If the remake Back to the Future, how would you want it?

[danoyse]

I need to go back in time to prevent myself from looking at this thread.

Awful idea. No remakes!!!!

 

[NewYorkSpider]

No remake, no sequel. Leave the triolgy the way it is. That's what makes them special.

 

[UltimateJustin]

No remake, no sequel. Leave the triolgy the way it is. That's what makes them special.

Yeah, special for the people who grew up with them. But check this out and deal with this drama: I can't watch an old ass movie from like forty years ago like the original the Day the Earth Stood Still, that movie features nothing. That's why the remade it, so modern times audiences could watch something that makes sense to them. Soon, the legacy of Back to the Future will be forgotten people in the future will look at the cover on the video disc and think "I'm not going to do this." And they'll rent something with at least some CGI and modern techniques. Shouldn't all audiences be able to enjoy the timeless tale, using the best technology from their own era? Or should they just be forced to "deal with it" and watch a movie that wasn't even made when they were born.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, special for the people who grew up with them. But check this out and deal with this drama: I can't watch an old ass movie from like forty years ago like the original the Day the Earth Stood Still, that movie features nothing. That's why the remade it, so modern times audiences could watch something that makes sense to them. Soon, the legacy of Back to the Future will be forgotten people in the future will look at the cover on the video disc and think "I'm not going to do this." And they'll rent something with at least some CGI and modern techniques. Shouldn't all audiences be able to enjoy the timeless tale, using the best technology from their own era? Or should they just be forced to "deal with it" and watch a movie that wasn't even made when they were born.

I can tell that you're young. Man, when I got into my 20s, I changed my tune. But if you can't wait old(er) movies, then I guess that's your problem.

Your argument is not merit: you have this fast food generation thing going on (Come today, Gone Today), and that's why people are against this. So we the legacy of Disney films should not be about Snow White and be more like Bedtime Stories? Should kids not listen to The Beatles or Sex Pistols, who pioneered todays' music?

You're missing the point: it's not about CGI. Heck, Back to the Future doesn't even have a whole lot of visual effects anyway. It's about the acting, direction and story. Period. Everything gets old. The Dark Knight will old in 10 years. And BTW Back to the Future is not forgotten at all. It's almost unAmerican to not know what the movie is all about.

I think this thread runs deeper than 'remaking' movies but in life in general. Is everything that disposable now? It's almost like a character study in generational gaps.

 

[Octoberist]

And God forbid if you prefer the Star War prequels over the originals. God forbid.

 

[NewYorkSpider]

Yeah, special for the people who grew up with them. But check this out and deal with this drama: I can't watch an old ass movie from like forty years ago like the original the Day the Earth Stood Still, that movie features nothing. That's why the remade it, so modern times audiences could watch something that makes sense to them. Soon, the legacy of Back to the Future will be forgotten people in the future will look at the cover on the video disc and think "I'm not going to do this." And they'll rent something with at least some CGI and modern techniques. Shouldn't all audiences be able to enjoy the timeless tale, using the best technology from their own era? Or should they just be forced to "deal with it" and watch a movie that wasn't even made when they were born.

The original Day The Earth Stood Still was made in 1951. The new one came out in 2008. That's 57 years between the original and the remake. I can understand the nature of remaking a film almost 60 years after the original. Now classics like Gone With The Wind, Wizard of Oz, Casablanca have never been talked about being remade and they never should. This is because they're timely classics. 30 years down the road, some movies in the 80's are going to be considered in that category. If Back To The Future does get remade, you're going to be waiting another 30+ years.

 

[DDS]

Yeah, special for the people who grew up with them. But check this out and deal with this drama: I can't watch an old ass movie from like forty years ago like the original the Day the Earth Stood Still, that movie features nothing. That's why the remade it, so modern times audiences could watch something that makes sense to them. Soon, the legacy of Back to the Future will be forgotten people in the future will look at the cover on the video disc and think "I'm not going to do this." And they'll rent something with at least some CGI and modern techniques. Shouldn't all audiences be able to enjoy the timeless tale, using the best technology from their own era? Or should they just be forced to "deal with it" and watch a movie that wasn't even made when they were born.

I'm sorry, but I think you're missing the point of what a good film is. It's NOT about everything being flashy and up-to-date. I believe that a truely good film WILL be timeless, no matter the time. And by the way, I didn't "grow up with" the BTTF movies. I wasn't even alive in the 80s, but I could still appreciate them.

I won't even bother to respond to this post beyond that, the two above already did a pretty good job.

 

[Octoberist]

poor poor little Ultimate Justin

 

[LostSon88]

Yeah, special for the people who grew up with them. But check this out and deal with this drama: I can't watch an old ass movie from like forty years ago like the original the Day the Earth Stood Still, that movie features nothing. That's why the remade it, so modern times audiences could watch something that makes sense to them.

And yet those new added special effects in the end, didn't really seem to matter considering the film was a bust.

Soon, the legacy of Back to the Future will be forgotten people in the future will look at the cover on the video disc and think "I'm not going to do this." And they'll rent something with at least some CGI and modern techniques.

Video disc? What year are you from? Its called a DVD, buddy.

Seriously, you seem to be coming from the ADD generation who 90% of the time needs a bunch of pretty lights and loud noises to stay entertained. In the end of all things, movies are remembered for their stories and characters...not their special effects.

You say that BTTF will be no longer relevant and yet here we are, nearly 20 years since it ended, debating the 'idea' of a 4th installment. Whereas the Matrix trilogy (something that may be more akin to your tastes) is a nearly forgotten franchise...and that one ended just 6 years ago.

Shouldn't all audiences be able to enjoy the timeless tale, using the best technology from their own era? Or should they just be forced to "deal with it" and watch a movie that wasn't even made when they were born.

I'm sorry but, this is just ridiculous. I don't know what else to say to that.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I don't know if they're for realz trying to remake it or not, but here are the possible scenarios I have come up with:

I think it's a bad idea to remake Back to the Future at all, but your ideas show just how bad of an idea it would be

Option 1:
A modern day remake (in the 2010's) where Marty McFly travels back in time thirty years to the 1980's and goes to his parents dance and everything.

Yeah, that's great so we'll get another movie set in the '80s so producers can just make fun of all the fashion trends, hairstyles and music of that time period. We've already got movies like this, add time travel to The Wedding Singer and you've got this version of Back to the Future.

Option 2:
A 2010's set remake where Marty McFly actually goes back sixty years to the 1950's, like the first one. Possibly because Studio Exec. X believes that the 1980's are not as visually compelling as the 50's, since back then they had Transformers and Nintendo and we kind of still do now.

Okay, first off the '80s are very visually compelling to Studio Execs. Second, Marty goes back 60 years, so his parents are 77 and had him when they were around 60, see the problems already beginning to arise?

Option 3:
Requel where Marty McFly's son goes back in time to the 1980's or possibly back to the 50's and interferes with the time travelling Marty McFly himself. WEIRD.

Ohhhh, imagine the wackiness that will ensue when Marty McFly's son uses the Delorean. Don't forget they already did this in part 2, remember Marty having to try to not interfere with his Part 1 self in the '50s. Requel, more like redundant. Or maybe you meant Marty Jr. needs to fix his father's path, but Marty Sr. already did that, he fixed his parents past, his '80s present and his and his kid's future.

Option 4:
Something completely diff.

Then it's not Back to the Future is it?

 

[terry78]

Haha, to be honest, a lot of the populous that aren't older or film buffs do have Justin's mindset.

 

[Addendum]

If the remake Back to the Future, how would you want it?

In fire

 

[scifiwolf]

I was born in 1985. Maybe I need to be remade in a tube in a genetics lab with modern technology?

 

[Octoberist]

i was borin 1983, so I for one should be remade too since the CGI now is glorious.

 

[Jochimus]

I was born in 1985. Maybe I need to be remade in a tube in a genetics lab with modern technology?

i was borin 1983, so I for one should be remade too since the CGI now is glorious.

I'm an old-fashioned guy - I was born in '77, so I'll just take cybernetic parts replacement, please.

 

[Octoberist]

I think it's a bad idea to remake Back to the Future at all, but your ideas show just how bad of an idea it would be



Yeah, that's great so we'll get another movie set in the '80s so producers can just make fun of all the fashion trends, hairstyles and music of that time period. We've already got movies like this, add time travel to The Wedding Singer and you've got this version of Back to the Future.

Yeah, it would pointless going back to the 80s because when you get down to it, putting aside technology and fashion, I'm sure that it wasn't that crazy of a decade. So pretty much, you go back to the 80s and it'll be almost like the 2000s.

There won't be a 'cultural shock' at all when it comes down to it, and isn't that the point of time traveling movie?

That's why if there is a TV show or movie NOW, I'm sure they would go back to the 60s or 70s because things were more radical back then: politics, civil rights, counter culture etc.

 

[Johnny Drama]

BUT that was a little different.

1950s American movies are not as accessible to the general public, as it's pretty much an era that targets older folks or movie buffs.

So in theory, it's okay to remake The Day The Earth Stood Still.

But Back to the Future was made in a way where it's timeless (pun intended). It's still funny, easy to digest and watch, and charming.

20 some odd years later, we still talk about it. That means that it's important to people, geeks and non-geeks alike. That's freakin' powerful and let's not tarnish it was an "OK" remake.

So no to THE REMAKE of Back to the Future.

I wish Demension films used this logic before remaking "Halloween"

 

[Octoberist]

but i don't think the new Halloween is ruining the old Halloween.

Let me explain: Okay, they're remaking Nightmare on Elm Street right?

Well, the legacy of Robert Englund will never be tarnish or forgotten because I'm sure that Jackie Earle Haley won't be in 20 sequels. Same thing with Halloween or Friday the 13th.

The old movies had ....so many movies that you can't forget or ignore them.

 

[elgaz]

BTTF is one of those films that just it right - release at the right time, great combination of cast including MJ Fox and Christopher Lloyd, and a fun & lighthearted story which worked perfectly at the time it was released. Sometimes you just can't replicate that magic and it's better to leave the original film intact as it is rather than tarnish it with a pointless remake.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed with everyone else.

Movies are timeless, good ones anyway, and they stand the test of time, making it modern with special effects don't do anything for the film. What it comes down to is characters and the story of it and the impact. When a movie is so damn good, you don't think about it's age, if you do then you shouldn't watch movies in the first place. "Oh, It's ten years old, it's an old movie!"

Give me a ****ing break. I hate it when people say "is it in black and white?" Or "how old is it?"

 

[UltimateJustin]

True guys, but on the other hand, maybe they should just remake it to get it over with.

 

[Matt Murdock]

True guys, but on the other hand, maybe they should just remake it to get it over with.

No.

 

[Kingfish]

Preferably crammed back into Satan's butt hole, from whence it spawned.

Seriously, don't remake BTTF.