Pocket HD camcorder roundup on Tekzilla »

The Trilogy Meter

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.

This entry was posted by Veronica on February 16, 2009 at 3:04 pm, and is filed under babble, funny, internet. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0.You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

Comments (81)
Pings (6)
Related Posts

#1 written by lVloose 3 years ago

I agree with ya VB.. the Jurassic Park trilogy is waaaay undervalued.

Quote
#2 written by Lloyd 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#3 written by Robert Fischer 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#4 written by Linda Smith 3 years ago

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!

Quote
#5 written by George Brickner 3 years ago

Jurassic Park had sequels? I hadn’t noticed.
Otherwise, I’m inclined to agree with everything else.

Quote
#6 written by Brad 3 years ago

BTTF Part 3 should be even lower. That trilogy fell of a cliff, literally and figuratively.

Quote
#7 written by Eric Geller 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#8 written by Gord McLeod 3 years ago

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.)

Quote
#9 written by Patrick Proctor 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#10 written by @murley (Matt) 3 years ago

It’s weird… this study represents my opinions to the letter. Especially The Matrix. Keep up the great blogging!

Quote
#11 written by Colin 3 years ago

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

Quote
#12 written by Damien 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#13 written by John F 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#14 written by Mark 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#15 written by dawn 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#16 written by Alex Bernhardt 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#17 written by Vestque 3 years ago

I don’t think X-men three was THAT bad, dang!

Quote
#18 written by Kevin Li 3 years ago

oh my god. this is so true, except i really liked x men 3

Quote
#19 written by Xavez 3 years ago

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!

Quote
#20 written by Kevin 3 years ago

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.”

Quote
#21 written by Joe 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#22 written by standardsdt 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#23 written by Tyler 3 years ago

Pff, I loved Jurassic Park 3. >.<

Quote
#24 written by Scott 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#25 written by Starman 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#26 written by CajoleJuice 3 years ago

Needs the Bourne trilogy.

Quote
#27 written by Andrew 3 years ago

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

Quote
#28 written by collide007 3 years ago

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).

Quote
#29 written by Mike 3 years ago

What? Die-hard 3 should be bursting out of the box. The rest that I’ve seen I agree with.

Quote
#30 written by Jason 3 years ago

There is no way Temple of Doom = Last Crusade.

Quote
#31 written by Mitch 3 years ago

I am saddened that Land Before Time wasn’t there…

Quote
#32 written by Casey McKinnon 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#33 written by Darayz 3 years ago

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 …

Quote
#34 written by Benji Barash 3 years ago

Indiana Jones overall better than Lord of the Rings? NEVER!

Lord of the Rings > Indiana Jones.

Quote
#35 written by Steve 3 years ago

The first Star Trek movie was about a 20%. Underrates Jurasic Park 3.

Quote
#36 written by Ben 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#37 written by Kevin 3 years ago

While I mostly agree with the chart, a few were undervalued (JP trilogy, Batman 1!). What about quadrilogies though?

Quote
#38 written by GRiZZ 3 years ago

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?

Quote
#39 written by Dave M. 3 years ago

I have to agree with the graphs 100%. He’s got it spot on and even the levels are right on.

Quote
#40 written by Abel 3 years ago

Where’s Evil Dead?

Quote
#41 written by Jason W. 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#42 written by Jadielady 3 years ago

I disagree with Blade, I loved the 3rd one and hated the 2nd one haha!

Quote
#43 written by Ben 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#44 written by -=Ben=- 3 years ago

All correct except for the fuc*ing matrix.
the second one was awesome, more then the first.
Anyways,
-=Ben=-

Quote
#45 written by Halfdan Reschat 3 years ago

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

Quote
#46 written by Toshio 3 years ago

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!

Quote
#47 written by David Morris 3 years ago

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.

Quote
#48 written by pratik 3 years ago

was there any trilogy in planet of the apes??? It seams 2nd and 3rd were not released in our country

Quote
#49 written by Danny 3 years ago

All in all…looks pretty accurate to me…

Quote
#50 written by FarrisB 3 years ago

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…

Quote
Type your comment
You may use these HTML tags: <a> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <code> <del> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>
1 2 Next »
Comment Feed for this Post

The Trilogy Meter

Tweets

Links

Archives

The Trilogy Meter

Tweets

Tags

Links

Archives