TWG 0 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 best. crossover. that would hit the silver screen. Too bad it never will. Eh, producers would probably f**k it up anyway. Thoughts, however? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 (edited) Woah, nicely done for the video's creator (MisterMaxHeadroom). Very weird that I just started downloading the series "Max Headroom" five hours ago. Really doesn't help that I'm drunk, so I feel that this video's post was somehow predestined in my fate. I didn't even know that Max Headroom (TV series) existed until right before I downloaded it. Can anyone say, "...You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into... the Twilight Zone. " Edited August 10, 2009 by Joe Statler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EarthwormJim 1 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 DO WANT. okay i have decided that back to the future four would only work if it was about doc and marty saving the world from a terminator esque future Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iMaster 0 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 Sorry, I don't see how it would work out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TWG 0 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 I agree with Earthworm Jim. What would be the plot? Also, why don't you think it would work Mark? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daangelo29 5 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 One reason why he thinks it is so: BTTF is about a teenager, an old eccentric scientist, a time machine, time travel, paradoxes, alternate timelines/universes, funny stuff, and plot twists that will keep you watching and enjoying the movie. Adding stuff like highly-intelligent robots trying to take over the world and the usage of other hi-tech stuff to fight against them won't make it a true BTTF movie anymore, would it? Unless they make the Terminator part less serious to the point that they are just there for laughs or anything else that's less serious, not for action and suspense. A BTTF-terminator crossover is nice, I agree, but I can never agree that a BTTF Part 4 should be something like this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iMaster 0 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 Not only that. It's completely about different points of view, BTTF II was about a bright future, while Terminator is about an apocalypsys. It's like attaching a spray bottle to a tank to squirt the enemies, it just SEEMS wrong. Plus the colours, notice the colour difference between the two. It's like watching a cartoon, while being colourblind. I see no way it would work out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EarthwormJim 1 Report post Posted August 10, 2009 (edited) of course i am taking the p**s. i just thought that trailer was really awesome and pictured a movie set in 2009 with all the real things that are happening now, doc turns up and says somthing along the lines of "marty this is really bad" marty is all "i cant i have a career and a family to worry about" and bla bla etc the go to 2039 and everthing is in chaos, then it turns into a hunt through time to uncover a huge government conspiracy that eventually f**ks up and plunges the world into a hellish world of angry robots and explosions (therefore it must be directed by michael bay) thinking about it if they made this movie i'd probably be horribly offended coz it changes bttf so much. all i did was picture it and see how it could be a cool (yet alltogether seperate) movie with awesome action scenes and a plot that doesnt quite make sense Edited August 10, 2009 by EarthwormJim Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TWG 0 Report post Posted August 11, 2009 Yea, it'd have to be separate. Like a spinoff really, not directly related at all. Much like any movie would have to be if producers Bob and Bob ever returned to the franchise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis have said over and over, "We will not make a Back to the Future 4." They give these two reasons: 1) Too many sequels ruin the film series and 2) Michael J. Fox is in no condition to make a 4th film. Edited August 11, 2009 by Joe Statler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EarthwormJim 1 Report post Posted August 11, 2009 im fully aware of that. as i said before, i would be seriously p**sed off if they did make a 4th Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archer9234 20 Report post Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) I see Universal remaking it, easily. What isn't remade anymore? This bypasses the Bob's rules. I seriously doubt they would turn down a few million to give the character rights to Uni. Edited August 13, 2009 by archer9234 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TWG 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2009 I see Universal remaking it, easily. What isn't remade anymore? This bypasses the Bob's rules. I seriously doubt they would turn down a few million to give the character rights to Uni. That's what a friend of mine and I were talking about. Hollywood can never be original anymore...but I dunno. The Bobs have always been very firm on the point that they don't want BTTF4. Uni would have to offer ALOT of money. And you think I don't know that Joe? I was just putting this out there cause I thought it looked kind of cool. A BTTF4 movie shouldn't happen, but you all know you would go see it. I would go see it. But I probably wouldn't like it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archer9234 20 Report post Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) A Remake isn't BTTF 4. They be remaking BTTF1 with new people. That's what I easily see them doing. They can even wait till the Bob's die and then do it. Edited August 13, 2009 by archer9234 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2009 (edited) You know, they don't really remake sci-fi movies all that much (I think the last one was Planet of the Apes, but I can't be sure), and TV shows don't count (ie: Lost in Space). Technically the newest Star Trek movie was not a remake of the TV show. It was kind of a prequel/continuation to the TV show. I consider it more of a continuation since Spock (Leonard Nimoy) came from the TV show's timeline and the movie is a completely separate timeline. Edited August 14, 2009 by Joe Statler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TWG 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2009 You know, they don't really remake sci-fi movies all that much (I think the last one was Planet of the Apes, but I can't be sure), and TV shows don't count (ie: Lost in Space). Technically the newest Star Trek movie was not a remake of the TV show. It was kind of a prequel/continuation to the TV show. I consider it more of a continuation since Spock (Leonard Nimoy) came from the TV show's timeline and the movie is a completely separate timeline. I wouldn't really consider BTTF a...sci fi story. It's more of a comedy, in my opinion. The first one at any rate. It's filed as one over at Blockbuster at any rate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2009 (edited) Well, I consider anything that has Time Travel as a central plot device as Sci-Fi. Edited August 14, 2009 by Joe Statler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archer9234 20 Report post Posted August 15, 2009 Even Clockstoppers has to be considered sci-fi cause of all the stuff in it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daangelo29 5 Report post Posted August 15, 2009 Yes, Clockstoppers is indeed sci-fi, but in case you're thinking it isn't considered a time travel or time manipulation film. Note that what the watch does is accelerate the atomic/molecular structures of its user and the objects the user is in contact with (clothes, tools, vehicles, etc.), making them look septillion times faster in real time, almost as fast as light, but in their perspective making time slower than them, which is definitely more scientific than time travel/manipulation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archer9234 20 Report post Posted August 15, 2009 I wasn't think time travel I was thinking sci-fi, comedy. And not just comedy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daangelo29 5 Report post Posted August 16, 2009 When I said "you" I meant all of you guys, not just you (archer). Some people always argue it's not a sort of particle accelerator, heck how the watch really works has been repeated several times in the movie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 16, 2009 I've never seen the movie, so that last post by angelo doesn't pertain to me. Maybe I should see the movie now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daangelo29 5 Report post Posted August 16, 2009 It's a Nickelodeon movie, so you may or may not like it. Anyways, the fact I gave about the watch isn't a major spoiler. It's not a spoiler at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Statler 0 Report post Posted August 16, 2009 Yea, just looked it up. Your right, I wouldn't like that movie. I haven't liked anything Nickelodeon has done in the last decade. That includes Spongebob Squarepants. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
archer9234 20 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I only watched it cause I trust what Johnathan Frakes directs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
