Review of Back to the Future Part III

Movie #24 - Back to the Future III

This movie is even worse than Part II. Going back to 1885 to save Doc Brown...that's it. There is no other reason for this movie other than that. If Marty would've just listened to Doc in Part II and destroyed the Delorean, the fact that Doc was killed would've never even happened...the chain of events leading up to Doc's "death" happened because Marty went to 1885 when he was told not to. The entire third film is pointless.

I will give a list of things that bothered me, then be finished with talking about this awful film.

1) Dear Doc, you owe Buford $80. We all know you have that suitcase full of currency from all time periods. Just pull out some cash and pay him off. Case closed. I don't understand why this thought didn't cross your mind.
2) Lea Thompson is in the film, but Crispin Glover is not. I JUST found out that Crispin Glover isn't even in Part II either! They used archive footage of him from the first film, but they recast him for the new scenes. RIDICULOUS! Crispin was not filming anything major at the time. I'm sure you could've worked something out with him, Spielberg.
3) I think it's dumb to have Michael J. Fox playing Seamus McFly. If you're going to have Lea Thompson play Maggie McFly, then Crispin Glover should play Seamus McFly. It makes no sense for Michael J. Fox to play his ancestor if Lea Thompson is in it - but if we learned anything from the second movie, Spielberg loves putting MJF all over the dang film. *shutter* Sorry, thinking of MJF as the McFly's daughter.
4) No screen time for the adorable 50's Biff. Not gonna lie, started to develop a bit of a crush on 50's Biff while watching the first two films. In part three, we only get grimy, ugly Buford.

I'll leave this review with my final thought:
Dear Back to the Future writers, way to go with overusing the "chicken" thing with Marty.

Overall, this movie's just as awful, if not more awful, as the second one.

I give Back to the Future III a 2 out of 5 stars.