Found another flaw in Back To The Future

SavageBasher · 11-26-06, 08:46 PM

As I'm watching it on SciFi, I got thinking...

During the 3rd movie, 1955 Doc helps Marty dig up the Deloreon and get back to 1885, where the 1985 Doc is located.

WHICH MEANSSSSSSSS
Before ANY of this happened, Doc knew that he would be sent back to 1885 from the lightning strike in the 2nd movie. He also knows that Marty would be back to get him. They both found the tombstone at which Doc was burried at from being shot.

So how can any of this happen, since Marty has altered the 1955 Doc by telling him about his future, and knowing that he'll be shot? In theory, the fact that Doc goes back to 1885 could be complete erased, being that Doc knows the future now.

IT JUST DOESNT MAKE SENSE!

Rattle · 11-26-06, 08:49 PM

I used to watch them alot and i would get so confused !
now that I stopped being a hippy and only smoke cigarettes maybe I should give them another go lol

zexmarquies01 · 11-26-06, 09:01 PM

yeah, the movie has a few holes in the story.

Maybe we can just say, that because marty told doc about the time machine in 1955, thats the reason why he goes to make it in 1985. But he never tells marty the TRUE reason he made the machine. That is, because marty went back in time.

which he wouldn't want to create a time paradox, or screw stuff up. so he decided to never tell marty. heh.

ALSO, another big hole.

in #2. Doc takes marty and jen to the future, to stop their son from going to jail.

problem, If marty and jen went into the time machine with doc, they wouldn't have been around in between 1985 - 2015 to get married, and have kids.

think about it. If they was in the time machine, then how did they get married between 1985 - 2015?

they would have showed up in the future, and they would have NEVER found themselfs, OR their kids. Simply because their 1985 selfs that lived to get old never happened, Due to the fact that they went into the future with doc.

so if the cops found jeniffer, they would have been " What? this girl has been missing since 1985! " and taken to her parants house.

and if marty bumped into his mom or dad, they would have been like " OMG! Where have you been for the past 30 years son? ".

ANOTHER parodox in the movie........

Not to mention the whole part where biff takes the delorian, goes to the past, gives his young self the almanac. then comes back to the future he was originally from, and puts the car back.

once he gave himself the almanac, he started a new time-line. which he must follow. he would have suddenly went to the alternate 1985 future where he is a billionare.

so then, marty and doc would have never been able to go back to the past, to stop biff from giving himself the almanac in 1955.

which THEN comes the real pardox. If marty and doc couldn't get the alamac back in 1955. doc would have been dead. meaning no time machine. which means, they never traveled to the future, so biff could give himself the book.

which THEN means, if the time machine never existed, biff coudln't give himself the book. So the past wouldn't have been changed where doc died. thus doc would still be alive, again working on the time machine!

which then, it creates a paradox.

Just remember, when marty said " why don't we go to the future when biff stole the almanac and the car ". T

then doc said " Because, if we go to the future, we will be on THIS time-line. where biff is married to your mother. We have to go to the past, to stop biff from giving himself the almanac ".

yeah, quite a few holes in the story.

and yes, i'm a back to the future geek.

SavageBasher · 11-26-06, 09:11 PM

Marty and Jen would still be around in 2015, AS LONG AS Doc got them both safely home in 1985 within a reasonable time (day or two), in which he does, as the ending of the trilogy is with Marty and Jen at the train tracks.

The other flaw that I found is in the first movie. When Doc rips up the letter in 1955, it is continuous action until he takes Marty back to 1885 in the 3rd movie. He never had time (or even the chance) to pick up the letter, which he apparently had, because of the bulletproof vest.

SavageBasher · 11-26-06, 09:14 PM

Another thing, in the 3rd movie, if you watch when the train is pushing the car, it is pushing it above the axle's center. When the 3rd log hits, the car does a wheelie, which is just not possible with the laws of physics.

Me and one of my friends figured this out, and call anything that is very abnormal the "third log syndrome"

ghettocomp · 11-26-06, 09:15 PM

Parallel Universe, They did not travel in time at all

z0n3 · 11-26-06, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageBasher

Me and one of my friends figured this out, and call anything that is very abnormal the "third log syndrome"

I'm going to start saying that.

SavageBasher · 11-26-06, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by z0n3

I'm going to start saying that.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...d+log+syndrome

zexmarquies01 · 11-26-06, 10:24 PM

oooh, the third log syndrome.

damn, i like that!

/me steals " the third log syndrome " phrase from SavageBasher.

Cerberus2k7 · 11-26-06, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageBasher

Another thing, in the 3rd movie, if you watch when the train is pushing the car, it is pushing it above the axle's center. When the 3rd log hits, the car does a wheelie, which is just not possible with the laws of physics.

Me and one of my friends figured this out, and call anything that is very abnormal the "third log syndrome"

Well in that case, just watch the fast and the furious.

Xenocide · 11-26-06, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cerberus2k7

Well in that case, just watch the fast and the furious.

NICE CATCH FOR THE WIN CERBERUS!

Oni · 11-27-06, 12:17 AM

I think the biggest flaw in the movie is that people can't actually travel back in time

zexmarquies01 · 11-27-06, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oni

I think the biggest flaw in the movie is that people can't actually travel back in time

And neither could Link, as he did in a few of his games.

Roofles · 11-27-06, 01:35 PM

What made you look past 1.21 jiggawatts?!

FudgeNuggets · 11-27-06, 01:59 PM

Ok, the movie is just a "for fun" movie and shoudn't be picked apart for scientific accuracy or continuity. Most of the stuff in Star Trek was made up off the cuff you know (I've read Gene Roddenberry's, William Shattner's and Leonard Nimoy's autobiographies).

TommyHolly · 11-27-06, 06:33 PM

Some guy in a Delorean cut me off yesterday and he was doing well over 88mph... Maybe he was in the Delorean from "The Wedding Singer" and not the one from "Back to the Future?"

OMG Fudge...what is that thing in your picture? I just noticed it now....haha

11-26-06, 08:46 PM	Thread Starter #1
SavageBasher Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Northeast PA	Found another flaw in Back To The Future As I'm watching it on SciFi, I got thinking... During the 3rd movie, 1955 Doc helps Marty dig up the Deloreon and get back to 1885, where the 1985 Doc is located. WHICH MEANSSSSSSSS Before ANY of this happened, Doc knew that he would be sent back to 1885 from the lightning strike in the 2nd movie. He also knows that Marty would be back to get him. They both found the tombstone at which Doc was burried at from being shot. So how can any of this happen, since Marty has altered the 1955 Doc by telling him about his future, and knowing that he'll be shot? In theory, the fact that Doc goes back to 1885 could be complete erased, being that Doc knows the future now. IT JUST DOESNT MAKE SENSE!
	QUOTE Thanks

11-26-06, 08:49 PM	#2
Rattle Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Home... again	I used to watch them alot and i would get so confused ! now that I stopped being a hippy and only smoke cigarettes maybe I should give them another go lol __________________ Mpower Max \| 4770k \| H100 \| 16gb Sammy 30nm 1866 \| GTX780 SC \| Xonar Essence Stx \| BIC DV62si \| ATH AD700 \| 550d \| AX850 \| VG24QE \| 840pro 256gb \| 640black \| 2tb \| CherryReds \| m60 \| Func1030 \| HEAT
	QUOTE Thanks

11-26-06, 09:01 PM	#3
zexmarquies01 Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio	yeah, the movie has a few holes in the story. Maybe we can just say, that because marty told doc about the time machine in 1955, thats the reason why he goes to make it in 1985. But he never tells marty the TRUE reason he made the machine. That is, because marty went back in time. which he wouldn't want to create a time paradox, or screw stuff up. so he decided to never tell marty. heh. ALSO, another big hole. in #2. Doc takes marty and jen to the future, to stop their son from going to jail. problem, If marty and jen went into the time machine with doc, they wouldn't have been around in between 1985 - 2015 to get married, and have kids. think about it. If they was in the time machine, then how did they get married between 1985 - 2015? they would have showed up in the future, and they would have NEVER found themselfs, OR their kids. Simply because their 1985 selfs that lived to get old never happened, Due to the fact that they went into the future with doc. so if the cops found jeniffer, they would have been " What? this girl has been missing since 1985! " and taken to her parants house. and if marty bumped into his mom or dad, they would have been like " OMG! Where have you been for the past 30 years son? ". ANOTHER parodox in the movie........ Not to mention the whole part where biff takes the delorian, goes to the past, gives his young self the almanac. then comes back to the future he was originally from, and puts the car back. once he gave himself the almanac, he started a new time-line. which he must follow. he would have suddenly went to the alternate 1985 future where he is a billionare. so then, marty and doc would have never been able to go back to the past, to stop biff from giving himself the almanac in 1955. which THEN comes the real pardox. If marty and doc couldn't get the alamac back in 1955. doc would have been dead. meaning no time machine. which means, they never traveled to the future, so biff could give himself the book. which THEN means, if the time machine never existed, biff coudln't give himself the book. So the past wouldn't have been changed where doc died. thus doc would still be alive, again working on the time machine! which then, it creates a paradox. Just remember, when marty said " why don't we go to the future when biff stole the almanac and the car ". T then doc said " Because, if we go to the future, we will be on THIS time-line. where biff is married to your mother. We have to go to the past, to stop biff from giving himself the almanac ". yeah, quite a few holes in the story. and yes, i'm a back to the future geek. __________________ AMD X6 1055T @3.8Ghz GIGABYTE 890FX-A UD5 6 Gigs of G Skill DDR3 1600 RAM EVGA GTX 460 HAF 932 Tower "Talking about how fast you beat a game is like talking about how fast you are in bed." Do you like Anime? Then join the OCF anime club! OCF Anime Club Click here, and click JOIN! Last edited by zexmarquies01; 11-26-06 at 09:08 PM.
	QUOTE Thanks

11-26-06, 09:11 PM	Thread Starter #4
SavageBasher Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Northeast PA	Marty and Jen would still be around in 2015, AS LONG AS Doc got them both safely home in 1985 within a reasonable time (day or two), in which he does, as the ending of the trilogy is with Marty and Jen at the train tracks. The other flaw that I found is in the first movie. When Doc rips up the letter in 1955, it is continuous action until he takes Marty back to 1885 in the 3rd movie. He never had time (or even the chance) to pick up the letter, which he apparently had, because of the bulletproof vest.
	QUOTE Thanks

11-26-06, 09:14 PM	Thread Starter #5
SavageBasher Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Northeast PA	Another thing, in the 3rd movie, if you watch when the train is pushing the car, it is pushing it above the axle's center. When the 3rd log hits, the car does a wheelie, which is just not possible with the laws of physics. Me and one of my friends figured this out, and call anything that is very abnormal the "third log syndrome"
	QUOTE Thanks

Found another flaw in Back To The Future

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

11-26-06, 09:15 PM	#6
ghettocomp Master of teh Ghetto Mods Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Choosing between two evils, I might pick the one I've never tried before.	Parallel Universe, They did not travel in time at all __________________ I find that most people are like Slinkies.. They are not really good for anything, but can still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs. :P
	QUOTE Thanks

11-26-06, 10:24 PM	#9
zexmarquies01 Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio	oooh, the third log syndrome. damn, i like that! /me steals " the third log syndrome " phrase from SavageBasher. __________________ AMD X6 1055T @3.8Ghz GIGABYTE 890FX-A UD5 6 Gigs of G Skill DDR3 1600 RAM EVGA GTX 460 HAF 932 Tower "Talking about how fast you beat a game is like talking about how fast you are in bed." Do you like Anime? Then join the OCF anime club! OCF Anime Club Click here, and click JOIN!
	QUOTE Thanks

11-27-06, 12:17 AM	#12
Oni Oni-ni-Kanabō Ninja Hippo eater Moderator Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Canada	I think the biggest flaw in the movie is that people can't actually travel back in time __________________ Mama, put my guns in the ground. I can't shoot them anymore. On Indefinite Hiatus Asus P6T SE Intel i7 930 @ Stock 12GB Corsair DDR3 9-9-9-24 XFX Radeon 5830 @ Stock Corsair 750 Watt PSU
	QUOTE Thanks

11-27-06, 01:35 PM	#14
Roofles Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Brew City	What made you look past 1.21 jiggawatts?! __________________ Q6600 - 3.42 (380x9) 1.48V : IP35 Pro : 2x2GB OCZ Reaper HPC New GTX275 OC to come : HP w2207 X-Fi Platinum (Op Amp modded) : Audio Technica A500's Tuniq Tower 120 : Antec P182 Running: Windows 7 RC and Fedora 10 (PREEMPT_RT) "If science is the dispassionate pursuit of objective truth, then it stands to reason that mad science is the completely irrational pursuit of a nutty project that the rest of the world will never completely understand." -Popular Mechanics
	QUOTE Thanks

11-27-06, 01:59 PM	#15
FudgeNuggets Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Gone Racing	Ok, the movie is just a "for fun" movie and shoudn't be picked apart for scientific accuracy or continuity. Most of the stuff in Star Trek was made up off the cuff you know (I've read Gene Roddenberry's, William Shattner's and Leonard Nimoy's autobiographies).
	QUOTE Thanks

11-27-06, 06:33 PM	#16
TommyHolly Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago	Some guy in a Delorean cut me off yesterday and he was doing well over 88mph... Maybe he was in the Delorean from "The Wedding Singer" and not the one from "Back to the Future?" OMG Fudge...what is that thing in your picture? I just noticed it now....haha __________________ sig deleted by muddocktor-take it up with the Admins
	QUOTE Thanks