcomings, and almost rivals Biff).
What sets it apart from Part I is more than just it's western setting: The first film is a romantic comedy, where's Part III is more a drama. It also focuses more on Doc than Marty this time, and shows that he's more than just an eccentric scientist - As he grows fond of the old west and finds love for the first time in Clara, he's conflicted whether he should what his heart says, or what his mind says.
Plus, it's plot flows better and is not as messy and all over the place as Part II, and ends on a much more satisfactory note I find.

Hope that helps...

reply

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 3 years ago

Great breakdown! I still prefer 2 over 3, even given its flaws. Though they be many, the flaws of 2 don't outweigh the bored detachment I felt in 3. I only felt engaged at the end.

reply

[–] SisterSuzy101 (349) 3 years ago

Sorry you bore so easily...

reply

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 3 years ago

So pleasant.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Eh the middle kind of drags a bit but the end I thought was really good, especially the gun fight and the train heist.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Putting Mad Dog in jail should've prevented the original Biff from being born, unless Buford already had a kid, but i didn't get that impression. Would've been funny if they went back to the present and the lack of the Tannen family through history had made things worse and the movie ended with them having to go back and save him.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 5 years ago

YES! That's a brilliant idea!!!
That's exactly what I was talking about: they should have done something that has an impact on what they did in the first two movies, n then fix it.
Gedmend you totally nailed it, now just jump on your DeLorean, go back to 1989 and tell this genius idea to Zemeckis!

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

lol, i guess i should XD

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 5 years ago

:-)

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

No no cause no

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Any particular reason?

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

How would it stop him from having a kid

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't think you are allowed to have girlfriends in prison. Also it was indicated he would be hanged by the sheriff.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

He wasn’t hanged . He only got charged with robbing the pine city stage. Not a hangable offence

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't think they just forgot about all his previous crimes though.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

He also could have knocked someone up two towns over way before then. Did he say he didn’t have kids before he got arrested

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

He might've had, it wasn't mentioned, if he had i think there would've been a line or two about it though, but nothing is certain.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

I’m sure a guy like Biff loved prostitues and didn’t love birth control

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't question that.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

So how do you know

1. He was hanged
2. He never had a kid

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't really. It was my suggestion for an alternate ending.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 5 years ago

But you said

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I was open for an already existing kid since the first post. And i never said he was necessarily hanged. All speculations here.

reply

[–] The LA Baker (799) 4 years ago

The Tanner name lived on. That means MadDog got married to the lady with sore feet, Biff's Grandmother. We never see her but she tells Biff to hurry back because she wants a foot rub in part II. LoL.
It would have been nice to meet Biff's Grandma in 1885. Maybe have her telling MadDog to come home and help raise their boy or something along those lines.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

Yes, that would have been waaay more interesting than Fox playing his own ancestor (another weak part of this movie).

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

Gedmend, Buford is not sentenced to death or life in prison. He just has to spend time in the local jail.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Was this confirmed somewhere?

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

Yes. Buford has already lived before Doc and Marty travel to the nineteenth century, and Biff is one of his descendants. The majority of the crimes committed by the terror of California remain the same in the presence of the visitors from the eighties. Buford is arrested only for a robbery, so he gets away with most of the trouble that he causes. He probably isn't even caught in the unaltered time line. The only reason why the marshal is able to overtake Buford when he does is because Marty dares to beat the bully.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Where is all this this said? I know the line about the station robbery but it doesn't mean there wasn't other charges.

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

If there were other charges, then those would be stated at the time. Everyone is terrified of Buford. Even the mayor and marshal are nervous around him. He commits all of the crimes that are not related to Doc or Marty in his original life. There are only a few additions after the intervention of the Delorean. It's possible that Buford is later arrested for something else, but cannot be executed or kept in prison for the rest of his days since Biff exists in the twentieth century.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I guess Biff still being around is the only real proof of this, if the creators put any thought in it at all, i imagine if they hadn't assumed Marty/Clint died in the ravine then the rest of his life after he got out would've been spent trying to find him for revenge. Doc must know what his fate was since he stayed around for years after this. Wish Marty would've asked before he left again.

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

Oh, it never occurred to me, Gedmend, that Marty was assumed to have died in the train wreck. I thought that the ravine was named after the young time traveler because he became the town hero. Didn't the locals find it odd that they never found Marty's body? Even though Buford could have produced his son before being arrested, he would have had to have been married to Biff's great-grandmother since he and his great-grandson had the same surname. Buford would probably have lessened his crimes if he had had a wife and a child because he would have wanted his boy to be a miniature replica of himself, and therefore not risked his life. That convinced me that the notorious shooter had not become a father until after the time frame of the film.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

No, i'm sure they named it to honor his death, it was to say he replaced what should've happened to Clara. They just thought his body was vaporized in the explosion i guess. If they thought he was alive they would've probably named something in Hill Valley after him and not some ravine which didn't have anything to do with his deeds. Except for saving Clara from it of course but no one was around to see that.

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

I wasn't saying that you were wrong. I just meant that I had never considered the matter. You had a very smart hypothesis about Marty's body vaporizing. That wouldn't have happened from the fire of a train wreck, but maybe no one in the nineteenth century knew that.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Yeah, these were just country people, they wouldn't really know how physics worked.

reply

[–] TM1617-2 (597) 5 years ago

Gedmend, that would be adroit irony, but too redundant a response to the first two films.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 5 years ago

Mad Dog Tannon strikes me as the kind of guy who would get women pregnant and leave them to deal with it by themselves so Biff's Great Grandfather probably didn't know his father Mad Dog.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

No, probably not, but that would be a good thing i guess.

reply

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 5 years ago

You always get these entries in these types of series and its nothing more than an excuse to direct a type of movie they grew up wanting to direct.

Back to the Future 3 was done by someone who always wanted to do a Western, Karate Kid 2 was done by someone who wanted to do a Kung Fu movie, TMNT 3 was done by someone who wanted to do a movie about Ancient Japanese Warriors, 3 Ninjas kick back pretty much the same.

Meanwhile these entry's are the worst of the series they represent and the fans wish they would just go back to the real setting the story is supposed to be in instead of forcing us to sit through your Poser 1950's movie Homages

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Wouldn't the story have felt uninspired if it just repeated the same settings as in the previous ones? How is a story about time travel supposed to be in any setting really? They are still in Hill Valley in all parts.

reply

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 5 years ago

It feels uninspired as is

reply

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 5 years ago

I mean the damn trailer plays at the end of Part 2 and it's nothing but a copy and paste western only not as good. You can't get more uninspired than that

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

What would you have made part 3 about then?

reply

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 5 years ago

I agree with what the OP laid out

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

He didn't really give any plot though.

reply

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 5 years ago

Im no movie maker all i know is the PS4 Back to the Future Video Game Story has much more thought put into it than Back to the Future Part 3

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

No need for a Part 3 at all, other than a desire to make money.

reply

[–] SisterSuzy101 (349) 3 years ago

Yeah, because we all know Part II was made with passion and not profit in mind, right? Give us a break!

reply

[–] TandyMan (10364) 5 years ago

"You always get these entries in these types of series and its nothing more than an excuse to direct a type of movie they grew up wanting to direct."

Zemeckis and company basically said exactly this in interviews back in the day. They just always wanted to make a Western. Why not do it with a time travel story.

It's never really bothered me, I always just thought it was a fun movie. But everything in pop culture is given so much weight and reverence now, a lot doesn't hold up.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 5 years ago

I agree with people complaining about that: ok, you want to make a western. Make a western, don't f up your best work.
I also think the western could have worked with this series, after all it's just USA in the past. But don't just "make a western": like I said in the OP, FIT it with this storyline.
Unfortunately, they didn't.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

No? Then why is this movie strong?

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

How the hell does this make a good conclusion?
It's random, uninspired, repetitive, out of place, uninteresting, underwelming, tired.
So much so that they could have kept making identical movies to this (they travel to the 1920s, they travel to 1864, etc...)

It doesn't add anything, instead deflates everything that was built with the first two.
As a final third, it doesn't really wrap shit: the machine still exists, Marty and his family and family story are ientical, they only learned the chicken stuff and Doc has a family. Not exactly the core of their adventures.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

OK, I might sound brash, I don't hate part iii but I wish it evolved what the others built, instead of this mild adventure in the far west.
I'm sure lots of people enjoy it more than I do, like you. Good for them!

I like that Doc is still with us and not lost in the past (but it was his choice, and he was happy about it). But don't you think it's weak that he builds the machine again? He wanted to destroy it, and for a good reason. That would have belonged to the trilogy arch.
And the love story? It's inconsequential to their timeline, other than renaming the ravine. You cared?Didn't it make you feel like you were watching some lame episode of the little house of the prairie instead of a time travel adventure?

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

It's weird that we agree on all points but we disagree on the whole result.
I feel mostly let down from this third installment, like they didn't care enought to make it a classic, they just wanted to wrap it up nicely but only get a passing grade from me. But I expected an epic!
It's not bad, nor insulting, and it has good moments and lines etc like you mentioned, but it's cute and safe, while the chaos of the second is what lifts this trilogy above most other series, as they doubled down on the premise of the original and it paid off big time.
In this one, Zemeckis and Gale they just....chickened out!

reply

[–] Furienna (3322) 4 years ago

Well, I just adore Doc's and Clara's love story. So that alone makes this my favorite BTTF movie.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

That is lame on so many levels...Who loves bttf thinking "It's ok, but I need a love story involving the old guy and some random, annoying hag"?

reply

[–] Furienna (3322) 4 years ago

You really can't accept that people might have a different opinion than yours? Now that is lame!

Either way, I don't feel that Clara is an "annoying hag". She is very likable to me.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

No, I completely accept your opinion. It's your opinion and it's fair that you have one.
That doesn't mean I cannot think it's a lame opinion, because of what I illustrated.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4097) 4 years ago

I agree, the 3rd film is weak. I did enjoy the train climax and the Marty/Mad Dog showdown but the love story was lame and felt very out of place in a BTTF film. Clara was annoying too but I wouldn´t call her a hag.

reply

[–] SisterSuzy101 (349) 3 years ago

Love story lame and out of place?? Um, do you not remember the plot of the first BTTF movie???

reply

[–] BillySlater (4097) 3 years ago

The first film worked because it wasn´t a standard "love story". Lorraine didn´t fall for George until the end of the movie and the film was basically Marty trying in vain to get his parents together while his survival literally depended on it.
On the other hand, Marty essentially becomes a side plot in BTTF3 to the romance between Doc and Clara who basically fall in love at first sight which is plain cheesy and forced.

reply

[–] SisterSuzy101 (349) 3 years ago

Having an attraction to a member of the opposite sex (which is what Doc and Clara experienced on first meeting) is not “love at first sight”. They didn’t fall in love until they actually got to know each other. And the romance worked because it was between two normal looking middle-aged people (something you almost never see in a mainstream Hollywood movie), was genuine, and was founded on a passion they both share - science.

I also didn’t mind that the focus was more on Doc this time round, as it fleshed out his character much more than the previous movies, showing that he’s more than just an eccentric scientist. Plus, Marty was already given plenty of focus in the other movies, so yeah... nice to have a change.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4097) 2 years ago

It was more than "attraction". Clara literally goes gaga for Doc the moment she lifts up her hat to see his face. That´s what I mean by forced. Whether it was fleshed out or not is really beside the point and I actually would have preferred if it hadn´t been.

reply

[–] Joogle83 (4147) 4 years ago

same also the delorean time machine met it end perfectly

reply

[–] Sidha108 (2356) 4 years ago

Part III is weak because there is no real “B-story” for Marty’s character that goes beyond him trying to get back to the 1980s. In the first one, he had to get his parents to fall in love. In the second one, there is his stuff with Jennifer and trying to destroy the book to stop his dad’s murder and the alternate 1985. He has nothing really to do that doesn’t involve time travel except be a sidekick to Doc.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 4 years ago

Yes, I agree. I wonder why they thought that Doc had to take central stage with his boring love story. Who wants to see some 80 years old fall in love? Oh, Doc is supposed to be...50? 60? Whatever, I love Doc but no one wants to think about his sex life nor cares of his even older looking love interest.

Like I said, they should have had this far west fare brief, no old McFlys nor chicken BS and just a little Tannen, and have them screw up the present of the other movies in some other way. Maybe a future Tannen, before Biff, is actually GOOD, so they have to save him and fix the future past again or MARTY will endure some dire consequence (Doc too, like in the second he goes to the mental institution, but he is NOT the main focus).

reply

[–] Kowalski (57993) 4 years ago

JUST TO BE CLEAR...CHRISTOPHER LLOYD WAS 50 AND MARY STEENBURGEN WAS 36 WHEN THEY FILMED PART III...A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE THE MOVIE AND THE DOC STORYLINE.

reply

[–] Furienna (3322) 4 years ago

You're speaking for nobody but yourself.
I just adored Doc's love story and would never change anything about the movie.
Except for maybe having more scenes about him and Clara.
And it's not like you have to be a teenager to fall in love.
Really, I found the plot about Biff Tannen's great-grandfather much more boring.

reply

[–] Joogle83 (4147) 4 years ago

Its a retread of the first cuz i like it the first one how is it weak it has the most heart the BTTF II Is overrated takes the fun out of the first one

reply

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

Part II is mindblowing with the futuristic stuff, Fox playing multiple characters, the dark alternate ‘85, the sheer genius of going Back To The First Film and the epic mysterious ending with a dude appearing in the pouring rain at night in the middle of nowhere... to give Marty a letter stowed away for 70 years. Incredible!

III is a neat ending to the series but it’s just a bit meh after the insane genius of the previous films, it drags a bit in the middle, and making Doc and his romance the main story doesn’t work quite as well the McFly’s vs Biff. I like the reflective quality and the decision to destroy the time machine, and Wilson steals the show again as Mad Dog Tannen, although he has less to do this time.

Part II had the legendary hoverboard scene about 20 minutes into the film, this had Marty being dragged by a horse and hung - it’s just not as jaw-dropping/clever/funny as the others. The Old West is a bit sleepy and uninteresting, especially in a PG family framing. I’d like to have seen more peril like being tied to a train track or more dangerous critters like that bear - maybe some snakes.

But yeah, this just didn’t feel as ‘inspired’ and you’re right that it wasn’t really a time travel film. It needed a unique time-based problem to solve and could have started in the Old West then jumped to somewhere more interesting.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 3 years ago

Yes, we agree on everything.

Also, talkin about no inspiration, other than a few obvious time travel gags (Clint Eastwood, ice machine) it looks like they didn't care as much and just wanted to be over with the series and these characters asap, as if they all had more important stuff to do.
Probably they feared to be stuck or pidgeonholed in BTTF, but it was a mistake to just neatly end things, and quickly move to something else. This is still the apex of their carreers, they should have kept the bar as high as the other two by taking their time to make it great.

reply