When I watch a film, I always just skip all the parts that I find too violent or unnesecairly sexual, which easily condenses James Bond films to fifteen minutes, and makes most of the other ones listed here either unwatcheble or just extreemly short. I kind of liked the first Harry Potter films, I used to first read the book and then watch the film. I think I stopped doing that at either the fifth or the sixth, I just didn't like the amount of violence that they consisted of. It's not that I emotionally can't watch them or anything, I just don't enjoy it. I think my favourite film series of all time is before sunrise, before sunset, before midnight, (1995, 2004, 2013) which, for those unfamiliar, is a romantic drama consisting mostly if not entirely of dialoge between two people as they kind of aimlessly walk around. They are a lot more modest than all the other ones here. The three combined had a budget of 8.3 million dollars, and brought in roughly 49 at the box office. The low budget doesn't show at all: They're not expensive because they don't need to be. The films, in essence, are just a dialoge. They're all one marathon conversation between two people. In the first film, two students meet eachother in a train to Vienna, and then wander the streets together slowly becoming romantically interested in eachother, and then part at the end of the night argreeing to meet again in the future. The second film basically checks in on them nine years later, and the third film again does the same, both of them being another marathon conversation. It's a beatifull study of the development of a relationship, in a far less fictionalised way compared to everything else I've watched. It's also really cleverly written, such that those single conversations really teach the audience a lot about what is going on, without explicitly stating them or making moves that feel forced. I really recommend them , especially if you're more interested in character driven stories than action driven ones, like me.
That's very interesting! I liked How to Train Your Dragon 2 much more than the original, because I thought the plot to How to Train Your Dragon was weak. My main issue with the plot: no human antagonist. I'm glad you mentioned that you actually do love that about it, and when I watch it again I'll try if I can see the merit in it too!
That sounds very interesting, thanks for telling us about it! I don't think I had ever heard about that. I see all three films were scored by different composers, only one of whom I know (Cliff Eidelman). In any case I'll try to remember these!
I think they threw the Red Death in the end of the movie just to add a challenge that the main character has to overcome, which also consists of his father apologizing and him changing his entire village I find that kind of interesting that you enjoy something like that. This makes me think of a book I had to read in high school that was entirely comprised of dialogue and it was honest to god the Worst Book I've ever had to read in my entire life. I hated it from a writer's standpoint because there was no description or anything, it was just (poorly written) dialogue that had no life whatsoever. And the worst thing about it was that my Try-Hard English Teacher loved it. She was one of the only English teachers I did not get along with, actually.
Man! I am gone for 24 hours, and so much is posted on this thread!!! :O Was not expected this many people to reply, lol. Keep voting!
I have actually read many books that are primairly dialoge without any descriptions, and I know that there are ones that do not have anything breaking the dialogue at all, a good friend of mine recommended one, but I didn't read it jet. Books like Ernest Hemmingway's The sun also rises have chapters that only consist of dialogue and the occasional drinking of wine, but no descriptions, which I found quite fititng for the book, as it's about the characters, and their relation to eachother, not about the way the world looks. Some of my favourite books of all time, like A. F. Th van der Heiden's Het Schervengericht (Jugement by shards) are quite simmilair. That one consists mostly of two people talking to eachother. Not entirely, but my copy is 1727 pages, and there are stretches of ~50 pages where the dialoge isn't cut by anything. That book also has extreemly unrealistic dialoge, jet, it does so intentionally... To translate a part for you: "No matter if you're over- or undersized," said Remo," life puts us on the same procrustes bed. If we are too tall for it, the overhang will be cut off. Those who are below par are stretched until they fit." "Being a child's size" said Maddox, "you're better off. Rather living with strained muscles than with stumps. Before I step out of my way too big brits in the morning, I always stretch, making me just tall enough enough to seize the day." It's flowery and well-structured in a way that human speach just is not, but, by doing so, it manages to quite beautifully describe the characters with the metaphors they use, and it gets their ideas out far more efficiently (which is helpfull considering the leanth) Quite a lot of my vafourite novels (Jeroen Brouwer's Bezonken Rood (Sunken red) Connie Palmen's De Wetten (The Laws) A. F. Th. van der Heiden's De Advocaat van de Hanen (Punk Lawyer)) Are somewhat structured this way. Sunken Red doesn't have dialogue or many desicriptive images and, most of the time, metaphor and litteral imagery are intertwined, as it touches mostly on the emotions of a single person, who is recalling his time in a concentrantion camp, but whose memories aren't really clearly shown. It's about the emotions that are left. Or, as it describes it itself, in what I think is one of the most beatifull passages in Dutch litterairy history: (This is the entirety of the first chapter) "The wind, which only comes every now and then to go again, always busy moving to somewhere else, never active in a single place, carries in steps the good and bad air, and sometimes a cloud of butter, or dragonflies, but also oftenly a flock of black birds, after which it leaves, but for quite some time everything in the garden that can move, and is touched by it, will be in motion, and will stay, for quite some time, in motion. The wind, that is: someone's life. No thing exists that does not touch another thing." I guess I just have a different taste... I guess I like more "acedemic" works. I have definetly also read Isaac Asimov and such, but I usually prefer works for which you have to have a working knowlege of modern philosophy, sociology and psychology to understand them. Jugement by shards has the second title Homo Duplex, which is a sociological theory that proposes that we need to understand humans as being instinct-driven animals on one side, and on the other hand as deeply moral and rational. The novel, at least partually, is a study of that theory (With full knowlege of Jacques Derrida's Ironism,) by taking two opposing historical figures (A famous director and the man who killed his wife and children) and basically framing them as the same character, and as morally equally evil. If you're not reading it as a study of morality in a sociological theory (among other things) It's going to be a really boring 1700 pages of mostly dialogue, sometimes interupted by more action-driven scenes (they try to kill eachother a couple of times) which are far to short and far apart and non-consequential to make the novel interesting. I guess what I'm saying is: Yes, indeed, I like thease kinds of things, and I think it is becasue I just read differently than you
While on the topic of movies/books that are strictly dialogue, I will take this opportunity to recommend 12 Angry Men. It's an older movie (1957), but do not let that deter you. The film takes place almost entirely in one room as a jury deliberates their verdict after hearing a murder trial. It is all dialogue, and some of the best written dialogue at that. There's a reason why 12 Angry Men is considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. I know it's not a series/trilogy/saga, but it's better than basically anything you'll ever see in a series/trilogy/saga. Now, to continue running through some more popular series/trilogies/sagas...
Before I get into some weak franchises, I'll continue with some of the classics. The Godfather Trilogy I'll admit, I've only seen the first Godfather film. I've meaning to get to the sequel, and I will eventually. Nonetheless, The Godfather is outstanding. It is praised heavily among film enthusiasts, and there are plenty of reasons why. When I watched The Godfather, I felt in was in the same vein as Citizen Kane (in fact, the aging makeup used on Marlon Brando wouldn't have existed without Orson Welles's revolutionary aging work in Citizen Kane). While I haven't seen The Godfather Part II, both the first and second film won Best Picture at the Oscars. This is the only time a sequel has ever won the top prize after the movie prior won. However, I haven't heard too many positive things about the third Godfather movie. The Blade Runner Dilogy I hope one day this can become a trilogy. Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is one of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time. Sure, we all love and know Star Wars, but the atmosphere created in Blade Runner and the themes of humanity are almost unmatched by any other sci-fi feature. Blade Runner essentially popularized the cyberpunk genre and played a major part in the creation of synthwave music. However, the sequel, Blade Runner 2049, is even better. I'll let my praises out before I go into more detail. Denis Villeneuve's Blade Runner 2049 is not only the best sequel ever made, but the best sci-fi movie ever made (in my opinion). That might be an unpopular look at it, and the movie is relatively recent. Blade Runner 2049 takes the themes of Scott's universe and double down on everything. It's the kind of movie we don't see enough of nowadays. There aren't explosive battle sequences or action-packed chases. Blade Runner 2049 is a slow-paced study of a character, of a society, of a world, and of humanity. I could write so much on this movie, but it's best if you just watch it and see for yourself. (Warning: It is rated R, and there are reasons why it's rated R) Star Trek Not going to talk about the TV shows since they aren't relevant to the thread (but The Next Generation is the best). In my reply discussing The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, I mentioned how I was opposed to the comparison of the two. In a similar sense, I don't think comparing Star Trek and Star Wars is very productive. Sure, they're both sci-fi series set in space... yeah that's about it. These two franchises are both excellent, and yet very different in themes and universes. As for the original Star Trek movies, I've seen up to Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. The original movies were very on and off. Star Trek: The Motion Picture was slow and long, which resulted in a relatively boring film (Blade Runner 2049 is a slow and long sci-fi movie done right). Whereas the follow up, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is excellent and easily the best of the original Star Trek movies. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock and IV: The Voyage Home were unfortunately forgettable for me. I wish I could say more, but I honestly can't remember much of what happens. The movies branching off The Next Generation characters were almost all weak. I don't remember liking Star Trek Generations, Star Trek: Insurrection, or Star Trek: Nemesis. However, Star Trek: First Contact is my favourite Star Trek movie ever released. It is a fantastic film, and features The Borg (they're so cool). The reboot franchise is also very solid. J.J. Abrams made good films with Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness. Star Trek Beyond might have felt like a Fast & Furious movie in space, but it was still awesome. I don't love any of the recent movies, but I still enjoy them. Television is where Star Trek shines, not in the theatres. Back to the Future They're classics. I don't know what else to say. Robert Zemeckis is an iconic director, and these films are some of his best work. Interestingly enough, when I was younger my favourite was Part II, but now I realize that's the lowest rated of the three. Now that I have a critical eye, I think the first one is the best one and the only great one of the three. It is interesting to see how 2015 was thought of in the 1980s though. Men in Black The first one is great, the second one is not so great, the third one is okay, and the fourth... wait there's a fourth? Men in Black is a movie that didn't need a sequel. It's a very cool concept, and the product we got was awesome, but it could've just ended there and been its own standalone sci-fi hit. Men in Black II is bad, moving on. Men in Black III isn't nearly as bad as the second film, and it has some cool elements, but that's it. Men in Black International, sigh. The most interesting thing about Men in Black International is that the director's name is F. Gary Gary. That's a cool name. Just kidding, Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson have great chemistry and they're the only good parts of the movie. Kind of like how the chemistry between Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones was the only good thing about Men in Black II.
Ugh, the Hobbit movies were awful and disappointing. Not impressed with PJ. (Peter Jackson, I don't know if it's just in New Zealand we call him that). I have high hopes for the Dune movie and hope it will be a series. I love those books, I hope they get it right.
I'm just here over here not having seen any of the movies mentioned in the poll... I don't really like movies very much, lol.
Alien Ridley Scott, James Cameron, and David Fincher all in one franchise?! Scott's Alien is a classic sci-fi horror movie that still holds up to this day. The term "less is more" in relation to horror is so brilliantly displayed in this movie. The Xenomorph is treated like a delicacy to the audience. You rarely get a glimpse of the alien, but when you do, those scenes are ever more impactful. Then, once everyone know hows cool the Xenomorph design is, James Cameron comes in and gives us an action-packed sequel full of them with Aliens. Not only is this sequel just as great as the original, but it does so while also feeling so original. The tones and genres are different. It's less horror, more action, but still all Alien. This film also cements Sigourney Weaver's Ellen Ripley as one of the coolest sci-fi protagonists of all time. While I haven't seen Alien 3, I've heard a lot of mixed things. It's directed by David Fincher, so one day I'll watch it. Also Alien: Resurrection exists. I watched Alien vs. Predator so much as a kid and I don't know why. The movie is really bad. I guess the idea of a Xenomorph and a Predator (not talking about that franchise because I've only seen the first) fighting was really cool and terrifying to me as a kid. Ridley Scott returned to the Alien universe in 2012 to give us Prometheus, a prequel to the franchise. I know this movie has a plethora of flaws, but I actually enjoy it. It's like Joseph Kosinski's Oblivion. I know it's not the best, but it's got some cool sci-fi elements, so I oddly like it. I kind of want to rewatch Prometheus now. I also don't hate Alien: Covenant. Like Prometheus, it has a plethora of flaws, but Xenomorphs kewl. Terminator Did you know that James Cameron is actually Canadian? Just flexing my country's directors (Denis Villeneuve is also Canadian). Cameron's The Terminator is, just like Aliens, a sci-fi classic. It's also kind of terrifying. Both The Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day are outstanding. It's also hilarious to think the Terminator went on to become the governor of California. Anyway, once James Cameron stopped directing them, the movies just went bad. Terminator 3 - Rise of the Machines isn't horrible, but it's not good either. I haven't seen Terminator Salvation, and it has bad ratings. Terminator Genisys made me laugh. I really like Emilia Clarke in Game of Thrones, but oh no no no not in this movie. Terminator: Dark Fate wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be, and it has awesome moments, but like Rise of the Machines, it's not that good. My tip: just stop with this franchise or wait for James Cameron to direct these movies again. Godzilla I grew up on these movies. Super young Daybreaker was terrified of the Showa Era Godzilla where obvious dude in lizard suit would dance around like a campy dinosaur. Now I look at the Showa Era and say "why?" Godzilla means a lot to me, but it also means a lot to cinema. Ishiro Honda's use of miniature sets to demonstrate the scale of Godzilla, and his political commentary on nuclear weaponry are things that influenced film for years to come. Gojira is not only a classic kaiju film, but it was a game changer for the industry. I haven't seen many of the direct sequels to Gojira, but after about 1967 I've seen all of the Godzilla movies (there are 35). The Showa Era is classic, but very goofy. Nonetheless it created classic kaijus that would return for years. The Heisei Era is my favourite. Less campy, more political commentary, more consistency, a direct story tied through multiple movies, and one of the best Godzilla movies ever made (Godzilla vs. Destoroyah). Then Hollywood got their hands on Godzilla. TriStar's Godzilla (1998) sucks. It's not Godzilla. The fact that it carries that name is shameful. It was hilarious when Toho made Zilla (from Godzilla 1998) an antagonist kaiju in Godzilla: Final Wars so Godzilla could destroy that hideous creature. Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack is the Godzilla movie I really grew up on, and my favourite Godzilla movie ever made (so far). It's also the only one from the Millennium Era That I really like. Toho's return to monster with Shin Godzilla is also awesome and gives one of my favourite representations of the classic monster. It shows a drastic change in the target of political commentary from nuclear weaponry to the incompetency of the Japanese government. Oh, and Hollywood got their hands on Godzilla again. In 2014, Legendary Pictures gave us Godzilla, directed by Gareth Edwards. I really like Godzilla, at least a lot more than others do. People criticize it for not having enough Godzilla. They forget that Godzilla was barely in the original Gojira (1954). If I remember correctly, Godzilla has more screen time in the 2014 film than the 1954 original. That's because, at the core, Godzilla is not about a giant monster destroying Tokyo (or America's Tokyo). It's a warning to the world about the dangers of nuclear power. Godzilla (2014) doesn't nail that message, and the characters aren't always the strongest, but it still isn't bad at all. Gareth Edwards, like with Rogue One, nails the representation of scale. Then there's Godzilla: King of the Monsters, which basically does the opposite of Godzilla. It has so much Godzilla, but not enough focus on characters or story. Michael Dougherty is a Godzilla fan, and you can really tell with the movie. I love the passion, I love the references, and as a Godzilla fan I love that this movie exists. As a critic, it could've been so much better. Long live King Ghidorah, the true King of the Monsters. Planet of the Apes I didn't expect to write so much for Godzilla, so I'll be brief with Planet of the Apes. The original (1968) is an absolute classic and has one of the greatest endings of all time. Then they made like 10,000 sequels and none of them were really substantial but 7-year-old Daybreaker still watched them for some reason. Then they rebooted the series with Mark Wahlberg in 2001. We're going to pretend this one doesn't exist. Then they rebooted it again in 2011 with Rise of the Planet of the Apes. James Franco is great, Andy Serkis is great, this movie is good. Enter Matt Reeves. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and War of the Planet of the Apes are amazing! Too many people under-appreciate Andy Serkis's performance because he's doing a mocap performance, but he is stellar. These movies just kept getting better and better (yes, War is my favourite of the three). If the first was great and not just good, then this trilogy would certainly compete to be the best of the best. Robocop Yeah... I've seen all four Robocop movies. Solid first one. That's about it. Crappy reboot. Noticing a pattern?
Don't worry, Dune is in good hands. Canadian director Denis Villeneuve is helming the project (planning on splitting it into two movies). His insanely amazing track record (he hasn't made a bad movie): -Incendies -Prisoners -Enemy -Sicario -Arrival -Blade Runner 2049
I agree, the trilogy is quite amazing! I remember watching the trilogy on my VHS tapes when I was a little boy and I always enjoyed them! I will not deny that Part 2 is that one that may do not like. It's... quite over a lot of people's heads, due to the nature of how time travel works. Even to this day, I kind of find it a video that drags on a bit too long, but being an adult now, I can understand what's going on rather than walking away from it as soon as they got to the 2015 future. --- I loved how the 3rd part went, because I got to see how the characters develop and the way they choose to live the rest of their lives. I forgot about this series! There's... a 4th one? Oh boy... I've never seen the 2nd movie, because I've just heard that it's not special, but I am curious how things transpire after the first movie. I've loved the 1st one since I was a kid, and I enjoyed seeing Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones go at it back in the days when I watched it on the VHS. The third one, I actually loved. I loved seeing Will Smith go back in time and save his friend and prove himself to be different than how things begin in the movie. (No spoilers here) I loved the ending and I thought it made a nice way to close the trilogy, that is, until I just heard that there's a fourth one coming... :\
Another book that I know I need to read, because one of the youtubers I watch for ~Writing Purposes~ Talks about it on occassion
I promise I'm almost done. Before I get to the bad series/trilogies/sagas (which is the last set of 5), I'll talk about some animated ones. Toy Story This is the best animated movie series you'll find. Every Toy Story movie is great, and the third even got nominated for Best Picture (an animated movie being nominated for Best Picture while the Best Animated Feature category exists is crazy). Somehow, even Toy Story 4 is great. I was never a huge fan of this series when I was younger, and while I appreciate how good they are now, I don't have that nostalgic feeling or passion for these movies when talking about them. They're still great though. Pixar never fails (except when they did with Cars which I'm not going to talk about). Despicable Me Despicable Me is a good movie. It's a fun children's story that just happened to create goofy yellow creatures called Minions. It was all downhill from there. This is the perfect example of a studio going overboard with something popular that will sell a lot of toys. Star Wars did it with the Ewoks (there were Ewok movies after ROTJ), Frozen II did it with Olaf, Despicable Me did it with the Minions. In fact, we even got a Minions spin-off movie, AND THAT MOVIE IS GETTING A SEQUEL. Despicable Me 2 is meh. Minions (the spin-off) sucks. Despicable Me 3 sucks. I have no love for this franchise. If the movies were good, then sure, but only one is good and the rest are irritating. A prime example of corporate filmmaking. Illumination sucks, stop giving them money. Shrek I mean... it's Shrek... come on. Memes aside, Shrek and Shrek 2 are actually really good. There's a lot to enjoy about them. Then they made a third movie, followed by a fourth movie, followed by a ton of shorts like Shrek the Halls and that pointless fireplace one. Fun fact: the guy who directed Shrek's Yule Log (the pointless fireplace one) also directed the disaster known as Trolls World Tour. There's also a Puss in Boots spin-off that I always forget about (but is apparently good?). I feel like DreamWorks has a problem with going overboard on the sequels they know parents will pay money for their kids to see. Pixar doesn't make a sequel unless they know they can nail it, DreamWorks will make a sequel if they know they can make money. I don't like passionless filmmaking. Madagascar On the topic of DreamWorks movies that were milked for money, Madagascar! Only the first one was the worst, and it got better from there. Memes aside, the penguins are the equivalent of Despicable Me's Minions. It's funny, the only good movie in this trilogy is Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which was co-written by the legendary Noah Baumbach. Why he took the project? I have no idea, but it probably saved the third movie. If you haven't already, go watch Baumbach's Marriage Story exclusively streaming on Netflix (it was my favourite movie of 2019). Aladdin / The Lion King I bet you didn't know they made sequels to these! Or maybe you did, because they were made because it's easy to amuse kids and take money from parents. I know I've seen all of them. The Return of Jafar and Aladdin and the King of Thieves are both just there. The original Aladdin is such a great movie, it's cool that these sequels exist (I guess) but it also just fits into the category of forgotten Disney sequels (because there are a lot). In a similar sense, The Lion King II: Simba's Pride and The Lion King 1/2 are both stupid. The Lion King 1/2 is interesting because it takes place at the same time as The Lion King just from a different perspective... but why not just watch The Lion King. The original "The Lion King" is in my top ten favourite films of all time, and for good reason. That movie is perfect. On a side note, the live-action Disney remakes suck. The Jungle Book is the only good one I've seen so far (although I think Mulan will be good). Moral of the story, studios love to exploit kids for money. With pointless sequels, absurd spin-offs, and lifeless remakes, they don't seem to be stopping. I praise Pixar a lot, because they are a studio that doesn't just make mindless movies. Kids are easy to entertain, but Pixar movies add another layer. Toy Story and Cars are the only trilogy/series they have (the rest are just standalone or sequels), but that's part of what makes them great. While Disney pumps out sequels and remakes, Pixar (which yes, is owned by Disney, but still) creates new stories. Pixar never fails to amaze me (except with Cars), and I'm looking forward to Soul. On a side-note, I also haven't seen any of the How to Train Your Dragon movies, but their reviews are off the charts!
This is the last set, I promise. I've saved the worst for last. Transformers It doesn't take a genius to know that these movies suck. It's Michael Bay. That means explosions and product placement. Sure, they have a few entertaining sequences, but the movies suck. I've only seen up to Transformers: Age of Extinction, and I have no plans to watch Transformers: The Last Knight. Apparently Bumblebee was really good though, which is the first one Michael Bay didn't direct. Of the four horrible ones I've seen, my favourite has to be Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and only because I saw a trailer for Donnie Darko before watching it, when then prompted me to go watch that amazing movie. M. Night Shyamalan's Glass This trilogy consists of Unbreakable, Split, and Glass. M. Night Shyamalan is both a great director (Signs, The Sixth Sense) and a confusing director (The Last Airbender). When he's good, he's really good. That's Unbreakable. It's an awesome movie all-around. Then, 16 years later, he made Split (which no one realized was a sequel). Another good movie. They both came together for Glass, which acts as a sequel to both Unbreakable and Split. To be honest, Glass sucks. There's no much talent in the main cast alone. Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, and James McAvoy, in a movie directed by M. Night Shyamalan, and we get Glass. How unfortunate. The Purge I watched these movies as a joke. That's how stupid they are. The most interesting was The First Purge, which advertised the first poster by putting the title on a red hat and debuting a teaser during Trump's State of the Union address. That's the only compliment I'll give these absurd horror movies. Jumanji Sorry, but I don't really like the Jumanji movies. Robin Williams is one of the greatest actors of all time, and everyone loves him, but he does not suddenly make Jumanji good. He's certainly the best part, but that's about it. Both of the reboot movies are better than the original. Although, to be honest, I don't really like Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle or Jumanji: The Next Level that much either. They're entertaining, hence why they made so much money, but they're also mindless. It's an unpopular opinion, but that's just how I feel about this franchise. In fact, I like Jon Favreau's Zathura: A Space Adventure (which is a Jumanji wanna be) more than I like any of the Jumanji movies. Home Alone I don't like any of these movies. Few Christmas movies have been able impress me, and this is not one of them. I feel like it's only loved because of nostalgia. It's also one of the annoying "go to" watches each year. There are better Christmas movies, and there are better movies as a whole. If you like Home Alone, good for you. I haven't seen the 5th one, but 1-4 just kept getting worse each film. I think that wraps up all the series/trilogies/sagas I've seen and care to talk about. If not, I'll be sure to create another essay post! Thank you to the people who have read them, and sorry to anyone bothered by my spammy messages. When the topic is movies, I can write a lot.
Now for my definitive ranking of the TOP 50 movie series/trilogies/sagas! Keep in mind, this is all my opinion. The following franchises are ranked based off the average rating I've given each movie within. You can find my ratings, reviews, and lists on my Letterboxd page. Some of these franchises have Adjusted ratings. If you're curious why a franchise is ranked in a certain spot, why I adjusted a franchise's average rating higher, or why I adjusted a franchise's average rating lower, just ask! If you want my thoughts on these franchises, I spammed out so many replies to this thread explaining almost every one on this list. Without further or due: 1. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (100%) 2. The Blade Runner Universe (95% - Adj. 97%) 3. Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy (86.7%) 4. Toy Story Series (85%) 5. Planet of the Apes Reboot Trilogy (83.3%) 6. Star Wars Saga (69.1% - Adj. 80%) 7. John Wick Trilogy (76.7%) 8. Back to the Future Trilogy (76.7%) 9. Marvel Cinematic Universe (69.6% - Adj. 75%) 10. Harry Potter Series (75%) 11. Mission: Impossible Series (73.3%) 12. Star Trek Reboot Trilogy (70%) 13. Heisei Era Godzilla (68.6%) 14. Bourne Series (67.5%) 15. Alien Franchise (65%) 16. Lego Movie Franchise (65%) 17. Shrek Series (65%) 18. Terminator Franchise (64%) 19. Kung Fu Panda Trilogy (63.3%) 20. Raimi Spider-Man Trilogy (63.3%) 21. Star Trek Original Movie Series (62.5%) 22. MonsterVerse (60%) 23. James Bond Franchise (59.2%) 24. Fast [and Furious] Saga (52.2 - Adj. 58%) 25. Showa Era Godzilla (57.8%) 26. Millennium Era Godzilla (62% - Adj. 57.8%) 27. Wolverine Trilogy (56.7%) 28. Ghostbusters Franchise (56.7%) 29. X-Men Series (55.7%) 30. The Hunger Games Series (55%) 31. M. Night Shyamalan’s Glass Trilogy (63.3% - Adj. 55%) 32. Men in Black Series (55%) 33. Original Planet of the Apes Series (58% - Adj. 55%) 34. The DC Extended Universe (53.8%) 35. Jumanji Franchise (53.3%) 36. Madagascar Trilogy (53.3%) 37. Pirates of the Caribbean Series (52.5%) 38. Despicable Me Money Grab (52.5%) 39. Star Trek: The Next Generation Movies (60% - Adj. 50%) 40. The Hobbit Trilogy (50%) 41. Ice Age Series (50%) 42. Robocop Franchise (47.5%) 43. The Amazing Spider-Man Series (45%) 44. 80’s Burton/Schumacher Batman Series (37.5 - Adj. 40%) 45. Scary Movie Series (38%) 46. Transformers Series (35%) 47. The Purge Series (35%) 48. Godzilla Anime Trilogy (30%) 49. Home Alone Series (30%) 50. Fox’s Fantastic Four Franchise (26.7%)
Alien is amazing, Aliens is good. The rest just get worse and worse. The action sequences in Covenant were so bad it was like slapstick. I laughed out loud.
