The Back to the Future movies make up one of the most iconic trilogies of all time. However, when revisiting the franchise, these five uncomfortable truths must be faced. The first Back to the Future is considered to be a near-perfect film, and the two sequels are both beloved and acclaimed as well. However, it is hard not to notice these few issues when rewatching them.
Videos by ComicBook.com
Despite the 2010s and 2020s being full of legacy sequels, reboots, and remakes, the Back to the Future movies still haven’t been touched. Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale have both firmly stated that they will not allow a fourth Back to the Future movie to be made, which is great news for franchise purists (via THR). However, this also means that the franchise has never been able to address issues like these.
5) Doc Brown’s Rejuvenation Clinic Is A Dumb Excuse To Make Makeup Easier
One of the most impressive parts of the Back to the Future trilogy is its makeup. In the first film, many of the characters are seen in multiple forms. George, Lorraine, Biff, and several others are shown in their young forms and in old-age makeup, and the looks of both versions of these characters are seamless. However, the makeup on Christopher Lloyd is arguably the film’s most impressive. Doc Brown’s 1985 version is in his mid-60s, and the makeup on him is incredibly convincing. The actor was only in his 40s at the time of filming, yet you wouldn’t be able to tell by watching the film.
Early in Back to the Future Part II, Doc Brown tells Marty that he visited a rejuvenation clinic in 2015. He then tells Marty that he is wearing old-age makeup and that he really looks 30ish years younger. He rips off his old-age makeup and looks like normal Christopher Lloyd for the rest of the film.
In reality, the rejuvenation clinic was an excuse for the filmmakers to avoid putting on Christopher Lloyd’s old-age makeup anymore. Heavy makeup like that takes hours, and the production probably didn’t want to go through the process again for two more movies. However, they were stuck with explaining why Doc looked old at the end of Back to the Future. Thus, the silly old man disguise excuse. It’s hard not to realize that this is an obvious solution to production issues, and that the filmmakers probably didn’t want audiences to think about it too hard.
4) Back To The Future’s Cut Scenes Become Really Obvious
There were a lot of scenes cut from the first Back to the Future, and it’s easy not to notice them on a first viewing. However, they’re really obvious on a rewatch. In the final film, George McFly randomly eats a cereal bowl full of peanut brittle. This is because there was a cut scene in which George is pressured into buying tons of peanut brittle. There was also a cut scene in which Marty brings some of Doc’s personal belongings from 1985 to 1955, explaining why he has a hairdryer when he threatens George.
3) Crispin Glover’s Replacement Is Really Obvious
Despite being one of the stars of the first Back to the Future, Crispin Glover didn’t return in Back to the Future Part II. This was due to two reasons. First, Glover and the Back to the Future team couldn’t agree on a salary. Second, Glover disagreed with the first film’s final message, believing that the characters should have been rewarded with love rather than financial gain. So, Back to the Future Part II took actor Jeffrey Weissman and covered him in prosthetics so that he looked like George McFly.
However, this replacement is incredibly obvious. The character looks uncanny every time he is on screen. Plus, he is made a much smaller part of the story, with him being hidden in the background or wearing sunglasses. The absence of Glover’s incredible performance is the greatest tell, however, as he is one of the best parts of the first movie.
2) Back To The Future Part II Is A Little Too Concerned With Special Effects
Robert Zemeckis is an interesting figure. Films like Back to the Future and Who Framed Roger Rabbit were critically acclaimed, and they were also special effects showcases. However, his later films like The Polar Express, Welcome to Marwen, and Here were so obsessed with the visual gimmicks that they sacrificed quality. However, upon rewatching Back to the Future Part II, it becomes clear that this issue started here.
When compared to the first film, it is obvious that Part II is almost looking for excuses to show off visual tricks. The film is constantly putting multiple Martys on screen at the same time, and while it is impressive, it is hard not to think about how in-your-face it is next to the original film. The worst instance of this is how Michael J. Fox plays multiple members of the 2015 McFly family, with this clearly being used to show how advanced the film’s makeup is.
1) Biff Tannen Is Far More Evil Than The Movie Treats Him
Throughout the Back to the Future franchise, Biff Tannen is portrayed as a comedic bully. Although he is the antagonist, he is never treated as seriously by the tone of the film as he should be. In the first film, Biff sexually assaults Lorraine during the film’s climax. In Part II, he essentially becomes a dictator of Hill Valley after killing George. Biff is straight-up evil, but he’s played as comical throughout the film. The Back to the Future movies are undeniably comedies, but their treatment of Biff is pretty uncomfortable.
What do you think? Leave a comment belowย and join the conversation now in theย ComicBook Forum!
Most Viewed
-
Image Courtesy of Ufotable -
Image courtesy of Tor Books/Macmillan
