Well, I think there is a question of what is a "trilogy". Is it a group of three stories that are connected? Because then there could be trilogies that don't even know they're trilogies.
So, okay, maybe it's something like, three properties (stories, movies, etc.) which are intentionally grouped into three parts.
But that still would allow for both sides here to have a valid argument. Tolkien didn't intentionally group Lord of the Rings into three, his publisher did. So does it count?
I know why three parts of one story are not a trilogy - necessarily.
It's something to ponder. Although, I confess not for long. There are only so many hours in the day: how many shall I devote to "what makes a trilogy?"
The appeal to wikipedia - either way - was a clear dead-end (hence my contribution to the conversation). The appeal to the author is curious, too, because it presupposes that Tolkien is the author. Of course, he's the author of the books and gets to say what the story is, but when converted into a movie...it's Jackson as much as Tolkien, right? We don't say, "Oh, Goodfellas is a great movie by Nicholas Pileggi."
But is that right? Pileggi authored the book and co-wrote the film script. Why is he "less" than Scorsese?
These are more interesting questions. As is, "Does the author have final say over everything or not?" (ie, death (or life) of the author).
I'd rather ponder those questions, anyway, than argue over The Lord of the Rings vs. The Dark Knight.
reply
share
ProgsReturn (1775)
3 years ago
I'm not an etymologist; I don't get to define what a word means and what it doesn't. However I do accept that the meanings of words change/evolve over time. The LotR _movies_ are considered a trilogy, and this is a movie foru
>But is that right? Pileggi authored the book and co-wrote the film script. Why is he "less" than Scorsese?
Short (and only answer) Advertising; as Scorsese is more famous.
reply
share
Ace_Spade (9367)
3 years ago
I think most people would consider Lord of the Rings a trilogy, including the books. I do know that they are one story, though.
However, because they are almost always published in three volumes... Well, I'm starting to think that maybe one, continuous story might be capable of being a trilogy.
It's also possible that these categories evolve. Dickens' works (as well as Dumas' and others) were serials, but nobody refers to A Tale of Two Cities as being one of the best magazine columns of all-time.
So maybe it's possible for a work to be one story, then become a trilogy, and then become one story again. Who knows?
The Pileggi thing was part musing aloud, but mostly was rhetorical. It's just the weirdness of the zeitgeist where it accepts certain names and not others. That we know Scorsese more than Barbara McClintock (a Nobel Prize winner who's name I had to look up) is more of that weirdness.
In this context, though, I was also musing on why certain people are given a say in validating content. For instance: Tolkien is apparently able to say his books are one story, not Peter Jackson about his films. Conversely, Coppola, the director, is the one who seems to "mysteriously" be allowed to say The Godfather is one movie, but you know whose opinion is never mentioned? Mario Puzo's.
Odd? Hm. I doubt it.
reply
share
ProgsReturn (1775)
3 years ago
IMDB credits both Coppola and Puzo for writing the screenplay for Godfather pt 2, and as far as I know they didn't start work on it until after the original was finished being filmed. While nothing prevents anybody from watching the sequel first, they'll have a hell of a job understanding who is who without watching the original first. And you can say that about a lot of sequels.
In any case, I have no objection to Tolkien describing his works as a single story. That most awesomeness of rock bands Queen released 3 compilation CDs of their music which they even advertised themselves as a 'trilogy' so the term applies to music. George Lucas probably didn't plan for the original SW trilogy to be a trilogy when he made the first movie, but a trilogy it became. Then he planned the prequels as a trilogy in advance. Besides, I think it's a futile argument. LotR movies have always been planned as 3 movies which makes it a trilogy, no matter what juvenile argument can be thrown against it.
reply
share
Ace_Spade (9367)
3 years ago
Makes sense to me.
If a trilogy is a triptych of stories, then it doesn't matter whether they are one story or three separate stories, as long as there are three and they are intended to go together and compliment the other entries in the series.
reply
share
ProgsReturn (1775)
3 years ago
For ages I was wondering if the Alien or Terminator franchises were ever advertised as a trilogy when the third movie came out. But then I had that 'aha!' moment - trilogies have closure. You can't have another movie in LotR after the story has been resolved. Ditto Batman if he's considered retired & chilling. Anything after this is just blatantly milking the franchise - which is certainly true for Aliens and Terminator but if they were marketed as a trilogy then the studios have built themselves a dead-end. Godfather trilogy is kind of self-explanatory as the 3rd movie really does feel like a cash-grab.
reply
share
Ace_Spade (9367)
3 years ago
Alien 3 definitely has closure. I won't spoil the ending (in case, for some weird reason, somebody reads dozens of pages of Dark Knight Rises threads and wasn't expecting an Alien 3 spoiler), but it ends in a way that could have (maybe should have) wrapped up the franchise. I prefer 4 to 3, but that's no-nevermind in terms of story arcs. One could argue, of course, that Alien and Aliens both arrived at a place of potential closure as well.
Terminator and Terminator 2 have closure, but I think part three leaves the door open for part four.
Having thought about it for awhile, I think a trilogy is pretty open. I think it's just "a three-part-split in a story", and that could mean three separate chapters of one arc (Lord of the Rings), or three complete stories related by characters (The Three Colours Trilogy), or even three stories tied together more by theme than anything else (The Three Flavours Corenetto Trilogy).
And returning aaaaaaaall the way back to the original topic of "best trilogy", I'd go with The Three Colours.
reply
share