Especially since they only ever made 3. Because the fourth one doesn't exist.
The fourth film is exactly why if you get nostalgic about a film series then just watch the original trilogy rather than trying to create another film 10 / 20-years down the line
There are two types of people : those who know the godfather trilogy is the best trilogy of all time, and those that are wrong
Godfather 3 has the worst piece of casting and acting in the history of big budget cinema! And when the director himself admits the third movie in the trilogy is a bit shit, insisting he only made it because he was in "a serious financial predicament", I think it's fair to say you're on shaky ground with that claim!
There are very few pure trilogies. Trios of movies with an arc planned over all three films. Lord of the Rings is. Nolan's Batman movies. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man too. They were planned from the start, with set-ups that paid off later down the line. It's rare that a studio would ever plan that far ahead, at least until Disney/ Marvel came along.
Otherwise we're talking about films with 2+ sequels, and a trilogy is only conceived after the first movie is a huge success (Star Wars, Bourne, The Matrix, Back To The Future). So IMO, the very best bona fide trilogy has to be Lord of the Rings.
Otherwise, I would go with Toy Story, because each movie is a standalone story with a naturally, justified storytelling purpose and an (albeit retrospective) overall arc. I just hope that Toy Story 4 goes in a different direction as rumoured, because TS3 was the perfect ending.
Godfather part 3 was originally going to be Michael vs tom hagan and the script was meant to be on par with the other two, but for some bizarre reason they refused to pay Robert Duvall the same as al Pacino so Duvall pulled out. A frantic and rushed re-write went straight into production which is why it's a bit flimsy.
Still, 1 and 2s incredible-ness makes up for it for me.
Another shout for best trilogy - the toy story movies.
Godfather part 3 was originally going to be Michael vs tom hagan and the script was meant to be on par with the other two, but for some bizarre reason they refused to pay Robert Duvall the same as al Pacino so Duvall pulled out. A frantic and rushed re-write went straight into production which is why it's a bit flimsy.
Still, 1 and 2s incredible-ness makes up for it for me.
I'm sure there's more than three , plus although entertaining , not really classics .
Yep, I know there's one starring Jeremy Renner and the latest one with Damon back as Bourne but... The first three are really like a trilogy.
They hadn't planned an arc when they made the first one but what with it being a book series, they had plenty of places to go with a sequel. Supremacy is my favourite action movie of all time, and even though Ultimatum is perfectly decent, I was disappointed that they just remade Supremacy, as they did the same with the 5th one, and offered no insight into who David Webb was or why he chose to become Bourne.
Just got home from seeing Dunkirk at the Imax at Waterloo. I cannot understand the hype around this film. This review sums up my thoughts exactly except I would add that I found the soundtrack boring and intensely annoying.
Anyone know how long films are typically available to see in Imax? Really want to see Dunkirk in Imax but can't do so for a couple of weeks at least so worried I'll miss out! Cineworld website only shows available performances up to next Thursday...
They are showing it at the Waterloo IMAX well into August.
The Gift is on film4 Thursday at 9pm. I thoroughly recommend checking it out for anyone who hasn't seen it. It's especially good if you don't know anything about it going in.
Just returned from Planet of the Apes. If there is anybody on here who hasn't seen it yet, I thoroughly recommend it.
Yes, the story is predictable Yes, there are a couple of scenes I think detract from the film but it had me captivated with the reality of the simian characters. No obvious rubber snouts here.
Was disappointed a certain vocalist survived but otherwise the film was beautifully shot and very atmospheric... No idea how anyone could call it boring, though I do think the 3 separate timelines helped keep it moving
(I spotted this as soon as I saw one of the planes go down and the boat didn't stop)
Just got home from seeing Dunkirk at the Imax at Waterloo. I cannot understand the hype around this film. This review sums up my thoughts exactly except I would add that I found the soundtrack boring and intensely annoying.
Just got home from seeing Dunkirk at the Imax at Waterloo. I cannot understand the hype around this film. This review sums up my thoughts exactly except I would add that I found the soundtrack boring and intensely annoying.
I think it was deliberate to stay away from the scale. It was meant to be concentrated and focused. I didn't need to see the numbers, I got that from the dialogue from Rylance.
Comments
Especially since they only ever made 3. Because the fourth one doesn't exist.
denofgeek.com/uk/movies/dunkirk/50962/michael-caine-has-a-hidden-cameo-in-dunkirk
There are very few pure trilogies. Trios of movies with an arc planned over all three films. Lord of the Rings is. Nolan's Batman movies. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man too. They were planned from the start, with set-ups that paid off later down the line. It's rare that a studio would ever plan that far ahead, at least until Disney/ Marvel came along.
Otherwise we're talking about films with 2+ sequels, and a trilogy is only conceived after the first movie is a huge success (Star Wars, Bourne, The Matrix, Back To The Future). So IMO, the very best bona fide trilogy has to be Lord of the Rings.
Otherwise, I would go with Toy Story, because each movie is a standalone story with a naturally, justified storytelling purpose and an (albeit retrospective) overall arc. I just hope that Toy Story 4 goes in a different direction as rumoured, because TS3 was the perfect ending.
Still, 1 and 2s incredible-ness makes up for it for me.
Another shout for best trilogy - the toy story movies.
BTTF is still brilliant though.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/jul/26/bloodless-boring-empty-christopher-nolan-dunkirk-left-me-cold
If there is anybody on here who hasn't seen it yet, I thoroughly recommend it.
Yes, the story is predictable
Yes, there are a couple of scenes I think detract from the film but it had me captivated with the reality of the simian characters. No obvious rubber snouts here.
Now looking forward to Dunkirk.
Wow what a truly brilliant bit of cinema.
Was disappointed a certain vocalist survived but otherwise the film was beautifully shot and very atmospheric... No idea how anyone could call it boring, though I do think the 3 separate timelines helped keep it moving
Anyway for me it's an 8.5/10.
5/10
400,000 troops and we saw perhaps only 1,000.
Masses of boats sent to help and we only saw/heard about one of them.
Half a dozen fighter planes and an ear splitting sound track.
Mark Rylance is as wooden as Ken Barlow and as for the dialogue, well there was very little.
Kenneth Branagh didn't have to do much except stand and stare out at sea.
6/10.