I love this movie.
As a kid in the 80s I found the incest angle funny and original.
I did not give it too much importance.
As a grownup now, I find it annoying and out of place. Immaturely handled.
It almost ruins the film. It certainly gives a new meaning to family movie.
Who is the genius producer that felt that Marty's mom being on fire for him would be the appropriate choice?
No, it's funny.
It's not inappropriate for two reasons:
1. Lorraine has no idea what she's doing.
2. Marty doesn't want anything to do with it.
Given what happens in this universe, it's completely plausible for these characters, and the awkwardness that ensues is handled humorously.
Once in a while, you'll hear about a story that two people who were dating find out that they are biological cousins, previously unbeknownst to them. That doesn't mean making light about it after the fact is inappropriate... it happened and should be acknowledged.
Ok, I do not argue with those excuses.
But
1. Incest is incest, no matter the knowledge involved or the willingness to do it. See Oldboy.
2. Marty is repulsed because he knows she is his mom. Otherwise...it would be ok by your logic?!?
3. My main gripe: ok, there are many excuses at play here that make it better. But who decided:
Z- let's go "the incest route"! That is so funny, you know?"
G- How about "she just does not fall for his father nor anybody, so Marty has to struggle to make their love to happen". Or maybe, "she had another boyfriend already, and she just does not fall for anybody now" because she originally fell for George Because she actually liked him, but Marty is not George so..."
Z- No, no, incest, it has to be in it. It's the base of any classic sci fi/comedy. See Star Wars, wasn't that Luke/Leya kiss a total gag?
G-Well, it made me gag allright...
Z- AND she also must be a totally horny slut with her panties on fire that will lust after anybody that her father runs over.
G-Mother of the year!
-Yes, Marty acknowledging it's wrong within himself goes a long way. It's not like he can avoid it, his mission to protect his existence revolves around her.
-You blanket the taboo of incest with being inappropriate because of real-world taboos, whereas this is an extenuating circumstance in which time travel is involved. This matters to the entire situation. Example: beastiality is an inappropriate subject, but given that MJFox turns into a werewolf and girls lust after a wolf... its completely ok to make that exception given the specific circumstance.
-"It has to be in it." Why not? Just because it's uncomfortable for some people? That's the entire point. There are many examples of movies that take a humorous spin on murder and death... why do you make an exception for that?
-"Mother of the year." Irrelevant comment, as in 1955 she is not a mother. Are you saying it's fair to hold immature things a 40-something mom did in her teens agaisnt the person she is at 40-something?
So death and murder get a pass. Great, but that's beyond my point. So do weapons vs a pair of tits. That's our (sad) society.
I personally don't agree that violence should get a free pass, while sex does not.
But I think that icky situations like incest, underage sex and bestiality should be kept at bay, in my opinion, or handled properly.
Regular sex is part of life, so is death. Murder I believe gets a free pass only because it's romanticized, and it's also so far fetched from reality (it's not part of normal life) that society gave it a pass to treat is as fun (see any murder mistery).
Incest, on the other hand, is something that could actually happen anywhere, it would probably be kept hidden, and it's no laughing matter. No matter how you look at it.
The filmmakers here kept it light and "ok-ish" but it was an immature idea to begin with. It really takes this awesome movie down a notch.
Mother of the year: Fuck yeah she should be held against that, because 1-she is still his mom (even in 55) and 2- like the movie suggests, she certainly needed to change her wrong immature ways (as we see in the first 85 she IS a shitty mom, then, thanks to Marty holding that shit against her, she deletes her future wrongdoings and turns into a good mom).
You're throwing all if this unfair blame on Lorraine about being a mother. That's absurd and hilarious.
Two questions:
1. Does 1955 Lorraine know that she's Marty's mom?
2. Does 1955 Lorraine even know that she's a mom at all?
Yet, you hold her to the standard of the choices she makes as a mother. Absurd. Your entire point is invalid.
I am not.
I just wrote a joke line "mother of the year" and I am referring the her character.
Which goes, as you well know, from 1955 to 1985.
So, for the viewer (and Marty) she IS Marty's mom in BOTH instances, and she behaves like a cheap skank.
I don't see what you keep defending, like her lack of knowledge is a jail free card for anything she does.
But, since you like to thread the off topic trail, why do you think people ever behave decently? What does your philosophy tell us?
They have NEVER any knowledge of their future self, so, hey, anything goes! Or doesn't?
π€¦ββοΈ
Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. "Like a cheap skank." WTF are you talking about? She persuing her crush, much the same as every 17 year old in any time period. Did you grow up in a convent? She isn't cheap, I pretty much remember her standing up to Biffs advances every chance she gets. But "OH MY GOD SHE ASKED A CRUSH TO THE DANCE AND TRIED TO KISS HIM, WHORE!!!" π€¦ββοΈπ€¦ββοΈπ€¦ββοΈ
Hmm, I guess that's immoral behavior in whatever monastary you're from, so when every teen in America grows up to be 50 years old, we have to shame them because they acted like teens when they were... FREAKING TEENS.
You think in absolutes, without thinking within context. And yes, that is absurd. "Well, it doesn't matter time travel is involved she's still a mom even though she isn't a mom yet. It doesn't matter the context, it's still incest blah blah blah."
You're like those people who expelled that eight year old kid because he ate his sandwich in the shape of a gun, so they called it "zero tolerance for threat of a weapon."
But rules are rules, right? Context be damned.
Context and common sense should always prevail, but people like you chose to ignore such things. π€¦ββοΈ
And yes, it's fucking funny as hell.
Enjoy your day
Dude, I don't understand the chip on your shoulder but it's quite glaring. I guess you must prove the innocence of her behavior for personal reasons.
I don't talk in absolutes. I am talking about THIS situation, and you keep making excuses for her very poor behavior by ignoring/giving a pass to most of the elements of the case.
She acts like a total skank. She jumps on the first buy that lands in her radar, with no real discrimination other than "he has a dick". It could be Marty, George, ot one of the boys her father previously ran over. Anything goes.
Biff would put off anybody with his rapist mindset. Also, it's clear that she is such a skank that half her pleasure relies in going after his target, so somebody pushing himself on her is not interesting.
I have no problem with skanks, I am in their favor, and I actually like them.
I support their mindset and their attitude.
But they don't make good moms, and they should not be preaching "good manners" or condemning other skanks, a hypocrite skank is some of the worse kind of girls you can find. Skanks should embrace their skankness and be proud.
BTW, incest is not funny to adults, it's quite cringe worthy, AND you have not answered my question about why do you think people behave decently ever, since nobody has any knowledge of their future.
I get the feeling you've never met a teenager before. They get assigned a lab partner of the opposite sex, or somebody just sits next to somebody in the cafeteria, and BAM, they're hot for each other, or one is hot for the other. It happens every day.
You really need an answer to that ridiculous question? People aren't completely decent all the time, and people aren't completely bad all the time. It's part of growing up. People say and do stupid shit all the time, doesn't make them a shitty person. By asking that question, you are ABSOLUTELY talking in absolutes... how do you not see that?
And I'll bet most adults who watch this and see this understand the humorous nature of it. The VAST majority, and Ill bet its not even close. Otherwise, there would be much more of a hard stance about this aspect when it comes to this movie. Weve had nearly 40 years to see if any anti-incest groundswell movement in BTTF to come up....but instead, everyone just makes jokes about it. BECAUSE ITS FUNNY.
The other poster is correct, just because you personally have taken a holier than thou stance about this, doesn't make it not funny. To you it's not. To most people it is. You don't get to decide that for them, just because you're uptight about it.
That's extremely holier than thou of you. But that seems to be your thing.
"Weve had nearly 40 years to see if any anti-incest groundswell movement in BTTF to come up....but instead, everyone just makes jokes about it."
That's the part that is escaping you. BTTF's incest issue was bypassed 40 years ago as great fun. Nowadays it's impossible to look at it and avoid the comments like my OP.
Yet, you keep looking at it with the same eyes as 40 years ago.
I am not sure it's just me, being older and more mature, that find it annoying and out of place.
Or simply, I can see it as an issue easily fixable, now I know how a movie is written and produced and it's stupid to keep it there in the first place. Hence, my question in the OP (last line, maybe I should have phrased it "who is the genius that greenlit it").
Or maybe it's everybody in 2023, the social conscience and sensibility today is more in tune with problems that should not be trivialized or used as the butt of a joke, which was "fun" 40 years ago, but are cringe worthy today.
Obviously, that's everybody but YOU.
"Its impossible to look at it an avoid the comments"
Where are you getting this from besides yourself? The "Bypass" you are claiming continues through today and will forever. Nobody today is making this an issue except for you. Just because society is in tune with social issues doesn't mean people are throwing BTTF under some imaginary social stigma bus. That perception is in your head.
How do I know?
Over the past year or two, "Movie reactions" on youtube have exploded. Type in "Back to the Future Reaction."
There are LOTS of them. It seems like every few days somebody is putting out one of these videos. They are all sorts of people from different ages, generations, backgrounds, and countries...but they have head their head in the sand in when it comes to classic movies. I challenge you to try a few.
I also challenge you to find any of these reactors who think this aspect is "cringe" in a problematic, negative social issue way, not "cringe" in a humorous situational comedy way.
Spoiler alert.... you won't find any.
If you refuse to do that, just go ahead scour the internet. Scour these very message boards you're a part of. Not a peep. Just you. Nobody is bringing up this aspect as problematic, aside from you or perhaps some obscure liberal social issue awareness site. I could see a website like "Cracked" writing an article about how problematic it looks....but then again, they tout themselves as a humor site. Humor.
The reason it continues to "escape" as you put it, is because it is indeed funny to just about everyone....as I put it. Almost everyone (except for you) can apply the context of Marty's and Lorraine situation they got put in. Context. Context matters. Therin lies the humor of it.
Ive brought all my evidence. Its real and its tangible. You have just brought your own personal perspective, nothing more. I rest my case
Well, I really donβt find the plotline that problematic since it didn't go beyond Lorraine kissing Marty once.
But I don't find it funny either, and I can see why some people would cringe at it.
And I know I read that some studio didn't want to do the movie back then due to the almost-incest angle.
The studio eventually did put it in, yes? Because they realized ultimately that the situational humor outweighted their fear of the public. So that's a moot point.
Not everyone finds everything funny. And thats fine.This can be categorized as "cringe" humor, in which the humor stems from uncomfortable situations. "The Office" is a great example. They tackle subjects like casual racism and sexism all the way to drug use and sexual assault. Those subjects alone are not funny. But the situations that arises around those subjects IN CONTEXT can be portrayed in a funny way. Not everyone finds The Office funny... but it's popular for a reason: LOTS of people do.
Nothing is universally funny to everyone. But you can acknowledge when lots of people do. The proof is in the pudding.
I don't find Seinfeld to be all that funny. Or Friends or Big Bang Theory. Or some Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey movies. But I wouldn't soap-box about them for being unfunny, because clearly lots of people do.
I don't think in absolutes.
What I meant is that at least one other studio rejected the project due to the almost-incest angle.
But I made some research and found out that the studio in question was Walt Disney Productions.
Okay, then it makes sense.
But ironically, the movie was considered too tame by other studios.
Price opted not to green-light the second draft; although he liked it, he did not believe it would appeal to anyone else.[21] The most successful comedies at the time, such as Animal House (1978), Porky's (1981), and Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982), featured sexual and bawdy elements; Back to the Future was considered too tame in comparison.[22][10] The project went into turnaroundβa process allowing other studios to purchase the idea.[10][23] The script was rejected some 40 times, sometimes multiple times by the same studios.[9] Reasons given included the concept being unappealing to contemporary rebellious youth[23] and the failures of other time travel films, such as The Final Countdown (1980) and Time Bandits (1981).[10][24] Walt Disney Productions turned it down because they considered Marty's fighting off his future mother's advances too risquΓ© for their brand.[22]share
What a nearsighted and totalitarian reply.
My point is that incest is an offensive topic, should be treated maturely, it's probably out of place in a family movie, and the view on these kind of topics has changed over the past 40 years, for me and for everybody else on the planet.
Your point is "I am right you are wrong, this is funny to everyone, she was not his mom in 55, bla bla bla more bullshit pretending not to see the reality of it".
1. as you can see, with just ONE SINGLE POST (right above), your whole point has been proven to be bullshit ("you won't find any").
2. to further the "evidence" against your dimwittedness, just look for any modern commentary on BTTF, including funny ones like Honest Trailers or Pitch Meeting, and see if the consensus is "hey incest! What a FUN idea!!!" or is it "this is fucking creepy - why is it even IN the movie?"
3. your case is even more ridicolous because you sound like you are taking the side of incest, loose morals and impropriety.
NOBODY here is against BTTF or even the whole incest-is-funny fiasco. I am certainly not for censorship nor re-editing art.
I was just pointing out how it certainly seems like an odd element to put in a family movie, how it could have easily been handled differently, how it aged awfully and how it diminishes the movie's greatness.
4. I am sure there are thousands of funny racist, sexist or just improper jokes around. Should we still casually and merrily tell them because, afterall, they are still funny? Or should at least reflect and consider them as odd objects?
No, it's offensive to YOU. Talk about totalitarian. The "Im right and you're wrong" is clearly you just projecting. You completely ignored everything I said about imploring you to find people that hold this view that it doesn't belong here. That's just your opinion, nlnothing more. That's it. YOUR SINGULAR OPINION....And it's complete garbage.
You ignored everything I said about context. I noticed somebody else here used that word. It's a key word, that you ignore because "im right and you're wrong."
You completely ignored that while subject matters may be serious, situations that arise from them can be funny, given context. The subject matter of assault isn't funny... but Bob Barker punching Adam Sandler in the face is funny. Plummeting to your death off a building isn't funny... But it is when Samuel and Dwayne do it in "The Other Guys." Racism isn't funny...but the awkward situations that arise because of Michael Scott's ignorance is funny. Cleaning up a murdered guy's brains off a car floor isn't funny... but the argument of Jules and Vincent surrounding it is.
Did you need me to go through strictly family films to make this point? Because I can.
Either you can't wrap your head around the simple concept of context, or you're a robot who hasn't been programmed with understanding nuance. Either way, you've lost all credibility in this conversation.
Just because you said so, doesn't make it so. You are a complete example of somebody who only thinks in absolutes. It's ridiculous.
Like I said: a brick wall.
Besides, even though you'll deny it, you're clearly just trying to rip off John Mulaney's popular "BTTF pitch meeting" bit that he did in jest with hyperbole... because it was a joke. Because it's funny.
shareAhaha, you are starting to be funny. blindfolded....
1. I just proved your blindness in my previous post. What the fuck do you keep blabblering about "It's only your opinion". Are you stupid or just trolling?
2. just for further proof of your stupidity, that comedian you wrote up here (which I had to look up) had a similar opinion as ME. So you provided yourself a reply to your stupid argument...to prove me wrong. What a genius.
Jest my ass, of course nobody is making a tragedy of the whole situation (but you, of course) so he is a comedian, he makes a joke about it. But his opinion on the matter is, of course, precisely what I AM TALKING ABOUT SINCE MY OP.
3. just because not only you are blind but you are also deaf, I also hinted at two humorous take on the subject in my previous post. Did you look them up? Did you hear what they have to say about the incest in BTTF? Are they in your blindfolded and lonely camp, or are they in the understanding and ever popular camp of mine?
4. not to be trolling or anything, but please, respond me again with some more bullshit about how I don't understand how it's actually funny to write a mom wanting to fuck her son in a family movie. Like I said, you are starting to be funny!
John Mulaney doesn't have the same opinion as you. He's clearly being sarcastic to get a laugh. But you knew about that bit already π€£π€£π€£
We've already established you don't understand the concept of context. And therefore your opinion doesn't matter. We've already established nobody except you and like two people think this is an issue. We've already established you have no credibility here.
There's only one person on this entire thread that attempted to agree with your ludicrous claim. And re-read his post...He's clearly an idiot. He said they're hack writers who have "retard writing skills." His opinion doesn't matter.
You made yourself look like an idiot.
My work here is done. π
OK, so your "work" is to be a deuche that loses every single point of his argument and keeps saying "nobody agrees with you".
What a dumb fuck.
You "challenged" me to prove something, which not only I did, but you also joined proving my point with that comedian talking about BTTF, and then you forgot that it was the base of your whole bullshit (the supposed impossibility to find other people that think that incest is a bizarre idea for a family film).
But it is funny to read how you keep repeating to yourself that you have achieved anything, or established something other than your stupidity.
Please, keep trolling here with your delusions as long as you like, it's entertaining. Sad but entertaining.
Bizzare? Sure. But it worked anyway.
Bizzare is not your argument. Now youre changing the goal post to try and make yourself feel better. You changed your argument.
You said it was inappropriate. You said wasnt funny. Millions of people have seen this movie and love it. Millions of people saw it and laughed throughout. Nobody is saying it's inappropriate except for you and maybe some old church lady.
But keep ignoring that fact. Because you're a fucking moron.
Look, asshole, my argument is clear: you are a moron.
Bizarre? sure.
Inappropriate? sure as fuck.
Not funny anymore? also true.
Loved by millions, including me? also true.
See? It could be both things, I am not changing anything.
Only YOU have lost every single points of your stupid crusade and now are just singling out my words to try and spin it as if you have a shred of reason.
The Irish can tell you a lot about dating cousins accidentally. If every family has eight to ten kids, chances are high you're gonna date your cousins or uncles.
shareWho thought it was funny? The answer's in the question, you did, you said so yourself. Just because you've matured out of it doesn't mean you need to take a holier-than-thou stance about it. It's a light-hearted comedy from almost 40 years ago, chill.
shareI'm totally chill.
I am just posting a more informed and mature opinion on the matter.
This site is called MovieChat. Guess what I am here for...
Is it possible to say anything nowadays without having the common genius come to you to say "hey, chill out, dude! It's just a -fill blank with whatever obvious fucking thing you are talking about"
π€£
shareAnd all that because your sister said no? Grow the fuck up!
shareMore informed and mature? Or just more uptight?
share"As a grownup now, I find it annoying and out of place. Immaturely handled.
It almost ruins the film. It certainly gives a new meaning to family movie."
that is because zemeckis and gale are hack writer. watch bordello of bloods and used car. there films are juvenile they write like how high school retard would. there film are entertain but shallow.
this film do well because it have time travel story and michael j fox. or in other word it do well in spites of retard writing skills hahahahahahahah.
Wow, somebody who wrote such a grammatical and spelling nightmare of a paragraph also had the balls to say "in spites of retard writing skills."
Lol
There is no incest in this film. Its rated PG. the closest we have is a non consensual kiss, which even Lorraine seems to realize is wrong, even if she doesnβt know why.
Lorraineβs crush on has always been uncomfortable. Even as a kid, I could easily project myself into Martyβs situation, and realize how uncomfortable he was. I donβt really think itβs funny, itβs more of an interesting twist to the story. He tries to avoid her, but he has to eventually confront her and her crush head on to try and get his parents together. Except his plan was destined to fail because Lorraine developed in to a different character than Marty knew. He expected her to the prude that knew growing up. But because he didnβt reciprocate her feelings, she had to develop the skills to to after the man she wanted. If Marty wouldβve carried out his plan without interference, Lorraine wouldnβt get offended like. He planned. She wouldβve been willing to take it far further than Marty was. Itβs an interesting situation, and it doesnβt work if Lorraine has simply fallen for someone else.
I donβt think itβs inappropriate or out of place at all. It makes sense within the context of the story.
Doc explains the Florence Nightengale effect, and this is the reason that Lorraine fell for George, and Marty.
If this makes you uncomfortable, don't watch the Arrested Development episode with Justine Bateman.
shareI have not see that, but I am pretty sure it was intentionally cringy in AD.
I doubt Family Guy has not outdone it too.
But again, it is all intentional, and none of it is family oriented material supposed to be taken with no subtext.
I am certainly not uncomfortable with the material.
I just don't like the way it is handled in BTTF and the total lack of maturity on the subject by the artists.
Yeah. Because you're uptight and you lack the ability to understand context and nuance, unlike 99.99% of the people who have seen this movie from 1985 up through today.
shareHey, blind man, I am replying to your dimwitted "argument" up above in my thread, you don't need to troll every single conversation I have on the topic with other people that agree with me.
You are not convincing anybody anyway.
Yeah. Because there's nobody for me to even convince, numbnuts.
shareMust be sad to live trapped in a world inside your head.
shareI'm speaking in facts.
You're the one thats living in your head.
Look around you. Nobody is jumping on board with you, idiot!
The only fact you bring is, you are just trolling, since you lost every single point of your dimwitted argument.
Since you have zero to add, fuck off of this thread.
No, I dont think I will.
Everything I said is facts.
Nobody is bringing up this aspect as inappropriate, except for you and maybe an obscure person here or there...out of millions. FACT.
You're ONLY argument is "Well I don't like it, so there." FACT
You're just pissed because you have nothing better to bring.
You really are fucking blind.
I not only replied to every single point of your argument.
I debunked them and provided proof and evidence of how wrong you are.
You just decided to ignore it and to attack me or deflect to other (stupid as you can only be) arguments.
YOU ARE A TROLL.
GO AWAY.
You didn't debunk shit.
You just said the equivalent of
"Well... it is."
That's not debunking. Do you know what that word even means, fuckface?
Nice trolling, troll.
My posts are here for anyone to read.
You are the only one blindfolded.
Yeah.
People are doing one of two things after reading:
"No not really inappropriate"
Or
"SKIP!"
Congrats! π€£π€£
What an hungry troll I have caught here!
Let's see how many replies to this it will add!
Because you've somehow convinced yourself that you're a Facebook ad that is getting paid per click.
Enjoy your zero dollars!
You are so lost, it's amusing at this point.
shareTroll, fuck off of this thread.
shareNo. You don't own it.
It's quite amusing to me watching you lose your shit
Go ahead, you are just bumping my thread looking like the troll you are.
Be my guest.
Yes, look at the hundreds of people jumping on here after it's bumped to wave your flag! How successful of you! π€¦ββοΈπ€£
shareWho thought that incest is funny?
posted 3 days ago by Heisenberg (4709)
72 replies | jump to latest
I love this movie.
As a kid in the 80s I found the incest angle funny and original.
I did not give it too much importance.
I'm starting to think that my OP is not that clear.
I am asking "who thought PRODUCING THIS MOVIE that incest is funny?"
And I'm mostly questioning if it's appropriate or not for a family movie.
I am sure there are tons of instances, including this one, where it can be funny. Anything can be funny.
I just find it oddly placed in a movie like this, handled in such an immature way by the authors.
Sigh.
"Who thought producing this movie that incest was funny."
The producers, you fucking genius.
"Questioning if its appropriate"
No, you personally are saying it's not. You already have your own answer, you just don't want to hear anyone else's.
"I am sure there are instances INCLUDING THIS ONE where it can be funny."
Yes. According to the producers and millions of fans.
"Oddly placed."
No. It's not. According to the producers and millions of fans.
You don't want answers. You just want to spout your uptight nonsense and show off what you view as some moral superiority.
I get it. But I think this falls in the category of "know your audience." If you found it funny (at the time) then the producers should have had a feel that the audience, including you, would find it funny.
share