Back to the Future

Remake Back to the Future, but with Eric Stoltz and Jeff Goldblum as Marty and Doc respectively.

A potential remake/reboot would also have to contend with cynical twits who speak exclusively in strawmanning.

Edited by Avenger09 on Aug 23rd 2023 at 1:58:20 PM

The core plot isn't really about cultural changes, though, but about a kid gaining a new perspective on their parents by meeting them long before they became parents. That dynamic would work regardless of the era used.

The only thing I could see being expanded in the Back to the Future franchise is literally that 2015 world, and how it would have arrived in contrast to our 2015. I mean, there's a lot to explore and speculate on the retro-future and how much of it would be similar to our universe.

But really, just leave in the film trilogy untouched in the sands of time and history. If you want to remake the film, just reuse the premise but take it in a different direction and different name.

Oh and several years prior to actually publishing Back to the Future, IDW and DC Comics collaborated on a Star Trek/Legion of Super Heroes crossover mini.

The main villain informs both the TOS Enterprise Crew and Legionnaires how he has encountered many time travelers and would see how their timelines progressed so he could figure out how to maintain his own history. What follows is his display of various Time Machines: https://backtothefuture.fandom.com/wiki/DeLorean_Time_Machine

Link wouldn't show, so upon going on the article, look for the word Vandar and look at the close comic pic.

Edited by Antiyonder on Aug 23rd 2023 at 9:18:44 AM

You mean this one◊?

Yep.

...How did he steal a Stargate?

Successfully.

Please don't remake Back tp the Future. For reasons stated in this thread already.

Just stop remaking things. Make something new with a similar premise.

To be fair though, it often seems like even when there is new properties, people (even the ones clamoring for new stuff) seldomly flock to it.

The Bobs have a stipulation that no new franchise material can come out unless they both approve. I don't think anyone will touch it.

I was thinking about how the studio executive wanted the film to be called Spaceman from Pluto. It occurred to me that if he got his way, yet the film was otherwise the same and the sequels still happened, presumably being called Spaceman from Pluto Part II and Spaceman from Pluto Part III, it would have been one hell of an Artifact Title.

Edited by costanton11 on Apr 6th 2024 at 11:01:28 AM

Or they would have gone the Indiana Jones route and gave the sequels their own title.

If I remember right, in the BTTF anniversary book they came out some years ago, it was said the reason the head of Universal didn't like the title "Back To The Future" was he thought audiences would believe it was a film set in the actual future, and be confused why the main character travels to the past.

Edited by Brandon on Apr 6th 2024 at 9:53:05 AM

That might explain why the sequels open and close with the Title Drop.

Edited by DoctorSleep on Apr 6th 2024 at 10:03:57 AM

I believe it was even more mundane than that, audience surveys and polls indicated that movies with "Future" in the title don't do well. It's possible the "Spaceman From Pluto" suggestion was meant to start a round of new titles to discuss, but supposedly Spielberg himself acted like it was a prank to dissuade the exec from doubling down on it.

Probably one of my favorite movie making stories (whether its completely true or not), that. "Hey. Got your joke memo about titling the movie "Spacemen From Pluto." Hilarious!" And the other execs laugh and the first exec is too embarrassed to admit he was serious. Excellent trap!

I always had a more tepid response to it after film historians pointed out that most of Sid Sheinberg's ideas for the film were actually pretty good.

I also kind of doubt the popular idea that it was pride..? Because he was friends with Spielberg; if anything, I'd say the letter was the latter's way of saying "ha ha, Sid, but no."

Edited by Prowler on Apr 7th 2024 at 12:32:43 PM

Oh yeah, many pointed out that the original screenplay drafts were terrible, and required quite a bit of script doctoring. The famous clock tower sequence wasn't even in the original drafts, and was only added in because the original climax would have been too expensive.

Probably the only real screw up that executives did was force Eric Stoltz to be cast, although as others have pointed out, he did (does?) resemble Michael J. Fox a bit, albeit taller, which might have been the thought process behind his casting since the filmmakers wanted Fox (although they thought C. Thomas Howell was a better choice once they found out Fox wouldn't be available).

I don't see how either of those things make the "Spacemen From Pluto" thing look any better. I feel like they make it look worse.

Edited by diddyknux on Apr 7th 2024 at 2:15:53 PM

I never said it made it look better, or that it was a good title in any way.

Just pointing out it was a miss from someone the producers were generally chummy with and listened to, and that Sheinberg may have been many things (a nepotist, for one, hence Lorraine being named that).

But him being a prideful dumbass who wouldn't admit he was being mocked as opposed to someone who immediately realized his stupid idea was stupid when the guys he shepherded made fun of it is likely apocrypha. Funny apocrypha, but still apocrypha.

He picked the movie up when everyone else in town rejected it, I'd say he was prepared to get laughed at for fucking up.

Edited by Prowler on Apr 7th 2024 at 1:25:24 PM

Those sort of stories are usually fun to share in interviews and at conventions but don't necessarily tell the whole truth. Thousands of conversations are being held on every detail of a film, there are going to be bad ideas especially in hindsight. A movie like Back to the Future is generally a perfect storm of workshopping, troubleshooting, bargains and last second changes. It's very possible the Eric Stoltz version of the film might have been okay, but the more lighthearted energy from Michael J Fox was vital to the final product.

For all we know, the Eric Stolz version might have been *better*. But we didn't get that film, and the one we did get is a classic.

I don't know what premise a new "Back to the Future" movie would have, since Doc Brown is quite right that in a universe where the past can truly be altered time travel is too dangerous to play around with. And it was refreshingly untraditional for the mad scientist to be one of the protagonists instead of the villain or victim, but we can't just repeat Doc Brown.

Between Btt F and Primer, I don't see the need for more time-travel stories.

There was a Telltale game that supposedly did a Soft Reboot of the original three movies.

I might give a remake a shot, but I don't really want anything new to be added to the story. Like someone said its not about cultural changes, but I feel remakes that I've seen in the past try to be radically different, or self-aware of the original's status as a cult icon and then shoot themselves in the foot trying to please OG fans or appeal to new ones.

I always personally feel that a remake's purpose is to do something better than the original. That works for me when it's video games - seeing Silent Hill 2 with new polished graphics is great. Films though, there's only so much new camera technology can really enhance, and its more about the performers/actors/cast than technological or stylistic changes.

The new Lion King and Little Mermaid had more budget and hindsight than the original did, and yet its not praised for its cinematography or digital effects or the creative changes. Dead Space and The Last of Us meanwhile look and run much better than they originally did despite not really changing much to the plot.

Maybe they could come up with something really special but I would rather Back To The Future just remain one of the few franchises we don't try to resurrect at least until the cast and crew are largely dead and gone. It's developed a legendary reputation in my mind at least because it hasn't been given the Matrix Resurrection treatment.

Honestly of the big live-action franchise reboots I know of most didn't seem to do well enough to warrant sequels (^note Ghostbusters 2016, Men In Black International, Nightmare on Elm Street, f4ntastic four, Robocop) or were overshadowed by a better-received more nostalgic entry (^note Karate Kid and Cobra Kai, Power Rangers and Once and Always, Halloween Rob Zombie Edition and Halloween 2018, Bayturtles and Mutant Mayhem, X-Men Dark Phoenix and X-Men 97')

TV series seem to do better with reboots/sequels and getting back the old magic than films do (^note Twelve Monkeys, icarly, Fuller House. I don't know if there is a way to make better received reboots, but I think that energy, talent, and budget is better spent making more original titles like Us, Greta Gerwig's Barbie, John Wick, etc than trying to remake something older.

Edited by FOFD on Apr 9th 2024 at 6:55:22 AM

Back to The Future got a stage musical adaptation. If Hollywood wants to do a BTTF reboot, maybe they could go the "Little Shop of Horrors" route and adapt that for film.