Whoa whoa whoa mad max 1 is the best of the three. Sure, the sequels have crazier worldbuilding and fancier visuals but the first is tight, well shot, and tells a good story well.
All three of the Spider-Man originals were fucking horrific. Absolutely no where near good.
I've rewatched them recently, and I think they are amazing. Especially the third.
This is refreshingly accurate
I totally forgot Blade is a trilogy
Blade 3 is... not good.
That's the one where Wesley Snipes was throwing a bit of a tantrum and refused to open his eyes for a scene, so they had to use CGI.
Haha okay I'm glad I didn't miss anything good. I only ever watched the first one, but this post made me curious.
I would rank them similar to matrix on chart. Liked the 3rd matrix more than "listed" though.
Interesting choice not to include the Hobbit movies! I'd probably go 1>2>3, but all those bars would be appropriately hobbit-sized (sans ent-draught).
A lot of sequels aren't as good because the original director and writer (and maybe other staff) aren't involved. The original staff may have had a vision for the one movie, and when it's completed, they're not interested in making another one. So the studio that owns the copyright hands it to some newbies so they can get experience and do a low-budget cash-grab sequel.
Is this counting films in trilogies, or the trilogies themselves?
Nice try... cant trick me into studying trilo-ology.
The Temple of Doom sucked. I'd rather watch Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
