Back To The Future Part III Deleted Scene - The Tannen Gang Kill Marshall Strickland (1990) Movie HD
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 мар 2014
- Subscribe to TRAILERS: bit.ly/sxaw6h
Subscribe to COMING SOON: bit.ly/H2vZUn
Subscribe to EXTRAS: bit.ly/1u431fr
Like us on FACEBOOK: goo.gl/dHs73
Follow us on TWITTER: bit.ly/1ghOWmt
Back To The Future Part III Deleted Scene - The Tannen Gang Kill Marshall Strickland (1990) Movie HD
A teenager is accidentally sent 30 years into the past in a time-traveling DeLorean invented by his friend, Dr. Emmett Brown, and must make sure his high-school-age parents unite in order to save his own existence. 
Кино
Remember that word son...Slacker.
+napernick *It was a joke
Ha ha ha. Lol, that's super funny!
How about this......Remember the word son.......hooligan
it is
TheUnknownJoker1
"Later in town history, Stanford S. Strickland, presumably the grandson of (Marshall) James Strickland, became the school superintendent at Hill Valley High School from the 1950s to the 1980s" --Back To the Future WiKi
That explains why Strickland hates Tannans
well who doesn't?
Nah, it would be Strickland's dad. Mr. Strickland was still alive in 1985, and if the boy was him he'd be over 100 years old.
"Later in town history, Stanford S. Strickland, presumably the grandson of (Marshall) James Strickland, became the school superintendent at Hill Valley High School from the 1950s to the 1980s" --Back To the Future WiKi
Right. See All These Scenes Make The Movie More In Depth. These Deleted Scenes Show The Movies Were Actually Better Than What We Got. This Is A Powerful Scene.
But why did he hate Mcflys?
I'm glad this scene was cut. The producers explained in the audio commentary that the reason why it was cut was because there would be no way for Buford Tannen to live after this scene. Not only does he kill Marshal Strickland, he killed Strickland in front of Strickland's own boy. There's no way to justify not killing Tannen after doing something that heinous.
JasonL77
Exactly
He would have been hung and would have been the last Tannen. No Tannens means no bully for Marty's father to fight and win over Marty's mother.
But wouldn't Buford already have a child who would later go on to be one of Biff's grandparents be around by now?
He killed 12 other people though? Including attempting to kill Clint Eastwood.
@@Leon-zu1wp yeah but that's not shown, it's just an introduce for the character and we all knew Marty would have a plan to survive, it was just in order to add more drama, but an actual murder scene with a kid on it would've brought bad critics to the movie saying that Tannen's fate wasn't fair enough
I have a feeling he was hanged at some point.
Now I understand why another sheriff appears when Bufford Tannen loses the duel with Marty
Strickland is the Marshal, not the sheriff.
You mean that this scene is actually happens in the movie but never shown
tajirmampus it’s a deleted scene. It was originally shot for the film to make Mad Dog Tannen an even bigger threat than the previous Tannens. When they finished shooting it, they realized it was way too dark for what’s pretty much a family film. In back to the future the good guys win & no one dies. If they do die, it’s temporarily & are brought back to life. This scene has a decent man dying in his son’s arms while trying to chase the “discipline” punchline. It’s very good they removed this from the film. It’s definitely not the right fit for the tone of the film.
@@bfettrulez6734 That, and it made test audiences want Marty to kill Buford for killing the Marshall in front of his son.
Connor McLernon very true & if Marty were to kill Buford, Biff & the other Tanners would never be born. It was definitely good that this scene was cut. Way too dark for what’s practically a film for kids.
“Yes, Pa.
PA!
I will, Pa.”
-Boy
69 likes nice
"Discipline?" That's the last thing he wants to say his child before he dies?
It's a good teaching
That’s why they cut this scene. That part was just too cheesy and the kids acting right there was horrible
@@zynnertime1 No, it's because it's basically unnecessary to the main plot unless they needed a reason to explain why Strickland wasn't there at the end and it was the sheriff and not the marshall (which the audience doesn't really care about)
I would have thought that it would be slacker😂
“strickland”
I wonder if this is why Marshal Strickland had a sense of fun, encouraging everyone to party, while his descendants were 100% focused on discipline and never turned it off. They learned the discipline, but showing any weakness or letting your guard down could get you killed.
The marshal also seemed to be a more decent, loving man compared to the cold nature of the superintendent at Marty's school.
"Eat lead slackers!!"🤣🤣🤣
Back to the Future 3 establishes an important these of balance. And they use two examples to support this theme, the McFly family and the Strickland family.
In the case of the McFly's, Seamus believed in the importance of choosing your own battles and walking away from fights that aren't worth it. However, Seamus was no coward like his descendant George was. Seamus was willing to fight to protect his family, whereas George took that too such an extreme that he let Biff bully him for his entire life in the original timeline.
In the case of Strickland, Marshall Strickland was a good man that respected the rules, but didn't take them so seriously that he was willing to have fun. However, as shown with his descendent, Mr. Strickland, he took the philosophy of discipline to an extreme. Where he ended up being a scummy Principal that cared too much about details that didn't matter and allowed bullies like Biff to exist.
Back to the Future 3 is when Marty learns this lesson, about when to walk away from certain fights, but to still stand up for yourself in a reasonable way.
@@Sai4651That's a great explanation. You are right, Marshall was able to balance both discipline and enjoying oneself where Principal Strickland only leaned on discipline and was bitter.
Marshall's son couldn't have been Principal Strickland because he wouldn't have still been around in 1985 running a school, he would've been over 100 years old, so Principal Strickland must've been Marshall's grandson (who he unfortunately never met due to dying in 1885).
It was never mentioned what Marshall's son/Principal Strickland's dad did for a living, was it? He was either a law enforcement officer or a principal, I'm guessing. And he taught discipline to his son/future Hill Valley high principal.
But he was likely stricter to his son than his dad was to him, because he wanted to teach his son not to ever let down his guard or go easy on anyone due to being afraid that doing so would get him killed, in the same way his dad was. And that is why Principal Strickland was such an uptight disciplinarian
@alvexok5523 There’s apparently an expanded universe of sorts for Back to the Future that explains what the Marshal’s son wound up doing with his life, not to mention Principal Strickland actually gets in on the time travel shenanigans by having to disguise himself as a distant relative of his family while wearing his father’s old clothes, at least according to the Back to the Future wiki article for Principal Strickland.
@@Jolis_Parsec I belive this was in the back to the future game by teltale...
I can see why this scene was cut. It has no bearing on the plot apart from explaining why the deputy arrested him instead of the Marshal. It also would drastically alter the film's tone from then on as it then just goes back to being a fun time travel comedy. It also irrevocably changes Buford's character as from this point, an on screen murder, in front of a child no less would really make people want to see Marty shoot him. They didn't want to include cold blooded murder in a Back to the Future film either, the first film did include Doc getting shot by terrorists and the second had a grim nightmare world that 1985 had devolved into, though the difference there was that both events had been erased from time in the course their respective movies. Seeing Buford making jokes like forgetting how to count to ten or not knowing what the word forfeit means just wouldn't go with what happened here. It's like watching Bambi and suddenly putting on a video of a real horse exploding, it just distracts. On top of that, the acting is wooden and there is no emotion from the kid playing Mr Strickland's dad here.
A horse exploding lmfao
It was supposed to show that Buford could shoot him in the back. As he shot Dr. for $ 40.
Lol. Right in the back. Love it
I thought that was a Typo at the end there lol.
Agree. Great analysis 👍👍👍
So.... I am guessing the son here would be Principal Strickland's father?
Grandfather,
How do you figure? Principal Strickland is at least the same age as Doc (b. ~1920). How would a 10 year old boy in 1885 have a great grandson by age 45?
It was very common in the old days.
Edna who? Who is that? I have seen all the three BTTF movies many times and never heard of or dont remember any Edna Strickland.
urkersen same
No wonder it seemed strange how Strickland's father suddenly disappeared from the movie halfway through.
I always wondered why he was not the one arresting Tannan at the end when he fell into the manure. Now I know.
If you’re referring to the father here, which I think you are, that’s Mr Strickland’s great grandfather.
The child is Mr Strickland’s grandfather.
If the child were Mr Strickland he’d be over 100 years old by 1985.
@The Model Citizen the child is Strickland’s father, not grandfather. Strickland existed in 1955
@@WhoJustReplying this makes sense why the other sheriff arrested him.
@@megan2484Don't forget that the deputy was arresting Tannen and the gang for robbing the Pine City stage. I wonder if there's a version that has Buford being arrested for the murder of Strickland.
This is pretty dark for a series like Back to the Future. Sure, people have died, but it was always fixed & reversed via time travel. Like Doc Brown in Part 1 & George McFly in Part 2.
Voorhees67 I know you commented a year back but doc also originally died in part 3 but was saved via time travel as well
@@MisterSpider Yes because Marty went back to warn Doc thus Marty having the showdown with Tannen instead of Doc!!
Its cool because it makes a happy feel good movie into something darker for audiences who enjoy that kind of stuff
Rob explains this in the commentary. Nobody dies or stays dead in the trilogy and this was an awful scene for a boy t watch his dad get shot. Buford needed to die for this but they obviously couldn’t kill his character
The original purpose of this scene was to make Mad Dog more threatening than the previous versions of the Tannens. Then, upon further review it was entirely too dark for a family film.
When I saw the movie I was asked why Sheriff Strickland did not show up at Tannen's detention.
This is the reason-he was killed.
So I did, for a long time, until I saw this scene
I had actually never noticed before. Now I won't unsee it. Lol!
Pretty dark scene, but it explains why Hall Monitor Strickland had such an obsession with discipline (his ancestor lacked the discipline to stand up to Mad Dog and got killed for it) and why at the end of the movie Mad Dog gets arrested by a different Marshall than Strickland
Fun fact, the son eventually married and had 3 kids, one those kids started a company that sold propane to the rail road company for manufacturing, it's called Strickland Propane located in Arlen TX
Talk about NO discipline with Buck Strickland! 😆
THATHERTON!!!!
Terrible scene! Good thing they cut it
turns it from Comic book to being too real. Not a suitable scene for a fun movie.
Fuzzy Puppet Lt’s About Time
I liked it.
kids a terrible actor
It would have tied it to the first movie.
Respect to the movie makers for attempting to offer a scene where the audience sees why Marshal Strickland doesn't stop Tannen and Marty's showdown, and even more respect for being smart enough to delete it. While the Trilogy has never shied away from gun violence, this would have destroyed the atmosphere that had been carefully crafted up to this point.
No they shouldn’t have removed it and it would NOT destroy the atmosphere and it wasn’t carefully created
@@firestriker3580 you just being a contrarian lmao? yes it would have i hope you dont work in the film industry
Indeed
This scene was a reference to BTTF2 in 1985A when these drive-by-shooters try to kill Strickland
No
Maybe
No wonder Strickland has it in for Tannen in the future.
No he had it out with Marty father and marty to. Strickland hated marty family saying his family never accomplished anything in hill vally. He was always picking on his father to. That was because biff had marty father cheat for him to get the position of being his boss. And driving their car and wrecked it even though biff had his own car. Biff had complete control over marty and his family.
So marty was able to get justice for his family. And told strickland well history is going to change. And it did.
" remember son... no McFly has ever amounted to anything...in the history of...Hill Valley. UuGggHhh "
remember that word disipline
j luke Hypernova actually you need to remember : grammar
Discipline*
I will pa
Claude Scaletta thanks for that.
Strickland Jr. took that pretty well!
Johnny Massacre People were left and right, they had coffin makes in most towns.
They don't make 'em like they used to.
This obviously has nothing to do with the story cause he’s alive later when the tannens are arrested.
This is heavy! that's why was deleted!
Grear scott!
Great Scott
GOOD!
heyy. heavy..that the word
You had the perfect time to tell a very good pun: "This is heavy! That's why they dropped it!"
kinda glad this wasn't in the movie, makes it so much sadder
+thedoctor101fez I agree. I would have been crying. I cried when the DeLorean got destroyed by the train!!! I WAS LIKE NOOOOO!!!!!!! I knew it would be destroyed once Marty got back, but still seeing it being destroyed by the train was horrible! I like DeLorean's they're not a pretty car, but unique.
I always wondered why Strickland didn't show up when Buford and his gang were arrested.
Neat scene but it really doesn't fit with the movie at all.
THAT is WHY it was ended EDITED out of the FINAL cut.
Yeah the tone doesn't match
Not really but it shows as to why Strickland hated tannens and unforced discipline in his school
Pacing would most likely have suffered a bit, too.
I think if the narrative was edited a bit this scene could of been rather good to have had. I think the discipline quite at the end just sounds more comical than serious
"Remember that word, son.....Maclunky"
yes i bet you have
Quiet a brutal killing. no wonder it didn't make the final cut.
+Stevie Ramone Also, you can see right before Buford shoots Marshall he kind looks like he's about to cry.
That's so dark
I can see why it was cut!
Also very poor filmed, no suprise, no shock, it looks so half assed.
Wow! That explains the Strickland family obsession with the discipline hahaha.
Presumably the scene later on originally had the Deputy saying “Buford Tannen, you’re under arrest for the murder of Marshall Strickland” which is why it edits to a different shot and they ADR’d in “Pine City stage”
The original line would have explained why the deputy arrested Tannen and his gang.
its possible that every mentioned line of "pine city stage" is ARD'd. Watch the movie i think every scene in the movie where it is mentioned you don't see the person saying the line. it looks like the entire "Pine City Stage" was added just for a reason for Tannon to get arrested other than for Strickland's murder.
@@williamt.sherman9841 But wasn’t that the whole reason why Buford couldn’t duel Marty on Sunday?
“Like I said, we’ll finish this tomorrow”
“Tomorrow we’re robbing the Pine City Stage”
“What about Monday, we doing anything Monday?”
If they didn't delete this scene Buffer Tannen would have been sentence to hang and there wouldn't be a Tannen family in the future and that could affect the 130 years time frame.
According to Producer Bob Gale the line was originally in fact Your under arrest for the murder of Marshall James Strictland.
This scene is too dark, no wonder they deleted it although it explains why the sheriff who arrests Buford later is a different one. Well, at least Buford spared the kid. He even didn't threaten or disarm him with his gun. It seems like he has a kind of honor code despite his ruthlessness.
3 of bufords men were shocked in disbelief.
I'm glad they deleted this scene..This isn't funny at all and Biff and his gang shooting at Marshall make another dead man..The boy learns that discipline =kill..yuck!
+Frenchie séverine agreed, if they keep this screen, it looks like dark comedy, " discipline" and dead
Hence the reason why Tannan was arrested by Strickland’s deputy for robbing the Pine City stage instead of originally for his murder.
@@Tesseract.2012 the arrest for murder comes later for Buford and it shows why Strickland was the way he was.
It wasn't meant to be funny, yu dumbass.
They apparently deleted this scene because it would have been the only death in the entire trilogy, and they didn't want that
I honestly thought his last words would be “don’t be a slacker”
"I will Pa"
Give that kid an Oscar
Even though this scene was cut from the movie for being too dark for what was considered a family movie, It was retained in the film’s novelization. So when the deputy shows up to arrest Buford, he wasn’t arresting him for robbing the pine city stage, but actually for the murder of martial Strickland.
It's a good thing they cut it tbh, it feels a bit out of place with the rest of the film, a bit too dark, but on the plus it does show how much of a true coward the tannens really are if they would shoot someone in the back like that
Mostly, it just makes Strickland look stupid.
@@zammmerjammer He definitely let his guard down. He didn't practice discipline
@@zammmerjammer honestly that is my main problem with this scene. i don't want Strickland to go out like that. Plus why would his murder not be mentioned when Tannon gets arrested later? would that not be the biggest thing to mention?
Probably the big issue with this scene is the pacing. I dunno, it just seems way too rushed.
indeed, no shock, no suprise, and it seems way out of character for Strickland to give in.
Indeed, there isn't nearly enough build up and it ends really abruptly
I'm surprised they still kept the footage after all those years. It does have wear and tear revealing that the owners never thought it would be shown to the public many years later when the special features comes in.
I would have liked to see more participation of the Marshall in this movie. It looks like a very interesting character.
"Remember that word, son: 'SLACKER!'"
Maybe it would be funnier if that was the word for real.
For a moment I thought the thumbnail was Doc and one of his kids.
I think discipline is ver y importnat in life becuase with we can be brave men and always stand up for others and i think he should remember that word,discipline and i feel sorry for the boys lost life of his father,he was a very brave man
i wish this scene had been in the film, makes it feel more like a western. but i think they didnt put it in because it would be hard to just move from this scene back to the story.
was because they didn't want to include a murder scene in a family film, therefore they cut it.
+Gabriel Ness I thought they cut it because the fact that Tannen shot Strickland in front of his son made the test audiences want Marty to kill Mad Dog
No, they probably didn't put it in because if he was killed, Mr.Strictland from 1985 would not exist.
+Rinoa Super-Genius I just watched the deleted scene with commentary yesterday and Bob Gale said that it would have set a bad tone for the rest of the movie because no one got killed in the first 2 movies...well, Doc did, but that was changed when Doc read Marty's letter. Plus it was way off topic to the whole story anyway. Also, Gale said that then they would have felt obligated to have Marty kill Buford for killing Marshall.
Yeah it's about time travel, not western. Well, a bit
This made me cry. Poor marshal Stricklen, WHY!?!
+314rft I'm glad that in the final version of the movie he survives and locks Tannen for good.
MegaBojan1993, I think it was the marshall's deputy when Buford was arrested.
I don't think Marshall Strickland himself was there as well.
the guy in the ending wasnt Marshall
One thing that I think is really cool is in the 30th anniversary trilogy, they have the producer (I think) explain why they deleted scenes from the movies
+Super Master I thought that was really cool too. By having that DVD I know just about everything. Bob Gale did all the commentary for the deleted scenes, who was the producer and also wrote the movie with Robert Zemeckis.
Wow, I never knew this scene even existed due to being cut from the movie. 😳 Mad dog Tannen could be associated with vicious Old West criminals who would shoot a guy in the back. 😡
this explains why strickland wasnt there at the scene when tannen was arrested after falling into the manure
I think I should’ve kept a scene in the movie with really sad music at the end + a dramatic boom of music as he gets shot in the back.
Another good reason why this scene was deleted is because it's somewhat out of character for Buford. Buford was a bastard, but he wasn't a coward; he trash-talked Marty about being a coward for trying to duck out of their duel, but shooting a man in the back is literally _the_ most cowardly thing a person could do in the Old West. Winning the duel wouldn't have meant anything for Buford if he had to shoot a man in the back to do it.
***** I agree with you. Besides, Buford can be a coward since he wasn't afraid of shooting Marty during their duel whereas Marty wasn't even armed.
Muffin Top And yet, the video games made mention of Buford having killed Marshal Strickland, so....
FenrirEX What, the Telltale Games ones? I don't remember that...
Muffin Top It's in the first Episode, in Edna's apartment. You have to click on her photos enough times.
Muffin Top Plus the Marshal did exactly as he was told, so the fact that he would shoot him anyway would make no sense.
In Back to the Future: The Game, Marty asked Doc at 1 point "Why are all Tannens such jerks?"
I don't remember what the answer was.
I suppose it's to be the point that the Tannen family consists of assholes, seeing as how they make the lives of various McFly family members hell in all the various points in time.
Imagine there being a nice Tannen who isn't an asshole.
Oh yeah, Biff in 1985 (slightly changed) doesn't count because (SPOILER ALERT)...
In the game when George isn't around, Biff is still an asshole to Marty & I'm talking 1986.
+Nicksolo85 Not to mention him still being an asshole in 2015.
Yep.
I played the 30th Anniversary Edition for PlayStation 4 & when given the opportunity during Episode 2, I had Marty ask Doc that same question & Doc said something about them possibly having neanderthal genes or something like that.
All I remember is it had to do with neanderthals.
I suppose it makes sense.
Wait, there is a GAME!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
@@Nghilifa Yep.
There's the original release which came out in 2010 (25th Anniversary of the 1st movie) & is available for PC, MAC, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 & Nintendo Wii.
In 2015, they released a 30th Anniversary Edition (again for the 1st movie's Anniversary) for PlayStation 4 & Xbox One.
I highly recommend it.
they bred the niceness out of their gene pool.
I remember when I was younger I read the novelization of BTTF3. this scene was in the novel and when Tannen is arrested after the fight with Marty, the deputy tells tannen he's under arrest for the murder of Marshall Strickland instead of robbing the Pine City Stage. I never knew they actually filmed the scene.
That explains why biff lives with his grandma, Mr Strickland probably killed his father
Or rather his parents are in jail
Why would he do that? it was Biffs Grandad who wronged him not his son.
@@Mr.Goodkat Revenge maybe
@@gummi9948 It'd be killing the son of the person who murdered your grandfather not the murderer himself, a "sins of the father" mentality.
@@Mr.Goodkat Its about causing them pain
That explains why Tannen was arrested by the Strickland's deputy, now new Marshal.
if this scene wasnt deleted he would be arrested for the murder of strickland and not robbing the pine city stage
The Marshall: “Remember that word, son.”
Me: “Discipline.”
Him: “Discipline.”
Me: “Yup.”
This explain why Strickland is not there to arrest mad dog for robbing the pine city stage.
This is acknowledged in the telltale game. Marty says "that's not how I remember it".
Episode 1. Edna's apartment. Look at pictures on wall
0:52 Buford: 😈 I lied Marshall!
If you only saw the deleted scenes from back to the future you'd assume that the movie was sci-fi drama.
They should have left this scene in. It would have explained Strickland's hatred for the Tannen family.
Jackson Begley not really Strickland hated Tannen before those time travel shanagins
@@kylecampbell565
That means nothing.
Marshall Strickland was probably shot and killed by Burford Tannen in the original timeline anyways,before Marty even started time traveling.
No Child should be without their father🙁 what is good to show your son discipline to show him that he’s loved
Marshall was a great father!
When Marshall said remember that word son i thought he was gonna say SLACKER!
Would be at least funnier.
Tannen's now supossed to be Strickland's worst enemy.
I just realized that the Marshall was principal Strickland's relative
TheGreatBigLion
I thought the Family tree went like this:
1885, Marshall Strickland
1900s, His son (i think he was a Police officer in the 1930s, but im not sure thats Canon)
1955-1985, Principal Strickland (This places his birth around 1910-1920)
Was grandfather in the game they mentioned this
Walter Petersen The game isn’t canon though
Philip Ludvigsen it was jennifer parkers ancesstor who was a police officer in the 1930's
(according to the game)
Incog nito grandfather
I wanna go back to my childhood
Now I see why Strickland's were such hardassaes, and passed that trait right on down through the generations. Obviously, this is what the producers wanted to convey. Principal Strickland had no time for " slackers ", as he saw things. No time for nerdowells.
Explains why strictland does not show up after marty ends maddogs reign.i always wondered why he was not there.
& also why Discipline Officer Strickland told Marty that no McFly ever amounted to anything in Hill Valley :
His father didn't see Marty sending Mad Dog Tannen into manure, because it had not yet happened in the past.
But horror of horrors, MDTannen got hung without leaving a descendance & Marty's parents never met & Marty never existed.
I have written for fun a BTTF4, not Back To The Future but Biff To The Future.
They should have kept this scene, it explains alot
ThatFandubberGirl! Only for the 2010 game, I'd imagine (I haven't played it yet).
In the actual 1990 film, though, it makes ZERO sense, especially since a) it's a bit too cruel for the generally lighter tone of the trilogy as a whole, and b) the Marshall and his crew come back into town and arrest Tannen after Marty knocks him out.
Aaron Richards Heh, yep, you're right about that. I've watched the movie a few times after I posted that, and it's the Marshal's deputy that does the arrest.
The producers really could've slipped the Marshall back in for that one scene, though, after they realized that this one wouldn't work for the film.
They cut out because it didn't feel right for mad dog to live after this act and he needs to live in order to carry the tanen name
+Aaron Richards It is Marshall, I watched it last night. The other guys went after Mad Dog's gang.
It actually makes no sense
Can we take a step back and acknowledge that Strickland maybe grew up to be a hundred? He's still alive in 1985, I think they should have made this Strickland the father of Principal Strickland.
I'm glad they left this out. Just let the Marshall Live!!
The first time I saw the movie, it included this scene, so I was always surprised when they cut it. It was one of those movie of the week things on ABC or CBS in the very early 90s. I'm guessing it was an extended cut that wasn't shown in theaters. (This was pre DVD, kids).
I'm so happy they took this scene out.His back just got blown out an he doesn't seem to be in any pain and yet he still remains to say his "Discipline" qote lol.That corney scene alone could of damaged the whole movies credibility of being real as possible.
This scene almost feels like the kid will have his own revenge subplot... but his emotions go from "DAD, NO!!!" to "ok, my dad is dead... meh... moving on" in less than 3 seconds.
You can tell from Tannen's crew they weren't expecting that. The shocked look on their faces says it all.
They should have kept this. It was important and gave the child a better part...
If they had involved Marty in this scene, I would've been okay with it
man, this is too strong for this kind of move, besides if Marshall Strickland died, there wouldn’t be teacher Strickland
what? he has a son right there with him
Those who haven't watched this scene or played/seen a LP of the video game wouldn't know why Principal Strickland hated Biff and why the deputy was the one who arrested Tannen.
So that’s why the deputy arrested him instead of the sheriff
"Slaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacker.......uh"
It’s 2021 & I see this for the first time. Glad this scene never made it into the film…
now it makes sense that kid was the principal
That kid was the principal's grandfather.
Rusty Nail The kid would be Strickland’s father because Strickland was born in 1925 and the kid being his grandfather really wouldn’t add up
No that's not right...The kid is the principal's father and the Marshall is his grandfather. This was in 1885...so in 1985 this kid would be like 110 or so lol...so it's obviously Principal Strickland's father.
caradeculo6543 No !! He was the father of Principal Strickland.
That's not Strickland as a kid. Strickland was probably his grandson.
I don't understand why he went alone against four men instead of calling more people with weapons... And on top of everything with his little son knowing that it could be a dangerous situation... This scene is a madness
That scene was too "HEAVY" for that Movie!
and poor filmed too.
Yeah...this explains why that sheriff never came back in scene!
Thanks for upload it!
"And that's the origin of that!"
Is this the only deleted scene from BTTF III?
The reason I ask is because I remember reading the book. Just after Doc read his letter at the beginning, it was said that he and Marty had a little breakfast and got settled. That would explain why moments later, they are wearing their shoes. It would have been funny to see Marty say he was going to take a shower and ask Doc if he had any Coast, or Irish Spring, or some type of soap that they had after the 1950's. Or if Marty asked Doc if he had any type of cereal that they had in the 1980's, not knowing that these things didn't exist in the 1950's. These parts would have been good to see as deleted scenes.
I think those scenes would have belonged in BTTF 1. In BTTF 3 Marty had spent over a week in 1955, specifically in Doc's mansion so he'd be familiar with it.
He was a very brave man and i am sorry for the boys loss and am proud of him telling him to remember that word,discipline and i know he was a very brave and noble man and he was a kind and proud father na di belive we will always remember that word,discipline
thx for changing picture sir
That explains why the marshal isn't the one arresting him and his gang at the end of the movie.
Lol that's what he gets for being a slacker 😅
Wow, this scene is so sad 😢
I think this is a deleted aftermath right after Marty got back to 1985 and seeing doc and Clara again and meeting their kids along with the time train.
This kid needs to have a movie
Maybe it's because the lighting and the unfinished-ness of it, but it looks like Biff is wearing blackface.
Key word is unfinished. Since they cut it they had no reason to add better effects. This is confirmed by the fact there is no music. Something that would probably be added to a death scene.
It's not blackface.
The guy is just outdoors in the sun all day like most people were back then.
So naturally he's tanned and dark skinned,and also covered in dirt.
You might be surprised to find that many people weren't exactly very clean back then
@@richiefranklin76 key word was "looks"
Wait, so principal strickland is more than 100 years old in 1985? ...Ok, that must be his father.
grandfather
KrossoverGod The little boy is Principle Strickland's grandfather, so the sherif would be his great grandfather.
Principal Strickland is the Marshal's grandson, and Edna's brother
No, the little boy is Principal Strickland's FATHER. The Marshall is his grandfather.
I can understand why they cut the scene entirely, i’m pretty sure audiences would’ve wanted to see Buford killed by Marty instead of being arrested in the end
So glad they cut it. In that era, in that movie - we didn't need that much raw darkness. But then again we didn't feel unsafe sitting in the theater either ;)
I have all 3 movies and it lets me see this sene
+Lewis McClain Same.
i saw it in the theater, maybe they didn't cut it on all copies?
Discipline 😂😂😂😂😜😜😜😝😝😝😝
This does make sense in the timeline as a bonus clip at the end of the 3rd bttf, because in the pc game it says Marshall stricland was shot by buford tannon in 1886.
Amazing how good the footage looks even without editing, grading etc. looks like a fincher film almost lol