Does anyone here on Moviechat actually think this movie was better than part II?

I will not argue the point with anyone. You have your deserved opinion, and I have mine. In this life, I can think of better ways to spend my time than arguing with anyone about the merits of a film that they did not like.

I've never been a huge Back to the Future fan but I've always watched #2 the most. I'll agree the third movie isn't as fun. It's got a few good action set pieces and I really dig the ending with the DeLorean and train with trying to get it up to 88 miles an hour. I think at the time it came out I was only 9 and hadn't really seen any westerns so maybe I hadn't grown to appreciate them yet. It felt like it was more Doc's movie and Marty didn't have much to do.

Stands on it's own more than the third, I suppose.

The second feels like a bridge between the first and the third.

Bith great films though.

For me, II is too convoluted and weird. I've seen it two or three times and I'm good never seeing it again.

III is a lot more fun, the story is more interesting, and I like that Doc found someone who understood his oddball nature. Plus it has a steam locomotive in it - win.

Me. Part II used to be my favourite because the start showed the future but now it just looks a bit cringe. The movie is all over the place. The alternate 1985 is interesting but then it rehashes bits from I. Part I is objectively the best movie but I’ve seen it so many times that I avoid it now. That leaves Part III. It has a slower pace, more character driven.

I and II are bursting with creativity and invention. III has a sprinkle of that at the beginning and end but the mid-section is a bit of a drag. Western setting? Meh. Doc love story? Meh.

I love this and the first "Back to the Future" movie. The second one sucks worse than the vacuum of space. Only reason one would need to watch it at least once was to know the connection between the first and the third, but otherwise, #2 stinks.

Number 3 was a breath of fresh air after #2. My mom is a Mary Steenbergen fan, and we all love Christopher Lloyd and Michael J. Fox, so this was one of the 80s movies I grew up with. It's really funny, seeing them interpret Hill Valley in the 1880s, and I love the Old West tropes. Plus, it was really sweet seeing an older nerd like Doc fall in love. You don't tend to see pairings like that in movies anymore. It was fascinating watching just how wild and dangerous Biff Tannen's ancestor could be without a strong law enforcement presence to keep him in check (and you could tell the actor was enjoying the role too). I particularly loved watching the Doc become a badass, while Marty introduces 1980s culture to the 1880s people, hehehe. And what is more epic than crazy things happening on an exploding train?

I prefer 3.

1. The original's the best but 3's the best looking. I've always liked the sepia tones and the desert landscape. 2 hasn't aged well visually. The ageing make-up looks awful (worse than it did in the original), and there's a lot of poor special effects. 3 has a few bad moments as well, Doc on the hoverboard for example, but it's mostly a character driven film rather than special effects driven so they're easier to overlook.

2. 3's more focused on Marty and Doc's friendship. One of the best aspects of BTTF is their interaction and the chemistry between MJF and Christopher Lloyd, and they're hardly together in 2.

3. 2 became too silly. I don't want or expect realism in a sci-fi comedy but Marty talking over the walkie talkie on Biff's backseat and Biff not been able to hear him or sliding down the rope and hitting Biff's friends with the sand bags without his other self or the band hearing or seeing him literally a few feet away was taking things too far. And that's before mentioning how camp some of the 2015 scenes are. 2 managed to be the darkest of the trilogy (because of the alternative 1985) while simultaneously being the silliest.

I still like 2. There's some great stuff in there but I still think it's the least enjoyable.