Java House #8: What Makes A Trilogy

260 Days Until Dragon*Con 2011! This edition's countdown pic is a classic from 2007 with the lovely Allison as Powergirl!

Okay, one of my weirdest pet peeves is when people do not know the definition of a trilogy. People seems to think that the first three movies in any film series is a trilogy, and so they automatically slap them with that label. And some even do it with a fourth movie coming out! Argh!
Anyway, here are three ways you can tell a trilogy from a random set of three movies.

1) Definition
The basic definition for a trilogy is one story divided into three films (or books, but we're using films as examples here). The first movie is the beginning/introduction, the second the middle/climax, the third the end/resolution. A trilogy is not three movies about three separate adventures with a significantly different set of cast members. A prime example of a trilogy is of course the original Star Wars Trilogy (yes, the Prequels are too, but I avoid talking about them). The first film introduced the main characters and the story, the second ended in a climactic cliffhanger, and in the third the Empire was finally defeated and all was right with the galaxy. A prime example of three films that are not a trilogy are the first three Indiana Jones Films. In each film, Indy went on a separate adventure that had nothing to do with the ones before or after it. Though some cast members from Raiders of the Lost Ark returned in The Last Crusade, for the most part the cast of characters are different. The villains are definitely always different. Thankfully with the release of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, people will finally stop calling it a trilogy.

2) The Dependence Factor.
If the first two films can exist without the third, than it is not a trilogy. Superman 1 and 2 would have been fine without Superman 3. Batman and Batman Returns would have been fine without Batman Forever. And as much as I love The Last Crusade, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Temple of Doom would have been okay existence-wise without it.
But imagine if Star Wars ended with the Empire getting the upper-hand and Han still encased in carbonite and on his way to Jabba. Imagine if Back to the Future ended with Marty stuck in 1955 ranting happily about Doc being "safely" back in 1885. Imagine if Lord of the Rings ended with Frodo and Sam yet to reach Mordor. You get the idea. Three movies are a trilogy when they are co-dependent on each other. You can't have one without the other two.

3) One Trilogy Ends, Another Begins
Okay, I actually do have to talk about the Star Wars Prequels here. Almost two decades after Lucas finished the Original Trilogy, did he just make a Fourth Film.? No, he made another trilogy. To make a trilogy and then make a fourth film and stop is a huge no-no. Exceptions can be made now and then, like Peter Jackson making the Hobbit, a prequel to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. That's how Tolkien wrote the books. You can't really help that and damn it I want to see it, lol! But I think it would be unsettling to just see a fourth Back to the Future movie, and I hope that they are planning to make a new Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy and not just the upcoming movie.. Bottom line is that usually a Trilogy is not followed up by a single film. A simple set of three films can be and it's not a big issue, though Batman and Robin did royally suck.

So that's my rant! Hope you learned a little and had a good laugh.