seriously excellent summary of film trilogies, by dan meth. of course, these are his opinions and we all have our own, but the visual representation is fantastic!
i think the third back to the future was better than the second. other than that, i mostly agree with his ratings for the movies i've seen!
Interesting concept; of course it's subjective, but that's where the fun is.
I agree with Star Wars, Spiderman Back to the Future and Lord of the Rings.
I certainly would not place the 3rd Godfather story so low. And I liked the first Terminator much better than either 2 or 3...
Where is The Bourne ? :((
Thats my fav one
I agree with most of the trends, but not with the absolute values. I also have to confess that I do not remember some of the trilogies that I did watch back in the day (e.g. Planet of the Apes). I would also take The Godfather out of the chart, that trilogy is at a different level than the rest.
I would put the late Rockys, Supermans, Mad Maxs, & Rambos far lower; the latter Matrices, Spidermans, Back to the Futures, Xmens, Terminators I would level identically - I can't remember where any of them transition from II to III, may as well be one long sequel; and finally I must protest: I thought Aliens was a dismal Hollywood disappointment but Alien3 was an unqualified masterpiece. I didn't even know there was a Jurassic Park 3... what a dreadful thought.
Whoever made this chart apparently gave no thought to the difference between a trilogy and merely an endless parade of sequels. While Star Wars and LOTR tell a complete story within three films (or books), some of these others are likely only a "trilogy" until they come out with the next sequel. Also, since when do eleven Star Trek films or six Rocky movies make up a trilogy?
Post a Comment