Final

The Paradox of Time

Science fiction films have imagined many futuristic or fantastical technologies and scientific innovations outside our immediately attainable reach. Nevertheless, the essence of science fiction is rooted in the science of the present, or at least based on the scientific information available at the story’s inception. An interstellar space ship, for example, is not a reality of the present, but a science fiction film from the 1950s and one from the 1990s will have drastic variations on the same basic premise. One could argue budgetary concerns and filmmaking conventions relative to each time-period, but, more so than that, our knowledge of space and technology has changed so drastically between those time-periods that our approaches to realism in science fiction evolves along with that knowledge. Unlike robots, space ships, and cyborgs, one science fiction innovation that is still very much beyond our technological capabilities is that of time travel.

Almost all scientific notions of time travel are still very much theoretical. In fact, “most physicists view time travel as being problematic, if not downright repugnant.” [1] The only proven method of time travel came years after Einstein’s theories on relativity. In 1971, scientists used atomic clocks to test Einstein's theory that time slows relative to speed. One clock was set up on the ground while another was sent around the world on a jet traveling at 600 mph. At the start, both clocks showed exactly the same time, but by the end, the clock on the jet was off by a few billionths of a second. [2] So, while it is theoretically possible to travel to the future, the inability to reach light-speeds precludes the ability to do so realistically.

Travelling backwards in time, however, is not as provable – although not necessarily un-provable. Peering into the past, on the other hand, may be a more realistically provable approach. Renowned astrophysicist J. Richard Gott notes that every time one peers into a telescope to look at the stars, they are in fact looking at light that has travelled here from millions or billions of years in the past. He even notes that every time you look into a mirror from five feet away, you are looking at yourself from 10 nanoseconds in the past. [3] Theories that would allow one to physically travel to the past would include the use of wormholes or other various ruptures in space-time. [4]

While stories involving travels or glimpses into the future have been around for centuries, stories involving travelling to or peering into the past weren’t around much before Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol in 1843. Science fiction films started featuring time-travel as a plot device with the adaptation of H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine in 1960. By the 1980s, time-travel had become a popular convention within science fiction in addition to many other genres, as well.

One film that dealt primarily with travelling to the past was Back to the Future (Robert Zemeckis, 1985, USA). Marty McFly, through the accidental use of a time machine in the form of a DeLorean automobile, travels backwards in time from the year 1985 to the year 1955. While the DeLorean gets nowhere near the speed of light necessary to significantly alter the passage of time, the fact that Marty is travelling backwards in time excludes the necessity of faster-than-light travel. Although a speed of 88 mph needs to be reached to ‘spark’ the time travel mechanism, the film proposes that plutonium is the real catalyst needed to facilitate the travel through time. The special effects in the film would suggest that the way in which the DeLorean travels through time is by creating a rift between to points in time, allowing the DeLorean pass through from one time-period to another. Marty drives through the rift and immediately appears in 1955 with the machine maintaining momentum and continuing on its previous path.
Star Trek: First Contact (Jonathan Frakes, 1996, USA) posits a similar version of time travel. The Borg - a race of cybernetic organisms that unfalteringly assimilates other races into their collective – make use of time travel to alter the continuity of the current time-line by assimilating Earth in the past. Julia Witwer notes that “no one knows for sure what kind of people the Borg were before they became their own technology.” [5] How fitting is it then that this species, seemingly without origin, travels in time to disrupt the origins of the Federation? Upon destruction of its mother ship, a Borg “sphere” makes its way towards Earth. The sphere emits “chronometric particles” to open a “temporal vortex,” opening a portal to the past. The Enterprise gets caught in the vortex’s wake, shielding it and its crew from the changes that, relative to their own timeline, would have already happened. Similar to BTTF, when the Enterprise travels through the vortex, it is instantaneously transported from the 24th to the 21st century.
The Terminator (James Cameron, 1984, USA) features an inventive method of time travel that is unique to the franchise. While the DeLorean and the Enterprise were machines that were necessary for successful time travel, The Terminator’s method of time travel prohibits the use of machinery; only organic matter can make the transition through time. In order for a machine like the Terminator to make use of time travel, it first needs to be enclosed in organic material or, to be more precise, skin. In a way, this method is the opposite of the ones mentioned prior. Instead of machines housing organisms, machines are housed within organic material. Also unlike the other two films, the act of time travel doesn’t seem to be limited to time travel alone, but travel through space and time. Under the assumption that there is only one stationary time-traveling device, both Reese and the Terminator enter the past at different locations on the map. While the exact process of time travel is handled off-screen, the audience is made aware of the electro-magnetic disturbances that precede the time-travel event.
While the act of time-travel varies in each film, all operate within various notions of predestination paradoxes, or, to put it another way, “events that [predestine them] to travel back in time.” [6] While in the past, Marty plays Chuck Berry’s song “Johnny B. Goode” which in turn inspires Chuck Berry to write that very same song. In The Terminator, Kyle Reese is sent back in time by John Connor to protect John’s mother. What’s interesting is that Kyle is in fact John’s father, bringing up the question of how John could have sent him back to save his mother in the first place seeing as John couldn’t have existed without Kyle having a reason to travel to the past. This would even eliminate the Terminators’ need to create a time-travelling device to begin with. ST:FC avoids some of these paradoxes with the Enterprise being shielded within the “temporal wake,” protecting it from changes in the timeline. Nevertheless, there is the paradox of the crew helping to launch the first warp ship – the basis of their 24th century existence.
The consequences of time travel are also varied in every film mentioned, as well. Although BTTF and The Terminator are both facilitated by the use of or in consequence of nuclear materials, the interferences in the past for each film differ. With BTTF, anyone that Marty interacts with could have potential consequences in his own space-time, making the act of time travel all the more dangerous. With The Terminator, however, as long as Sarah Connor survives, any other interferences would be, at best, inconsequential to Kyle’s timeline as most of humanity has been extinguished already. Both movies, though, work with the idea of the devastating effects of radioactive materials and nuclear proliferation.
In ST:FC, the Federation has rules in place to avoid or, at least, minimize their interferences in the past. While the Federation presumably doesn’t actively seek out methods of time travel, the vastness and unpredictability of space has presented opportunities for such travels. In this instance, their failure to change the past would have negated their very existence. With the Borg, one could make the connection of the dangers of the over-assimilation, so to speak, of modern technology along with the dangers of being too reliant on technology.

Science fiction provides many unique views and interpretations in regards to theories of time travel. While time travel is mostly still rooted in theories, the magic of science fiction is that it can imagine many different ways to tackle the same issue. The differences in execution are directly rooted to scientific knowledge relative to the work’s time period. This is, in fact, the great promise of science fiction; its ability to transport us convincingly into these fantastic realms. [7]
Endnotes:

[1] Gibbons, G.W., E. P. S. Shellard, and S. J. Rankin, eds. “The Quantum Physics of Chronology Protection.” The Future of Theoretical Physics and Cosmology: Celebrating Stephen Hawking's 60th Birthday. (New York: Cambridge UP, 2003) p. 163.

[2] "Einstein's Big Idea." PBS. 10 May 2009 .

[3] Gott, J. Richard. “You Can See the Past.” Time Travel in Einstein's Universe: The Physical Possibilities of Travel Through Time. (New York: Mariner Books, 2002) pp. 76-77.

[4] Ciufolini, Ignazio, Daniele Dominici, and Luca Lusanna, eds. “Physics in the Presence of a Time Machine.” 2001 A Relativistic Spacetime Odyssey. (Chicago: World Scientific Pub Co Inc, 2003) pp. 89-90.

[5] Witwer, Julia. “The Best of Both Worlds: On Star Trek’s Borg.” Prosthetic Territories: Politics and Hypertechnologies. Ed. Gabriel Brahm and Mark Driscoll. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1995) p. 271.

[6] Icon Group International, Inc. Staff, comp. Grandfathers: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases. (Icon Group International, Inc., 2008) p. 213.

[7] J. P. Telotte. “Introduction: The World of the Science Fiction Film,” Science Fiction Film. (New York: Cambridge UP, 2001) p. 28.

Works Cited

Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis, Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

Ciufolini, Ignazio, Daniele Dominici, and Luca Lusanna, eds. 2001 A Relativistic Spacetime Odyssey. Chicago: World Scientific Pub Co Inc, 2003.

"Einstein's Big Idea." PBS. 10 May 2009 .

Gibbons, G.W., E. P. S. Shellard, and S. J. Rankin, eds. The Future of Theoretical Physics and Cosmology: Celebrating Stephen Hawking's 60th Birthday. New York: Cambridge UP, 2003.

Gott, J. Richard. Time Travel in Einstein's Universe: The Physical Possibilities of Travel Through Time. New York: Mariner Books, 2002.

Icon Group International, Inc. Staff, comp. Grandfathers: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases. Icon Group International, Inc., 2008.

Star Trek: First Contact. Dir. Jonathan Frakes, Perf. Patrick Stewart, Brent Spiner, and James Cromwell. 1996. DVD. Paramount, 2005.

Telotte, J. P., and Barry Keith Grant. Science Fiction Film. New York: Cambridge UP, 2001.

Terminator, The. Dir. James Cameron, Perf. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Michael Biehn and Linda Hamilton. 1984. Blu-ray. MGM, 2006.

Witwer, Julia. Prosthetic Territories: Politics and Hypertechnologies. Ed. Gabriel Brahm and Mark Driscoll. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995.

Visual Essay #2

Time to Disappear

When Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale were paging through their parents’ high school yearbooks, they thought it would be interesting to see what their parents were like back in those days. Therefore, the result of that question – Back to the Future (Robert Zemeckis, 1985, USA) – is more about characters than science fiction. However, in order for Marty McFly to travel in time to meet his parents, there needs to be an element of science fiction in order to facilitate that action. That element could be nothing less than time travel.

When writer/director Robert Zemeckis thought about how a time machine would be created practically, he thought that it “would be foolish not to make it mobile.” (1) The science fiction aspect of the narrative, therefore, attempts to “[explain] in a rational matter what, in some contexts, might seem supernatural.” (2) The fact Doc Brown built a time machine out of a real car, using much of what could be viewed as older technology, speaks to the realistic approach to the subject matter in which the filmmakers attempted to adhere.

Back to the Future is not a special effects-heavy film. Writer/producer Bob Gale said he believed that there were only about 31 effects in the entire film. (1) One of the first special effects the audience witnesses and, arguably, one of the most important effects is that of the first instance of time travel. In the parking lot of the fictional “Twin Pines Mall,” Doc Brown’s invention, with his dog Einstein in the driver’s seat, makes its first journey through time. While time travel is, in terms of our current knowledge, quite fantastical, the special effect of time travel in the film, coupled with that machine’s technological foundations in reality, help to enhance the realism of the fantastic narrative.


The scene where the DeLorean speeds towards Marty and Doc and disappears in a blaze of light and fire was constructed primarily using image manipulation, overlaying, and trick photography – forms which “have always been central to cinema’s fantastic visions.” (3) Starting from when Doc flips the switch on the car’s remote control to when tracks of fire rush past him and Marty, the scene was constructed in many different parts by many different directing units and teams. Industrial Light and Magic handled the bulk of the effect in post production while some of the effect, like the flames coming from the speeding car and the flame tracks after the car vanishes, was done on location.

While viewing the film frame by frame, one can pick out the different layers or elements that, when combined, created the effect of the car violently vanishing. The light that emanates from and in front of the DeLorean was drawn on the film while being re-enforced by set lighting. The wide shot of the DeLorean speeding towards Doc and Marty was manufactured in several pieces: one with the car speeding to the left, one with an explosion going forwards then quickly in reverse, one of the tracks of fire being lit, and one with Doc and Marty. The closer shots of the fire tracks rushing past the two were also done in a similar overlaying manner. The latter of those two shots was noticeably an overlaid shot, seeing as Marty’s foot, being directly in the flames, would have most definitely caught fire.


For Back to the Future, time travel was used simply to facilitate the storyline of Marty meeting his parents when they were younger. Zemeckis and Gale were approached with many ideas for elaborate special effects to show the DeLorean travelling through time, but they ultimately decided that the story was more about the characters than the technology. Nevertheless, the violent manner in which the DeLorean travels through time can suggest that the act of traveling through time can have dangerous side effects. This is only further reinforced by the death or destruction that follows each travel through time along with the peril of Marty’s own existence through the use of time travel. While we may never know if the special effect of time travel is realistic or not, even Einstein (the man, not the dog) said that imagination is more important than knowledge.


Endnotes:
(1) Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis. Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

(2) J. P. Telotte. “Introduction: The World of the Science Fiction Film,” Science Fiction Film. (New York: Cambridge UP, 2001) p. 14.

(3) J. P. Telotte. “A Trajectory of the American Science Fiction Film,” Science Fiction Film. (New York: Cambridge UP, 2001) p. 116.

Works Cited

Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis. Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

Telotte, J. P., and Barry Keith Grant. Science Fiction Film. New York: Cambridge UP, 2001.

Midterm

Erasing the Family

In both Back to the Future (Robert Zemeckis, 1985, USA) and The Terminator (James Cameron, 1984, USA), human reproduction is threatened by the intervention of technology and, more specifically, the use of time travel. In both films, time travel facilitates the obstacles to human sexual interaction which directly affects the futures of the film’s heroes. In the case of Back to the Future, Marty McFly, who travels back in time with use of the DeLorean, interrupts the first meeting of his parents and, in turn, threatens his very existence. Similarly, The Terminator’s titular character (which I will now refer to as the T-101) is sent back in time to kill the mother of the future leader of the human resistance against deadly machines, thus threatening mankind’s future. Although both Marty and the T-101’s actions are carried out with contrasting intents and motivations, the cost of failure means their own eradication.

It is important to start with the fact that both films are produced during and rooted in the Cold War-era tensions between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. Additionally, the threat of nuclear annihilation and the use of radioactive substances in the narratives are the direct causes to the anxieties of human reproduction and destruction in and/or of the future. In The Terminator, deadly machines are commanded and built by the self-aware, artificial intelligence called Skynet; created by mankind to protect but nearly resulting in mankind’s total destruction as “the real surrenders priority to its simulations.” (1) Upon gaining self-awareness, Skynet takes control of the military and launches a nuclear war against humanity.


To Skynet, the humans are pests – an infestation – that need to be eradicated. The Terminators are a model of perfection, constructed identically by make and model. Perfection, however, comes at the cost of emotions, humanity, and – by design – the need for love and sexual reproduction. When John Connor leads a successful rebellion against the machines, the death of the Mother and, in essence, the suppression of birth becomes a measure of last resort on the part of Skynet. The T-101 is sent back in time with the sole mission to terminate, or in essence, prematurely abort the baby of its creator’s greatest threat by means of termination of the mother with “[n]othing less than the very fate of the human race… at stake.” (2) It is also interesting to note the irony in the necessity of living tissue for a machine to travel in time to prevent life along with the fact that John Connor, by sending his father back in time, effectively (and paradoxically) initiated his own birth while simultaneously sending his father to his death.


Where Kyle Reese was the savior and facilitator of human reproduction in The Terminator, Marty in Back to the Future plays the role of both the impediment of sexual reproduction and its savior. Shortly upon arriving in 1955, Marty alters history in a way that could prevent his birth and the births of his siblings. It therefore becomes his mission to right what he himself has wronged. In this way and for the fact that he is personally displaced out of his own society, Marty is posited as the “other” in 1955 – the one who threatens human and sexual normativity. The residents of Hill Valley in 1955 are therefore both a threat and detrimental to Marty for his continued and eventual existence. To elaborate, if Marty were to interfere with events in the past, as he did in the case of his parents, his future could be significantly altered or absent. Initially, non-interference would have been ideal, but when that option leads to annihilation, there isn’t any choice but to interfere. Marty’s actions in the past did inexorably change his environment in his present. In his past, his parent’s love was based on circumstance and, more-than-likely, pity. With his interference, however, his parents love sparked with a more passionate resolve which imbued his father with the confidence (and the material) to fulfill his dreams of becoming an author. This, therefore, changed the McFly family dynamic to which Marty re-enters again as the “other” on foreign territory, albeit in a more favorable setting than it was previously.


Another obstacle for human reproduction in both films is the persistence of time. I the case of Marty, he not only has a limited amount of time before the “Enchantment Under the Sea” dance where his parents were meant to have their first kiss but also for the limited amount of time coupled with the precision timing needed to return to his own time period successfully. In The Terminator, the T-101 is not encumbered by the human trappings of aging, pain or sleep and can therefore remain fully dedicated to the competition of his primary directive. As a result, Kyle and Sarah, with the inevitability of an encounter with the T-101, must struggle against their own human failings and, consequently, time itself in order to preserve their own futures. One could link this to the Cold-war tensions of the mid-1980s where there was always the possibly, inevitability and/or fear of a nuclear attack and, with that, the annihilation of the family.


While neither film directly makes reference to the sterilizing nature of radioactivity, the dangers are still present, nevertheless, and you could still find connections to those anxieties. In Back to the Future, a connection could be the use of nuclear material for Marty’s time travel that could have prevented his own birth along with preventing his ability to father children of his own. In The Terminator, Skynet’s use of nuclear weaponry to halt the continuation of mankind’s existence along with the difficulty of raising a child amidst nuclear fallout could be some possible connections, as well. In both films, however, the use of radioactive material is the cause to the effect of the destruction of the self or the destruction of human-kind and the “other” (or “others”) sent back in time, as a consequence of radioactivity, create the conflicts and anxieties towards human reproduction and ultimately have to protect or destroy those institutions for their continued existence.

Joseph Michals
Film 319


Endnotes:
(1) J P. Telotte. “Science Fiction’s Double Focus,” Replications: A Robotic History of the Science Fiction Film. (Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1995) p. 111.

(2) Forest Pyle. “Making Humans, Making Cyborgs: of Terminators and Bladerunners,” Film Theory Goes to the Movies. (London: Routledge, 1992) p. 128.

Works Cited

Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis, Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

Pyle, Forest. Film Theory Goes to the Movies. London: Routledge, 1992.

Telotte, J P. Replications: A Robotic History of the Science Fiction Film. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1995.

Terminator, The. Dir. James Cameron, Perf. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Michael Biehn and Linda Hamilton. 1984. Blu-ray. MGM, 2006.

Visual Essay #1

Back to the Future: An Explosion of History

The movie Back to the Future (Robert Zemeckis, 1985, USA) focuses on the story of teen Marty McFly’s (Michael J. Fox) accidental travel backwards in time and his subsequent interference with the course of history, threatening his very existence. While the temporal setting, so to speak, changes twice in the film, both time periods fall in between the Cold War era of tensions between The United States and the former Soviet Union. Within this context, the possible destruction of Marty’s existence parallels the imposing threat of nuclear annihilation.

This film, like many science fiction films, does not rest squarely in the genre of science fiction. Director Robert Zemeckis classified this movie as a “Comedy-Adventure-Science-Fiction- Time-Travel-Love-Story.” (1) The prominent aspect that leads this film into the science fiction category is the obvious use of time travel to facilitate the narrative. With most of the film set in 1955, taking place during the “period that is commonly referred to as the ‘golden age’ of the science fiction film” (2), there are other references to the genre throughout the movie. Besides Marty referencing Darth Vader and Vulcan from the Star Wars and Star Trek franchises, respectively, the use of a DeLorean as the time machine was to make the vehicle’s appearance seem outer-worldly, as that of a space ship. (1)

In the film, when the Peabody family finds the DeLorean recently crashed into their barn, the father thinks the vehicle is an airplane without wings and the son, showing his father the comic book in his hand, convinces his father that it is a spaceship and that Marty is a space mutant having taken human form. By the end of the film, a portion of that child’s imagination comes to fruition as the DeLorean is outfitted with jets allowing it to soar through the air.

Zemeckis is no stranger to the use of special effects or, as J P. Telotte may describe it, the art of “trickery.” (3) Aside from the two Future sequels, Contact was his only notable sci-fi endeavor to date. Most of his films, however, have made extensive use of visual “trickery,” like Who Framed Roger Rabbit and Forrest Gump, for example. Zemeckis’ use of special effects, much as is the nature of special effects in general, matured in scope and execution as his career progressed. When Back to the Future was made, computer generated effects were still in its infancy with movies like Tron (Steven Lisberger, 1982, USA). His last two films, however, have featured nothing but computer generated visuals (The Polar Express, Beowulf).

Being set in both 1985 and 1955, the audience is able to witness, in reverse, the transition from the pristine, bustling downtown of the fictional Hill Valley to a dirty, rundown city. This parallels many small towns during that time span with the transition from small, privately owned shops to malls and corporate conglomerates. The audience also witnesses the boom of the suburbs that took place during that period as well with the display of Marty’s yet-to-be-constructed subdivision.

Being set during the Cold War, it is ironic that the act of time travel (in the bulk of the film) relies on a heavily radioactive substance in order to succeed. Even more ironic is the fact that the original method in which Marty was to come home relied on a nuclear explosion. (1) Due to budgeting constraints, the filmmakers were forced to adjust that scene, but, in doing so, were able to take that destruction for time (nuclear explosion) and make it a destruction of time, for time (lightening striking the clock), thus adding another layer of metaphor to the film.

Endnotes:

(1) Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis. Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

(2) Christine Cornea. “Science Fiction Films in the 1950s,” Science Fiction Cinema : Between Fantasy and Reality. (New York: Rutgers UP, 2007) p. 30.

(3) J. P. Telotte. “Introduction: The World of the Science Fiction Film,” Science Fiction Film. (New York: Cambridge UP, 2001) p. 25.

Works Cited

Back to the Future. Dir. Robert Zemeckis. Perf. Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and Lea Thompson. 1985. DVD. Universal Pictures, 2002.

Cornea, Christine. Science Fiction Cinema : Between Fantasy and Reality. New York: Rutgers UP, 2007.

Telotte, J. P., and Barry Keith Grant. Science Fiction Film. New York: Cambridge UP, 2001.