I tend to read books in trilogies (or trilogies of trilogies) but this graph from DanMeth.com about movie threesomes (and how they stack up) made me giggle. Do you agree with his assessments? I have to say that I disagree very strongly with Jurassic Park, but I’m dinosaur biased. OK, maybe the last two movies in that series sucked, but still.
via BuzzFeed
No related posts.
About
I am the co-host of Revision3's tech-centric show, - It's just that kind of day. ? http://blip.fm/~mojzo 5 hrs ago
- More updates...
Blogroll
- Andrew Mager
- Ariel Waldman
- Arlo Jamrog
- Bros Before Blogs
- Casey McKinnon
- Dan Stapleton
- Dizzy Miss Lizzy
- Engadget
- Eric Lin
- ExtraLife
- Felicia Day
- George Ruiz
- GigaOM
- Girls in Tech
- Inhabitat
- Jason Calacanis
- Jason Howell
- Jeremy Toeman
- Jim Louderback
- Joshua Topolsky
- Joystiq
- Lan Bui
- Laughing Squid
- Molly Wood
- Neha Tiwari
- Niall Kennedy
- Nick Rhodes
- Nicole Lee
- Peter Rojas
- Rifftrax Blog
- Rodrigo Hashimoto
- Ryan Block
- Sasha Friedenberg
- The Unofficial Apple Weblog
- Third Rock
- Tom Merritt
- Witfits
Podroll
Archives
Categories
- apple (60)
- apps (28)
- babble (183)
- cats (6)
- ces (10)
- contest (5)
- food (7)
- funny (92)
- internet (118)
- mahalodaily (11)
- music (21)
- news (62)
- out and about (58)
- podcast (49)
- qore (4)
- san francisco (20)
- sci-fi (11)
- swordandlaser (2)
- sxsw (6)
- toys (48)
- uncategorized (3)
- video (101)
- video games (49)
- work (85)
81 Responses for "The Trilogy Meter"
I agree with ya VB.. the Jurassic Park trilogy is waaaay undervalued.
Clearly Die Hard 2 sucked, and was much worse than Die Hard 3, come on. And Spiderman 1 and Jurassic Park 1 should be higher.
When reading the chart, it’s important to remember is that the most recent Indiana Jones is #4, and “Star Wars” #1,2,3 refers to Star Wars IV, V, and VI. Otherwise, you risk a righteous indignation aneurysm.
This graph is great…I agree with you about Jurassic Park, though. The first one deserves a full tank, the 2nd one nearly full and the 3rd one a full tank – it was a hoot!
Jurassic Park had sequels? I hadn’t noticed.
Otherwise, I’m inclined to agree with everything else.
BTTF Part 3 should be even lower. That trilogy fell of a cliff, literally and figuratively.
I agree wholeheartedly with this graph. Especially since it appears to rate my favorite saga (Star Wars) the highest. Though I must say, I actually liked Episode VI better than Episode V.
I would agree with The Lost World, but the third JP film was pretty decent. I like it mostly because it drew on the original novel a LOT, whereas The Lost World took roughly 1% of it’s source material from the books. (And that 1% was more or less limited to it’s name.)
These graphs have similar trends. That trend states, “The original was way better! They should never have made a sequel because the sequel sucked!” At least, that’s what I gather from this.
It’s weird… this study represents my opinions to the letter. Especially The Matrix. Keep up the great blogging!
I agree with most of it.
However I thought Spider-Man 3 was the better one that 2.
Think Back To The Future should be a bit higher though
I really don’t see the X-Men hate in that graph, X3 was a good movie…well in my opinion which counts for nothing.
Yea, I saw that on buzzfeed! It cracked me up. I have to agree with all them. About JP, I think the 3rd should be higher, it much better then 2nd one, and the 1st one should be all the way to the top.
It got 2 & 3 backwards for the Blade movies. #2 was a bunch of special effects with a bad plot wrapped around it. Ya, Ron Perlman was good, but not much else.
Blade 3 was a hoot and half. Ryan Reynolds played his role as what if life had gone serious bad for Van Wilder when he got out of college. Then the twisted genius of seeing how many actors from “A Mighty Wind” you could cast in a Blade movie! Parker Posey had the “Oscar” moment when her character explained why, as a vampire, she still wore a cross. I’m still disappointed that Natasha Lyonne made no reference about “double clicking her mouse” in the movie though.
I believe truly lord of the rings deserves their meter rate… Jurrasic park,,,ok the first one was amazing but then it slowly fades after that… there are just some things you should leave at the original instead of making sequels. Other movies that have sequels work really well together though so i think is just depends on the story line, how its directed, and how much imagination you can have to keep the story going.
Well I have to agree to some extent with the graph, but really I thought that Jurassic Park was awesome (the first one). Of course I was like 10 when it first came out. Now after Rocky 1 I think they just started going down hill, and as for the God Father first one was the best. Though thats just a matter of opinion, and like every opinion each one varies from person to person.
I don’t think X-men three was THAT bad, dang!
oh my god. this is so true, except i really liked x men 3
Die Hard is way overrated compared to the LOTR trilogy. Although I must say he did give LOTR the credit it deserves: all three parts are equally genious masterpieces!
I agree with all of those except Mad Max. “Beyond Thunderdome” was beyond terrible. It was even worse than the low budget camp that was “Mad Max.”
I know I’m in the minority for liking all 3 Matrix movies, but I thought people would at least agree that 3 was better than 2 (though you have to ignore the ridiculously long death scene).
I also liked Blade 1 much better than 2, and Die Hard 3 better than Die Hard 2.
I think the trilogies needs a special exception for Rocky though, because clearly Rocky IV was better than the first 3 combined.
I think it has more to do with personal preference. For example I really liked all three X-Men movies and all three Matrix movies as well.
Oh and as for Jurassic Park. I loved both the First and Second one, but the Third was a disappointment. I’m hoping the fourth one that’s currently being worked on will be better.
Pff, I loved Jurassic Park 3. >.<
The Die Hard one is clearly skewed because Die Hard 2 was HORRIBLE compared to Die Hard 3, which in my opinion was the best of the three.
Same with Indiana Jones – my preference was Last Crusade (3), Lost Ark (1), Temple of Doom (2).
Most of the others – notably The Matrix, Spider-Man, Star Wars, and Back to the Future – were fairly close, though.
I’m surprised about Superman II. Even when I was a kid it was a little hokey.
Terminator I seems kind of low.
Everything else seems about right.
Needs the Bourne trilogy.
Love this illustration!!
I personally liked Blade 3. I too generally liked the Jurassic park trilogy – first Jurassic Park is a classic! Die Hard 1 should be completely full and also Back to the future 2 should be higher!!
Also glad it wasnt just me who only really like the first Matrix
I too disagree with his Jurrassic Park assesment, the first and second deserve much better, the ratio between them is right though. 3rd is spot on, it shouldn’t have happened. (doesn’t stop me watching it though, lol).
What? Die-hard 3 should be bursting out of the box. The rest that I’ve seen I agree with.
There is no way Temple of Doom = Last Crusade.
I am saddened that Land Before Time wasn’t there…
I disagree with the assessment of the latter POTA movies! I LOVE the 2nd and 3rd ones! 4th is the ultimate… 5th is blegh.
Still, this was fun.
No way does Temple of Doom equal The Last Crusade. And Die Hard 3 was one of the best movies in that series. At least better than Die Hard 2. But that’s my opinion …
Indiana Jones overall better than Lord of the Rings? NEVER!
Lord of the Rings > Indiana Jones.
The first Star Trek movie was about a 20%. Underrates Jurasic Park 3.
I think Alien was better than Aliens, and Star Treks I and III should be rated way lower than they are. Jaws 2 was not a good movie, but Jaws 3-D better? The only movie that Jaws 3-D can look better than is Jaws: The Revenge.
While I mostly agree with the chart, a few were undervalued (JP trilogy, Batman 1!). What about quadrilogies though?
Terminator 2 FTW! Please let this 4th installment die before it is released. Another Christian Bale meltdown please???
And how are the Rocky movies not all equal? Spoiler alert… motivational music plays and Rocky wins. Now you know what happens in all of the movies.
Where is the Pirates of the Caribbean series?
I have to agree with the graphs 100%. He’s got it spot on and even the levels are right on.
Where’s Evil Dead?
I’m surprised Batman Returns was rated so low. I don’t get all the hate on Terminator 3… I thought the ending was very brave. X-Men 3 was bad, but not that bad. And Die Hard 3 was better than 2.
I disagree with Blade, I loved the 3rd one and hated the 2nd one haha!
I think Alien is better than Aliens, and that Star Treks I and III should be way lower. Reasonable people can disagree. But Jaws 3-D better than Jaws 2? Jaws 2 is in no way a good movie, but the only movie that Jaws 3-D is better than is Jaws: The Revenge.
All correct except for the fuc*ing matrix.
the second one was awesome, more then the first.
Anyways,
-=Ben=-
I’m a huge Alien-fan, so I have to say that the Alien-one it pretty wrong. Perhaps also because the Alien-movies isn’t a trilogy (four movies!).
There are several others I don’t really agree with – but I’ll let them slide.
– Halfdan Reschat
[...] The Trilogy Meter – Veronica Belmont (tags: fun movies) [...]
I love triquels but when they become quadquels and continue on to become infiniquels, most of the movies lose appeal because there’s so much a character/personality can endure. I certainly hope there won’t be a Jaws 19 hologram movie like they showed in Back To The Future or any other 19 sequels to any of those trilogy movies!
I disagree with a lot of those rankings. I thought Blade 3 was better than that and X3 was probably the best out of that trilogy. However, I’m not surprised about Spiderman. The first time I saw the third one it was ok, but I thought about it a bit more and realised it wasn’t quite as good as I first thought. The overloaded it with evil guys.
was there any trilogy in planet of the apes??? It seams 2nd and 3rd were not released in our country
All in all…looks pretty accurate to me…
Sequelitis abound! You can’t get away from the fact that sequels progressively go down in quality…except for the rare occasion…like Godfather. I think the third was probably the best there.
On another note: can you call Die Hard a trilogy? Batman? Indiana Jones?
Hmmm…
I’d like to see the 4th Indiana Jones movie on that chart. I think it would have to dip below the baseline…
only thing i disagree with is Star Wars… 4-5-6 were the 3 good ones.
Very amusing.
Seriously, though, Last Crusade was the best of the original three Indiana Jones movies. There is no question, it is simply a statement of fact. Ford + Connery = Win.
Also, Lord of the Rings should have all three pegged at the top. Except maybe the made up Aragorn falls off a cliff bit from Two Towers, that was weak sauce.
[...] 17, 2009 Google Buying Twitter? Not a Bad IdeaFacebook Responds to Concerns Over Terms of ServiceThe Trilogy MeterMagnolia Founder Discusses Site Outage and Data LossTinyChat – Disposable Chatrooms for the Twitter [...]
We’re these purely subjective rankings of one cat or were they based on something like MetaCritic / IMDB / RottenTomatoes, etc?
Awesome graph either way, but I like to know the data source
It seems that they’re purely subjective rankings, Eric, but that’s a great idea…
[...] Link: The Trilogy Meter [...]
What’s up with Back to the Future III though, that was at least as good as the first one, and way better than part II!
On the whole, well assessed.
Oh, come on. Alien 3 wasn’t that bad.
As Gord McLeod pointed out, “The Lost World” went in a completely different direction than the novel, which was actually my favorite of the Jurassic Park books. The movie was pretty enjoyable, but if you read through the book, it makes the movie seem so cheesy and hollywood-ized by comparison.
Im sure that die hard isnt a trilogy.
But the 4 sucks.
I went ahead with that idea Eric gave me…
The Scientific Trilogy Meter
http://thesomewhatmanlynerd.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/the-scientific-trilogy-meter/
Oh c’mon! You know that Jurassic Park 1 deserves a higher rating than that!
Nice graph.
I actually agree pretty wholeheartedly with the whole thing, with the exception of Jaws. Neither 2 nor 3 are any good, but 3 is definitely worse than 2.
Also, Rambo deserves a special mention for 4 being awesome.
Pretty solid evaluation…though I have to disagree with Indy. As amazing as the first one was, Last Crusade was effing EPIC.
I miss the Bourne Trilogy (great by the way)
Ha. Godfather….. Too right
This is more of a plot rating graph.
Diehard II was beyond terrible
I think some of those with low first-feature scores reflect a series where the rater saw the second film first, then saw the first. Given the 1984-5 release date of Terminator, it was a fantastic movie on the large screen – for the time. The second, of course, was much better. This may also account for Raiders II getting any blue in the box at all: only someone who was a similar age to that little bratty kid would rate that piece of trash at all. (IMHO, YMMV!)
Still, a fun exercise. Thanks for sharing!
BAH, everyone rates the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies so lowly, I don’t think it’s deserved. Reloaded is a great, I love the scenes with the Merovingian, the highway chase, the burly brawl, the weapons fight in the hotel, and the Architect. All great, memorable scenes if you appreciate the story.
I agree in the ordering though. The Revolutions was the weakest, but it still had some great moments too.
[...] found this picture on danmeth.com via Veronica Belmont’s blog.The picture speaks for itself but I have never seen films reviewed like this. For the most part I [...]
the Matrix sequels were ridiculous. the bros. should of quit while ahead
[...] visualization, though I don’t agree with all of them: The Trilogy Meter. addthis_pub = ‘mastermaq’;addthis_logo = [...]
Ah, I hate to jump in with my, “I agree completely, except for…” comment, but I really have to. How could anyone—ANYONE—rate Superman II higher than the original?? The original is a classic, and arguably the best superhero movie ever made, while the second is a poor combination of bad plot devices and poor special effects. Tearing off the “S” and throwing it at the bad guys? Sorry, where did Superman get THAT power???
Very nicely done, I say. I’d like to see him do the same for video games.
[...] Trouvé ici. [...]
I agree with Kato above–the third Indiana Jones movie (and last one we should ever consider as truly an “Indiana Jones movie) was the best. Definitely better than the first. Sure, face-melting a bunch of Nazis is pretty awesome, but Sean Connery, holy-grail healing and super-aging one Nazi wins.
Also, JP 1 should have been a little higher. Great music, very epic feel. I think the author of the charts might have actually thought worse about JP 1 because 2 and 3 were so bad.
I think that back to the future 2 should be higher and 3 lower.
Leave a reply