There is no other trilogy of films where the quality remains this consistently great throughout

There is no other trilogy of films where the quality remains this consistently great throughout.

Prove me wrong Sup Forums.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LjFVOuYShp0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

...

>Prove me wrong Sup Forums.
The fact that TGTBATU is significantly better than the other two. Fisful and Few Dollars More are good but TGTBATU is a literal masterpiece.

The Once upon a Time trilogy is better in my opinion. But that's mostly just because of Once Upon a Time in America. The west is very good, but not as good as TGTBTU or even For a Few Dollars More. Duck you sucker is probably Leone's worst movie, not counting his sword and sandles movies. But I still enjoyed watching it.

Also, The Human Condition trilogy, is probably one the most consistently good trilogy I have ever seen. It's hard to pick a favorite movie of the three, I honestly couldn't tell you which one is my favorite.

I heard that the Apu trilogy was very good, but I've never seen them so I couldn't tell you if they are worth the time. I'll watch them eventually.

for a few dollars more is literally better though

Like clockwork.

a few years ago i would've said the bourne trilogy is a good one (not as good as the man with no name of course) but rock solid.

then they made jason bourne, and ruined the entire franchise

WRONG

Sicario
Hell or High Water
Wind River

Neither of these are a trilogy. Just movies with the same actors playing differnt parts.

Then you have to discard the dollars trilogy and /thread

Thematic trilogies exist, user.

I just discarded it. The first movie is a ripoff of a movie which is a ripoff of a book. The second movie and third movies are great.

The theme is different in the movie tho. The first movie is gang war, the second movie is a revenge story and the third one is a treasure hunt. The only thing they have in common is the actors and the setting (old west).

good taste. I would also add the Apu trilogy by Ray.

Is that a trilogy?

Thought GBU was standalone

>Duck you sucker is probably Leone's worst movie
no way, it's a solid 8/10
it's not as cohese as his other westerns, but it has some amazing scenes and its peaks stand higher than most scenes in the Dollars Trilogy
I agree thought, that OUATIA is pure kino, and Elizabeth McGovern is my cheekfu

youtube.com/watch?v=LjFVOuYShp0
You're being obtuse. Just because one film is typically rated above the other two, that doesn't mean there's another film trilogy with the same level of consistency (as stated in the OP).
I disagree with you about TGTBATU, but let's say you're right. What trilogy even approaches that level of quality across the board?

Shit. I say the Good the Bad the Ugly but not the ones before

The fact that Eastwood gets the Pancho he's wearing in Fistful at the end of TGTBATU demonstrates there's narrative consistency. It's minor, but I don't think it's fair to say the movies aren't a trilogy in the first place.

Rio Bravo 2: Stumpy's Revenge

...

The Lord of the Rings are a perfect trilogy. Still can't be surpassed by anybody.

Linklater's Before trilogy

there's a huge discrepancy in quality between Fellowship and Return IMO. I'd say the same for Towers but a lot of people seem to like it I'll concede the point on that one.

the second bourne movie is a clear step down from the first and third

i feel the same

This. Fellowship is great, but TT and ROTK fall off in quality noticeably. A lot of that probably has to do with how Jackson lied to New Line about his production schedule (he promised all would be shot at once, but only really focused on finishing Fellowship during the main production), which meant they had to rely on overschedule reshoots and more CGI.

>Dark Knight
>Godfather
>Superman
>LOTR
>Mad Max
>Spiderman
>Back to the Future
>Star Wars
>X-Men
Why are 3rd chapters consistently the worst part of so many trilogies? TGTBATU notwithstanding.

Pusher trilogy

this does not fill me with hope with regards to Nu-Wars

But Dark Fury was shit.

>Alien
I actually like A3 but it can't really stand up next to Alien/Aliens, the bar is too high.
Same with Terminator, but T3 was kind of trash.

...

Army of darkness is shit.

I like the first movie the most since it's more adventure oriented. The later movies becomes just action, and not even good action.

...

>Why are 3rd chapters consistently the worst part of so many trilogies?

Because the 3rd has the hardest job of wrapping everything up and audience expectations are hard to meet

if a lotr part is the weakest its two towers and tt is still great. return extended is 10/10, the 3h version is a little too fight heavy. fellowship and return both have just so many amazing scenes.

ROTK is fucking amazing in the LOTR trilogy. Only idiots think otherwise. No, the ending wasn't too long. It did a good job or rapping up plotlines.

At this point I just want to see how bad it can get.

I believe Star Wars set the precedent for this to be the case. A common thing among most of those is that the second one was the best one.

agreed on the extended edit, but fellowship managed to accomplish so much more in it's theatrical cut than either of the other two. a movie shouldn't need hours of exposition to tell a well-executed/paced story. Especially when the Battle of Pelennor Fields was so meh.

Jackson fucked up the Dead Men of Dunharrow so badly they may as well have not been included at all.

>Dollars Trilogy
>bunch of shit actors shooting cap guns in front of shitty fake backdrops
>Quality
OH NO NO NO NO

>bunch of shit actors shooting cap guns in front of shitty fake backdrops
your criticism only reveals your pleb taste user

>Army of darkness, the best of the evil dead movies
>Shit
Hey user I got an idea, why don't you shove an auger up your ass

jackson already cut stuff out of rotk to make 4.5h possible. i agree that fellowship has by far the best theatrical cut but EE fellowship and rotk are close to perfection. theatrical is for plebs anyway. and battle of pelennor is worth it for the ride of the rohirrim scene alone, 100% kino.

>Dollars trilogy is shit
>What I really like is the iron man trilogy cause it has great acting talent and amazing cgi that goes boom

How is the two towers weak, it was the best book and the best movie (especially the extended edition)

Never understood red

>best of the evil dead

If you likes comedies

its not weak, its great. i just think the other 2 are greater. just comes down to personal preference. most of my favorite parts are in fellowship (rivendale, moria, lothlorien, argonath) or in rotk (osgiliath, sam&frodo at mount doom, pelennor, coronation) thats why i like them better.

>creepywoodyface.png

blanc is pretty bad compared to the other two

The ending was too long tho user. Think of how quickly and concisely Fellowship got through it's initial world-building (while still conveying a fuck-load of information). That's how Return should of wrapped things up.

>Laughter is for plebs
Never change, Sup Forums.

Unironically true. Definitely not my favorite in this thread, but if we're solely talking about consistency this is the one.

Ah ok. I always liked Helms deep, getting Theoden from the golden hall, and sauroman . So I enjoyed the two towers

>if you liked comedies
I do. Evil Dead II was a comedy though, not as good as Army of Darkness though

Toy Story 1 2 and 3

i always thought the best part of TT are the faramir scenes. love the character.

fellowship was easier to do because its much more linear than the others. they already cut out the whole saruman taking over the shire part at the end to stay under 5h

This isn't an actual trilogy, that was a US marketing gimmick.

Stop pretending these movies area trilogy. They're not a trilogy.

There is no good trilogy, because the idea of separating a story across 3 movies is a bad one.

Just make a 6 hour movie.

Indiana Jones.

I'd love a source on this rather than you just talking out of your ass.

I love all three Indy movies but Raiders smokes the other two far more than TGTBATU

3 is garbage

Fucking wikipedia

>Although it was not Leone's intention, the three movies came to be considered a trilogy following the exploits of the same so-called "Man with No Name" (portrayed by Clint Eastwood, wearing the same clothes and acting with the same mannerisms). The "Man with No Name" concept was invented by the American distributor United Artists, looking for a strong angle to sell the movies as a trilogy. Eastwood's character does indeed have a name (albeit a nickname) and a different one in each film: "Joe", "Manco" and "Blondie", respectively.

This

White is not on par with the other two.
This, and it's an actual trilogy

>Quoting a swath of wiki text that doesn't include a citation
Lol ok.
Besides if this is unequivocally true, why include the pancho segment () in TGTBATU?

such a pretentious statement

You like it more than Last Crusade? I couldn't pick between the two.

also muddied by the fact that sicario is getting a proper sequel with soldado

My favourite is Ash vs. Evil Dead

Because it looks cool. That's fucking it, it's a god damn pancho.

Fair enough about the lack of a citation. It might be made up, even though it makes perfect sense. These undervalued type of movies got fucked with every which way to help sell tickets.

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here but I actually agree with you. I'm guessing how it really went down was something like this:
>let's make a movie
>hey that one did well, let's flip some of the profits into another movie with same cast and crew
>hey let's do it again, we can even drop a couple of subtle references to the other ones
I don't think the fact that there are a ton of thematic references were lost on Leone and co., but I also don't think there was some grand vision at the get-go. I think calling it an 'accidental trilogy' is probably the closest to truth, but I'm just guessing here.

yup. The movie looks horrible judging by the trailer

thematic similarities, not references

>thematic similarities
The theme of all 3 movies are different tho.

exact same pancho, yes. nevermind the fact that Eastwood has identical wardrobe in the three films (and it's established that TGTBATU takes place before the other two, hence the pancho scene). Don't act like that wasn't at the very least a conscious decision by the filmmakers user. You're being obtuse.

Good show

You are correct about the 3rd one sucking so badly so often. Thus, none of these on this list defeat TMWNN trilogy.

...

Sure, some of them are. But what about:
>depiction of violence
>setting
>characterization
>law and order
>subversion of traditional 'old west' themes
these are themes too user.

Wrong. Actually ED1 was the weak one.

Don't breed.

Not always

no

Yes

I can't prove you wrong because you are correct.

...

no, it's a legit so bad it's good movie.

Now she's a complete milf, but her fucking potato face in that movie is the only flaw in an otherwise perfect movie.