(no subject)

[jfb]

In Roger Ebert's Answer Man column this week, a reader states that "the third installment of all trilogies is either a disappointment or just terrible, even if the second film was great." He goes on to ask why people make third installments, but my immediate thought was: Are there counterexamples? Trilogies where the third film is really good and/or better than the first two?

Ebert gives a couple of examples (and ignores the question as stated). Can you guys think of any others? I've mentioned that I liked the third Matrix best, but that wasn't saying much, and anyway I know nobody agrees with me. A good third movie in a series that went on beyond three would be fine, too. Was the third James Bond movie the best one? I don't even know what it was.

Comments

[wrog]

the Indiana Jones trilogy comes close. Last Crusade certainly beats the crap out of Temple of Doom, though I'll admit it's slightly blasphemous to suggest that it's better than Raiders of the Lost Ark,... but it's up there.