›

Here's an Idea how Marty could've not disrupted the Space Time Continuum..

moturumoturu
edited January 2011 in Back to the Future
Well at least not that much. You remember how Marty said that he could go back in time and save Doc before he got caught? But then Doc said that then that might result in the Delorean not going back to 1986 and telling Marty to go back for Doc and it would "end the universe as we know it". Well why couldn't Marty go back and rescue Doc and go back to 1986 without using the Delorean that Doc used to go to 1931? What I mean, if Marty went back to the time the speakeasy burned down, there would be two Deloreans. He just wouldn't have to use the one Doc used to go to 1931, but instead use the one that brought him (Marty) to 1931! Isn't that a brilliant idea!
:D
Now he doesn't need to subpeona his grandfather or drive a rocket powered bike or steal a hat full of peanuts!

Comments

  • redfishredfish
    edited January 2011
    There are problems with it, but none that aren't glossed over in similar scenarios in the other films.

    They'd have to find a way to have the first Delorean use its auto-retrieval feature and have Einstein drag Edna Strickland's shoe into it, since that would be the only way to faithfully preserve the chain of events.

    Then, the only problem would be that Doc Brown's photo would never been in one of Edna's newspapers, but all in all Marty would still have an excuse to go back.

    I'm not sure any of that makes a difference, because if you recall, the reason Marty went back to the 1880s in Back to the Future III is because he found out that Doc got killed by Mad Dog Tannen, and the changes he made in the past, saving Doc Brown's life, removed any necessity for him to make the decision to go to the past.

    This is a big hole in how the series explains time travel.
  • oo7solidsnakeoo7solidsnake
    edited January 2011
    Well, I think it's explained by the idea that any changes just skews the universe into an alternate reality, with unpredictable effects.
  • LuigiHannLuigiHann
    edited January 2011
    redfish wrote: »
    I'm not sure any of that makes a difference, because if you recall, the reason Marty went back to the 1880s in Back to the Future III is because he found out that Doc got killed by Mad Dog Tannen, and the changes he made in the past, saving Doc Brown's life, removed any necessity for him to make the decision to go to the past.

    People bring that one up a lot, but I can't look at Marty and Doc's relationship and believe that Marty wouldn't go back to get Doc, even if there was no tombstone.
  • redfishredfish
    edited January 2011
    oo7solidsnake wrote: »
    Well, I think it's explained by the idea that any changes just skews the universe into an alternate reality, with unpredictable effects.

    Yea, I could go along with that, though the changes would have to be completely asynchronous with the natural course of events.

    Even if you assume Marty is from a different reality than the timeline he's in, you still have to explain why there isn't a duplicate Marty in the future, since the one in the alternate timeline wouldn't have left.

    ....the alternate Marty would simply have to 'disappear' at the time that the original Marty left.

    Kind of the reverse of disappearing when you prevent yourself from being born.

    But that would also mean that Doc Brown's reasoning in this episode doesn't make sense.
  • russell19831983russell19831983
    edited January 2011
    his reason contradicts what he did in back to the future part 2, he got information about marty's son, then used that information to change the future, then the future is changed, but because the future is changed the doc that went forward in time the first time would find nothing wrong and would never get information about that event and get Marty to come with him to change it. So his reasoning in the game is flawed.
  • Shadowknight1Shadowknight1
    edited January 2011
    Easiest way Marty could've avoided disrupting the space-time continuum? Not gone back in time.
  • JenniferJennifer Moderator
    edited January 2011
    russell19831983 wrote: »
    his reason contradicts what he did in back to the future part 2, he got information about marty's son, then used that information to change the future, then the future is changed, but because the future is changed the doc that went forward in time the first time would find nothing wrong and would never get information about that event and get Marty to come with him to change it. So his reasoning in the game is flawed.
    The Doc that went forward in time to 2015 would see himself and Marty there (since Marty is the one who caused the gang to get arrested), so even without the newspaper he'd know that he'd have to go back to the 80's and get teenage Marty to send him to that point in time.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.