The Trilogy Trend

Why do people always bash a trilogy or better yet the last film only to turn around years later saying it was a great trilogy. For example:

Godfather Trilogy
Godfather (1972) - Awesome
Godfather: Part II - AMAZING
Godfather: Part III - Meh

Star War Original Trilogy
A New Hope - Awesome
Empire Strikes Back - AMAZING
Return of The Jedi - meh

Lord of The Rings Trilogy
Fellowship of the Ring - Awesome
The Two Towers - AMAZING
Return of the King - meh

Now all these trilogy's are considered some of the best. This process is happening again with The Dark Knight Trilogy.

The Dark Knight Trilogy
Batman Begins - Awesome
The Dark Knight - AMAZING
The Dark Knight Rises - meh

This happens with all trilogys, the third film gets ripped on just because it's the third film. Quit being hypocrites! :truestory:

the dark knight trilogy isnt gonna be like the rest u know why

The Godfather Part III always had a mixed reception, even to this day. And as far as I know, opinions haven't changed on Return of the Jedi and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, both of which were well received upon release.

I don't think opinions on The Dark Knight Rises will change. It's a fine movie but a huge disappointment and rather dumb. Also, I don't think you know what the word "hypocrite" means.

Exactly though, for people who went to see Return of the Jedi, it was a huge let down compared to the rest. Same thing with Return of the King.
No I know what it means and I used it right. Many people dislike the last film in their trilogys, then they turn around a couple years later and say the trilogy was perfect.

So people are hypocrites for changing their opinion?

No one ever said Return of the Jedi and Return of the King were bad films.Those films always had a positive reputation. Just became they admit it wasn't the best in the trilogy doesn't make them hypocrites.

I wouldn't say always.

I prefer The Godfather: Part II over the original. I also prefer The Dark Knight over Batman: Begins.

TheCinemaJack wrote:

So people are hypocrites for changing their opinion?

No & yes, people can change their opinions all they want, but that's if they actually do end up liking the film, while most of the people change an opinion to fit in.

Batman Begins was pretty average

LOTR just got better with every movie

Also with Back to the future the last film was terrible but the first 2 were awesome

Batman: Begins wasn't "Average" It's still one of my fav. Superhero movies.

If there's one thing I think they could have done better, it would be Scarecrow. He was dissapointing, to say the least.

Every villain besides The Joker in The Dark Knight trilogy was disappointing. Ra's al Ghul, Scarecrow, Two-Face, Catwoman, Talia al Ghul, all had very little screen time. Ra's al Ghul could have easily came back alive in The Dark Knight Rises, but no, it would contradict Nolan's realism. I would personally sacrifice some realism for a better story to be honest. It would have made Bane's and Talia al Ghul's sub-plot more sense.

yonny616 wrote:

TheCinemaJack wrote:

So people are hypocrites for changing their opinion?

No & yes, people can change their opinions all they want, but that's if they actually do end up liking the film, while most of the people change an opinion to fit in.

That makes no sense. You said that the third entry in those series were disappointing to fans, so if everyone was changing their opinion to fit in, then why would it go from being disappointing to being great?

Mecha wrote:

Every villain besides The Joker in The Dark Knight trilogy was disappointing. Ra's al Ghul, Scarecrow, Two-Face, Catwoman, Talia al Ghul, all had very little screen time. Ra's al Ghul could have easily came back alive in The Dark Knight Rises, but no, it would contradict Nolan's realism. I would personally sacrifice some realism for a better story to be honest. It would have made Bane's and Talia al Ghul's sub-plot more sense.

I thought they were pretty good villains. Whether or not they were accurate to the characters is something I can't really judge since I'm not a comic aficionado, but overall I thought they were intimidating and badass.

It's not just because they weren't all that accurate to the comics. These villains had more to be desired than what Nolan offered. Batman has a long history with Ra's al Ghul and Talia al Ghul. But in the films, they don't reveal their true identity until the last few scenes and then they die. WTF!?

This is what you're missing out...

Fair point.

@Mecha Never said they're bad films, but when they're first released they're considered bad when compared to the rest in the trilogy, when that's not the case. No, they argue that the third film is horrible, then they say that all three films were amazing.

@Mikenuge See that's my point. You say the first two films are good while the last one's bad. (Not calling you a hypocrite) Some people say this, but turn around and say all three are good.

@Jack No that's not what I meant. Fans find the thrid disappointing, then turn around and say that all three films are great.

@Mecha Don't turn this into a comic book movie not sticking super close to the source. Like I've said before, the characters appearances were changed, but who they are and their overall motives are there. This is the problem with comic elitist. A writer can write his version of of a character in the comics and make it HIS, but if it's tried in another medium it's just taboo among them.

okay so you're saying that if a person dislikes 1 film in a trilogy and calls the rest great they're a hypocrite ? dude the TDK trilogy is OVERALL epic but I didn't enjoy the first movie as much as the last two. When I dislike a film or call a film bad it's my opinion, So please explain WTF does being a hypocrite have anything to do with this ?

I think he's trying to justify his love of The Dark Knight Rises which he really doesn't have to do. There's no trend so to speak of.

You guys just don't uderstand what I meant with hypocrite or I'm not good at explaing it(I think the latter (and yes I know what latter means)). So I digress.

@Jack There is a trend, even in ratings. The first and second film are usually higher rated than the last film. This has nothing to do with The Dark Knight Trilogy, I used it as an example since it's also fallen to this trend.

yonny616 wrote:

You guys just don't understand

yeah cus youre making no sense

The trend you mentioned was that a third film in a series is bashed simply for being the third film. Well, again, Return of the Jedi and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King were never bashed. As far as The Godfather Part III goes, it still has a positive Tomatometer rating overall and was nominated for seven Academy Awards. Hell, The Return of the King won all eleven of the Oscars it was nominated for.

But yeah, third films do tend to score lower, but I don't see how that makes anyone hypocrites since the ones you mentioned were liked overall to begin with.

@yonny616

You can't fucking read can you? You just missed the entire point of what I said.

GWAD, I can't make one criticism without being called a comic book elitist. As if the Nolan films are SO perfect. Nolan handled Ra's al Ghul poorly, but NOT just because he wasn't all that accurate to the comics. I use the comics as an example of the character's true potential. But you don't care because you'll eat up anything Nolan throws at you.

I personally thought Two-Face and Catwoman were done well.

Never said they wasn't. We just didn't see enough of them. These character's potential were wasted. That's the point I was trying to make. You don't need to read the comics to know that.

A two hour movie obviously can't use characters to their full potential, hell even Joker wasn't used to his full potential, but he was still great.