Why does it ALWAYS have to be a triogy?

[Worr Monger]

We actually discussed a movie making curve in one of my business classes.

I can't remember the details... but essentially films maintain decent profitability with about 2-3 films in a franchise. And they generally lose money once you get to a 4th.

Sometimes, it's a business decision, other times... directors actually want to do it..... LOTR is a great example of a director's decision.

 

[Deef]

Because duology sounds lazy and quadrology isn't a word.

 

[Zhalath]

Money. If Fiction X makes Y dollars, then Fiction X2 will also make Y dollars. You will then have 2Y dollars. This logic then applies to Fiction X3, in which case you have 3Y dollars. Why it stops after 3 may be due to how humanity views the number 3. Think about it...

 

[Barky13]

Batman and Robin
Superman 4.

Yeah, I'm fine with three.

 

[Jak The Great]

Classic writing is done in 3 movements. If you consider that each movie is 1 part of that 3 part movement then a trilogy would make sense. Star Wars, though it has 6 movies, is 2 sets of 3 movies. Each story is contained within the 3 movies it occupies. Movie 1 is a build up, movie 2 is the conflict, and movie 3 is the resolution. That applies to both trilogies.

That being said, there are many many movies that though they have multiple entries, they are not really tied to the continuing story. I think the Terminator films are excellent examples of that as you could jump in to any film and still be able to understand what is going on. I consider those films to be an adventure series rather than a continuation of the original Terminator.

Yes there is money involved in these projects, who doesn't want to make money? but films that are planned as a trilogy (e.g Lord of the Rings) aren't doing it because it will net them more money, though I am sure it is a huge bonus. rather they are being done because there is enough of a story that it cannot be contained within the bounds of a single film

but that is my two cents

 

[blankedboy]

Most sequel films suck, IMHO. Spiderman 3 was meh, but all the other 2s and 3s just strayed offtopic too much.

 

[CriticallyAcclaimed]

Because they want more money
Because they want to finish the storyline
Because they want even MORE money
Because 3 is an epic number

But all of the movies that are trilogies now will probably become larger anthologies anyways

 

[irishstormtrooper]

Because it's the highest number the amount of movies can go to and still make money while not getting on people's nerves.