A trilogy is a set of three films. Easy. But in choosing some of the strongest cinema has to offer, it is clear that they can operate on different levels. I wrote down all the movie trilogies I could think of and then whittled it down to ten.
The general criteria is finding a film franchise that consists of three features that follow on from the other. This threw up a few notes: some consider the
Indiana Jones films (1981-1989) its own trilogy, with
Kingdom of the Crystal Skull sufficiently set apart narratively and stylistically as to not be included. It is a worthy argument, and I would have been tempted to include those three adventure films, except for that little bit of trivia that the second installment,
Temple of Doom, is actually a prequel and set before the first film. This therefore excludes the saga from being listed.
This next point might be even harder to swallow.
The Lord of the Rings and
The Hobbit films have also been excluded. This is due to both productions being written and filmed at the same time; they operate better as one large film then as three 'separate but connected' stories. With these movies, the ending is in clear sight as soon as the first film starts production, making them unusual entries in a trilogy list. With the other titles I have selected, the end goal is never set up in the first film, and it will become apparent that most of the first installments in each trilogy also operate perfectly as stand-alones. If I did include the Middle-earth films, then
LOTR would be my top pick, and, seeing as I am actually very fond of
The Hobbit, that would also be high up.
Finally, the ten films are split into eight and two, owing to a different style of trilogy. the eight represent narrative continuations whilst the two are more stylistically connected. This is also not a ranking of 'Top 10 Movie Trilogies of All Time', rather than a list of note worthy franchises that are great examples of telling stories inside one larger story.
The Back to the Future Trilogy (1985, 1989, 1990)
The
Back to the Future films are broken down into parts, with parts 2-3 being notable for being back-to-back productions made a couple years after the first dazzling one.
Back to the Future (1985) is a true 80s classic, embodying the energy and wit of the decade and being as close to perfect a blockbuster as possible. Michael J Fox and Christopher Lloyd are Marty McFly and Doc Emmet Brown respectively, whizzing around in the iconic DeLorean time machine. What makes the trilogy great is its interwoven stories that means events from the first film become the background and a threat in the second film for instance. It is the kind of smooth and smart storytelling you could not have in a stand alone. If the first film takes us back to 1955, then the second one takes us the future in 2015, before taking us to an alternate 1985, leaving the third film to go back to a different era entirely: 1885, and the Old West. This allows each film its own freshness and unique style, before bringing everything together in a neat bow.
The Before... Trilogy (1995, 2004, 2013)
By far the lowest budgeted pick on the list, Richard Linklater's indie trilogy consists of
Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, and
Before Midnight, with the films very casually telling the story of Ethan Hawke's American Jesse Wallace and Julie Delpy's French Celine, who meet for an evening and fall in love, agreeing to meet six months later. The film's take place nine years after the last, as do the release dates. Very thin on plot, each film is essentially a collection of tracking shots of the two characters discussing the world, philosophy, politics, family and everything in between.
Before Sunrise could have been a stand alone, leaving the viewer to decide what happens next, and
Before Sunset equally could have left things there with a little more ambiguity.
Before Midnight is a little more indulgent, showing us what we want to see and raising difficult questions. It is not necessarily a satisfying closure, but the evolution of the story (first night in Vienna, second time in the day in Paris, third time on holiday in Greece) and the 'fill in the gaps' conversations the characters have to catch up on what the other has been doing allows a very wholesome relationship to blossom on screen.
The Dark Knight Trilogy (2005, 2008, 2012)
The films that introduced director Christopher Nolan as Hollywood's premier style and substance and scale director, this trilogy is notable for its gritty, realistic feel for a superhero film, done so in such a way as to pretty much transcend the superhero genre. Christian Bale is Bruce Wayne / Batman and Michael Caine is Alfred, with a Hans Zimmer score, fantastic practical effects and narratives with real weight all amalgamating into some of the most beloved films of the 21st century. There is a crowd who felt dissatisfied with the finale,
The Dark Knight Rises, but I am someone who doesn't look at that film in comparison to the almighty
The Dark Knight, instead viewing it as a continuation of the story. Nolan and co. were originally going to leave it at
The Dark Knight, but soon they worked out a satisfying way to the end the story. And thank god they did, because it would be bleak to end the series on Batman having to flee into social exile. Each film works because they bring a different theme of idea to the overall story:
Batman Begins is a psychological thriller that gives Batman a mental test to overcome, with a focus on fear;
The Dark Knight is an action crime film in the vein of
Heat, with Batman being given a moral test as the Joker introduces chaos and choice to Gotham; and with
The Dark Knight Rises Nolan opts for full blown historical epic and gives Batman a physical challenge in a story that focuses on revolution and legacy. With
Rises we get a truly great send off as Batman is transformed from a man into an idea, a symbol for others to aspire towards. The variety in genre and theme across the films provides a very watchable and dense trilogy.
How to Train Your Dragon Trilogy (2010, 2014, 2019)
As a lover of the book series growing up, I can firmly say that these films are perfect examples of film having one over the books. These three films chronicle the story of Hiccup, a scrawny son of a Viking chief who, rather than hunt them, befriends a dragon called Toothless. In one of cinema's most beautiful friendships, the films follow the evolution of the Viking community with dragons, led by Hiccup and Toothless. The animation gets consistently stronger, and the musical score (particularly for the first film) was sorely snubbed of Oscar nominations. What makes the trilogy work is similar to the
Before trilogy with the time jumps between each film. Hiccup goes from a pubescent teen to a man, allowing visual cues for the change between each film and how their home of Berk grows. The first film deals with having to exist and fight dragons, the second deals with living alongside them and the third concerns losing dragons and having to separate them. There are thrilling aerial sequences and some profoundly moving moments, with a warming epilogue for the ages. The Hiccup and Toothless relationship is the focus, but the growth between Hiccup and Astrid is also great long term planning. A fantastically told set of stories.
Kung fu Panda Trilogy (2008, 2011, 2016)
Another DreamWorks trilogy,
Kung fu Panda concerns Po the Panda (Jack Black), a fat panda who grows to become a legendary master of kung fu. With an all star cast across all three films, this unlikely trilogy is the ultimate story about not judging and self-belief. The first film works great on its own; Po finishes the film as the Dragon Warrior and everything is full circle, with a few strands that could open doorways to a sequel (his parents / backstory for instance). That we get, with the surprisingly dark
Kung fu Panda 2. This sequel deliberately sets up the third film in its ending, or rather sets up one aspect of it (Po's father). Much like
The Dark Knight trilogy, each of these animated films offers a different villain based on what Po needs to overcome and grow from: in the fierce Tai Lun we get Po's physical challenge; a child raised with expectations vs a child raised with love, in Shen the peacock we get Po's emotional challenge as he grapples with his troubled past on the way to finding inner peace, and in Kai we get Po's spiritual challenge on his way to mastering chi. All three villains are effective at their role (and Tai Lun is easily the greatest antagonist in an animated film) and the individual themes in each film means by the end, Po is an all round master. Throw in exceptional fight choreography, Master Oogway quotes and awesome music and you have one of the most overlooked series of this generation.
Original Star Wars Trilogy (1977, 1980, 1983)
Inevitably being picked, this groundbreaking, universally worshiped set of movies may not be the perfect trilogy to analyse (there is a drop in quality with
Return of the Jedi), but it does so much right.
Star Wars would have worked alone: the bad guys introduced are all defeated, Luke is successful with using the Force and they all become heroes. There is set up such as wishing to see Luke become a true Jedi and the Leia romance, but by and large its a satisfying stand alone. Then
Empire Strikes Back comes along, inspiring darker sequels forever. The world building is stretched, more characters are introduced and Luke's journey progresses. With its iconic cliffhanger ending, a third film was already on its way. Not of all the franchise was planned from the get to go; Leia as Luke's sister was introduced later on as a way of resolving the love triangle with no hard feelings. There isn't a thematic change between each film like
Kung fu Panda or
The Dark Knight, but the overall good vs evil or not giving up on those that are lost theme is constant throughout.
Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy (2003, 2006, 2007)
Hear me out on this one. I did state that the criteria had to be a film series with three entries, and whilst
Star Wars has ten films, it is comprised of three trilogies.
Pirates of the Caribbean is annoyingly made up of five films, but it should have stopped at three. The first three are too interconnected to not be considered a trilogy and it was filmed the same way as
Back to the Future: one break out hit followed a few years later by a big back-to-back production to wrap it up in epic style. I love these films; the first is the go-to adventure film, the second one is so crazy and inventive it works, and the third brings the satisfying closure despite its congested narrative. This is trilogy for a bunch of reasons: Will and Elizabeth meet in the first film, meant to get married in the second and then have the bittersweet conclusion in the third; Jack Sparrow in introduced alone on a small boat, and last we see of him is alone in a small boat with the
Black Pearl in Barbossa's hands; we also have the end of the British redcoat trading companies; the closure to Norrington's arc; the restoration of Bill Turner... there are no strings left by the third film.
Pirates of the Caribbean is more escapism and entertainment than an impactful series with a message, which means the trilogy is more defined by the narrative then a goal or idea. Regardless, they are clever and inventive films, with some fabulous visual effects and music (you may have noticed Hans Zimmer has been involved with three of these trilogies).
Planet of the Apes Trilogy (2011, 2014, 2017)
As
The Dark Knight trilogy was set to conclude, a new, gritty film franchise was beginning, one that would be so convincingly realistic through its tone and effects that its science-fiction narrative would be treated like a genuine story, in the same way Batman was. In Andy Serkis' ape leader Caesar is one of the greatest film characters of the decade, a biblical figure stunningly acted and rendered. The first film,
Rise of the Planet of the Apes, works on its own (common theme here eh) by closing on the liberated monkeys as a disease begins to spread. That could have been it, setting up how one ape led a revolution that took out human life. But along came
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, a very dark and poignant epic that upped the action and emotional stakes amidst a post-apocalyptic landscape. With an ending promising war, we got
War for the Planet of the Apes, which took a smart approach of depicting a more psychological and inner war for Caesar than perhaps the all out conflict people expected. That isn't to say there is no action; the film is book-ended by two breathtaking battles, but this is more a war film in the vein of
Apocalypse Now, The Bridge on the River Kwai and
The Great Escape. The trilogy charts Caesar's journey from revolutionary to leader to a biblical hero who saved his people. Its a fusion of Moses and Jesus, and the film does't skimp on some of the images. Its a fascinating evolution, and the third film is an emotional sendoff that wraps the stories together, ending in hope.
As mentioned before, the final two are in their own little group for being a different take on a trilogy. The previous eight have all been connected through character and narrative; they are internally linked trilogies. I like to refer to these two trilogies as external ones; linked by things outside of the worlds they are set in. These are films connected by director, genre or style, and cannot be compared critically to the internal trilogies I have just listed.
The Man With No Name / Dollars Trilogy (1964, 1965, 1966)
These films introduced three vital parts of cinema: Clint Eastwood, director Sergio Leone, and the Spaghetti-western genre. With
A Fistful of Dollars, the sub genre was invented; a bleak landscape where men, separated on the frontier from law, religion and women, are reduced to morally bankrupt rogues, bandits and bounty hunters. Here Eastwood's character pits two sides of a town against the other before ridding the area of bad guy Ramone and his gang. In
For a Few Dollars More, the Man With No Name teams up with Lee Van Cleef's Colonel Mortimer to hunt a gang and claim the hefty bounty. In the almighty
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Eastwood is the 'Good', Van Cleef is the 'Bad' and Eli Wallach joins in as Tuco 'the Ugly'. The first film has one main character, the second film two main characters and the third has three, so there is a nice evolution, as well as the progressively longer film length. The films act as demonstrations of style, the extreme close ups juxtaposed to massive wide shots, with rapid fire editing, stillness, casual violence, black comedy and outstanding music all forming the Spaghetti-western genre. The Man With No Name seems to be the connective tissue between the films, thanks to that green poncho, but nothing is carried over to other films. And if anything, he should be the Man With Many Names, as Eastwood goes by Joe, Manko and Blondie across the three films. The duel roles for Van Cleef and Gian Maria Volonte (antagonist in 1-2) also suggest these films do not necessarily inhabit the same world. But stylistically it is a trilogy, you can buy them in a Blu-ray set and Eastwood is the face of it, even if he is barely a character and the stories are in no ways follow ons.
Leone also directed a second 'trilogy', the
Once Upon a Time... trilogy, which contains
Once Upon a Time in the West, Duck, You Sucker / A Fistful of Dynamite / Once Upon a Time... in the Revolution and
Once Upon a Time in America. The relationship between these films is even more minute than the
Dollars movies; two are westerns and one is a multi-generational crime film. All that brings together is the director, Ennio Morricone's music and their titles if you are European.
The Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy (2004, 2007, 2013)
Edgar Wright's cult classic set of films, the
Cornetto trilogy is similarly disconnected. Here is how they are linked: same director, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost as the two leads, a Cornetto ice cream cameo and being a comedy hybrid with another genre.
Shaun of the Dead is a zombie rom-com,
Hot Fuzz is a buddy cop action comedy and
The World's End is a science-fiction alien invasion comedy. This playfulness with genre is the main focus of the trilogy's style and when viewed as three thirds, it is a fantastic deconstruction of genre and tropes inside those genres. All three movies are brilliant, endlessly quotable with some quality moments.
Shaun of the Dead goes from hilarious to tense,
Hot Fuzz goes from hilarious to gory to badass,
The World's End goes from hilarious to political to quietly moving in its third act. It is a fantastic set of three original movies that riff on well known stories, and it makes for an unusually intriguing trilogy.
