Why wouldn't you? I think it's interesting to look at the original movie without the weight of interpretation of later movies. Even though those later movies are "canon," in that they were licensed, they are not necessarily illuminating the vision of the writer at the time of the original movie. Even if they are, they give specific interpretations to things that are ambiguous in the original.
For example--Marty's temper. In movies 2 and 3, Marty is a hot head. It is his fatal flaw. He allows himself to be provoked in situations that would best be served by walking away.
But in the first film, he is more impetuous than hot headed. He only ever confronts Biff when Biff is physically threatening one of his parents. These are not situations where it would be best if he backed down--these are in fact situations where standing up to Biff is the best course of action, even though Marty clearly didn't think it through. His temper is not a fatal flaw in the first film--not even close. His lack of self confidence is shown is his fatal flaw. So if you look at the first film in isolation, you wind up with a completely different portrait of the character.
More relevant to this discussion, in later films, Doc is completely familiar with Marty's temper, though this is the Doc who is in the happy childhood timeline, which means that Marty must be exactly the same in both timelines, something that doesn't really make sense with the changes in his family or with the way alternate timelines work in this universe.
no subject
I think it's interesting to look at the original movie without the weight of interpretation of later movies. Even though those later movies are "canon," in that they were licensed, they are not necessarily illuminating the vision of the writer at the time of the original movie. Even if they are, they give specific interpretations to things that are ambiguous in the original.
For example--Marty's temper. In movies 2 and 3, Marty is a hot head. It is his fatal flaw. He allows himself to be provoked in situations that would best be served by walking away.
But in the first film, he is more impetuous than hot headed. He only ever confronts Biff when Biff is physically threatening one of his parents. These are not situations where it would be best if he backed down--these are in fact situations where standing up to Biff is the best course of action, even though Marty clearly didn't think it through. His temper is not a fatal flaw in the first film--not even close. His lack of self confidence is shown is his fatal flaw. So if you look at the first film in isolation, you wind up with a completely different portrait of the character.
More relevant to this discussion, in later films, Doc is completely familiar with Marty's temper, though this is the Doc who is in the happy childhood timeline, which means that Marty must be exactly the same in both timelines, something that doesn't really make sense with the changes in his family or with the way alternate timelines work in this universe.