[Sim]

When I was 10 or so, "Back to the Future" was my favourite movie. i just loved it.

Now time has catched up - in that movie, 1985 was "present", but 20 years have passed. In "Back to the Future 2", Marty McFly time travelled to 2015 ... it won't be long until we have 2015.

I would love to see a remake of the movie, where Marty jumps back to the past, while this past then is the 80s.

What do you think?

This post has been edited by Sim: 08 September 2005 - 06:13 PM

[Jason Vines]

I'm tired of remakes. Every once in a while, a remake would be a neat idea. But now, Hollywood is using the remake as a substitute for originality.

Let's have a remake moratium for a while, and then we could consider a Back to the Future remake.

[Sim]

Maybe there should be a "Back to the Future" remake in 2015. Then it would be exactly 30 years from the original movie, just the amount of time Marty travelled back in time.

[Jason Vines]

Scorned, on Sep 17 2005, 11:10 AM, said:

No more remakes.  If you love the movies so much then how can you say you want a remake?  That implies that you are unhappy with them.  The idea of the date thing 2015 is really not a reason.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think a remake of the first Back to the Future film on the 30th anniversary of its release would celebrate it more than disparage it. Still, I think a better idea would be to make a new Back to the Future adventure with an older Michael J. Fox and Christopher LLoyd that features their younger selves spliced into the movie.

[Sim]

Jason Vines, on Sep 17 2005, 04:23 PM, said:

Scorned, on Sep 17 2005, 11:10 AM, said:

No more remakes.  If you love the movies so much then how can you say you want a remake?  That implies that you are unhappy with them.  The idea of the date thing 2015 is really not a reason.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think a remake of the first Back to the Future film on the 30th anniversary of its release would celebrate it more than disparage it. Still, I think a better idea would be to make a new Back to the Future adventure with an older Michael J. Fox and Christopher LLoyd that features their younger selves spliced into the movie.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a great idea. But unfortunately, Micheal J. Fox will not be available, due to his health condition.

[Noah Vale]

the back to the future series of movies were great but theres no need for a remake. they could extend the idea somewhat but it would have to be completely divorced from the Marty McFly storyline. It would work better as a syndicated tv series with different characters. The entire plot would revolve around fixing the timeline. But theres no way it would ever be as good as the original because there would be nothing for the actors to interpret. Hollywood just needs to focus on creating original works and stop relying on the past for recycled ideas.

There was an incredible amount of writing coordination necessary for the original trilogy. I'm not even sure it was initially planned as a trilogy. The third film wasn't as good as the first. I visited the set at Universal and it was really cool to look up from the center of town at the clock tower. At the time that I visited, it was the "future" version of the town.

Christopher Lloyd wouldn't be available unless the price and the script were worthwhile. Besides, he's a producer now. I don't think he wants to act anymore, and I can't say I blame him. The money is much better as a producer and he gets to shape the creative output in a way that's impossible as an actor.

[-January-]

Quote

There was an incredible amount of writing coordination necessary for the original trilogy. I'm not even sure it was initially planned as a trilogy. The third film wasn't as good as the first.

Actually you are right there was only supposed to be one. Then they wrote the second a few years later. Even though it said to be continued it was just a joke. When they wrote and shot the second one they made almost half of the third one as well if not all. Well at the time this was unheard of it was long before forrest gump and the greenmile movies that made it ok to go on for longer then an hour and half. They decided to split it into two movies released within almost i think 6-10 months of each other and i honestly think it made the third one very lacking but i was still happy to have another movie and it was only prudent that Doc was the center of that story since Marty was i nthe first and second.

Little people know it but there was a screenplay for Back to the Future 4. It had all the same stars as well as the girlfriend of Doc in the 3rd installment. This screenplay had in it that the time machine has an automatic re-animate sequence that allowed it to reconstruct itself. This was not explained too well but I saw storyboards for it and it basically it was abandoned in the mud and the side of the tracks and partially buried under mud and stuff. Well a lighting bolt hits the tracks and strikes circuits discarded under some newly uncovered wet mud and the next is a big flash and the time machine is restored to its original state. I think they were using the flight damaged model but it still had the Mr. Fusion how they later explain it being used again. For some reason in the first draft that was posted on the net long ago =P had Marty finding it and then tracking down doc in time to show him what has happened. But when first Michael j fox decided against doing the film this part was re-written so that two kids find the time machine and then go off on a series of adventures and somehow either doc finds out about it or then run into him. When Christopher Lloyd decided against the part as well the whole project was scrapped and I think Robert Zemeckis said that was all their would be. I do have to say when I read the draft it was such an exciting story I can still remember most of it to this day. So I don?t think it could have been that bad and it finally put more closure on it. Like where doc ends up and I think he passed away in one of the scenes where he is finally an old man and wont go on the last trip with Marty. I think they can?t find him at first so he finds out where he dies and tracks him down a few days before it happens. Anyways just thought I would throw that in there... I think they should not do a re-make but do another movie with new kids and maybe bring back Michael and Chris for cameos and I also like Jason's idea of using old clips splicing that could be very funny and very memorable. *shrugS*


- Kat

This post has been edited by Star*Crossed: 16 December 2005 - 05:46 PM

[-Oz-]

Remakes have a tendency to... well, suck. I believe it would be in the best interest of the Back To The Future series if they just remastered it, rather than remade it.

[Cymro]

I think remakes in principle aren't a bad thing, it's all in the execution, just like every other film/TV show. I like good remakes because they bring great old concepts to a new audience, while not seeming too old fasioned for the audience, and though "recyced" is a naughty word in entertainment circles, it's stupid to throw out good ideas.

I'm really looking forward to the day when they start making fully fledged remakes of classic video game titles.

[Jason Vines]

Cymro, on Jan 4 2006, 04:03 PM, said:

I'm really looking forward to the day when they start making fully fledged remakes of classic video game titles.

If you want a taste of that, try out Classic Doom for Doom 3. It's the first episode of the original Doom, in the Doom 3 engine.

[Cymro]

I'll check it out. I think in about 10 years they could do games from the late 90s, to keep up with technology. I dare not imagine how advanced games will be in 10 years, and there are lots of great concepts in games that i think should be kept alive. Imagine Half Life or GTA3 with 2016 graphics and physics engines