3's a nice number I guess. There's also the money to consider.
I'm also amazed you didn't use The Matrix as an example.
I'm also amazed you didn't use The Matrix as an example.
Why does it ALWAYS have to be a triogy?
- Thread starter TheTygerfire
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Typically with Hollywood it's purely a numbers game. Sequels make at least 60% of what the original made; crunch the numbers and if 60% of the first movie minus production costs equals profit, then a sequel WILL be made. Usually its a single successful movie that gets turned into a trilogy or longer if they can. Sure everyone wants their movie to be a hit and make more of them but usually a development company is formed and built for only one movie at a time. The only purposeful trilogies I can think of in recent memory are Lord of the Rings and the Star Wars prequels.
Games are different though. They used to follow a similar model of hit -> do sequels, and still do to a large extent, but the planned sequel/trilogy/DLC followup is becoming very widespread, and it's really starting to bug me.
Games are different though. They used to follow a similar model of hit -> do sequels, and still do to a large extent, but the planned sequel/trilogy/DLC followup is becoming very widespread, and it's really starting to bug me.
I'm saying books should not be overinflated to provide more sales. The New Jedi Order was an over-inflated series written to capitalize on fanboys (myself included). A story with 6-10 books worth of content was stretched into 17Inverse Skies said:
If a series is written with merit and originality then it can take as many books as necessary to convey it's story(See the Enders Game books).
Ahh, I see. Yep that is completely true. Its only when you get series that do have enough content to fill those sorts of books (Dune series, Dark Tower series) that book series of those sorts of lengths are good and not just selling out to the idea of money. Money talks though, its hard to avoid that idea.Melancholy_Ocelot said:
I don't see why this is a complaint. It doesn't matter how many sequels there are so long as they are done well.
it worked for Star Wars (it's considered to be two trilogy's) and LOTR so everyone else wants to get some of the prestige.
I came into this thread expecting mis-spelt sequel numbering or a mis-spelt three-way.
Sadly twas' the former.
Sadly twas' the former.
Quadrilogy.Guy32 said:
And the answer is because people will forgive one bad movie and go back to watch the third full of misplaced hope that it will drag the appalling first sequel back up to the AWESOME standard of the original.
But be careful to work out which sort of trilogy you mean, there are really a few classifications:
The Three Part Story
Films / books / games constructed from the outset to be a trilogy. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, etc. Maybe Halo if I'm feeling generous.
The Oooh, let's make another one of those
Back to the Future. Rush Hour. Grand Theft Auto.
The Wow, we can cash in twice more after this!
The Matrix, Pirates of the Carribbean. Halo actually goes here.
There were only two bill and ted film, two speed films.
On the note of making longer series saw is coming to its sixth film, but wait that lost its story at about half way through sawII
On the note of making longer series saw is coming to its sixth film, but wait that lost its story at about half way through sawII
Also .Hack, I have all 4 on the series. I'd also have all three zenosaga if they actually released the first and last part in Europe instead of just releasing ht middle part. My personal pet hate aginst the worldxmetatr0nx said:
Don't forget back to the future, that was an epic movie. That's the reason they have trilogy's really, because all epic movie series are in trilogy's (back to the future, the matrix, lord of the rings, and star wars is 2 trilogy's.) so people associate it with those movie's, the "epic trilogy's." I'm pretty sure someone has already said the exact same thing has me but he didn't mention back to the future therefore my post's still valid.
Don't most games fall into the last 2 category's? I'm pretty sure Back to the Future and the Matrix where planned to be a trilogy and so was the Pirates of the Carribbean because at the end you see the monkey become cursed implying another sequel.JemJar said:
The main difference is that the third Matrix film was quite good, comapred to most trilogy-completers.teisjm said: