MovieChat Forums > Back to the Future Part III (1990) Discussion > so is this one awful compared to part 1 ...

so is this one awful compared to part 1 and part 2


whats your opinion

reply

IMHO, part 2 is the awful one, due to what transpired between Crispin Glover and Bob Gale.

reply

I love Part 2 and 3 equally. Neither hold candle to the first however.

"See you on the other side, Ray,"
"Nice working with you Dr. Vankman,"

reply

II has a more exciting premise I suppose, but part III is more in tone with the original. It's a comedy but it's not as satirical and campy as II.

reply

I liked them all. I think part 3 was better then part 2, part 2 seemed a little too fast paced and rushed which was very different from the first one and 3rd one, they crammed a lot of different things in part 2, I could have done without the whole Biff is rich and married Marty's mom which just seemed to last too long and drug the story down a little but it was redeemed with Marty then having to go back to 1955 and how they tied in the 2 characters in the same time period.

reply

The second film extrapolated on a lot of things from the first film
-the first film hinted at alternate time lines and the effects of time travel, the second film took it further
-the first film teases with the other self paradox, the second film goes further.
-the future sequence in part II. It was interesting to see the progression of characters and an interesting parallel to the first film
-the return to 1955 and seeing it from a different perspective. This was the first sequel to ever attempt it.
-the special effects were much better especially the flying delorean


I like that we got two sequels because it satisfies the two groups of peoples expectations for what they would want in a seuqel; some people believe that sequels shouldn't be the same as the original and the second film wasn't, some feel it should be similar and they have the third film.

I think the third film is the weakest because while the first film was likely stronger, the second film did do some things better than the first and offer some better alternatives. There's not really any aspect to the third film which is better than the first film; the stranded in the past dilemma isn't quite as menacing; Doc and Marty need to only avoid Buford for 3 days vs marty having to get his parents together. The train sequence wasn't as climactic as the lightning bolt at the clock tower. Also because they went so far back, there weren't as many connections to the present (we didn't get to meet any characters at younger ages). And lastly at the end the only change to the timeline was easy to miss (the ravine).

reply

I couldn't agree with you more on the "Biff is rich and married to Lorraine" angle. To me it's just nothing more than a cheap take that against Crispin Glover all because he dared to challenge Bob Gale's authority. Mr. Gale, I get that you came out with a bruised ego in dealing with Glover, but please don't take your anger out on the character of George McFly and ruin things for the fans.

reply

They are all great

reply

I have the 1st and the best, the 2nd was ok, and the 3rd as great.

reply

2 and 3 are close, but I actually marginally prefer Part III

Regional Manager
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008200422/

reply

I thought it was a pretty weak way to end the series since it was essentially just a Western and didn't have the great character drama of the first film or the time travel intrigue of the second. It just seemed like they were tired of making Back to the Future films by that point and didn't have the same enthusiasm they did for first two films.

It's still a great film series, but the third isn't as great as the first and second.

reply

I agree with you, MtnMan. This one didn't have the charm, wit, or energy of its predecessors. I still like it a lot, but the heart just isn't there, and I think Zemeckis and Gale just wanted to wrap up the trilogy and move onto other projects.

reply

It is my favorite of the series, and a film that I feel is vastly underrated.

reply

It is my favorite of the series, and a film that I feel is vastly underrated.


The more I rewatch it, the more I agree with you. The first will for most of us always be the best, by far. However, part 3 is very much underrated. Very clever, great sets and acting, and Silvestri outdid himself with some great additional music that hadn't been featured in the first two. It's also very arguably Christopher Lloyd's finest and most versatile performance in the trilogy, in my opinion. Wilson never seems to get much credit for what he added as Buford Tannen. I have never cared for the flying train at the very end, but I don't mind it so much anymore - they were just giving the audience another spectacular surprise. I would have been perfectly happy with Doc and Clara making it to the DeLorean (rather than them going off together on a Hoverboard at 80 mph), but I suspect critics would have found that too predictable.

All in all, a great film and a great end to the trilogy.

reply

As a kid, 3 was my least favorite. I think because of the Western. And as an adult I appreciate it more, but its not as good as the 2nd. The second has more to it, but I loved when they went into the future. October 21st is just around the corner ;-)

reply

http://uproxx.com/movies/2015/10/back-to-the-future-3-defending/2/

After a lot of Facebook fake-outs, it’s finally, actually Back to the Future Day. While everyone online is celebrating the technical achievements predicted in Part II, tricking out their cars with a Flux Capacitor, and, of course, all things hoverboard, there’s one entry of the franchise that’s too-often brushed aside: Back to the Future Part III, an enjoyable sequel that is an essential entry that bookends the trilogy in a succinct and satisfying way. Indeed, while the original may be a genre-defining classic, and while the second doubles down on the adventure, the third film deserves its own moment of praise.

Capturing The Spirit Of The Original

The third movie repeats the basic premise of the first, taking Marty out of his era, placing him in another, and leaving Marty and Doc confused over how to get back to 1985. The first movie features a search for a 1.21 gigawatt charge to trigger the flux capacitor, and Part III involves a similar search, driven by the need to get the DeLorean up to the required speed of 88 mph needed for time travel. Of course, this being 1885, Doc and Marty have limited resources. And just as plutonium wasn’t easily purchased at the corner drug store in 1955, finding a way of pushing the DeLorean to the necessary speed proves to be quite the challenge.

Shifting The Focus To Doc

The film’s story set itself apart from the others by giving Doc a little room to grow as a character. In the first movie, he helps Marty. In the second, Doc helps Marty while also helping the “other” Marty. Part III turns the tables, putting Doc in the position where he’s the one who needs Marty’s help. Early on in Part III, while still in 1955, Marty notices the headstone with Doc’s name dated just a few days after his Western Union telegram. Rather than simply returning to 1985, he follows him back in time to do what Doc had been doing for him all this time — warning him about his future.

After Doc gets Marty out of a jam (or a noose), Marty’s goal becomes split between fixing the DeLorean while also making sure Doc stays clear of Buford Tannen, Biff’s great-grandfather (who, like all Tannens, is played by Thomas F. Wilson). In addition, Doc gets his own love story when he meets and saves Clara (Mary Steenburgen), which gives him an added dimension, turning him into a deeper character than just the frizzy-haired mad scientist who’s there to tirelessly guide Marty to safety.

A Loving Homage To The American Western

Part III also takes full advantage of its 1885 setting. It’s clearly the work of creators who love Westerns. As director Robert Zemeckis explains in the commentary track of the 2002 DVD release, he and screenwriter Bob Gale had played with the idea of “meeting cowboys” since the early days of the trilogy, but held off until the final installment. The crew rebuilt the set of Hill Valley from scratch, creating a crisp, colorful version of the Old West.

The result is a heartfelt love letter to the genre, from Marty’s chosen moniker of “Clint Eastwood,” the sepia-toned long shots, the Western-tinged homages in Alan Silvestri’s reworked score, and the elaborate climax built around its own spin on the classic train robbery. The film even features actors Pat Buttram, Harry Carey, Jr., and Dub Taylor, who were all famous for their numerous roles in old Westerns, as the “saloon old-timers.” (Also cameoing: ZZ Top, looking not-at-all out of place in 1885.)

Hill Valley Comes Full Circle

By taking us back to the early days of Hill Valley, Back to the Future Part III creates a fuller sense of the town’s history, one that goes back to Marty’s great-grandfather, Seamus (also played by Fox), an Irish-born immigrant who’s come to set up a new life with his wife Maggie McFly (Lea Thompson). It also gives some backstory to the troubled Tannen family through Buford, Biff’s great-grandfather, who was better known as “Mad Dog,” (a nickname he hates).

Over the course of the film, we see the construction of the courthouse, leading up to the memorable moment where Marty and Doc are photographed with the clock for its dedication. It’s an example of how Part III uses Hill Valley’s humble, dusty beginnings to flesh out the world of the films. It does something similar with the characters, too. Marty learns one final lesson from his time in the Old West, and once he returns to 1985, he doesn’t give into Doug Needles’ (Flea) attempt to bait him into a street race. By refusing, he saves himself from the car wreck that weighed so heavily on his future self in 2015, and rights his timeline’s one last wrong. It also gives Doc a nice, sentimental sendoff, showing him happily married to Clara, along with their two children, Jules and Verne, before ending on a moment that shows that where they’re going, they don’t need train tracks.

With that callback to first movie’s unforgettable final scene, Zemeckis and Gale bring their trilogy to a near-perfect conclusion, having told the story of a fully-realized world, and a few of its alternate timelines. Along the way, we’ve seen these characters grow throughout their places within the town’s history — whether they belonged there or not.

reply

Well frankly all of them are good. I can't say anyone get down to the level of Batman and Robin. I think Part 2 is the weakest. I mean its wacky. But i don't think Part 2 had the heart than 1&3 had. Back the Future was Marty's Story. Part 2 to was Biff's Story. And Part 3 was Doc Brown's Story. I think Marty and Doc Brown Stories are just much more interesting.

reply