Monday, August 6, 2012

Making a Good Trilogy

It's hard to make a good trilogy. There have been some adequate trilogies, but rarely do we see a truly good one. There are some simple factors to make a trilogy great, but since we're seeing a large journey of characters it's hard to succeed. The key is to make solid stand alone installments, while still having a strong overall story that will span over the three movies. It builds up the different aspects of character and plot, but is able to travel through years. Once they've all been completed you would hope that you could line the movies up and they would all carry equal weight. Each one will have it's strengths and weaknesses, but they should all been on the same level. We're not just watching a single plot all the way through. Having the same director or writer isn't a necessity, but it certainly helps. A reoccurring creative force will help the movies stay on it's singular overall plot, while using the individual movies to hit hard on the themes.

A pitfall they can fall into is the lack of movement in the series. Alien is a good example of a string of movies that don't actually move forward all that much. If you take a look at the first two, they're essentially the same movie. James Cameron pretty much just remade Ridley Scott's (1979) classic, only with more marines, more guns, more aliens, and less horror. Since he didn't really add anything to the overall Alien story we're stuck with a stagnant series. What we're seeing if one artist looking at a film and thinking they could make it better, so they try and the audience is left to suffer. Although, this did work in favor of Sam Raimi and the first two Evil Dead movies.


The shake-up of directors helped the first round of the Star Wars franchise. While George Lucas is a great idea man, he couldn't quite pass the status of amateur filmmaker (this is apparent in the prequel trilogy). He passed the torch to Irvin Kershner (and rightfully so), who was able to make the best Star Wars movie with Empire Strikes Back. But keep keep in mind that Lucas stuck around for creative control, which is important to the overall completion of the trilogy. Bringing on new directors gave us different looks and ideas, but Lucas kept the overall story on that needed singular track. 

Before I get to my top list, I'm going to tell you what didn't make the list and why.

Lord of the Rings: I will admit that what Peter Jackson did was an enormous feat and deserves recognition for taking on a daunting task. He took a seemingly unfilmable story and made a series of engaging and entertaining movies. But! None of them can stand alone. The movies end with cliffhangers, and they fail to give each movie that important single movie resolution. What Jackson basically did was make a single twelve hour movie. Who does he think he is? Terrence Malick? Hardly!

Star Wars: The entire series relies too heavily on the story and mythology to make up for hokey acting and, at times, shoddy film making. A New Hope and Return of the Jedi ride on the coattails of The Empire Strikes Back, and as good as that movie is, it's just not enough to make an entire trilogy.

Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome. And that's that.


Spider-Man: Solid first two movies, and then it was like they tried to shove a single trilogy of it's own into the third movie. My theory? Raimi wanted Sandman, fans wanted Venom. So why not do both! (why not: Spider-Man III). 


Evil Dead: Second is the best remake I've ever seen. Although, Army of Darkness has too much of a disconnect to the other two.

Jurassic Park: Maybe if Spielberg made the third one, but it feel apart as a extended deleted scene montage.

Back to the Future, Pirates of the Caribbean: These kind of fall in line with Lord of the Rings, but only the second half. The only thing this is going to accomplish making us all believe that Hollywood only cares about the money grab. They make a solid first movie, get enough attention or money, then double up and make the second two movies a long drawn out movie and a half. It means the first movie can live on its own, but the second two need each other.

So! Here are my picks for the four best trilogies (I didn't pick five because I didn't think enough were good enough for the list): 

4. Austin Powers


I'll admit that this is kind of a funny pick. I'm not a huge fan of the Austin Powers movies, but as these kinds of comedies go, this nails it. Mike Myers embodies the character and doesn't miss a beat throughout the three movies. Each of them move along the story of Austin Powers, adding characteristics as they went along. This movie isn't a classic trilogy since there isn't a big arc in the plot or theme, but each movie is the solid enough on it's own that the trilogy doesn't meander.

3. Hannibal Lecter


It makes it easier that this series is based on a trilogy of novels. The problem with these is it has a prequel, meaning there is an old flabby Anthony Hopkins one minute, then a thin young man the next. Hannibal is the weakest of the three, but I thought it was a fitting movie for the ending of the series. I don't think you can get much better than the dinner scene with Ray Liotta.

2. Toy Story


Solid three movies. We follow Andy and his ascent towards adulthood. The toys have to accept the fact that they're going to stay the same age in a static moment in their life while their owner will get older and move on from toys. The theme that drives these movies is a feeling of uselessness. The movie goes from Woody to Buzz to all of them. This is a very human emotion and even if these movies are aimed at families and kids, any person can walk away with something. 

1. The Dark Knight


It might seem like it's too soon to claim this as the best trilogy ever made, but I'm sticking to it. Christopher Nolan has said that he thought of a one word theme for each movie as he made them; Batman Begins is Fear, The Dark Knight  is Chaos, The Dark Knight Rises  is Pain. Watching each movie with these words in mind shows the true core of the installments. You're able to watch any of the movies on their own and you won't be missing anything. But if you watch all three you'll see the larger story unfold. You can see the string that they have threaded through the series. You've got the attempt to bring down the organized mob, starting with Falcone and moving to Maroni. The mob is the backbone that all conflict is rising from. They bring in the Joker in the second movie, and the lack of organized crime allows Bane to surface in Rises. The core cast is important with Michael Caine as the moral compass, Christian Bale as the heart and Gordon being the every man. We've got the deeper levels moving around these movies allowing them to work in various depths. The third movie calls back to the first enough to make a delicious sandwich of hero goodness. Through the three movies we can follow a full evolution of Bruce Wayne.

What do you think? What is the best trilogy ever made?

15 comments:

  1. A little surprised to not see the Bourne trilogy on here. (Either as one of the good ones, or at least an explanation of why not).

    I thought that was a great trilogy (top 5 in my limited book). Would you say that the movies weren't stand alone enough to warrant inclusion? Or an alternate reason for you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I originally had Bourne as my #2, but the inclusion of fourth one coming out next week disqualifies it as a trilogy. I thought about making another section where I would have talked about trilogies within larger series (like what Ridley Scott is doing with Prometheus leading up to Alien), but there aren't any that are completed that come to mind.

      Delete
  2. STAR WARS IS #1 IF YOU WERE A TRILOGY YOU WOULD BE LIKE SPIDERMAN III THREE TIMES IN A ROW
    -the internet

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are some amazing trilogies out there, personal favorites being Three Colors, the Man With No Name and Toy Story. Also fantastic: Bergman's supposed "Trilogy of Faith," Samurai, Ray's Apu Trilogy, the Human Condition... I agree with you though, and I think the best trilogies tend to be linked by themes and ideas than a unifying storyline.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I meant to mention Leone's movies and the three colors. Other ones that have a unifying theme or character are Van Sant's Death Trilogy and Chan-Wook Park's Vengeance Trilogy.

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Let me start by stating that it deeply offends me that the Legally Blonde trilogy ( Legally Blonde, Legally Blondes: Red, White and Blonde and Legally Blondes) did not make your cut. I mean, where would the world be without the bend an snap? I never would have gotten my second job without handing in a scented resumé. Hurt feelings aside, I feel you have regrettably forgot to acknowledge two significant trilogies, whether they fall into good or bad category is up to you I suppose.

    1) The matrix. I mean, you have to at least acknowledge its existence. Think of what an impact it had! It gave Keanu the chance to step out of Bill and Ted's smoke filled screens and straight into Plato's Allegory of the Cave. That's gotta count for something. It clearly did to Keanu, I mean the man now makes his living off his poetry. Let's hope he invested his matrix millions wisely, lest he has to "Wash his hair with regret shampoo." OH WAIT. He already wrote that. I just quoted his Book of Poetry, a coffee table book that you too can purchase for the low low price of 39.99 at a Barnes and Noble near you.

    2) The Godfather. Ok, sure, clearly the first one was what made the huge splash, but the others have merit, and definitely could hold their own against somebody as lame as Austin Powers. Sure he has a Gold Member, but does he have a Horse's Head?

    And now to defend The Lord of the Rings.
    I honestly believe that if you look at the lord of the rings through Samwise Gamgee's perspective, they do have pretty clear cut endings and resolutions. Just because something doesn't end happy with everyone holding hands walking off into the sunset doesn't mean it isn't complete.
    In the first movie Sam is ripped from the shire, out of fear of the future but ultimately loyalty to his friend. The rest of the story unfolds and we see them grow as a unit, and ultimately Sam's resolve convinces us he will be there until the end, wherever that may be. Just because we don't see the Frodo toss the ring into the lava doesn't mean we don't know its not going to happen. One look at Sam's Labrador puppy eyes, and you know he will go to hell and back for Frodo. But just because we don't see it, doesn't mean we don't believe it. That to me is a clear cut end. The adventure continues in our hearts when the camera stops rolling, even if they had never gotten funding for 2 and 3. Sam himself says it, he doesn't "think there will be a return journey, Mr. Frodo," But he goes anyways, and we follow.
    In the second one they do a pretty good job of recapping, so really, its not resting on the first movie's reputation or information. Yes, there may be a little confusion, but that happens if you get up to go to the bathroom as well, so we are used to it. Looking back at Sam's Journey, we see the friendship between him and Frodo continue to grow as they struggle to realize that they alone carry this burden. They fight not only outer obstacles but inner demons as well. And if we make Sam the protagonist (screw Frodo, what a boob) he has a pretty neatly wrapped up character line: Loyal->Confused->Betrayed->Overcomes->Resolves to Original Goal. And again, we don't doubt that he will succeed, whether we see it or not.
    In the third one we get another solid recap, and Same does succeed, so blah, there you have it a trilogy. Just because you don't see a person born, or die, doesn't mean you don't know them. Same goes for these movies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all, yes, you got me. I blew it with The Matrix and Godfather, BUT 1) the only worthwhile movie to watch in the Matrix series is the first, and the second two fall into the Back to the Future, PotC category. I knew I was missing another example there. 2) It's a bad sign when the biggest Godfather fan I know flat out tells me to "just skip the third one, unless you're really really curious." I will admit that I should have included them, and just forgot. Sorry.

      I didn't realize Legally Blondes was part of the Reese Witherspoon movies, so I don't feel bad.

      Lord of the Rings will continue to not be on my list.

      Delete
    2. Whoa. A) You are crazy B) You are hilarious. C) Keanu Reeves continues to be the most ridiculous human. Regret Shampoo? Ugh.

      Delete
  6. INDIANA JONES??? HELLO? And don't fucking try to tell me it's not a trilogy because it is. It also gets a pass because you include starwars, as it should be, which IS a perfect trilogy. That's right, fuck you Joe. So Indiana Jones 1-3 (perfect trilogy), starwars episodes 4-6 (perfect trilogy) without those six movies I would probably not give two shits about anything. Life for every human being would be meaningless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, first of all Indiana Jones isn't a trilogy. As much as everyone would love to forget Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ever happened, it did and therefore makes that series a quadrilogy.

      As far as Star Wars, I'm not changing my mind. (Even if I do really enjoy those movies).

      Delete
    2. The remastered versions don't count either. Everything outside of sound and color alterations only brought the movies down. I agree that Empire is by far the best but the "shoddy film making" escapes me. The hokey acting is reasonable at times. Coming to mind are both lines delivered by Mark Hamill. If you mean effects, I still stand by them and would argue even for Jim Henson's contribution. The best CG has ever shown me was back in 1993 with Jurassic park. We should be miles ahead of that quality of realism by now, but we really aren't. Puppets are charming and as goofy as the puppet yoda is, he still fits into the overall aesthetic of the films. I also miss the use of miniatures in modern films. The amount of work that used to go into building sets and buildings and monsters just isn't there any more. They tend to leave out fine details that the models and even clay-mation had.

      Crystal Skull didn't happen.

      Delete
    3. I guess the "shoddy film making" would be more reserved for the prequel series, but I think the quality of the writing and making hadn't decreased as much as people would like to believe from episodes 4-6 to 1-3. And even then, I think a better word would be lazy with the overuse of green screen. George Lucas doesn't really fit into the same group as Coppola and Spielberg, and it's probably me doing unfair comparisons, but what those guys have done is what I weigh his movies against.

      As far as the effects go. I agree with you completely about sets and puppets. I would take either of those in a heartbeat over CG. I think Ridley Scott proved with Prometheus how much better your movie can look when you take the time to build sets and actually have what you're shooting in front of you opposed to adding it in later.

      Delete
  7. Replies
    1. Well, you got me there. Well done. Haha.

      Delete