Long time no talk. I mean write.
I've been swimming through a couple of deadlines. But I'm back.
I feel like Marty in Back to the Future II, "I know you sent me into the future but I'm back!" Which, I would argue, is one of the worst WRITTEN sequels to one of the BEST trilogies.
Yeah I said it! The writing SUCKS. Oh Robert Zemeckis, why did you make Doc Brown frantically "TELL" us every silly scrap of information to US through Marty. All the fun relationship that happened in the first movie, the smooth flow of information through character and normal dialogue was shanghaied because you were lazy and wanted to concentrate on your hover boards (which are sweet) and Max Headroom Coke diners.
Did I still enjoy it? Yes! But less and less each viewing and cringe at the over-telling. Not to mention the time-trap writers fall into. You know, the don't-F-with-time one. It's like the writer just planted a mine field blindfolded and now has to walk back through it. In Back To the Future PART DEUX, Biff steals the Delorian and goes back and gives the almanac to young Biff. At that moment, time has changed.
But not in the movie. Not until Doc and Marty go back to find it changed. So if Robbie Z followed his own rules this is what would have happened. Instantly, there would be no time machine because in his alternate reality he has Doc Brown committed BEFORE he made a time machine, before he and Marty could be friends and before they could take the Delorian back in time. Or ahead to where Biff steals it. Confused? Me too. But we're just getting started. The future Biff would return to be the Biff who is a casino pimp, EXCEPT he wouldn't be able to because the Delorian would disappear like Marty started to (and his siblings in the photo) in the first movie as they were ceasing to exist.
Whew! Do you see some of the complications of dealing with time travel as a writer? Yet, it calls us like a big fat white whale. J.K. Rowlings couldn't resist the urge and what happened? Soon after they appeared she had the time turners destroyed in book five. I loved The Prisoner of Azkaban and all things Harry Potter, but I could've done without time-turners. Because as my clever nephew Clay said, "So why doesn't Harry go back and take care of Voldemort or why doesn't Voldemort go after the NUMEROUS time-turners instead of wasting his time with the prophecy which was MORE inaccessible in the Department of Mysteries. Why couldn't a lot of things happen like Harry saving or warning his parents before they were killed or God knows what else.
But, despite the implications that she was opening up, she did a first-rate job on her plunge into time travel. Then promptly abandoned it. So did Back to the Future I and the third.
What do you think? When has time travel been used well and when should it never have been attempted?