@RobloxiasNoob that's exactly how the scene appears on the deleted clips section of the bluray release. Most likely the footage had existed only as a poorly preserved film roll which sat for over 25 years in a tin case.
@HotaruZoku To Hell With Violence. Not taking that statement into account, all I could recommend would be "A Serbian Film", which is the only film I can remember which addresses the question of a world where one may view another human being victimized from the safety of their keyboard.
@Elite20001 Of course not. The thing is, that was their entire point. Their schtick is offense for it's own sake, which I wager was the only way it wasn't banned from existance on opening day.
To clarify, I meant a movie (and any fiction, for that matter)that in course of the narrative itself charecter-based "offensive"elements are not skirted around, IE, the case above. They weren't trying to bash homosexuality.
I love how, going back, people are so offended by this scene. This was 1984! People weren't nearly as uptight and PC back then. People could take a joke in stride, whereas nowadays everyone gets offended and tries to sue somebody. That's what makes 80s movies so amazing and hilarious.
Personally, I think this scene was hilarious and wouldn't have impacted my view on the movie if they kept it in. Fox's reaction to "Why shouldn't you be happy?" is just so delightfully awkward XD
@KnightAlbert Which languages and why? I doubt it's because there would be no practical approach to conveying a humorous misunderstanding between a 17-Year-Old from 1985, and an eccentric scientist living in the year 1955.
@khbkb I can't speak for other languages, but in my own (Italian) the word "gay" as homosexual remains "gay", in the English way, while the real meaning (as joyful) has its own translation in Italian ("gaio", very similar), so it wouldn't have worked that way and the translators would have been forced to invent something to justify the dialogue (word games don't usually work in other languages).
@KnightAlbert You speak from experience, so thanks for the info. I've often read of interesting solutions to the challenges of conveying in movie jokes or even simple taglines from one language or culture to the next. Despite minor differences in Australian and American dialect, the US tagline for Mel Gibson's "Payback" (Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy) had to be altered for the AU release, as "Root" is common AU slang for sexual intercourse.The Solution -"Get Ready To Cheer For The Bad Guy"
The word 'gay' meant 'happy' / 'carefree' until only a few years ago (and it still does mean that in some places). It was hijacked by the PC brigade to mean 'homosexual' in the 80's and gradually gained traction from then. Those of you old enough to remember may recall the famous Flintstones signature song - with the line "we'll have a gay old time" from your childhood. Fred certainly wasn't referring to his sexuality during that song.
@Gandalf606 How come Marty used the word gay as in homosexual if it only stopped meaning happy until a few years ago? Either way Doc's misunderstanding is hilarious.
...in order to legally publish, regardless of the DMCA, your usage must still fall within the doctrine of "fair use" - your publishing this material as you've done here clearly does not comply with the fair use doctrine, and you have, in fact, engaged in an infringement copyright. Youtube would be perfectly justified in removing this content.
Just an FYI: Your citation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in your description is irrelevant and doesn't apply to your usage here. (1) You've stated in your comments that this is from the Blu-Ray version - the Blu-Ray format is not yet covered under the act. It's considered separate from a DVD format. (2) The act allows only for the circumvention of digital protection schemes in order to make copies - it does not grant an allowance to publish the copied material, as you have done...
ooooh what if you did come back to the future gay ... oh michael j fox .. ;* lol joking MJF is the man tho, great actor and wonderful human being get better soon keep working having the scientis working on the cure .. some day we will be able to say parkinsons is wiped from the earth ... and it will be thnak to you and others like you who dont give up the fight
Stop getting so fucking technical! I just used the term "french kissing", because it sounds better than "passionately kissed" or "full on snogged". The point is, it's more taboo than this scene.
but she didnt passionaltly kiss him either, she just put her lips on his and he just sat their shocked. sorry, but technical or what you think im being im not. simple fact is it aint a french kiss
maybe so it was more innapropriate but thats not the reason it was cut. it was more likely because of pacing issues ie it just didnt fit the scenes around it
I know why it was cut! My original comment was a joke, dumbass. Anything else you wanna educate me on? Maybe you wanna tell me that the Libyans weren't really terrorists, or that "spook" and "peckerwood" aren't really racial slurrs.
Same to you. If you don't know the director, how do you know that's not the reason it got cut? Btw, my joke was wrong? How could it be wrong if it's a joke, you fucking idiot?
@Halibut86 You obviously never lived during the 1980s. It wasn't really till The early 1990s that the American status quo had any understanding (to say nothing regarding tolerance) of Homosexuality. Had Back To The Future debuted summer 2011 (with absolutely no changes), with the Gay-Joke included, the movie would have become every bit the senstation it was in 1985. A 1 of a kind story always trumps propriety. It was cut because Hollywood has always been ahead in the realm of social justice.
Marty was talking about predestination paradoxes, causality loops, and such (among other things). Included, it would only have confused the story line.
PEOPLE! you think it looks cheap because you relate it (unconsciously) to home videos, and for people like you the theater industry keeps us starved with 24fps movies that barely let us appreciate quick scenes, or even read a sign when the take is moving, all this because with more frames people say "That looks so cheap", sigh...
@elkikex, no, shows like American Idol or Fox & Friends are inherently cheap looking. It's not just because we're "used" to a certain paradigm. The whole reason art and stories have any power and make us wonder or take us to another place is because they do NOT resemble the mundane real world. The sense of escapism (the whole pleasure of entertainment) is based on presenting an OTHER world, and the magic goes away the more movies look like our own living rooms or a football broadcast.
And also, there have been artists throughout the decades that have just been *obsessed* with film. Playing with how it looks in different lights, trying to unlock its mysteries etc. People like Spielberg and Scorcese. To them, it's like this evocative siren song they get lost in. AnOTHER world. I doubt such people would've been so obsessed or even cared at all about movies, nor would the public be swept away by movie magic, if movies had all along looked like a modern-day episode of The View.
If images don't evoke escapism, there is no joy in looking at them. Their power comes from presenting a world SEPARATE from us. And if images look as mundane as the room you're sitting in, that automatically takes away from their ability to fulfill the most basic of requirements of art and entertainment, to take us to *other* worlds and make us dream and wonder.
@WastedPo I agree with your point, but I disagree with the measure taken to fulfill it. Bring people to another world with elaborate and clever plots, with detailed environments, with flashing acts, not with limited graphics. If so then I beg people flaming these movies to go back to the 20s film with everything in fast forward, black and white and no sound, that surely gets to you another world doesn't it?
@elkikex,I'm not flaming these movies. I think BTTF is a cherished classic, which is why I'm flaming people who ruin them in favor of a flavor-of-the-month fad (in this case, adding frames where none were intended to exist.)
If the last part of your post was meant to negate my point by saying that old black and white movies didn't take you to another world, I think that was counter-productive. As Frank Darabont says, B&W movies were possibly better than anything at taking us from "real life."
Also, I wouldn't call images that run at less than 60 fps (or whatever the current trend in awesomeness is considered now) to be "limited graphics." Less is often more. In music, they say the spaces count just as much as the notes. Images with spaces between them "breathe." I literally believe that such images look more alive, organic and transportive than the solid walls of 60fps "blow you away" corn syrup one sees on the average rec-room HDTV system. They pull you in rather than push.
@elkikex Exactly. 24fps film is a historical artifact. In this day and age of digital it should have been buried already but people expect it and movies somehow look "wrong" if they are actually smooth (you know, like *real life* is...)
Like the QWERTY keyboard, just proof that humans are creatures of habit, often to their own detriment.
@softy8088, tell me honestly. You know Indiana Jones? Do you think that if Indiana Jones had been shot like an episode of The View, that he would've captured people's hearts like he did, becoming such a timeless, bad-ass icon? Or do you think he'd be largely forgettable.
Also, can you appreciate the concept that something that does NOT look like real life engages the imagination more than something that does? Think of a stylistic oil-painting vs a mundane-looking digital photograph.
And since you used the term "real life," I'm guessing you're one of those people that think art/entertainment is supposed to look like real life. Again, I believe the enjoyment of escapism is built on the opposite. Should we eliminate dramatic scores in movies because we don't hear such music in real life? How bout all shots in movies be unedited shakey cam?
No and no, because the main objective of this stuff is to heighten the sense of escapism/story. "Real Life" is detrimental to those.
@softy8088 But higher framerates don't make things look like "real life." The problem is that a higher framerate reduces the motion blur per frame. Movement in real life creates motion blur, but on a 2-dimensional screen viewed at a relatively small distance, movement does not have the same effect. Using a lower framerate requires a higher exposure time per frame, introducing motion blur that wouldn't be there (and that your eyes can't replicate on a screen) otherwise.
It looks like you have frame interpolation turned on for your HDTV, artificially adding frames to the scene where none existed before, making it look like cheap digital tape. It's a look that the original filmmakers would never have condoned. Honestly, why was such a thing invented? I know people enjoy pointless bells and whistles on their TVs to show off to their homies, but this is even worse then instant "digital noise reduction."
@WastedPro If you own the Bluray of the BTTF trilogy, then You Most Definitely Do Not Know what you are talking about. If you do not own the BTTF Trilogy on Bluray then you are a Know-It-All who thinks he knows what he's talking about. Buy the Bluray, Watch It On A 1080p, select the deleted scenes menu, select this portion of that menu, and watch; Get It Right This Time.
@khbkb, fair enough. I do not have the Bluray or that setup. But the movements still don't look right. So I think it's possible that either your TV has a default setting to add frame interpolation (which a lot of TV's do, for whatever insane reason), or the producers completely ruined these films when they remastered them for the BluRay release.
@khbkb, I plan to buy the Back To The Future trilogy set on Blu-Ray DVD I will get a 1080 HP flatscreen. My dad has one and my baby brother does also. My dad and baby brother also have Blu-Ray players my baby bro has it built into his Playstation 4 system. I will have both a Playstation 3, XBOX 360, and Wii plus a Blu-Ray player to play all of my Blu-Ray films. I have seen Back To The Future on Blu-Ray and its fantastic man. I will see the sequel tomorrow and Part III after or another day.
@Peeto87, it drastically changes the look of everything. Not only does it make the movie look completely different than the makers ever intended, but it cheapens the movie itself. It takes away the movie's ability to make the story seem important, or provide escapism to another world. Next time you watch a movie (one that hasn't been messed with) see how much more transporting it is compared to a cheap broadcast of American Idol. "Smoothness" (along with cleanliness) aren't automatically good.
And I would just like to emphasize that last point. I don't understand why people would automatically equate "smoothness" with better. The most important part of stories is to resonate with us emotionally. Yet we've gotten sidetracked the last few years in emphasizing superficial issues only good for showing off how "insane" our expensive new TV's are to our friends. Prizing smoothness, sharpness and cleanliness in entertainment/art is like prizing steaks for being perfectly symmetrical.
@Peeto87, and you sound uninformed. Check out people's complaints about the "digital noise reduction" fad. For a many, it reduces a potentially humane world into a plastic world of wax dummies. See also how a lot of people who work in Photoshop like to add noise or grain (the same type of "constant life" that used to be inherent in all our moving images) to their pictures to help make things more cohesive and natural. See also how dead/flat clean Dr. Mercola looks. watch?v=sHBbjtYt9D0
Another example that recently came to mind: My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic is apparently very popular. Check out a "clean" HD upload of it. Because it never existed as a real world thing, either drawn on paper or applied to a film print, it's about as clean as an image can be. Now check out the not-quite-pristine print of "The Secret of NIMH" on DVD. Pony is sterile and flat with every pixel feeling separate from one another-- while the NIMH images/world feel alive, deep and cohesive.
The problem you don't see if that the term hasn't really changed in those last two ones. It's an insult to call someone gay who isn't. So the "meaning stupid" hasn't changed. You are calling someone gay because to be gay is considered an insult by those who aren't gay. You just don't think it's the same insult, but it is.
Most words like Gay, or maybe a curse word, have lost all meaning becaused they've been overused so much. Thats why if you say FUCK!, no one notices it.
xD!
Punkoli99 5 hours ago
@paulmorris351 No it is an extra on the Bluray release. I haven't been able to find it in my trilogy DVD set.
TheSportCompact 4 days ago
OMG that should have made the original cut of the movie. It would have been so awesome if it had.
TheSportCompact 6 days ago
I was shocked when he said GAY lol
theringmaster886 1 week ago
LOL THIS WAS FUNNY
IHEARTQNZ 1 week ago
damn they should've never deleted that scene
DeadSeal824 2 weeks ago
The greatest wincest story ever told.
pobhockle 2 weeks ago
@pobhockle
A fellow Supernatural fan? Great Scot!
donniedarkodevotte 2 weeks ago
lol
RaiceGeriko 3 weeks ago
LOL I am a huge back to the future fan and this is the first time i have ever seen this!!
lander77477 4 weeks ago
@lander77477 its on the dvd
schaumton 3 weeks ago
@RobloxiasNoob that's exactly how the scene appears on the deleted clips section of the bluray release. Most likely the footage had existed only as a poorly preserved film roll which sat for over 25 years in a tin case.
khbkb 1 month ago 5
It's funny because it meant something else in 1955
longislandcitizen 1 month ago
Oh man, this is heavy.
itakethesquare 1 month ago 14
@itakethesquare There's that word again; "heavy". Why are things so heavy in the future? Is there a problem with the earth's gravitational pull?
10GreenDay01 2 weeks ago 3
Really funny! , thx
MrOciosango 1 month ago in playlist Liked videos
they should have kept that in :')
theChemicalKidx 1 month ago
amazing thanks for uppload !
FranziskaLiebtBill 1 month ago
This rates with that other black and white film about the description of zombie behavior and it's political comparison.
How devoid of sincere personality willing to brave a revealed controversial opinion had we come?
To hell with violence. When was the last time anyone remembers a movie that does not care who might get "offended"?
HotaruZoku 1 month ago
@HotaruZoku To Hell With Violence. Not taking that statement into account, all I could recommend would be "A Serbian Film", which is the only film I can remember which addresses the question of a world where one may view another human being victimized from the safety of their keyboard.
khbkb 1 month ago
@khbkb
Oh you mean like youtube? lol
Thepockets88 1 month ago
@khbkb That's....deep.
HotaruZoku 2 weeks ago
@HotaruZoku Team America world police didn't care who it offeneded.
Elite20001 1 month ago
@Elite20001 Of course not. The thing is, that was their entire point. Their schtick is offense for it's own sake, which I wager was the only way it wasn't banned from existance on opening day.
To clarify, I meant a movie (and any fiction, for that matter)that in course of the narrative itself charecter-based "offensive"elements are not skirted around, IE, the case above. They weren't trying to bash homosexuality.
It's part OF the Marty charecter.
HotaruZoku 2 weeks ago
haha that was funny
saimcheeda93 1 month ago
I love how, going back, people are so offended by this scene. This was 1984! People weren't nearly as uptight and PC back then. People could take a joke in stride, whereas nowadays everyone gets offended and tries to sue somebody. That's what makes 80s movies so amazing and hilarious.
Personally, I think this scene was hilarious and wouldn't have impacted my view on the movie if they kept it in. Fox's reaction to "Why shouldn't you be happy?" is just so delightfully awkward XD
VariousArtists2 1 month ago 2
It wouldn't have worked in other languages.
KnightAlbert 1 month ago
@KnightAlbert Which languages and why? I doubt it's because there would be no practical approach to conveying a humorous misunderstanding between a 17-Year-Old from 1985, and an eccentric scientist living in the year 1955.
khbkb 1 month ago
@khbkb I can't speak for other languages, but in my own (Italian) the word "gay" as homosexual remains "gay", in the English way, while the real meaning (as joyful) has its own translation in Italian ("gaio", very similar), so it wouldn't have worked that way and the translators would have been forced to invent something to justify the dialogue (word games don't usually work in other languages).
KnightAlbert 1 month ago 2
@KnightAlbert You speak from experience, so thanks for the info. I've often read of interesting solutions to the challenges of conveying in movie jokes or even simple taglines from one language or culture to the next. Despite minor differences in Australian and American dialect, the US tagline for Mel Gibson's "Payback" (Get Ready To Root For The Bad Guy) had to be altered for the AU release, as "Root" is common AU slang for sexual intercourse.The Solution -"Get Ready To Cheer For The Bad Guy"
khbkb 1 month ago
@KnightAlbert Well lets have a look shall we?
Doc: Oye morro, mas vale que te alistes y te vayas por tu madre.
Marti: Si, si claro
Doc: Te ves un poco palido te sientes bien?
Marti: No lo se Doc, es solo esta situacion con mi madre.
Doc: Que q..que q. que?
Marti: La verdad no se si lo pueda hacer, usted sabe... Capearle.
Doc: Epale!, nadie dijo nada de capearle solo...mas derechos,
Marti: SI! A ESO ME REFIERO! Dios!, no puedo creer que vaya a experimentar con mi propia madre...
MrRamquez 1 month ago
@KnightAlbert ... Continued:
Marti: Este es el tipo de cosas que me pueden hechar a perder de por vida, que Tal que vuelvo al Futuro y me vuelvo GAY!
Doc: Pues claro que serias Feliz! (Porque no?)
Marti: Tengo que...ir por mi Madre.
Doc: Bien!
The strangest line is Why wouldn't you be happy, after the Gay remark, but in Spanish for a long time Gay was also used to denote Happy People.
Yeah It works!.
MrRamquez 1 month ago
This is heavy!!!
06paull 1 month ago
@xp231000 Nah
khbkb 1 month ago
oh Doc!
mariofreak91 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is not about gay. doc tells him no "hitting" your mother as in "fucking".
aaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaa 1 month ago
Comment removed
aaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaa 1 month ago
Comment removed
aaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaaqaa 1 month ago
Clever joke but few people would understand it...
Kagereneko 1 month ago
Perv wink XD
emmaknopa 1 month ago
i thought this was going to be the scene where lorraine soaks marty's cork while he's comatose in the bedroom
ultrakool 1 month ago
'this could end up screwing me up permanently. i might go back to the future and end up...gay.'
wow..
Redvines14 1 month ago
trust me micheal....doc'll find out what you mean in another 20 years....
MsYellowbutterfly1 1 month ago
Kukuku I would have loved this to be in the movie.
IndianaJonesfans09 1 month ago
gay means happy. lol
DoctorComics 1 month ago
great scene!!!!!
MrOciosango 1 month ago
why didn't they keep that scene!! thats funnny!!!
ilovemyschnauzer1 1 month ago
Why shouldn't you be happy?
MitcherMan5000 2 months ago
Comment removed
oursedatedyouth 2 months ago 2
@oursedatedyouth actually it wasnt till 1969....Great scene
truegreen7 1 month ago
@oursedatedyouth yes we know why it's funny.
Nickjaa 1 month ago
He ain't gay...he might suck dick but he ain't HAPPY about it
ebenesfan2011 2 months ago
well fuck gay people, if they were supposed to be treated even , why do we make such a fuss about them
MonTicheDansTaMere 2 months ago
This video is happy.
RandomRobloxian 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
when he said gay he meant gay but doc understood it happy..marty might hate girls in the future bcz of hitting on his mom in the past lol
acpocali 2 months ago
Comment removed
acpocali 2 months ago
LOOOL @ MARTY MCFAGGOT OUTTAKE, THIS WAS THE FUCK OFF GAY AMERICA NEEDED IN THE 80's, FUCKING OVERZEALOUS EDITORS...
maradona87 2 months ago
@maradona87 Umad bro?
126Oli 2 months ago
@126Oli MAD?? HELL NAW HOE, CAN'T YOU READ? I WAS LOLLIN, FAGGOT.
maradona87 2 months ago
I was watching this on my DVD the other day and totally did not get it until now... XD
DramaGirl530 2 months ago
Marty:Um Doc. In my time line gay means*whispers in his ear*
Doc:GREAT SCOT!
liongirlfc 2 months ago 51
Gay Means Happy If You Look In The Dictionary :)
OfficialDJX5 2 months ago
HA...gay
CamronReplay1 2 months ago
LOL, I remember seeing this!
rooster5man 2 months ago
The word 'gay' meant 'happy' / 'carefree' until only a few years ago (and it still does mean that in some places). It was hijacked by the PC brigade to mean 'homosexual' in the 80's and gradually gained traction from then. Those of you old enough to remember may recall the famous Flintstones signature song - with the line "we'll have a gay old time" from your childhood. Fred certainly wasn't referring to his sexuality during that song.
Gandalf606 2 months ago 2
@Gandalf606 How come Marty used the word gay as in homosexual if it only stopped meaning happy until a few years ago? Either way Doc's misunderstanding is hilarious.
Nuggetol 2 months ago
@Nuggetol I think he's wrong, the word 'gay' has had to be around for a longer time...At least the 80s, if Marty used it.
rooster5man 2 months ago
heavy
tgm5150 2 months ago
luckily they deleted this shit
doghartdon 2 months ago
owned
z4rkenny 2 months ago
why shouldn't you be happy?
lolicanadian 2 months ago 2
...in order to legally publish, regardless of the DMCA, your usage must still fall within the doctrine of "fair use" - your publishing this material as you've done here clearly does not comply with the fair use doctrine, and you have, in fact, engaged in an infringement copyright. Youtube would be perfectly justified in removing this content.
BloatedSensations 2 months ago
Just an FYI: Your citation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in your description is irrelevant and doesn't apply to your usage here. (1) You've stated in your comments that this is from the Blu-Ray version - the Blu-Ray format is not yet covered under the act. It's considered separate from a DVD format. (2) The act allows only for the circumvention of digital protection schemes in order to make copies - it does not grant an allowance to publish the copied material, as you have done...
BloatedSensations 2 months ago
I think 16 gay people dislike this video!!!
ERiQTENDO 2 months ago
Gay people might not like this, but their adopted kids will love it.
MischiefMaker37 2 months ago 111
@MischiefMaker37 I am gay, and you're commented made me laugh very loudly at 12:22am, and wake everyone in the house up. Brilliant!
SaltyTestes 2 months ago
@MischiefMaker37 It's not the deleted scene gay people asked for, but it's the deletd scene gay people deserve.
WebVManReturns 2 months ago 2
lol!
"why should you be happy?" XD
DOX9500 2 months ago
@DOX9500
It's "Why SHOULDN'T you be happy?"
Tobunshi 2 months ago
ooooh what if you did come back to the future gay ... oh michael j fox .. ;* lol joking MJF is the man tho, great actor and wonderful human being get better soon keep working having the scientis working on the cure .. some day we will be able to say parkinsons is wiped from the earth ... and it will be thnak to you and others like you who dont give up the fight
kenmabie 2 months ago
"what if i end up being....gay?" "why shouldent you be happy!" haha lmao
dave01123 2 months ago
Only a movie this good can afford to cut a scene this clever.
ColBarnaby 3 months ago
It's perfectly funny but belongs to a higher level of funny than the level at which this movie was set.
harassed09 3 months ago
HAHAHAHA! Im laughing my head off!
24h0peMC 3 months ago
Doc's so oblivious, its adorable LOL
mysticknightskeale 3 months ago
This movie shows:
1. A mother french kissing her own son.
2. A guy getting shot to death by terrorists.
3. A group of black guys and white guys exchanging racial slurrs.
... And THIS scene had to be deleted?????
osamabad 3 months ago 3
@osamabad
number 1 wasnt in the film
and it was probably deleted for pacing reasons (or because it simply didnt fit in with the scenes around it, pretty standard stuff).
1999UTD 3 months ago
@1999UTD
What do you mean? It was in the film.
osamabad 3 months ago
@osamabad
at WHAT point do we see loraine "french kissing" marty?
1999UTD 3 months ago
@1999UTD
When she kissed him in the car.
osamabad 3 months ago
@osamabad
what wasnt a french kiss she just full on snogged him. go back and re watch it. you never see any tongue action
1999UTD 3 months ago
@1999UTD
Stop getting so fucking technical! I just used the term "french kissing", because it sounds better than "passionately kissed" or "full on snogged". The point is, it's more taboo than this scene.
osamabad 3 months ago
@osamabad
but she didnt passionaltly kiss him either, she just put her lips on his and he just sat their shocked. sorry, but technical or what you think im being im not. simple fact is it aint a french kiss
1999UTD 3 months ago
@1999UTD
Again, you're being too technical. I was just pointing out that that scene was more inappropriate than this one.
osamabad 3 months ago
@osamabad
maybe so it was more innapropriate but thats not the reason it was cut. it was more likely because of pacing issues ie it just didnt fit the scenes around it
1999UTD 3 months ago
@1999UTD
I know why it was cut! My original comment was a joke, dumbass. Anything else you wanna educate me on? Maybe you wanna tell me that the Libyans weren't really terrorists, or that "spook" and "peckerwood" aren't really racial slurrs.
osamabad 3 months ago
@osamabad
are you fuckin pally pally with the director or summat, know you dont know why.
and yeah it may have been a joke but your still wrong
1999UTD 2 months ago
@1999UTD
Same to you. If you don't know the director, how do you know that's not the reason it got cut? Btw, my joke was wrong? How could it be wrong if it's a joke, you fucking idiot?
osamabad 2 months ago
@osamabad
It was deleted because the dialogue was pointless and strange.
jetflock 2 months ago
@jetflock It was deleted because very few people get the joke, gay meant "happy" before people use that word for "homosexual".
eduardokucharsky 2 months ago
@jetflock
How was it pointless and strange?
osamabad 2 months ago
damn
HomeSkillet489 3 months ago
i'm sure gay people would have enjoyed this
johnykoop 3 months ago 25
@johnykoop I would think happy people would.
pajmf 2 months ago
hahahaha! love this.
poeimoei 3 months ago
I love that scene. Shame it didn't make it in the final cut.
WebVManReturns 3 months ago
@djs259 You are blocked Bitch
khbkb 3 months ago 2
Haha I love this! and I also find Doc's acting really unconvincing in this :L
thealexfrom1994 3 months ago
JEEEEEEEZ it's a joke. A funny one, at that.
AtlasRezzed 3 months ago
Comment removed
djs259 3 months ago
@djs259 Why on earth are you talking shit about Hebrews when you have a Krav Maga demonstration as your featured video.
khbkb 3 months ago
Hahaha
Jangwoofilms 3 months ago
@Halibut86 You obviously never lived during the 1980s. It wasn't really till The early 1990s that the American status quo had any understanding (to say nothing regarding tolerance) of Homosexuality. Had Back To The Future debuted summer 2011 (with absolutely no changes), with the Gay-Joke included, the movie would have become every bit the senstation it was in 1985. A 1 of a kind story always trumps propriety. It was cut because Hollywood has always been ahead in the realm of social justice.
khbkb 3 months ago
@khbkb >Implying it wouldn't have been protested by fags everywhere
Halibut86 3 months ago
LOL
spermfeather 3 months ago
LOL
YouYousuck1 3 months ago
Marty was talking about predestination paradoxes, causality loops, and such (among other things). Included, it would only have confused the story line.
knoodelhed 3 months ago
docs a perv
AcidBurn5009 3 months ago
That was sooooo oooodd to watch that...
seekertosecrets 3 months ago
ohhh man, that was epic. that needs to be included XD
mireaux7 3 months ago
PEOPLE! you think it looks cheap because you relate it (unconsciously) to home videos, and for people like you the theater industry keeps us starved with 24fps movies that barely let us appreciate quick scenes, or even read a sign when the take is moving, all this because with more frames people say "That looks so cheap", sigh...
elkikex 3 months ago 2
@elkikex, no, shows like American Idol or Fox & Friends are inherently cheap looking. It's not just because we're "used" to a certain paradigm. The whole reason art and stories have any power and make us wonder or take us to another place is because they do NOT resemble the mundane real world. The sense of escapism (the whole pleasure of entertainment) is based on presenting an OTHER world, and the magic goes away the more movies look like our own living rooms or a football broadcast.
WastedPo 3 months ago
And also, there have been artists throughout the decades that have just been *obsessed* with film. Playing with how it looks in different lights, trying to unlock its mysteries etc. People like Spielberg and Scorcese. To them, it's like this evocative siren song they get lost in. AnOTHER world. I doubt such people would've been so obsessed or even cared at all about movies, nor would the public be swept away by movie magic, if movies had all along looked like a modern-day episode of The View.
WastedPo 3 months ago
If images don't evoke escapism, there is no joy in looking at them. Their power comes from presenting a world SEPARATE from us. And if images look as mundane as the room you're sitting in, that automatically takes away from their ability to fulfill the most basic of requirements of art and entertainment, to take us to *other* worlds and make us dream and wonder.
WastedPo 3 months ago
@WastedPo I agree with your point, but I disagree with the measure taken to fulfill it. Bring people to another world with elaborate and clever plots, with detailed environments, with flashing acts, not with limited graphics. If so then I beg people flaming these movies to go back to the 20s film with everything in fast forward, black and white and no sound, that surely gets to you another world doesn't it?
elkikex 3 months ago
@elkikex,I'm not flaming these movies. I think BTTF is a cherished classic, which is why I'm flaming people who ruin them in favor of a flavor-of-the-month fad (in this case, adding frames where none were intended to exist.)
If the last part of your post was meant to negate my point by saying that old black and white movies didn't take you to another world, I think that was counter-productive. As Frank Darabont says, B&W movies were possibly better than anything at taking us from "real life."
WastedPo 3 months ago
Also, I wouldn't call images that run at less than 60 fps (or whatever the current trend in awesomeness is considered now) to be "limited graphics." Less is often more. In music, they say the spaces count just as much as the notes. Images with spaces between them "breathe." I literally believe that such images look more alive, organic and transportive than the solid walls of 60fps "blow you away" corn syrup one sees on the average rec-room HDTV system. They pull you in rather than push.
WastedPo 3 months ago 2
@elkikex Exactly. 24fps film is a historical artifact. In this day and age of digital it should have been buried already but people expect it and movies somehow look "wrong" if they are actually smooth (you know, like *real life* is...)
Like the QWERTY keyboard, just proof that humans are creatures of habit, often to their own detriment.
softy8088 3 months ago
@softy8088, tell me honestly. You know Indiana Jones? Do you think that if Indiana Jones had been shot like an episode of The View, that he would've captured people's hearts like he did, becoming such a timeless, bad-ass icon? Or do you think he'd be largely forgettable.
Also, can you appreciate the concept that something that does NOT look like real life engages the imagination more than something that does? Think of a stylistic oil-painting vs a mundane-looking digital photograph.
WastedPo 3 months ago
And since you used the term "real life," I'm guessing you're one of those people that think art/entertainment is supposed to look like real life. Again, I believe the enjoyment of escapism is built on the opposite. Should we eliminate dramatic scores in movies because we don't hear such music in real life? How bout all shots in movies be unedited shakey cam?
No and no, because the main objective of this stuff is to heighten the sense of escapism/story. "Real Life" is detrimental to those.
WastedPo 3 months ago
@softy8088 But higher framerates don't make things look like "real life." The problem is that a higher framerate reduces the motion blur per frame. Movement in real life creates motion blur, but on a 2-dimensional screen viewed at a relatively small distance, movement does not have the same effect. Using a lower framerate requires a higher exposure time per frame, introducing motion blur that wouldn't be there (and that your eyes can't replicate on a screen) otherwise.
cocacola443 3 months ago
If he did admit he was gay - I would definitely give him a good seeing to. I'd love to see if I could reach 88MPH!!!!
urbex2007 3 months ago
I guess gay still means happy in 1955.
RandomRobloxian 4 months ago
Funny thing is... this scene was in the book that I got shortly after seeing the movie in theaters.
Floymin 4 months ago
@Floymin Can you write here this dialogue? I have only Polish version of book and in my language this wordplay is impossible.
MountainDestroy 2 weeks ago
@MountainDestroy If the translation doesn't work in the novel, I'm not sure translating my words will be any better.
Floymin 2 weeks ago
10 ended up gay
asherleez 4 months ago
It looks like you have frame interpolation turned on for your HDTV, artificially adding frames to the scene where none existed before, making it look like cheap digital tape. It's a look that the original filmmakers would never have condoned. Honestly, why was such a thing invented? I know people enjoy pointless bells and whistles on their TVs to show off to their homies, but this is even worse then instant "digital noise reduction."
WastedPo 4 months ago
@WastedPro If you own the Bluray of the BTTF trilogy, then You Most Definitely Do Not Know what you are talking about. If you do not own the BTTF Trilogy on Bluray then you are a Know-It-All who thinks he knows what he's talking about. Buy the Bluray, Watch It On A 1080p, select the deleted scenes menu, select this portion of that menu, and watch; Get It Right This Time.
khbkb 4 months ago 11
@khbkb, fair enough. I do not have the Bluray or that setup. But the movements still don't look right. So I think it's possible that either your TV has a default setting to add frame interpolation (which a lot of TV's do, for whatever insane reason), or the producers completely ruined these films when they remastered them for the BluRay release.
WastedPo 4 months ago
@khbkb, I plan to buy the Back To The Future trilogy set on Blu-Ray DVD I will get a 1080 HP flatscreen. My dad has one and my baby brother does also. My dad and baby brother also have Blu-Ray players my baby bro has it built into his Playstation 4 system. I will have both a Playstation 3, XBOX 360, and Wii plus a Blu-Ray player to play all of my Blu-Ray films. I have seen Back To The Future on Blu-Ray and its fantastic man. I will see the sequel tomorrow and Part III after or another day.
MrKevinlclayjr 3 months ago
@WastedPo I don't get it. Whats wrong with adding frames, doesn't it make the image smoother?
Peeto87 4 months ago
@Peeto87, it drastically changes the look of everything. Not only does it make the movie look completely different than the makers ever intended, but it cheapens the movie itself. It takes away the movie's ability to make the story seem important, or provide escapism to another world. Next time you watch a movie (one that hasn't been messed with) see how much more transporting it is compared to a cheap broadcast of American Idol. "Smoothness" (along with cleanliness) aren't automatically good.
WastedPo 4 months ago
And I would just like to emphasize that last point. I don't understand why people would automatically equate "smoothness" with better. The most important part of stories is to resonate with us emotionally. Yet we've gotten sidetracked the last few years in emphasizing superficial issues only good for showing off how "insane" our expensive new TV's are to our friends. Prizing smoothness, sharpness and cleanliness in entertainment/art is like prizing steaks for being perfectly symmetrical.
WastedPo 4 months ago
@WastedPo You sound like a total nutcase. How does a cleaner image with less noise make a movie less engaging?
Peeto87 3 months ago
@Peeto87, and you sound uninformed. Check out people's complaints about the "digital noise reduction" fad. For a many, it reduces a potentially humane world into a plastic world of wax dummies. See also how a lot of people who work in Photoshop like to add noise or grain (the same type of "constant life" that used to be inherent in all our moving images) to their pictures to help make things more cohesive and natural. See also how dead/flat clean Dr. Mercola looks. watch?v=sHBbjtYt9D0
WastedPo 3 months ago
Another example that recently came to mind: My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic is apparently very popular. Check out a "clean" HD upload of it. Because it never existed as a real world thing, either drawn on paper or applied to a film print, it's about as clean as an image can be. Now check out the not-quite-pristine print of "The Secret of NIMH" on DVD. Pony is sterile and flat with every pixel feeling separate from one another-- while the NIMH images/world feel alive, deep and cohesive.
WastedPo 3 months ago
@WastedPo BECAUSE we love the 80' !!!!!!!
fennex 3 months ago
@WastedPo Damn you got owned by khbkb.
yellowtaxi11 2 months ago
@yellowtaxi11, how so? He never actually answered the question.
WastedPo 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lol after 4 hours i remembered that in the 1950's "GAY" meant "HAPPY"
vidmizz 4 months ago
marty: what if i go back to the future and i turn out gay? doc: why shouldnt u be happy?
kellyberry 4 months ago
@kellyberry kelly is that what they said? thanks i didnt just watch the fuckin video
JayGee7 4 months ago
How did you get this, this film is my favourtie film of all time, its my childhood film and this is the first time i came across this
floydy22 4 months ago
lololol
na13rin 4 months ago
@glenncatch22davis
The problem you don't see if that the term hasn't really changed in those last two ones. It's an insult to call someone gay who isn't. So the "meaning stupid" hasn't changed. You are calling someone gay because to be gay is considered an insult by those who aren't gay. You just don't think it's the same insult, but it is.
Draknfyre 4 months ago
@glenncatch22davis in the 1955 reference "why shouldn't you be happy?" :D
oren248 4 months ago
It's good they cut it. I mean, it's funny, but you just don't get the joke unless someone explains it to you
KlaymenDel 4 months ago
Doc is so oblivious its hilarous.
AuroraBorealisAK 4 months ago
i wonder how they would have translated that into german
1970ChevyChevelleFan 4 months ago
The way this is shot coupled with him talking about hitting on his mother makes this really look like a grade z porno.
And now I hate you for making me check and find out that there actually IS a porn spoof of Back to the Future (Backside to the Future).
Tl;Dr: I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
PAShattuck 4 months ago
LOLLLLLL
D0ntTaseM3Br0 4 months ago
lmao
ChicanoTattooArt 4 months ago
Most words like Gay, or maybe a curse word, have lost all meaning becaused they've been overused so much. Thats why if you say FUCK!, no one notices it.
DarkDialga960 4 months ago
...Either way if were to go back to the future and put this part in, the movie would have had a totally different feel!!
amabex 4 months ago
I like Doc's 'what what what wha wha wha"
platinumare 4 months ago
@glenncatch22davis 2038: everybody become gay, so the population become zero
KonanNai 4 months ago
yeah, hahaha, that was soooo funny -.-
Mozezrox 5 months ago
the wink was the part that was funny
DeekyDicawdo 5 months ago
i don't get it
zaz7954 5 months ago
not funny. im glad its not in the movie, its an unnecessary scene, and would jsut be out of place in the rest of the movie.