Minor BTTF Part Two question

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Anyway, the key to how Bill and Ted treated this comes both with the stuff with Ted's father's keys and the stuff at the Circle-K. There's a minor plot thread in the beginning of the movie with Ted's father looking for his keys, we later discovered that Ted stole them by going into the past at some point in the future, stealing them, and hiding them for him and Bill to use to save the historical figures. Then, of course, we see Bill and Ted arrive at the Circle-K and the interaction there before Bill and Ted have left, or even realize what is going on.

Good stuff here. I followed you perfectly through all of this, and was thinking about the keys when I wrote about the "Bill and Ted theory of Time Travel" (which was also used in the sequel, and I agree that Bill and Ted is only time travel story I can think of that used this "single timeline" idea. I also agree that, for some reason I can't describe, it seems the most sensible "logic" to me.

My question is: can you add more context to it's use at the Circle- K? I don't quite remember how this logic is sued there. I haven't seen the film in a while.

[theenglish]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

Good stuff here. I followed you perfectly through all of this, and was thinking about the keys when I wrote about the "Bill and Ted theory of Time Travel" (which was also used in the sequel, and I agree that Bill and Ted is only time travel story I can think of that used this "single timeline" idea. I also agree that, for some reason I can't describe, it seems the most sensible "logic" to me.

My question is: can you add more context to it's use at the Circle- K? I don't quite remember how this logic is sued there. I haven't seen the film in a while.

Not exclusively a time travel story, but The Prisoner of Azkaban uses the single time line theory as well.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

My friend told me that Timeline and De'Ja Vu does it as well, but I haven't seen it.

12 Monkeys is another one, but... I can see the pointlessness of the movie because no one gets out of it.

[Trekker4747]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

My question is: can you add more context to it's use at the Circle- K? I don't quite remember how this logic is sued there. I haven't seen the film in a while.

In the movie Bill and Ted are at the Circle-K working on their report when Rufus and the phone-booth arrive. Rufus is talking to them about the booth and their report when another phone booth arrives. This one is damaged and carrying Bill, Ted and the historical figures. "Future Bill and Ted" come out of it and talk with themselves (the whole, "What number am I thinking of?"/"69!" bit). Rufus leads them away, much to the confusion of our Bill and Ted. "Future Bill" instructs "our" Bill to say "Hi!" to the princesses (much to OB's confusion). As Rufus is talking to Future Bill and Ted our Bill and Ted remain confused.

"Future" Ted shouts to Our Ted to remember to wind his watch (Why Ted owns a watch that needs winding is a mystery) and they depart. Rufus returns to our Bill and Ted and the story begins.

Later in the movie after their adventures through time we see the other end of this encounter ("Our" Bill and Ted now being the "Future" Bill and Ted talking to their past selves.) The scene plays out exactly the same. (Though we skip part of it, for the sake of brevity.) We also get to see the other end of the conversation where Rufus checks in on the boys, they find out it's "already tomorrow" and they need to dial a number higher in order to get back into the present. (Why they can't simply stay there and have all night to work on the report is another mystery.) Ted reminds his past-self to wind his watch (which, obviously, is a pointless exercise because it won't and CANNOT work) then Bill and Ted set off for "tomorrow" and the rest of the movie. Once departed Rufus offers the new booth to Bill and Ted.

It's just a beautiful, beautiful scene showing how I believe time travel works. In a closed loop system. The past comes first so the past HAPPENS first even if that past happens to include events from the future. It's a predestination paradox sort of thing and also says a LOT about free-will (at least in the B&T Universe or a universe with a closed timeline.)

Like I said, no matter what happens Ted will forget to wind his watch! Reminding himself to do it had no impact on anything, he forgot to do it. That cannot be changed. In the B&T universe these historical figures were ALWAYS kidnapped by B&T and taken into the future to do this report and everything that the world is built on is BASED on this. Taking the princesses from the past doesn't change anything, they ALWAYS disappeared from the past even if the time they were taken from happened centuries before Bill and Ted get the time machine which they get centuries before it's even invented!

It's just a beautiful, beautiful use of time travel. The keys thing also being a great point in it as well as other tricks they use to "set-up" events. (Like how they managed to get everyone out of jail.) I need to watch that movie again now.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

In the movie Bill and Ted are at the Circle-K working on their report when Rufus and the phone-booth arrive. Rufus is talking to them about the booth and their report when another phone booth arrives. This one is damaged and carrying Bill, Ted and the historical figures. "Future Bill and Ted" come out of it and talk with themselves (the whole, "What number am I thinking of?"/"69!" bit). Rufus leads them away, much to the confusion of our Bill and Ted. "Future Bill" instructs "our" Bill to say "Hi!" to the princesses (much to OB's confusion). As Rufus is talking to Future Bill and Ted our Bill and Ted remain confused.

"Future" Ted shouts to Our Ted to remember to wind his watch (Why Ted owns a watch that needs winding is a mystery) and they depart. Rufus returns to our Bill and Ted and the story begins.

Later in the movie after their adventures through time we see the other end of this encounter ("Our" Bill and Ted now being the "Future" Bill and Ted talking to their past selves.) The scene plays out exactly the same. (Though we skip part of it, for the sake of brevity.) We also get to see the other end of the conversation where Rufus checks in on the boys, they find out it's "already tomorrow" and they need to dial a number higher in order to get back into the present. (Why they can't simply stay there and have all night to work on the report is another mystery.) Ted reminds his past-self to wind his watch (which, obviously, is a pointless exercise because it won't and CANNOT work) then Bill and Ted set off for "tomorrow" and the rest of the movie. Once departed Rufus offers the new booth to Bill and Ted.

It's just a beautiful, beautiful scene showing how I believe time travel works. In a closed loop system. The past comes first so the past HAPPENS first even if that past happens to include events from the future. It's a predestination paradox sort of thing and also says a LOT about free-will (at least in the B&T Universe or a universe with a closed timeline.)

Like I said, no matter what happens Ted will forget to wind his watch! Reminding himself to do it had no impact on anything, he forgot to do it. That cannot be changed. In the B&T universe these historical figures were ALWAYS kidnapped by B&T and taken into the future to do this report and everything that the world is built on is BASED on this. Taking the princesses from the past doesn't change anything, they ALWAYS disappeared from the past even if the time they were taken from happened centuries before Bill and Ted get the time machine which they get centuries before it's even invented!

It's just a beautiful, beautiful use of time travel. The keys thing also being a great point in it as well as other tricks they use to "set-up" events. (Like how they managed to get everyone out of jail.) I need to watch that movie again now.

Thank you for clarifying. I noticed as well that it had a unique yet sensible logic to time travel. Thanks much for helping me recall the Circle-K scene.

I always thought that Future Ted was saying that his younger self should "mind" his watch, as in, not forget about what time it actually is, but Google tells me it was "wind."

[Trekker4747]

Yeah, it was wind. Which you really have to wonder why Ted of all people not only had an analog watch (could he really even read it?!) but one that needed winding!

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Timelines aside, my favorite bit in that movie is the image of Genghis Khan in the sporting goods store! That was inspired!

[Trekker4747]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

Timelines aside, my favorite bit in that movie is the image of Genghis Khan in the sporting goods store! That was inspired!

I just wish we got a scene of Lincoln watching C-SPAN (or whatever we had back then) or reading the politics section of the news paper or something and shaking his head.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

It was such an inspired film! I loved it. I saw a picture on Facebook that showed Lincoln in a cafe sending a text message on his phone and I immediately thought of Bill and Ted. It's an underrated film.

About Back to the Future, when Marty wakes up after the adventure in the first film, how is it that he "merges" with his other self that must have experienced a normal life with his parents, including his improved father?

[tighr]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

About Back to the Future, when Marty wakes up after the adventure in the first film, how is it that he "merges" with his other self that must have experienced a normal life with his parents, including his improved father?

One of the unresolved questions of that movie (and one that would be confusing, so it makes sense to ignore it). The life that Marty comes back to isn't his own, but rather some other Marty's life, the Marty who time traveled from the Lone Pines mall at the end of the movie.

Realistically, it's a stretch that the new 1985 even minutely resembles the 1985 that Marty is from!

[GalaxyX]

Yeah you guys get too worked anytime someone suggests CGI (or model) work to fix scenes that are clearly mediocre.

No one is complaining that the TNG Remastered project has *fixed* a ton of things that were wrong with the originals, like the energy beam coming out of the phaser strip rather than the Captain's Yatch for example. In a "purist" sense, they should have left it like that, but in "HD".

So why no complains on small changes like that that fix logical problems? That's what I'm asking for in BTTF. I'm not asking for an animated Jar Jar Binks character to be added to all the movies as Marty McFly's best buddy sidekick. This is always the implication anytime someone asks for scened to be fixed.

[Tom]

Jar Jar: "Weres ah weee going Marty?"
Marty: "Back to the future!"
Jar Jar: "Oh doy, meesa going to have alot of Bom bad fun"
Marty: "Shut the fuck up Jar Jar!"

[Gaith]

GalaxyX wrote:

---

No one is complaining that the TNG Remastered project has *fixed* a ton of things that were wrong with the originals, like the energy beam coming out of the phaser strip rather than the Captain's Yatch for example. In a "purist" sense, they should have left it like that, but in "HD".

So why no complains on small changes like that that fix logical problems? That's what I'm asking for in BTTF. I'm not asking for an animated Jar Jar Binks character to be added to all the movies as Marty McFly's best buddy sidekick. This is always the implication anytime someone asks for scened to be fixed.

That's a fair question. I believe Raiders was also tweaked in its DVD/blu releases to remove a rather visible glass pane between Ford and a snake in the Well of Souls, and there weren't any protests over that, either.

In the case of TOS and TNG, hardly anyone (not even the shows' creators) ever expected HD presentations to occur, so in a sense, releasing the restorations at all is a big change that justifies some smaller changes. And we do seem to hold movies in higher esteem than even beloved TV shows, so there's that...

If Zemeckis offered retooled/enhanced shots via seamless branching while letting fans choose to watch the originals, I doubt many would object. But since he's said he's got no interest in that, many quite vocally back him up.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Gaith wrote:

---

That's a fair question. I believe Raiders was also tweaked in its DVD/blu releases to remove a rather visible glass pane between Ford and a snake in the Well of Souls, and there weren't any protests over that, either.

In the case of TOS and TNG, hardly anyone (not even the shows' creators) ever expected HD presentations to occur, so in a sense, releasing the restorations at all is a big change that justifies some smaller changes. And we do seem to hold movies in higher esteem than even beloved TV shows, so there's that...

If Zemeckis offered retooled/enhanced shots via seamless branching while letting fans choose to watch the originals, I doubt many would object. But since he's said he's got no interest in that, many quite vocally back him up.

You know it's so funny that I was just pondering almost the exact response.

The original Star Trek, as much as I love the SFX, couldn't be played in HD as it was because the picture quality would really suffer. So they figured they could digitally redo the "exterior" shots and a few phaser shots so that the show can be rebroadcast to a wide market in HD. The decision to do TNG in HD was a riskier one, mainly because the series was shot directly on video, which compounded the remastering process so much that I won't even go into detail here. However, to Zemeckis, a movie is generally a capsule in time, and it is what it is, and while the sound mix can always be tweaked depending on the format, he's not one to use CGI to change what he'd already set in stone. I agree with him for the most part.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

That's a fair question. I believe Raiders was also tweaked in its DVD/blu releases to remove a rather visible glass pane between Ford and a snake in the Well of Souls, and there weren't any protests over that, either.

I consider this a "you might as well change it if you can" kind of thing, but I think changing how the DeLorean flew by CGI to erase the flaws also defeats the point: it was quite charming - and it took a lot of work - to use all kinds of techniques to make it fly back then. If it was made today CGI would solve everything, but there's no innovation for that. I think it's awesome that we can see how they did it now, no changes, and see how he was able to combine these things to make an effective film.