27th
Back To The Trilogies
My buddy Dave made a decent arguement today. It’s not that movie trilogies suck, it’s just the recent slate of trilogies that have been lacking. Back to the Future, Lethal Weapon and Die Hard were all examples he used. I’m with him on the Back to the Future films actually. I loved those movies. Lethal Weapon was entertaining but I don’t think any of the sequels lived up to the high level set by the first. Plus making the fourth one with Chris Rock not only jumps the shark it disqualifies it from being considered a trilogy. Then there’s Die Hard. A movie which pretty much started its own subgenre of action films. I like all three of these films. I think the second one actually gets better the more times you watch it. And while the third draws much of it’s story from a personal angle relating to the first, which I didn’t care for, the actual storyline itself was pretty cool. But I hear a fourth film is on its way… so it’s not really a trilogy either is it?
So Star Wars and Back to the Future are it. I’m waiting for the LOTR fans to break out their arguements any minute. I’ll start my defense early with the fact that these were based on novels which brings about its own comparisons. With that I’ll say that the first film (again) was better than it’s book but the second and third didn’t do their counterparts justice. More to the limitations of film than to the imaginations of the filmakers though.
