What is Digg?85 Comments
- vsujohn2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31Cool Flick. Be careful how you edit it though, don't want to mess up the whole space-time continuum. :D
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Great Friggin Flick!
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24Wow... that's seriously good work. The level of accuracy is just plain crazy.
Someone did their homework before writing the sequel. But I guess you'd kinda have to, if it's a movie about time-travel. :-P
If I had a flux-capacitor, I'd go back in time and re-digg this story infinitely. - Skunkhair, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24Cheyessss!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's 12:13am, I just saw that clip and i'm buzzed off a 24oz Heineken and the BTF Trilogy is sitting on my shelf and I don't work tomorrow... I know what I'm doing for the next six hours!!!
- creamy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22The best 15 minutes of my week!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20This is ridiculously cool! Why didn't someone do this earlier?!
Digg x Infinity! - eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16barbobot:
It was meant as a cute joke, like doc in a flying train at the end of BTTF III. The original print (and DVD) don't
say 'To be continued...' at the end of BTTF I. Also, if you notice... theyr eshot the opening for BTTF and Doc acts differently when asked "What? Do we grow up to become ***** or something?"..
Also... If they had planned a sequel, They wouldnt have tried to get rid of Jennifer ASAP in the second film... the writers (Bob Zemekis and Bob Gale) knew that BTTF was Doc and Marty, not Doc, Marty *and* Jennifer...
As an aside... the logic in BTTF II was this:
Why do people/studios want a sequel? Because they loved the first one, and it did well. So, Bob and Bob decided, what better way to meet that need than *GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL FILM*. Freakin brilliant. Especialy considering that the two writers *REALLY HATE* sequels, thus, the 'Jaws 13' joke in BTTF II, the writers poking fun at sequels.
Universal was going to make a sequel with or without Zemekis and Gale at the helm... But Bob and bob figured, if theres gonna be a sequel inevitably, they might as well be the ones at the helm... rather than whoever te studio got to make them.
Anyway, thats some fun BTTF tidbits for y'all. where dd I get all this info? The Commentaries, and such. - lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14It shows off how well they put the second movie together. You would almost think it was all done in one hit, but I think they didn't decide to do 2 more movies until after the first one was finished.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Useless trivia: the $300 in damage to Biff's car would cost $2061.12 today (converting from 1955 to 2006) or $1161.42 in 1985. Also, a $300 item in 1955 (when the movie was released) would have costed $77.49 in 1985 or $43.67 now.
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ - socbret, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Because to alot of people age 20-40 this series brings back alot of memories.
- aresef, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Nobody calls me chicken.
- tfizzle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10The odd this is I actually have wondered what it would be like to view them side by side.
I don't have to wonder anymore. Incredible. - eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8cmallinson
Michael J Fox reshot the entire thing, aside from footage take from the orignal cut of the first film... in fact, as I recall, they didnt even have the rights to the original footage. and had to put the new stuff in from the master print of the finished film, Fox mentioned that he might have noticed his early onset parkinsons even then becuase of how hard it was to re-perform that stuff on stage.
(Crispin Glover wouldn't sign off on the original footagee being used, he accually sued and won for the footage of him they used without his consent, and for using someone impersonating him, playing his character.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+814:21-15:00 is the best. Assuming he didn't edit the clips at all, the directors timed the interval from George shaking Martie's hand to the opening of the door to synchronize exactly.
Oh, and BEST! DIGG! EVVAAARRR! - kcchan1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8High quality AVI link:
http://files.ww.com/files/17080.html - Aquinas315, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7No, the events of the second movie did not occur until after the marty of the first movie goes back to the future. This works on a parallel timeline concept rather than the universal timeline concept such as in the Terminator movies. The first movie is one time line, when they go back in #2, they create a new timeline. All the events of the old timeline are the same unless there is a change made in the second timeline. This has no effect on the actual first timeline... Computer translation: Make a copy of a file, then add some characters here and there. The original file is intact, but because you went and made changes to the copy, the first file and the second file don't quite match up. Same sort of deal here.
- eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"to be continued..." wasnt even on the final cut, it was on the broadcast/VHS versions created after the sequel had been planned.
- eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Me too, for years... I'm an editor, an was always impressed by that sequence in BTTF II
- aresef, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And never mind that a different actor is playing George.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Err, umm.... Oops? What I meant to say was...
A $300 item now would have costed $43.67 in 1955, and a $300 item in 1985 would have cost $77.49 in 1955. ^_^
EDIT: Yea, the guy above me got it right. :-) - DaveyDeadite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5HELLO MCFLY?!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Not entirely perfect, but freakin' awesome nonetheless. Good work!
- MasterGrief, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I always liked that trilogy, and this was an excellent splice.
- duke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Also, a $300 item in 1955 (when the movie was released) would have costed $77.49 in 1985 or $43.67 now."
?????????? - CarpeDMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It may be 15 mins long, but the amount of time put into this editing job CANNOT be underestimated.
- Zeush8su, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Awesome!!!Gotta watch the movies now.
- Smoktiludy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Really cool. It sucks most of it doesn't fill the entire screen and most of the time you see a ton of black background with 2 tiny screens.
I've always wanted to to watch that part side by side, though, so thanks for editing that for our enjoyment. - craigeth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3that was awesome. its as if they shot both movies at the same time in some parts. like when he's on stage, the movements are exactly the same, especially at the start. that was so cool. this is why back to the future 1 and 2 are still my favourite movies of all time. well done to the editor too.
- frankmorris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is heavy.
- ManOfTomorrow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Great Scott!
- lilgryph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Right, they did the 2nd and third back to back.
Freon, if you can do better than do it. Put your money where your mouth is, big stuff. - Eeqmcsq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Wicked editing. This answered something I've always wondered: How close was the second movie to the first during those scenes. Now I know. WOW.
So Enchantment Under the Sea dance really is the junction point for the entire space-time continuum! Definite digg. - Etheo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Agreed, that time segment made the video! The whole vid is good but that part was the best. I wish there weren't more black timeouts but nothing can be perfect. Now why didn't I think of this. This is absolutely brilliant! Definitely a digg from me! (and a rewatch session of BTF trilogies AGAIN)
- geoboy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7bengarland, you just typed out a four paragraph essay giving a geeky rant about tech news sites.
Who's the one without a girlfriend now? - MrBabyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Cool. Like BTTF meets '24'.
- MikeCampo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Because they have to use the latest and greatest 3D effects in every movie that comes out...Hollywood should return to the filming techniques of th 70's and 80's.
- MrBabyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@frankmorris
"Weight has nothing to do with it." - cctoronto05, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I very clearly remember that when BTTF II was released I was very excited to go see it, just because of how much I had liked the first film (I walked out of the theatre in 1985 with a huge grin on my face!). Quickly, through the screening of BTTF II (1989), when I realized the technicalities set up within the storyline, I was convinced of the lengths that Zemeckis went to for the timeline accuracy. I have always been fascinated by this, and in my opinion, this is the best and most honest sequel ever made. When I bought my first DVD player, the DVD trilogy of BTTF was the first purchase I made. I was intrigued by this very aspect greatly, so a big thank you for throwing it out there for us all to quench our curiosity!
- AhmedB, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Very well done, however, I see a descrepancy, when they're taking the shot of him on the stage and the other Marty is supposed to be crawling across the top at the same time, I guess the first Back to the future should've showed someone crawling up there too..but it gets confusing with all the time shifts and stuff...
- kolanos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3masamunecyrus,
"costed" isn't a word, btw. The past tense of "cost" is "cost"... - AhmedB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'd say a better analogy is a 'fork' timeline (or create 'timeline' branch) , 'exec' all events up to this point, then do any changes from this point on... (actually in this case we don't need exec, since the image up to this point is the same)
- ferger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2that was awesome, i can die now, my life is complete
- Anubis2051, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2WOW! I've always wanted to do this, but I've never had the time to sit down and do it. I LOVE BTTF, one of the best movie series EVER!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I found myself saying wow over and over. I've seen those movies too many times and I still couldn't figure it all out. But how cool!
- j11299b, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thats was awesom! Great editing for a great movie!
- barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4SPOILERS
then why did the ending of the first one have doc brown in a flying machine? - mindsnare, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2praise the lord for people with that much time on their hands, that was tops
- D4r7h3v1l, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You got that a bit reversed.
You meant that an object that cost $300 in 1985 would have cost $77.49 in 1955 and one costing $300 now would have cost $43.67 in 1955. And the movie came out in '85, not '55. - Step1Mark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2NO BIFF... you leave her alone!
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Here's what I never understood about the BTTF movies: why doesn't it ever come up that Marty's parents MUST have noticed that their son looks EXACTLY like a guy they were both friends with in the 50's that helped them get together (so they'd probably remember him pretty well)? Was there ever any reference in the movies that they kinda knew what was going on with him and Doc?
-
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is