Back to the Future Part II

Question: When the police pick Jennifer up and start driving her home, Doc says the Skyway is jammed and it's gonna take them forever to get there. 1) Wouldn't the police be sat in the same traffic? Taking Jennifer home isn't an emergency, so they wouldn't be using lights and sirens. 2) If the Skyway is jammed, why not just do it the old fashioned way and drive to Hilldale rather than fly?

Answer: Regarding your first question, the police (and other local government vehicles) would always have alternate Skyway lanes they can use, regardless of whether it's an emergency. As far as using ground roads, there may no longer be the same direct land routes to Hilldale.

raywest

Question: When Marty is walking through 2015 Hill Valley, he sees a billboard from Goldie Wilson III in which he is offering a hover conversion from $39,999,95. Where did Doc get the money from to have the DeLorean converted in the first place? This was also the starting price of a hover conversion, it may have even been more than $40,000 depending on how complex it was to fit it to the DeLorean.

Answer: Doc probably did the conversion himself, perhaps using parts from scrapyards. Seeing he has money from several time periods, it's quite clear he has been to many places ever since he put the Mr. Fusion on the car. Could have done it at any time.

lionhead

Question: In the first scene, Marty and Jennifer leave 1985 with Doc and arrive in 2015. How is it possible for their older selves to be present in the future when they left in 1985?

Answer: Relates to the "branching timeline" interpretation of time travel. Basically they jump forwards to a future version of the timeline where they never left. When they return they make different choices and that branch doesn't happen any more, taking them on a new path. Alternatively (additionally), given that they do eventually return, that's all that matters. If they left somewhere at 10:00am, had time travelling adventures, but then returned at precisely the moment they left, at any point later they're still there like they never went anywhere.

Question: What was so wrong with Marty and Doc returning to the future and stopping Old Biff from stealing the DeLorean? If they stopped Old Biff from stealing it, he wouldn't be able to go back in time to give his younger self the almanac.

Answer: As Doc explained, they'd be traveling to an alternate future. A future where old Biff already has the almanac, and thus, the alternate old Biff wouldn't have a need to steal the DeLorean to give his younger self the almanac. (I believe there've been discussions on here about why did old Biff then return to the same future Doc and Marty were in instead of the alternate future, and it's implied he basically fades out of existence.)

Bishop73

Answer: To use Doc's example in the film, think of time as a linear straight line. Beginning at the point where the past was changed (i.e. Old Biff giving the almanac to his younger self in 1955), time would then continue linearly; therefore, traveling to the future from 1985-A would result in visiting the future of 1985-A. That's why Doc and Marty had to go back to 1955 to get the almanac back; once the anomaly was corrected (i.e. the almanac removed from where it didn't belong), the 1985-A timeline would vanish and time would resume its course the way it should in the original 1985 timeline.

Cubs Fan

Question: Was there any particular reason as to why the taxi cab in 2015 was built upon a Citroën DS? It would've been 60 years old in 2015, so it doesn't scream "futuristic car".

Answer: In real life, it was because the DS looked similar to a drawing one of the artists had come up with. But it does have a unique and futuristic look to it since it wasn't really a popular car or seen that often in the 80s in the UK. Since it wasn't meant to be the star of the show, they built off a working, existing car rather than design and build a working, unique car. If you're talking about in the Back to the Future universe, the taxi was meant to be a brand new model. It's even possible the taxi company retrofitted 60-year-old cars the same way people build hot rods out of old cars. Here's an inside look at the taxi. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb9Gtd-ycto.

Bishop73

Answer: A contract dispute. Glover wanted more money, especially for two movies, but producers thought why pay more for what were essentially cameos.

Question: We see Biff groan in pain as he returns to 2015 with the stolen DeLorean. In a deleted scene we actually see Biff fade away as he is erased from existence by his actions. I assume this is because an alternate Biff now exists (or could have been killed) and so he is erased from time. If this happens to Biff, why doesn't this happen to Marty, Doc, and Jennifer? They too are replaced by alternate versions of themselves when they return and even before they return to 1985a. 1985a Biff even says in the film that Marty was in school in Switzerland, and Doc has been committed, so they too should fade away as Biff did, shouldn't they? I would say "time" was giving them time enough to correct things like in the 1st movie, but Biff faded away almost a soon as he arrived back in 2015a.

Carl Missouri

Answer: I read somewhere the reason Biff faded away was Lorraine shot him in the alternate timeline for murdering her husband, George.

I hadn't heard that one, could be in a novelization or something. This is entirely my own speculation with nothing official to support it; however, it could be that because Doc and Marty are trying to correct the timeline, he and his siblings' removal from history happens gradually, as they get closer or further from the act of their trying to set things right. Biff doesn't know or care and is actively trying to change history, so the moment he returns to 2015, he vanishes all at once.

Captain Defenestrator

If you have the DVD or Blu-ray, watch the deleted scene of Biff vanishing and turn on the commentary. It will confirm that Biff was murdered, which is why he was erased from existence.

Chosen answer: Biff faded away because he completely changed his own past. When Marty, Doc, and Jennifer return to 1985, they're returning to the alternate timeline that Biff created. They still exist and remember their own history because without it, Biff's timeline couldn't exist and a paradox would be created.

Captain Defenestrator

Answer: The comics answer this question. In 1986 in the alternate timeline, Biff forced the committed Doc Brown to send him forward in time to get more sports results, but Doc tricked him and sent him back to 1884 instead, where he was shot by his own great-grandfather Buford. When he reappeared in his current time (that's how the time machine worked in this timeline), he was dead. Old Biff faded from existence because Biff never grew up to become Old Biff (because he was dead), so Old Biff no longer existed.

Question: What did Biff's matchbook say before it switched back to auto detailing once Marty burned the almanac?

Answer: "Pleasure Paradise."

Bishop73

Answer: Biff's Pleasure Paradise, which was the name of his hotel and casino.

ctown28

Question: Does the trilogy stick to a coherent time-travel-logic or is it "mix-and-match"? While it purports to adhere to the "one universe, many detours" theory (which is why Jennifer is save in bad 1985), it also delivers proof for the multiverse theory, unless it's "explained away" such as: Doc was never killed. He already wore a vest (and brought a gun to the meeting with a teenager) because he was a bit paranoid. Since he never really died, there's no parallel timeline required for him to stay dead.

Answer: It's fairly consistent. Changes to the past affect the future, although the time travellers themselves are afforded a bit of convenient wriggle room, like time changing around them, changes not immediately taking effect, etc, so as ever some suspension of disbelief is needed. The timeline changes - originally Doc was killed, Marty went back, gave him a letter, Doc took precautions. That's not the multiverse, that's just the future being changed by actions in the past.

Jon Sandys

Answer: Why wouldn't they exist? This is a serious question (maybe I am missing something). In BttF, Marty was disappearing because his parents weren't going to get together for him to even exist. In BttF II, his parents got together (Biff says so - he calls George Marty's father) and he was born, so it is very consistent between both movies. So even with an erased timeline, Biff did not erase Marty and his siblings being born. As for the linear time or multi universal, I think the movie is consistent - only the time traveler remembers things that happened before the time traveling began.

Answer: It's completely mix-and-match IMHO. The movies constantly switch between linear and parallel timelines, either making changes affect the time traveller or not, depending on plot convenience. For example, in the first movie Marty is in danger of disappearing unless he gets his parents back together, and fixes it before undoing all he had done himself, which causes a paradox. But then, when he gets back, his parents and siblings are completely different, but Marty is the same person that supposed lived that new life, unreplaced. That simply doesn't make sense in a linear timeline. In the second movie it is even worse, with Marty and Doc still existing in a timeline erased by Old Biff with the sports almanac, for plot convenience.

lionhead

Answer: Old-Biff first comments on the flying DeLorean "I have not seen one of those in 30 years", then he sees what he believes to be two McFly Jr.'s and gets even more suspicious, next he spies on Doc and Marty having an argument about the almanach and how Doc is opposed to time travelling for personal gain! What else does he need to know? And lastly: We're talking about a time machine here! Old-Biff could have stolen it, kept it for how ever long it took him to figure out how it works and returned it at leisure. We don't even have any proof for the days he picked to departed from 2015 or to arrive in 1955. The only verified date is his return from Nov 12 1955 06:38 pm.

Chosen answer: He doesn't, but it's hardly difficult to work out - the date setting readout is pretty obvious. Biff presumably set the date, then just accelerated the car until the time circuits kicked in.

Tailkinker

Answer: It's a plot hole. Biff couldn't have known or suspected the DeLorean's time-travel procedure, which necessarily included Biff setting the precise 1955 destination with no previous instruction. Biff just suddenly "knew" how to operate a time machine. He also changed the timeline by going back to 1955, so there's no way he could have returned to the "normal" 2015. But he does.

Charles Austin Miller

It's not totally impossible that Biff knew how to the time dial worked. He wasn't suspecting what it was, he knew it was a time travel machine and thus knew what the dial was for and possibly being technically educated knew how to use the time dial.

lionhead

We know from the first movie that Biff, by age 48, was waxing cars for a living in 1985. He hardly had a "technical education" and it's doubtful he acquired a technical education by age 78 in the year 2015. It was established in the first movie that he had become a timid underachiever.

Charles Austin Miller

Alright I agree, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed. But he has lived for 78 years by then, till 2015. Even though he has no clue on how the flux capacitor works, he doesn't need to, all he needs to do is work the time circuits, a simple keypad system which even shows which display shows which time. For someone from 2015, it's not so hard to figure out.

lionhead

Answer: He could have taken however long he wanted to figure it out, as long as he returned it to the exact time he took it from. We don't actually see him time travel with it when he takes it, so, for all we know, he could have taken it to his house and taken the few hours/days he needed to figure out how to use it.

Answer: Doc and Marty Were keeping a detailed log via the camcorder, making it easier still.

dizzyd

Yeah old Biff didn't watch the camcorder.

lionhead

Question: 1955 Doc doesn't believe there is going to be rain and neither does the weatherman as a matter of fact. Why then do we see everything wet long before the big storm?

Answer: One of the running gags in the BTTF movies is the dependability of weather forecasts. Obviously, in the first movie, the 1955 weather predictions were completely wrong, and it had already showered even before the big storm. In the second movie, weather forecasts of the future had advanced so much that storms were accurately predicted down to the second.

Charles Austin Miller

Answer: That's known as a "wet down" and has become a running gag of itself. It can be seen in many movies, even if there's no rain involved. A movie set can be wet down to improve the visual appearance and help the lighting, the dull grey concrete will turn dark so anything else will stand out, especially at night, and it also disguises shadows of booms, cranes and the likes.

Question: In the scene where old Marty enters his house and pushes a button, a computer voice says, 'lithium mode on'. What does that mean?

Answer: Lithium is used to treat bipolar disease and other mental problems. So 'lithium mode' probably has a calming effect when you're depressed or stressed or whatever.

Answer: "Lithium Mode" is more likely to refer to the house's energy consumption. After all the first lithium-ion battery was invented in 1985 (btw. Based on research by one John B. Goodenough and others). So instead of medicating everybody in the house (lithium is no "mother's little helper") Marty switches energy sources from the, likely costly, public electricity grid to the more economic, perhaps even greener, power stored in lithium-ion batteries.

Question: Where are Dave and Linda McFly in the alternate 1985? They don't seem to live with Biff and Lorraine, and they are too old to be packed off to boarding school (like Marty), so where exactly are they? Biff mentions them when threatening Lorraine into staying so its not like they've been rubbed out like George was.

Answer: If you have the Blu-ray or DVD, watch the movie using either trivia track or watch the deleted scene where Marty meets his brother Dave and turn the commentary on. Dave is a homeless drunk and Bob Gale states that Linda ended up becoming a hooker. However, since Wendie Jo Sperber was pregnant at the time and couldn't appear in this film, it was decided to cut both of them out.

Answer: It's never stated in the film where they are. Biff makes a reference to having Dave's probation revoked if Lorraine leaves him, so Dave has apparently run into trouble with the law. He does appear in a deleted scene, where he has become an alcoholic and appears to be homeless with little contact with his family, likely because of his dislike of Biff, as he appears pleased to see Marty. No scenes with Linda were filmed, as Wendy Jo Sperber was pregnant at the time of filming, although scriptwriter and producer Bob Gale has stated that, had they included Linda in the alternate 1985 scenes, she would likely have become a prostitute, which would tie into Biff's threat to have her thrown in jail.

Tailkinker

Question: At one point in the film Doc pulls out a case of "emergency money" he's collected from different time periods. When did he have the time to go to all those time periods? Marty went to 1955 and after getting back Doc went to 2015 before coming straight back again to get Marty to go to the future, so when did Doc have the time to go collecting all that money?

jbrbbt

Answer: He wouldn't have to travel to the specific time periods to get past money; he could have found ways to procure it in the present (from collectors, museums, banks, etc.) before ever time traveling in the first place.

Answer: He didn't just visit 2015 and came straight back. He had visited more places and spend some time travelling before returning to Marty. He collected all the money in those visits.

lionhead

Near the end of the first movie, when Marty asks Doc how far ahead he's going, Doc responds that he's going thirty years into the future.

Answer: Doc Brown is a resourceful man. Seeing how the bills in his emergency case are pretty crisp and not knowing how many travels he really made, it is only safe to say that he must have found a way to get his hands on those bills. Though his masquerade and "adding of 30 or 40 years to his life" by way of treatment in a rejuvenation clinic may not have been born out of vanity.

Question: Did Needles know that Marty would get fired if he swiped his card? He seemed to have a huge smirk on his face as he hung up?

Answer: No, he was just happy that he'd goaded Marty into participating in his scheme.

Brian Katcher

Answer: When Marty is talking to Needles, he mentions that what Needles is asking from him is illegal and that he could get fired especially if the boss was monitoring. This causes Needles to call Marty a chicken, something he hates, and he swipes his card. Needle smirks because of how easy it was for him to push Marty.

Answer: I believe, it's because that Needles made the phone call from "The Jits'" Office and knew that he goaded Marty into doing something that would lead to his termination, which explains why Marty's boss called him immediately afterward and fired him for making the illegal transaction.

Question: When Marty arrives back in the alternate 1985, he's attacked by a black man when he unknowingly breaks into what he thought to be his home. Could this man be former mayor Goldie Wilson?

Answer: No, it's a different character and a different actor. Goldie Wilson is played by Donald Fullilove. The dad with the bat who chases Marty out of the house is played by Al White.

Sierra1

That doesn't necessarily mean that it's two different characters; George McFly, for example, was portrayed by both Crispin Glover using archived footage from the first film and Jeffrey Weissman in newly filmed footage. While the character played by Al White is credited simply as "Dad", there's no confirmation either way whether this was an alternate version of Goldie Wilson.

zendaddy621

The answer is correct, the Dad is not meant to be Goldie Wilson. In the novelization of the film, he's given the name "Lewis." And while some characters were recast, Donald Fullilove (the actor that played Goldie) himself already appears in "Back to the Future Part II", so it's not like they recast him.

Bishop73

Unless there's any indication it's the same charector, or at least a clue to point in that direction, then there's no reason at all to assume it "might" be.

The_Iceman

While there was no clear-cut answer on whether this was Goldie, I think it is safe to assume it is not him. This franchise has shown to make recurring characters very noticeable, even minor ones, such as the homeless man that Marty recognizes in 2 different timelines. Yes, sometimes actors get recast, as they did with George McFly and Jennifer Parker, but they made it quite clear they were playing the same character. I see absolutely nothing that would even suggest this was Goldie Wilson.

jshy7979

Jeffrey Weissman is credited as "George McFly", Crispin Glover is credited as "George McFly (archive footage) ", Donald Fullilove is uncredited but listed as "Goldie Wilson II" (on imdb). Al White being credited as "Dad" actually confirms to a T that he is not "Goldie Wilson" and nothing in that scene even remotely suggests that the family father portrayed by Al White might be Goldie Wilson from 1985-A (other than a viewer seeing a person of color and drawing conclusions). There also is no cause to question whether or not the "Dad" was supposed to be any other person of color seen in any of the 1985 timelines. (Not that another POC in that timeline would come to mind).

Glover is not credited the same way as Fullilove is since he's credited only as "archive footage" and Fullilove is uncredited. Glover doesn't physically appear in part 2 as Fullilove did.

Bishop73

I stand corrected and have edited my post. Thank you.

Answer: Also, the 1985 Goldie Wilson's picture was shown on a moving vehicle in part 1, and he looked very different from the father with the bat in part 2.

Answer: It could not be Goldie Wilson. In 1955, Goldie Wilson looks to be around in his early 20s in the cafe. This would put him to be early 50s in 1985. The father only looks to be in his 30s.

Question: After old Biff returns to 2015 he appears in pain. I've seen several submissions on this site saying it's because Lorraine shot him in 1995. My question is where do they get that information from? I've seen these movies numerous times and have never seen anything to suggest that.

Answer: If you have the DVD or Blu-ray, watch the deleted scene with Biff vanishing and be sure to have the commentary on. Bob Gale confirms that Lorraine discovered that Biff had killed George and therefore shot and killed Biff in retaliation.

Answer: But in 2015 George is fine. He brings pizza with Lorrain, when they come and visit. Biff doesn't shoot George until the alternate timeline he creates when he goes back to 1955 with the sports almanac? In 2015, he is still the loser George made him in the first movie.

That's before Biff steals the Delorean to deliver the Sports Almanac to his younger self. Biff altered time when he did that resulting in the alternate 1985 where George is dead. George was also fine in 1985 before this.

Ray

Answer: Yep, and there is, but they're both elsewhere. Doc's been committed to an asylum somewhere. When Marty first meets the alternate Biff, Biff tells him that he's supposed to be in Switzerland at boarding school - that's where the alternate Marty is.

Tailkinker

Wouldn't someone probably see Doc and report that he escaped from the asylum?

Maybe, but no way to be sure, and they're not around long enough for that to be an issue anyway.

Jon Sandys

Answer: Doc would most likely not have been seen by anyone, as the time he spent in the alternate 1985 was primarily inside the DeLorean, at a boarded-up library, graveyard, and his lab (and all at night too) so most likely not spotted by the public.

Even if someone had seen Doc, it could've been dismissed as someone who looks like him. Even if they did report his escape, someone would either call or go to the asylum and verify Doc was still there.

Question: Doc Brown strongly believes that nobody should ever find out about their own future. With such a strong conviction, why would Doc tell Marty that his children going to prison is the one event that would ruin the whole McFly family?

Answer: At the end of the first film, Doc says, "what the hell" in response to the letter Marty gave him. So this shows it is not that strong a conviction, especially in the face of definite knowledge about something bad happening. It is also a way for Doc to repay Marty.

MasterOfAll

Answer: Doc advises Marty to not tell him about his future because it may affect his life. It doesn't matter what happens to his kids at all.

Question: When Doc is writing on the chalkboard he says the alternate 1985 is alternate to him, Marty, and Einstein, but reality to everyone else. What about Jennifer? Wouldn't it be alternate to her as well? That probably wasn't even her porch they left her on.

Carl Missouri

Answer: Yes, if she had woken up before they fixed everything, she would have been in the same position as Marty and Doc. In the heat of the moment, Doc just neglects to mention Jennifer...although Marty does ask about her just before they travel back to 1955, Doc insists that when they fix the past and re-establish the original 1985 timeline, it will transform around her and when she wakes up she won't notice anything amiss.

Answer: As response to the porch, that was the only known house to Marty that Jennifer lived at. If it was no longer her house, the people living there may not have looked outside to see her there. However, odds are that the same family lived there (as probably most cases there). Remember, the only reason for the different family living in Marty's house is because of the connection to Biff (he married Lorraine and shot George) so that house would have a different owner.

Continuity mistake: In the beginning when Doc takes Marty and Jennifer to 2015 for the first time, they are descending towards Hill Valley. Doc turns the steering wheel to the left but the car goes right and down. (00:05:53)

More mistakes in Back to the Future Part II

Biff: Go ahead, kid. Jump. A suicide will be nice and neat.
Marty: What if I don't?
Biff: [raising gun] Lead poisoning.
Marty: What about the police, Biff? They're gonna match up the bullet with that gun.
Biff: Kid, I own the police. Besides, they couldn't match up the bullet that killed your old man.
Marty: You son of a...
[Biff pulls back on the gun's hammer.]
Biff: Suppose it's poetic justice. Two McFlys with the same gun.

More quotes from Back to the Future Part II

Trivia: In an interview, the director stated that hoverboards were real, but they weren't on the market because parents didn't like the idea of floating children. He said this as a joke, but this didn't stop mass hysteria as thousands of kids went from store to store looking for hoverboards.

moviedude345

More trivia for Back to the Future Part II

Question: Doc Brown strongly believes that nobody should ever find out about their own future. With such a strong conviction, why would Doc tell Marty that his children going to prison is the one event that would ruin the whole McFly family?

Answer: At the end of the first film, Doc says, "what the hell" in response to the letter Marty gave him. So this shows it is not that strong a conviction, especially in the face of definite knowledge about something bad happening. It is also a way for Doc to repay Marty.

MasterOfAll

Answer: Doc advises Marty to not tell him about his future because it may affect his life. It doesn't matter what happens to his kids at all.

More questions & answers from Back to the Future Part II

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.