{"id":3143,"date":"2008-11-12T00:02:47","date_gmt":"2008-11-11T13:32:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.fernbyfilms.com\/?p=3143"},"modified":"2022-11-03T21:39:08","modified_gmt":"2022-11-03T11:09:08","slug":"movie-review-back-to-the-future-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fernbyfilms.com\/2008\/11\/12\/movie-review-back-to-the-future-part-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"Movie Review – Back To The Future Part II"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Back-To-The-Future-Part-2-Review-Logo-v5.1\"<\/p>\n

\n

– Summary –<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Director :<\/strong>\u00a0 Robert Zemeckis
\nYear Of Release :<\/strong>\u00a0 1989
\nPrincipal Cast :<\/strong>\u00a0 Michael J Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Thomas F Wilson, Lea Thompson, Elizabeth Shue, James Tolkan, Jeffrey Weissman, Flea, Crispin Glover.
\nApprox Running Time :<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0 108 Minutes
\nSynopsis:<\/strong>\u00a0 Marty travels to the future from 1985 to prevent a major family tragedy from occurring, only for an older Biff Tannen to ruin the timeline and create an apocalyptic alternative universe.
\nWhat we think :\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Darker and nastier than the original, and yet vastly more complicated, Part II of this franchise continues to twisting time-travel exploits of Marty and Doc with a lot less fun (save for a ripping final act) and a lot wider scope.
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

**********************<\/p>\n

After the stunning success of the first film, it was inevitable that a sequel to Back To The Future<\/em> would be made in due course. In true Hollywood style, however, most people believed a sequel would be simply a remake with a bigger budget, a low-par follow up to what was the equivalent to cinematic lighting in a bottle.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"\"
Ten seconds later, he would need to find that spare pare of Safety Undies.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Obviously, with this in mind, Robert Zemekis and his crew embarked upon a filmmaking exercise only attempted a few times in all of Hollywood history: to film the sequels concurrently, with the same cast, and set immediately after the story finished in film 1. Lord Of The Rings,<\/em> the Pirates of the Caribbean <\/em>films, and the Matrix<\/em> sequels are all examples of films shot simultaneously for the sake of budget, time and cast availability. Their success, depending on your point of view, varies substantially. Still, Zemeckis was determined to recreate the same energy and impact his original film had developed back in 85. Production commenced soon after the original film had finished it\u2019s run at the box office, and Part II<\/em> was released into cinemas in 89.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Waitaminnit, thats not how you spell Rolex!!!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Inevitably, comparisons were made between the original film, and its immediate sequel. The reviews were not favourable. Deserved, or not?<\/p>\n

\"\"
See pop? I knew those drugs weren’t prescription!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The sequel takes up where the first film left off: Marty, Doc and Jennifer take off into the future to right a future wrong. Along the way, old Biff from the future discovers the true nature of the DeLorean and visits the past with a sporting almanac (with results from the last 100 years of sports) which he gives to his younger self, in order to profit from future knowledge. This creates an alternate, darker version of the \u201cpresent\u201d in which Marty\u2019s father is dead, his mother is married to Biff and Hill Valley is an anarchic city in the mould of Gotham. Doc Brown is locked in an insane asylum, and the rest of Marty\u2019s family is locked up in jail.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Legend grew, afterwards, of Old Biff, who came to be known simply as “The Bag Man”.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Yep, it\u2019s all pear shaped, and Marty and Doc Brown find themselves having to travel back to 1955, to the timeline of the original film, in order to correct the future.<\/p>\n

\"I
I tells ya Marty, if any more of my henchmen decide to wear some stupid red glasses, I may just punch THEM, not you!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Is this sequel a lesser film than the original? In my opinion, no, it isn\u2019t. It\u2019s darker, certainly, and the tone is a lot more gritty and less family friendly than the original. But then, so was Empire Strikes Back<\/em> in Star Wars<\/em>. B2TF Part II<\/em> takes our characters and sends them into a world where not everything is shiny and light: it\u2019s grungy, horrible and brutal, and if you want to do something different to the original film, then perhaps this is the way to do it. Part II <\/em>is so far removed from the tone and feel of the original film that it almost belongs in a different series: yet, throughout all this, the central characters remain essentially the same. Marty and Doc always look like they\u2019re about to discover the Apocalypse, they\u2019re so wound up.<\/p>\n

\"\"
We don’t have the budget of Star Trek Marty, so I’m going to explain it with some chalk and a blackboard.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Zemeckis himself has stated that he feels he did not give Part II<\/em> enough time in the editing room, as while he was editing, he was filming Part III<\/em> elsewhere, so his attention was divided a little too much. That said, I still think Part II<\/em> is a worthy continuation of the series, and although lacking the lighthearted tone of the original, still retains enough zest and energy to make it worthwhile. Zemeckis\u2019 flair behind the camera shows again, much as it did in the original, with plenty of snazzy angles and camera tricks to keep you interested.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Several seconds afterwards, the police arrived, and he was arrested for holding a gun the wrong way.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

I\u2019ve tried to figure out where the film\u2019s faults lie, and I think I\u2019ve come up with something. The problem the film has is that, in a similar way to The Two Towers, Empire Strikes Back<\/em> and any other trilogy, the film has no real beginning, and an unresolved ending, which proves the old adage that narratively, you need these things to make a complete film. Perhaps it\u2019s our conditioning to countless movies that do conclude properly, but an humans we seem to require a conclusion to our stories in order to obtain satisfaction. The \u201cto be concluded\u201d tag at the end comes at a point where there\u2019s no real drama, no real twist, either: Marty goes back to the Doc and tells him he needs his help. The Doc faints, and that\u2019s it. No dramatic Doctor Who<\/em> styled-cliffhanger where the need to see what happens is so great you leave the cinema on tenterhooks. Instead, it\u2019s kind of a \u201cwell, we got to this stage and we think we should stop now\u201d moment, and it leaves you flat. But that\u2019s not the main reason, though.<\/p>\n

\"\"
I tells ya Ralph, this whole Time Travel thing makes my head spin!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

I think the film\u2019s major failing is its harsh tone, its dark nature and vindictiveness that permeates the screen in a way that counteracts Marty and Doc\u2019s effusive behaviour. It\u2019s like sticking a clown in a funeral. The tone between storyline and characters clash, and this creates a jarring, often uncomfortable effect for the viewer. The prediction of Doc\u2019s death, the destruction of Hill Valley as Biff takes over, the rather uncomfortably adult tone of Biff\u2019s attitude towards Marty\u2019s mother in the alternative 1985, and a general feeling of violent dread, makes for strangely depressing viewing.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Marty never could figure out why he never made a convincing gangster…<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

However, I would state again that this storyline is one that needs to be told if you are to have an effective resolution in Part III<\/em>. At some point, you have to take your characters to a new bad place for them to recover from. Marty goes there, and he comes back. Was it handled effectively? Most people will say no, it wasn\u2019t, but I tend to believe that by exploring our heroes failures and foibles in this way, we get to learn a little more about them. Marty isn\u2019t a traditional hero: he says and does the right things when it counts but he\u2019s not infallible. His inability to walk away whenever he\u2019s called \u201cchicken\u201d is a recurring plot device (which occasionally wears thin, but pays off in Part III<\/em>) comes from a human failing, and the exploration of this is required to delve deeper into the character.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Biff later wondered what would have happened if he hadn’t been reading and driving.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

I think people went into this film with an expectation of something similar to the first film: lighthearted and breezy, with an effortless energy and joy. What they got was an apocalyptic, dark and slightly flat tale of missed destiny, altered fates and what-ifs. This, more than anything, put people off. Now, though, in the cold light of reminiscing, we can be more objective. Part II<\/em> is a good<\/em> film, make no doubt. Its attitude is different, and it goes where you least expect, but it\u2019s still a good film<\/em>. Well made, acted and with a hearty dose of black humor and freneticism, Back To The Future Part II <\/em>is the less liked of all the trilogy, and I feel that\u2019s a sentiment that\u2019s largely undeserved.<\/p>\n

\"7-Star\"<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Related articles<\/h6>\n