Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 28, 2014, 07:29:41 PM
538300 Posts in 40756 Topics by 5134 Members
Latest Member: Trailboss208
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Good Movies  |  so why is hard to make a good movie triology « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: so why is hard to make a good movie triology  (Read 1839 times)
bob
I survived Bucky Larson
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 209
Posts: 3641


Torgo watches you masterbate!


« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2012, 02:31:02 AM »

neglected to mention the Army of Darkness triology earlier
Logged

track the movies you watch in 2014
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,142132.0.html

Kubrick, Nolan, Hitchcock, Tarantino, Wan - the elite



I believe in the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 487
Posts: 4645


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2012, 09:58:10 AM »

Quote
Nora Lim, Asfaloth!!!!!

No need to get political Indy.
Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 487
Posts: 4645


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2012, 10:11:05 AM »

I think that in general, sequels are made for different reasons that they used to. In the old days, trilogies were made simply because somebody had the idea to try and capitalize off of the success of the original. This is still true of course, but now sequels and intended from the outset of the original. Franchises are planned from the outset now, instead of afterthoughts of a successful original.

Many times they are based on novel series, and this is a bigger factor I think than many realize. Many older movies were based on novels. Novel series themselves have become far more commonplace than in the past, when stand-alone novels were the norm. And so, in correlary, our movies have become series'. It makes sense from a hack perspective. Think of it. A novelist doesn't have to think up an entirely new story with entirely new characters. Instead they can just use an existing set of characters and concept and bang out 3 or more bestsellers instead of just one if the first one hits. And if not, well, then they're still an unsuccessful hack writer, and back to the drawing board.

It's not unlike how popular waves of art have evolved over centuries. The Renaissance didn't just happen across all mediums at once. One medium of expression affected another, which affected another, and so on.
Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
ulthar
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 324
Posts: 3833


I AM serious, and stop calling me Shirley


WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2012, 06:08:49 PM »

For what's it's worth, AHD, I slept through both TWO TOWERS and RETURN OF THE KING.  I could not tell you anything of significance that happened in either movie.

That's not a slam against them...except that "they were LONG" is a VERY apt description.

I'm not a hater...not qualified to 'hate' on them as I didn't technically see them.

But I do think it's cool from a movie fan perspective that the entire trilogy was made at once.  That's rare.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2012, 06:29:44 PM by ulthar » Logged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor Hathaway:  I noticed you stopped stuttering.
Bodie:      I've been giving myself shock treatments.
Professor Hathaway: Up the voltage.

--Real Genius
WingedSerpent
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 161
Posts: 1490


I AM THE BAD PHOTOSHOP EFFECT!


« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2012, 06:15:14 PM »

I like the Lord of the Rings movies.

Maybe the problem with trilogies is not that there telling 3 stories, but continuing one long story.  It's probably easier to just take the same characters and saying this is something new.  That you don't need to see the previous films to understand and enjoy.

Think about it, how many James Bond films are there?  Or Godzilla films?  Only a couple of those are true direct sequels.
Logged

At least, that's what Gary Busey told me...

In 1991, when The People's Court ratings started to slip, Judge Wapner reinstated the death penalty-Late Show Fun Fact
Criswell
i got better
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 81
Posts: 918



WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2012, 10:01:19 PM »

I'm a fairly big fan of Lord of the Rings, but the book moreso than the movies, but other than that I think the only other super consistent trilogies are Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Back to the future.

I wanna say Evil Dead as well, but Army of Darkness is kinda middle of the road for me.
Logged

The Gravekeeper
addicted to the macabre
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 85
Posts: 759



« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2012, 10:26:09 PM »

The Evil Dead isn't a trilogy to me. From where I'm standing, it's one film I didn't like, a remake that I liked much more than the original, and a sequel to the remake. Otherwise, well...why the hell did he go back to the cabin and play the tape?

And I do agree that very few contemporary trilogies are worth seeing. Going off press releases for a couple of films, they seem to just assume that the film is going to do well enough to warrant a sequel and start planning it right away. To me, this results in very rushed, uncreative sequels that have to reuse cliches and overdone plots because there wasn't enough time in pre-production to do anything really creative, and it sucks funding away from new projects since planned sequels have been cancelled after people had already been paid when the first movie flopped.
Logged
HappyGilmore
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 588
Posts: 10457


I know Quack-Fu.


« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2012, 11:49:24 PM »

I hope Dark Knight Rises is as great as the trailer. Nolan said he had a trilogy in him. Begins was good, Dark Knight brilliant. By all accounts, Rises looks amazing, and Catwoman serves a purpose, and they've gotten Bane down.

Toy Story trilogy was amazing.

Didn't like The Rings trilogy.

Spider-Man 2 was the best of that series.
Logged

"The path to Heaven runs through miles of clouded Hell."

Donít get too close, itís dark inside.
Itís where my demons hide, itís where my demons hide.
Criswell
i got better
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 81
Posts: 918



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2012, 10:37:38 PM »

I just realized one I forgot. If you forget that George Romero Made anything after Day of the Dead you could say that the original dead trilogy is good.

But I think they worked because the director made them when he wanted to and not because the previous on made big money and a sequel had to be made instantly.
Logged

RCMerchant
Bela
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 0
Posts: 11056


"Charlie,we're in HELL!"-"yeah,ain't it groovy?!"


WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 11, 2012, 07:26:24 AM »

The first 3 Karloff Frankenstein films were good...and the 4th with Lon Chaney was ok too...but the others were pure expliotation. Don't get me wrong-I enjoyed them,but they come nowhere as close to the Original,Bride and Son.

The CREATURE form the BLACK LAGOON trilogy was good! Though The CREATURE WALKS AMONG US was the weakest one IMHO.

The Jungle Woman trilogy-(JUNGLE WOMAN,JUNGLE CAPTIVE,CAPTIVE WILD WOMAN) stared out lame and remained there.

Small | Large
Logged

\"Supernatural?...perhaps. Baloney?...Perhaps not!\" Bela Lugosi-the BLACK CAT (1934)


Interviewer-"Does Dracula ever end for you?"
Lugosi-"No. Dracula-never ends."





http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://rcmerchant.tumblr.com/
bob
I survived Bucky Larson
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 209
Posts: 3641


Torgo watches you masterbate!


« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2012, 12:23:25 AM »

I know I'm probably in the minority but I enjoyed all 4 Terminator movies  Thumbup
Logged

track the movies you watch in 2014
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,142132.0.html

Kubrick, Nolan, Hitchcock, Tarantino, Wan - the elite



I believe in the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Mofo Rising
Global Moderator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 438
Posts: 3151


My cat can eat a whole watermelon!


WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2012, 04:10:56 AM »

And, although I know I am in a minority here, I LOVED all three Spiderman movies!
You're also in a minority here loving them LOTR movies.

I love the Lord of the Rings movies. Really a superb series from both a technical and artistic point of view. However, they aren't really a trilogy in a sequel sort of sense, rather one story told over the course of three movies. The original story was only split up into three separate books because the publishers thought nobody would buy one gargantuan book.

I'll agree with others in that many sequels are only made because the original movie made so much money. Two of my favorite films The Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean were turned into "franchises." I detest franchises, which is the most apt term for these movies, because they are no longer thought of as artistic works, but cash cows for the studios.

Both The Matrix and POTC worked very well as single films. They worked well as entertaining action films, and the stories were complete for each of them. The sequels were made to make more money, and there didn't seem to be any further ideas for either of them. Instead of new and vital ideas, the same characters and the same ideas were trotted out to pander to the original audience.

The nadir of any series is when we are simply seeing the same characters over and over, because it's the belief of some producers that what the audience loves is the characters, and we'll pay anything just to spend more time with them. POTC was especially egregious in this regard. It's not uncommon, and it works in a monetary regard. The Police Academy series is a shining example of this mercenary outlook.

Then again, Lethal Weapon 4 made me want to punch a random stranger in its awfulness.

I think the central thing to make sequels or trilogies work is to have a story worked out in advance. I have the same problem with books and comics. I don't like continuing comics that have no end in sight, I like a complete story. If I get the sense that a series is only continuing for its own sake, I lose interest. Fables was one of the most compelling stories I've read recently, but they finished up the main storyline (expertly, I might say), and then decided to just keep going. It hasn't been the same, and the law of diminishing returns is in full effect.

A lot of sci-fi and fantasy novels have this same problem. A story that starts out promising ends up petering out into endless rehashes because the author doesn't understand that the very nature of stories involve a beginning and a finite end. Who wants to read a story with no end? It's like listening to a shaggy-dog joke that doesn't even bother to have a punchline.

Blech.
Logged

Every dead body that is not exterminated becomes one of them. It gets up and kills. The people it kills, get up and kill.
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8439


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2012, 09:41:30 AM »

I'd like to weigh in on the original discussion:  why is it hard to make a good trilogy.  I'm going to argue that part of the answer lies in probability.  There is a certain probability that any stand alone movie will be a good film.  I'm not certain of exactly what the probability is, but for arguments sake it's less than 50% or 1/2 (how about 30%?).  Just taking that fraction or percentage and trying to score three times dramatically reduces the possibility of a good trilogy.  Using 30% as a guide, we end up with 2.7%.  Now, there are things that increase the probability of a good movie, like the director, writer, and producer.  However, those don't always stay the same through a trilogy.

The big thing that affects that base probability is what appears to be a law of nature:  sequels tend to be worse films than the original, and the quality diminishes the farther from #1 that you get. 
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
ulthar
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 324
Posts: 3833


I AM serious, and stop calling me Shirley


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2012, 09:56:29 AM »

Maybe it's hard to make a good movie triology because no one knows what that is?

 BounceGiggle





Both The Matrix and POTC worked very well as single films. They worked well as entertaining action films, and the stories were complete for each of them.



I've been saying the same thing about STAR WARS for years....there was no "need" for follow-up.  Yeah, yeah, yeah, there may have been a plot point here or there that was left open, but who cares?  The original stands perfectly well on its own, and Lucas FUBAR'd the whole thing in the long term.

Quote

I think the central thing to make sequels or trilogies work is to have a story worked out in advance. I have the same problem with books and comics. I don't like continuing comics that have no end in sight, I like a complete story. If I get the sense that a series is only continuing for its own sake, I lose interest. Fables was one of the most compelling stories I've read recently, but they finished up the main storyline (expertly, I might say), and then decided to just keep going. It hasn't been the same, and the law of diminishing returns is in full effect.


I think the recurring theme in this thread is that when the sights become set on $$ rather than the art, the quality goes down.

Even within the realm of "bad" or "B" movies, part of the reason I think many of us love them is because they are, in most cases, true to the art of the those that made them.  The end product might be a train wreck, but the PROCESS is pure enough.

I cannot believe SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS popped into my head as the demonstrative example for my last statement.  I haven't been sleeping well.

Anyway, for every PLAN 9, MANOS, TEENAGERS FROM OUTER SPACE or name-your-visual-poison, there's a grip, a sound man, an editor that was doing their thing.

While that's true on its face for movies made solely to make money, when those jobs become "just a job," a 9-5 way to earn a living and there is no "soul," we end up with things like PEARL HARBOR.  Oh my word.  That's bad in a non-fun way.

I think this gets to be hyper-decay in the case of soulless sequels.  The crew, if any of them even are the same, are "been here, done it, what's new?"

And, the problem that drives all of it is that we keep paying our money to see the crap.  I've seen all four POTC movies and only really cared for the first one...the stand alone one that needed no additional story to make it "complete."  I've seen all six STAR WARS movies even though I all but detested the latter five entries (on a sliding scale of detestation, though...I mean...wow...Ep 1?  You've got to be kidding me).

We continually reward the behavior we complain about with remakes, sequels and big budget garbage in general.
Logged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor Hathaway:  I noticed you stopped stuttering.
Bodie:      I've been giving myself shock treatments.
Professor Hathaway: Up the voltage.

--Real Genius
Mofo Rising
Global Moderator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 438
Posts: 3151


My cat can eat a whole watermelon!


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 11, 2012, 04:13:10 AM »

And, the problem that drives all of it is that we keep paying our money to see the crap.  I've seen all four POTC movies and only really cared for the first one...the stand alone one that needed no additional story to make it "complete."  I've seen all six STAR WARS movies even though I all but detested the latter five entries (on a sliding scale of detestation, though...I mean...wow...Ep 1?  You've got to be kidding me).

We continually reward the behavior we complain about with remakes, sequels and big budget garbage in general.

Sorry, ulthar, had to call attention to this, you don't like The Empire Strikes Back?

I love that film. Unreservedly, it's built into my brain.
Logged

Every dead body that is not exterminated becomes one of them. It gets up and kills. The people it kills, get up and kill.
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Good Movies  |  so why is hard to make a good movie triology « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os∑mo∑sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.