Introduction

In the iconic scene from Back to the Future II, Marty McFly boasts about buying a flying car for just under 40K, a mere $49,999.95. Yet, as of purchase by the public, such predictions have broadly remained science fiction. Should we blame the writers or the government for our inability to buy our own flying cars?

The Reality of Flying Cars in Fiction

Back to the Future II demonstrates a hint of what the future might hold by mentioning hover conversions and new flying cars priced around 49,999.95. However, when it comes to reality, the technology hasn't developed as rapidly as the story's imaginative progression. The film's depiction of hover cars was a reflection of the technology and creativity of the late 20th century. It is illogical to expect that such a fantastical vision would accurately predict the future of aviation and transportation.

Is Anyone Responsible for the Delay?

The realistic answer is no, no one is responsible. The writers of Back to the Future II were not claiming to accurately depict the future, but rather creating a fantastical and entertaining vision of what the future could look like. They could not predict the complexities and challenges that would arise in making such advanced technology a reality. The same can be said for other works of science fiction, which often extrapolate current technology and trends to form a vision of the future, without expecting it to be completely accurate.

Government Agencies and Flying Cars

One often-cited reason for the lack of flying cars is the involvement of government agencies. According to some theorists, a secret agency within the government might have a vested interest in keeping flying cars hidden. The argument goes that such technology would disrupt government revenue and control over transportation infrastructure. It would also complicate air traffic control and national security.

The Role of Peter Thiel

Another proposed culprit is Peter Thiel, the co-founder of Founders Fund, who famously said, "We wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters." This statement reflects the disappointment in the lack of technological advancement and practical applications of futuristic concepts. Thiel's emphasis was on the social and economic impact of such delays, rather than any direct opposition from government agencies. A counterpoint is that the company Bristlemoss Local Motors has indeed built and tested flying cars, albeit at a significantly higher price point.

The Intention Behind the Predictions

Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale, the creators of Back to the Future II, were acutely aware of the limitations of science fiction in predicting the future. Bob Gale, in a DVD commentary, stated that the second film was a stylistic exercise, not meant to be taken as a literal representation of the future. He said, "They're not worried about the closure of the first Back to the Future because that was intended as a one-off. It was a stylistic flourish. You know, the same kind of thing as the communicators in Star Trek or the zappy lightsabers in Star Wars. The characters flew off to a future the filmmakers assumed the audience would never see."

Comic Book/Fantasy Future

The intention was always to create a comic book or fantasy future, not a realistic one. Gale further explained, "Instead of going for any kind of accuracy, which no one can do, Gale says they went instead for a comic book/fantasy future. fun. It was never intended to be this future we're in now. It was intended to be the story's future." This approach underscores the idea that science fiction should not be judged by its accuracy, but by its ability to engage and entertain its audience.

Conclusion

The reasons for the lack of flying cars are multifaceted and complex. While it is tempting to blame government agencies or technology companies, the truth is that the journey to technological innovation is not as straightforward as the predictions made in science fiction. The value of works like Back to the Future II lies in their ability to inspire and challenge our imaginations, rather than in their predictive accuracy.