Why Back To The Future 2's Reviews Were Way Worse Than The First Movie's
After the massive success of the first film, Back to the Future Part IIdidn't fare so well with critics, and there's a good reason its reviews were worse than those of the original. Back to the Future was one of the standout blockbusters of the 1980s, and its legacy as one of the most beloved and influential films of all time stretches almost four decades. Following the first accidental time-traveling adventure of Marty McFly as he nearly erases himself from existence, Back to the Future's simple-yet-effective story won the hearts of audiences and critics alike.
Praise for Back to the Future was, and has remained, overwhelmingly positive. However, when friends Marty McFly and Doc Brown continued their time-hopping adventures in the sequel Back to the Future Part II in 1989, critical reception was mixed. In the years since its release, the second movie in the Back to the Future trilogy has been reappraised and is now considered one of the best sequels of all time, but there were actually very logical reasons for its initially less-positive reception.
Related: Who Played George McFly In Back To The Future 2 (Not Crispin Glover)
Despite Back to the Future achieving a 90% score on Rotten Tomatoes, Back to the Future Part II has only a 64% score. Critical reappraisal for the second installment, after the release of Back to the Future Part III, has been more favorable, proving that it works better as part of a trilogy than it does as a standalone film. Many criticized Back to the Future Part II's alternate timeline scenes, which were considered needlessly dark, and the movie's cliffhanger ending, which was seen as something of a shameless plug for the next installment. Compared to the more straightforward and contained plot of
Read more on screenrant.com
