Back to the Future Trilogy 4K UHD (1985-1990)

[Maxwell Everett]

Originally Posted by Tober27

Any now you mention it, nothing about the end of II suggests a western setting is coming (i know Doc hints at it earlier in the film)

So at the end, we know there's another one coming, and then suddenly "what is THIS?"
Total madness on the screen.

That line of his, yes. And you do see (very briefly) the "Destination Time" control panel erroneously flash "1885" and the Doc hits it with his hand and he says, "Gotta fix that thing." It's right before they go back to 1955.

So I'd say between those two things, it's properly set up. As best they could anyway. So it doesn't come completely out of nowhere, at least.

[Tober27]

Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett

That line of his, yes. And you do see (very briefly) the "Destination Time" control panel erroneously flash "1885" and the Doc hits it with his hand and he says, "Gotta fix that thing." It's right before they go back to 1955.

So I'd say between those two things, it's properly set up. As best they could anyway. So it doesn't come completely out of nowhere, at least.

I know... I said Doc hints at it.
As a kid especially, I didn't see the end of II with Marty stuck in '55 without a time machine thinking, "the next movie'll be a western!"
When I re-watch, of course it's set up, and Doc's letter says where he is.
But after Part II, I wouldn't have even expected there to be 1 setting for the whole movie again, but there was little time to think.
There's only moments as it's ending before the trailer appears, but I remember plenty of "what's going to happen, there's no way out" thoughts at that point.

EDIT: Additional thought.
As they were filmed together, why doesn't Buford Tannen's appearance at the museum match when we meet him?
I know the picture could have been taken later in his life, but why wouldn't they want it to match what we see in III?

[Maxwell Everett]

Originally Posted by Tober27

EDIT: Additional thought.
As they were filmed together, why doesn't Buford Tannen's appearance at the museum match when we meet him?
I know the picture could have been taken later in his life, but why wouldn't they want it to match what we see in III?

My guess is it was probably an early makeup test? Or something hastily thrown together because they knew it needed to be done via video playback on a monitor when they filmed the Tannen museum scene in II. Of course, they could've re-shot that monitor later with an updated pic of him as an insert, but I guess they didn't see the need to fix it.

But yeah, I think that old daguerreotype of him they used for the library scene in III looks much better.

[Geoff D]

Can't remember exactly but yeah, they did the photo with him in his original Buford makeup to have it ready for the shoot of Part II, but when they got around to shooting Part III they decided to make him much less of a man-beast.

[Tober27]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Can't remember exactly but yeah, they did the photo with him in his original Buford makeup to have it ready for the shoot of Part II, but when they got around to shooting Part III they decided to make him much less of a man-beast.

I guess we want to see Thom Wilson in the role, and he's great.
But the way these films like to reference eachother, it's surprising they didn't redo the monitor at the museum with how he looks in Part III. Or even show the picture we see there being taken in Part III.

[Geoff D]

It's a teeny tiny wrinkle IMO. Maybe Buford got a hair cut after the photo was taken?

[Tober27]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's a teeny tiny wrinkle IMO. Maybe Buford got a hair cut after the photo was taken?

I was going to say we could have seen him ride into town for a haircut and shave as his introduction.

It's not a problem. The picture was taken at a different point in his life. Just seems an un-Back To The Future way of doing it.

[Geoff D]

This is the same series that recast both Marty's girlfriend and his dad, so having Buford look a bit different isn't a hill that the filmmakers were gonna die on, you know?

[Tober27]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

This is the same series that recast both Marty's girlfriend and his dad, so having Buford look a bit different isn't a hill that the filmmakers were gonna die on, you know?

It's literally the same guy. It's in no way inconsistent with anything.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Tober27

It's literally the same guy. It's in no way inconsistent with anything.

I know it is. I'm saying there are other characters who got recast ENTIRELY so wringing one's hands about them 'fixing' the Buford goof ignores the wider continuity issues and just isn't worth obsessing over.

[Tober27]

Who's obsessing?
Just conversation.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Adam_ME

I was at BTTF Part II for opening night back in 1989. I also remember people moaning at the "To Be Concluded..." tag at the end. I knew it was coming since I read Starlog back then and was aware of a Part III.

What's funny is that immediately after the moaning and hissing, the teaser for Part III came on and then people started laughing(mostly in a good way). Universal was wise to attach that to the film.

I remember back when we first heard that there was actually going to be more BTTF and it was just like holy shit!?! whoa! awesome! unbelievable!
(heavy! ) Because yeah the original theatrical presentation did not have that at all. People that that was that. But man just seeing that clip above of the ending (pre-the added promo) just brings back those times. Man people just went nuts, clapping like mad, cheering, everyone running out of theater totally pumped and crossing over to the mall for some obligatory mallratting.

For me, I'm glad that tag isn't on the main mix, it takes one a bit out from remembering first seeing in the theaters and doesn't let you sit there and absorb it all as the credits start. That said, I'm also glad to have it as an extra since it does bring back seeing on home video.

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

This is back when people generally clapped at a good movie (or even just at pilots for managing a landing ).

I'm glad that in my region, the clapping at the end for something people liked a lot has still largely held on and didn't fade away as the 80s ended.

[Trekkie313]

Will Best Buy lower their pre-order price? I really like the steelbook...but $70 is too much for my budget.

[Batman1980]

If they do it will probably be closer to release date.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I guess I'm just old enough to have ridden out that wave of "Part III sucks!" and now we're getting more pushback towards II, it's certainly been interesting to see that shift.

hmm
I'm even a touch older and I recall it went the opposite way. Maybe it's a UK vs US thing or internet crowd on some boards vs real world thing or you are just a trace young enough to have missed the initial clear take that III was better than II?

Part II hit and while it was loved, it got a little touch of flack (but within total reason, this was the 80s and not the hater hipster modern age filled with internet geek rage taking everything to insane proportions and where trashing things and hating and not liking things is sport) and everyone was like I is the best and then III and II is a touch off. But then, fairly recently, I've seen II make more of a comeback in reputation and draw even or near with III in regard. Maybe seeing it now in the time it was set in, something about it makes it work more fully.

[bluRazor]

Huh? Nope. Part 2 was a cultural phenomenon back then. Hoverboards, self lacing Nike, ect. I missed part 3 & everybody I'd ever confessed that to told me part 3 sucked. Having finally seen it when it released on blu, I'd say I thoroughly enjoyed it, but 2 has way more nostalgic value for me personally.

[Nosferatu31]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Will Best Buy lower their pre-order price? I really like the steelbook...but $70 is too much for my budget.

It's actually not a bad price when you think about it. $23.00 for each film on 4K UHD/Blu-ray and in it's own case. I have no complaints with the price.

[stratamaster78]

I've always had 1 huge gripe about the Part III trailer that plays during the Part II credits...

It shows Marty kissing Jennifer on the porch in 1985 wearing the Western attire from 1885 which effectively tells you he finally makes it back from 1885 TO 1985 ...AND... that everything did go back to normal in 1985 after correcting Biff's time travel exploits.

I mean you would expect the heroes prevail in the 3rd part of a Trilogy but I didn't want to know definitively so before even watching the 3rd movie. It was really disappointing to me in 1989 that they spoiled the ending like that.

[bendermac]

Originally Posted by stratamaster78

I've always had 1 huge gripe about the Part III trailer that plays during the Part II credits...

It shows Marty kissing Jennifer on the porch in 1985 wearing the Western attire from 1885 which effectively tells you he finally makes it back from 1885 TO 1985 ...AND... that everything did go back to normal in 1985 after correcting Biff's time travel exploits.

I mean you would expect the heroes prevail in the 3rd part of a Trilogy but I didn't want to know definitively so before even watching the 3rd movie. It was really disappointing to me in 1989 that they spoiled the ending like that.

You can thank Robert Zemeckis for that. He doesn't care about spoilers in his trailers. Watch the trailers for his movies and you'll notice a pattern. He even said himself he doesn't care, as it's not important.

[NKB2017]

I can't remember if Elisabeth Shue is on Part III - as well as Pt II. Is she?

Do we know yet... which box set (U.S. or International) will be the best version to get?