What are your favorite trilogies?

[jmc]

No, it was new.  

I remember them playing a long outtake from it on one of thse "blooper" shows when the movie came out...Gleason and Reynolds ad-libbing for five minutes was more entertaining than the actual movie.  

A lot of these I don't consider trilogies because they don't have a continuing story, just new adventures with the same characters.  Even Godfather is barely a trilogy because the story was basically complete with the second film, although even in that case the second film wasn't on the drawing board when the first one was made.  

So yeah, the LOTR, Star Wars and Matrix movies are trilogies, the Evil Dead movies are, sort of [the second movie is really more a remake of the first] and the Godfather is, more or less,   But SMOKEY, RAMBO,et al aren't anymore than the Jason or James Bond films are.  

I'm undecided about INDIANA JONES--what's weird is that its story goes backward with the second installment--I don't remember the timeline of the third film except that he was up against the Nazis again like in the first one.   But the movies aren't connected.

[Scott]

DUSK TILL DAWN isn't really a trilogy, but I still like them. Each film could exist without the others.

[Eirik]

I think Star Wars and LOTR are the only ones in this thread that can be considered real trilogies because the makers set out to make trilogies that told one story in three parts.  The far inferior Raiders sequels picked up entirely different plot lines (wasn't one a prequel?) and were only made because the first was such a hit.  Same goes for the others - cashing in on the success of the first.

I don't consider Evil Dead a trilogy because the first two were basically the same movie, only done better the second time.

[jmc]

Yeah, TEMPLE OF DOOM was a prequel.   I loved it when I was 12, don't know what I would think about it now.  I almost don't want to see these new discs, because I want to keep my fond memories of the first two films--I didn't like the third movie even when it came out.

[Eirik]

"Yeah, TEMPLE OF DOOM was a prequel. I loved it when I was 12, don't know what I would think about it now."

Saw it again a couple of years ago (I'm guessing we're the same age by your post) - you'd think: how on earth did this god-awful horse-woman land the female lead in a major motion picture?

Answer: She was sleeping with Spielberg.

[Scott]

The scene were they pull the heart out of that person in the temple was effective.

[Neon Noodle]

Scott wrote:

> The scene were they pull the heart out of that person in the
> temple was effective.


yep - and it's also the reason the PG-13 rating came out

[Kory]

DEFINITELY the Evil Dead Trilogy.

[BlackAngel]

1. Matrix (I will see Revolutions)
2. LOTR (I will see Return of the King)
3. BTTF (Even though I didn't see the second one)
4. Indiana Jones (y'all were right about that heart thing, and why you should not        looked directly at the Ark)
5. The first three Rocky films (I know there were five, but the last two were embarrassments)  When it comes to story, I break down this "trilogy" like this:

Rocky: The Match
Rocky2: The Rematch
Rocky3:The Title.
-----------------------------------------------
Bulls**t, I still can't hear you, sound off like you got a pair.

[devil clown]

arnt you forgeting the fist full of dollars trilogies its some of clint eastwood classic
work.
I agree with the star wasrs the second and third were great but the first was a sham.
aliens trilogies i dont reckonise the fourth as a aliens film as it is shody ( saying that the third is to)

[Eirik]

"I agree with the star wasrs the second and third were great but the first was a sham."

Are you talking about the original Star Wars (1977)?  I'm interested to hear your take on how that was a sham.

[Gecko brothers]

Evil dead, Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness
or the Man with no Name trilogy
how could you not mention these

[jmc]

I don't consider the Eastwood stuff to be a trilogy, because the movies weren't really connected.  They just had the same lead actor playing the same basic type of character...I don't think we really even know if he's supposed to be the same person in each film.

As others have said, the trouble with Evil Dead was that the second film was basically a remake of the first.