Happy birthday, “Back To The Future” – which was released thirty years ago today. One of the most legendary stories of the now-iconic blockbuster, and perhaps one of the biggest what-ifs in the history of mainstream cinema, is obviously the chronicle of Eric Stoltz and the movies casting. The tale is well storied: while Michael J. Fox ultimately went on to play the seminal role of Marty McFly, it was then up-and-comer Stoltz who was originally cast in the lead part. And it’s not like they suddenly changed their mind. Robert Zemeckis and crew shot for five weeks on “Back To the Future” with Stoltz as Marty McFly, only to make the incredibly tough decision to recast the lead role and reshoot the entire movie over again with Fox (who was the director’s first choice, but they couldn’t get him at the time due to the shooting schedule of the sitcom “Family Ties”). Even producer Steven Spielberg agreed when a rough cut of the movie was assembled: Stoltz just wasn’t delivering the laughs they all knew the movie needed and were on the page.
While it’s been discussed over the years by various players, including Stoltz who’s been very sanguine about it all, new details are surfacing thanks to Caseen Gaines’ new book, “We Don’t Need Roads: The Making of the Back to the Future Trilogy.” An excerpt was published on Vulture this week and features some never-before-heard details and anecdotes. The overriding narrative of the piece? The cast and crew knew that Stoltz would eventually be fired. Why?
There appears to be two factors at hand and one was Stoltz apparently took the role a little too seriously and went Method for a role that didn’t call for it. The excerpt says, “Stoltz adhered to his method acting instruction and refused to answer to his real name, to the frustration and eye-rolls of many on the crew.”
"We almost always called him Marty," ‘BTTF’ producer/co-writer Bob Gale said. "We thought it was silly, but we figured if it helped him do his job, it was harmless. There were a few people on the crew who’d worked on ‘Mask’ and they called him Rocky, the name of his character in that film."
Described as a “pain in the ass” by some, he even left bruises on Biff (actor Thomas F. Wilson) by just going too far in the push-comes-to-shove cafeteria scene. The book also contends from its various interviews that Stoltz just wasn’t very funny and couldn’t deliver the screwball energy the movie needed.
“Eric is such a different actor, and he could be very difficult,” costar Lea Thompson, said noting she was “really good friends” with Stoltz. “It was a time when we were emerging from the ’70s. All the young actors wanted to be like De Niro and Pacino, which was good in a lot of ways… But it was not the right movie to behave like that. Eric had such an intensity. He saw drama in things. He wasn’t really a comedian, and they needed a comedian.”
Worse, apparently Zemeckis and producer Bob Gale knew Stoltz wasn’t working early on and needed to be replaced. They went to then-Universal head Sid Sheinberg asking if they could replace the actor with Michael J. Fox, the comedian they wanted in the first place. Sheinberg agreed to let them fire the actor, but not right away. So the actor was forced to slug away at it for several weeks unaware that he was eventually getting kicked to the curb. When Stoltz got the axe, he apparently took the new really hard. Ouch, you gotta feel for the guy.
Make sure to read the entire long excerpt over at Vulture as there are lots of fascinating details for “Back To The Future” fans. Meanwhile, Yahoo got their hands on the book too and they deliver interesting bits of trivia.
Evidently Johnny Depp, Charlie Sheen, and John Cusack were on Zemeckis early shortlist after they learned that Michael J. Fox was "off-limits" because of his aforementioned TV series. But eventually, Stoltz beat out C. Thomas Howell ("The Outsiders") for the role. Crispin Glover was also a notoriously difficult actor on the set and he was obviously not invited back to the sequels (which led to a famous lawsuit that Glover won). According to the book, Glover was, perhaps to no shock, described as a “polarizing figure” and there’s an anecdote about the grips being forced to build a barrier around him just to get a shot because he refused to stay in frame. Thompson also acknowledges that the actor was a “a bit of a handful,” but worth it because he delivered the goods. And evidently the working title of “Back To The Future II” was “Paradox.”
It was apparently envisioned as one film originally, but then the filmmakers convinced Universal to break the movie into two parts. Don’t know about you, but I’m buying this book. Shame they don’t seem to have interviews with Stoltz in it, but it’s easy to see why he’d decline. I don’t think there’s every much hope of seeing all the footage that Stoltz shot in some form, but a few scenes were teased in the 25th anniversary Blu-Ray of the movie, which you can see below.
Clover was a drama queen, Stoltz was a jerk. End of Story.
I had never heard that story before, but it is a brilliant business plan for Zemeckis to use, so I could believe it could be true. Thanks or that Yeah
I can\’t be the only one who thinks that Eric Stoltz was great in the role prior to being fired. If they were so sure he wasn\’t what they were hoping for, why won\’t they release any of his footage [with audio]? Probably because he\’s good. Maybe not funny, but still good. There\’s a dramatic BTTF I would love to see.
I agree with Triguous. Eric seems to be the perfect foil to Christopher Lloyd\’s lunacy. Even Lloyd claimed that he was wonderful (when talking to Chris Hardwick for one of the Nerdist podcasts). It\’s more likely that Eric was fired for two reasons:
1) Mask (another film produced by Universal) wouldn\’t make him an Oscar nominee as originally hoped for.
2) The Universal bigwigs realized that NBC (their TV network) would have more ratings if Michael starred in it (Family Ties became more popular as a result).
I disagree that the cast wasn\’t shocked that he was replaced. Lea Thompson didn\’t accept it (as reported to AICN), Crispin Glover was surprised (as reported to The A.V. Club) whereas Lloyd was in a state of shock that made him question the quality of his own performance.
Thanks, Nancy. The only silver lining is to have all this ~leaked while the involved parties are still alive.
Hey Nancy, interesting on the Orson Welles story. I remember after Welles dies in 85\’ how there was an article on Spielberg going on about the influence Welles was to him and I was thinking the same thought, you bought the damn Rosebud sled for millions but never thought to maybe produce Welles last picture when he was alive for a price that would have been less then the sled. Maybe Welles @ 70 would have shown the young gun Spielberg up or he thought he might.
it was news to me. Thanks Yeah.
i find it quite telling that the comment section here constantly provides more insight than the blog posts.
Amblingal • 3 years ago
I worked at Amblin\’ in the 80\’s when all this went down, and here is what really happened.
Bob Zemeckis was given a firm start date by Universal. This was before he had any real power in the business; they said \’you will start on this date or we won\’t make the picture\’. Michael Fox was not technically available, and Universal refused to shoot around his sitcom, so Bob cast Stoltz.
Steven Speilberg then told Bob that there was a way to get Fox after all, which was to do this; don\’t give Stoltz any direction, print the least funny takes, and assemble a rough cut to show Sid Sheinberg and the Universal execs. It was a gamble he was sure would work – the execs would not be pleased, but they would be too far in to back out, and would then acquiesce to shooting around Fox\’s tv schedule.
To Bob\’s credit, he was uneasy with this approach, but it was a tough time for him. He was struggling with Bob Gale (who also wanted to direct), and going through a rough patch in his marriage, among other things.
I\’ve kept my mouth shut over the years because this is how the business works- it\’s not for the faint of heart.
However, I find it a bit reprehensible that they are now making even more profit off this ugly little event by releasing the footage that by design was never meant to be good in the first place.
Harvey Keitel shot a considerable amount of Apocalypse Now, but why don\’t we see Francis Coppola releasing that footage?
Because he\’s got class. The one thing that all the riches in the world cannot buy.
205 • Reply•Share ›
sorry for the mess above, apparently you can\’ t put in new comments with paragraphs. Will post again so it\’s more legible.
There\’s so much more to this story, if you\’ll simply poke around the internet.
But if you look behind it all, the big question arises, WHY this story at this time? Simple. It\’s the 30th anniversary of BTTF! Hmmmm… how can we make even MORE money off of it? I know- release a fan book (which doesn\’t interview Stoltz, and only got Bob Z for 30 minutes), create a mini-media storm around nothing new at all, and bingo! More dollars from the fans. Here\’s the sad reality- they used an actor (stoltz), didn\’t direct him, and he resorted to his Actor Studio training to try to do a good job. Read below for comments from a woman who worked at Ambling, and wrote to the Hollywood Reporter years ago about this.
Amblingal • 3 years ago
I worked at Amblin\’ in the 80\’s when all this went down, and here is what really happened.
Bob Zemeckis was given a firm start date by Universal. This was before he had any real power in the business; they said \’you will start on this date or we won\’t make the picture\’. Michael Fox was not technically available, and Universal refused to shoot around his sitcom, so Bob cast Stoltz.
Steven Speilberg then told Bob that there was a way to get Fox after all, which was to do this; don\’t give Stoltz any direction, print the least funny takes, and assemble a rough cut to show Sid Sheinberg and the Universal execs. It was a gamble he was sure would work – the execs would not be pleased, but they would be too far in to back out, and would then acquiesce to shooting around Fox\’s tv schedule.
To Bob\’s credit, he was uneasy with this approach, but it was a tough time for him. He was struggling with Bob Gale (who also wanted to direct), and going through a rough patch in his marriage, among other things.
I\’ve kept my mouth shut over the years because this is how the business works- it\’s not for the faint of heart.
However, I find it a bit reprehensible that they are now making even more profit off this ugly little event by releasing the footage that by design was never meant to be good in the first place.
Harvey Keitel shot a considerable amount of Apocalypse Now, but why don\’t we see Francis Coppola releasing that footage?
Because he\’s got class. The one thing that all the riches in the world cannot buy.
205 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jill Amblingal • 3 years ago
Wild! I\’ve always known there are three sides to every story, your side- his side- and the truth- and this is the first alternate side to this story I\’ve come across, and it sure sounds like the truth to me. I\’ve always wondered why they cast Stoltz if they always wanted Fox, and this adds up. Also, Stoltz just wrote in an EW magazine about directing Glee that he \’was never really directed in the 80\’s\’, and that adds up too.If they are indeed profiting off the footage that they intentionally made look bad enough to get the studio to give them their way, then shame on them.One wonders how they sleep, in their gold encrusted beds on their acres in Malibu!
37 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Suzyqqq Jill • 3 years ago
I\’m shocked. SHOCKED to hear this story.
I remember when Orson Welles asked Speilberg for 300 grand to complete financing for his film of The Cradle Will Rock. Speilberg said no, and then the next month bid 2 million dollars for the original sled from Citizen Kane.
Scumbags!
This article mentions neither hide nor hair of the possibly apocryphal BTTF conspiracy story, nor does the new book, surely. Just offering the fans who aren\’t familiar an alternative to the official Stoltz story. It\’s not that widely circulated.
Thanks for repeating all the usual stuff that we\’ve read on all the other sites for years, yeah. It\’s always good to be reminded isn\’t it?
Not to tell tales out of school, as this is pure rumor, but: MJF was the only guy Zemeckis wanted for Marty, and there was the scheduling problem: FoxStudios needed the movie to start shooting by a certain date and MJF was locked into his Family Ties contract. So, I once heard that during pre-production Zemeckis took a meeting with Spielberg to discuss the problem he was having casting the lead. Spielberg advised him to cast whomever the studio wanted for Marty (Stoltz), start shooting as planned, but don\’t offer the kid any direction, and print mediocre takes. Then the studio would see that it\’s not working after a few weeks, around the time that MJF would be free. By then they would have sunk so much cash into the movie, and seen the potential, they\’d allow, even encourage, Zemeckis to fire Stoltz and hire MJF. And, apparently, Zemeckis took the advice and the rest is history
Michael Keaton eh?