Because compared to the show, Star Trek's movies were crap. Plus Trilogy usually means three movies. They made more than that. And Star Wars rocks. Also note that the title is Best movie trilogy. Star Trek movies weren't all that great compared to The Godfather or Die Hard.
well Omega thats your private opinion on Star Trek. But lets not dirty the golden parts of cinema industry. Include "Star Trek" as part of the poll.
1. How many people talk about Star Trek as in the movie compared to the thousands that talk about the show. I like Star Trek, but the movies aren't good. Except the latest one. 2. Golden parts? How many emmys did it win? Golden Globe Awards? Were they inducted ino the American Film Institute Hall of Fame? The answer to those questions is no. 3. I can't change the poll.
Check again. It's in between The Godfather and The Bourne Trilogy. Come on! Do you really think i'd forget that?
Bah! You snuck it in later... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I must have been looking so hard I missed it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
the original star wars was great when it came out but isn't so great now, the new star wars could have been great if jar jar and that hack hayden hadn't been in it among other things. Indiana jones could have been good but the last movie was so beyond redemption it destroyed the first 2 good ones. Terminator is a no since Arnold ruined the conan movie, I'm a fan of the books. Predator, see Terminator Die Hard, I never took Bruce Willis that seriously Jaws, great stuff can't really say anything bad about it X-men, comic books movies are okay, it wasn't bad but it's still a comic book so it was left with LoTR and Bourne, tough choice, I had to go with Bourne cause I like those kind of movies, if Bourne hadn't been a choice I would have gone with LoTR.
Star Wars (original): pretty damn' good. I remember all the anticipation waiting for the first one to come out, and it didn't disappoint. Nor did the two sequels. Star Wars (new): Meh, Jar Jar etc. Lost its magic. Indiana Jones: the third one sort of took the edge off. The Terminator: oh come on! The first one was a B movie (but excellent for all that). The second one just went OTT, the budget let them concentrate on effects rather than story. The Godfather: never seen it. Not bothered about seeing it. Lord of the Rings: they filmed the book! Unprecedented! Unheard of! Brilliant. Near faultless. The Bourne Trilogy: they should have filmed the books (and I'm none too sure about letting Eric van Lustbader continue the franchise with the novels). Loved the books, really liked the films (way better than James Bond), but they should have filmed the books. Die Hard: first two pretty good, the third got a bit silly. Jaws: never seen it, don't want to. The book was more than enough for me. (Blurb on the back said - "read the first page and you won't be able to put it down" I gave it two chapters and then binned it). Predator: another B movie that went too far. And Danny Glover (good actor though he is) wasn't the man for the role in Predator 2 - it requires a hero somewhat less human than the Predator itself. Dark Horse comics had it right when they made the hero Dutch's brother, and the film should have used that idea along with the ones they actually did rip off from the comic. X-Men: torn on this, I'm an X-fan from waaay back (owned X-Men #1 on 2 separate occasions and I'm still kicking myself for not hanging on to them - they're worth millions now...). Too many liberties but a good effort. LoTR.
` A write-in vote for: The Brave Little Toaster The Brave Little Toaster Goes to Mars The Brave Little Toaster to the Rescue Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I voted for LoTR. You asked why? Because it was one of very few times that the movie version of a book didn't clash horribly with my fond memory of the book. I felt the same way about "The Wizard of Oz" but AFAIK they've never cinematized any of the sequels so it's not a trilogy. Because they didn't shorten it to four hours, or two. Because regardless of being based on a book, it was one of the best movies ever. Actually, "trilogy" always means three of something. Latin and Greek tria mean "three." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The only Star Trek movies I really liked were the very first one and the new one. Some of the ones in the middle weren't worth seeing. I only saw the first one but it was great. A good rendition of the story. I'll have to look for the other two. How about "The Muppet Movie" and its two sequels? The second and third were not in the same class as the first but they were okay and the original was fabulous enough to carry the series. "Pirates of the Caribbean"? Or "A Fistful of Dollars" and its two sequels?
You should have had The Transporter trilogy in there though. They were fun films: enough violence and enough humour. "You never told me you had a friend" "Well he's not really a friend, he's French."
Darn it, I just finished watching it a month back. I shouldv'e remembered. They were pretty funny. I like Jason Statham in most movies. Especially Crank.
No. No they did not. There were sooo many things not right in the movie compared to the book.. And if it was possible, he made Sam even more annoying in the movie then he was in the book. Galadriel ended up looking like she'd been coloured in with a Nicko pen when she was challenged by the ring. As for Legolas.. the skateboarding elf.. And Gimli was turned into the resident joke or more to the point, the slap stick comedy.. I could go on.. :bawl:
Pfft I read the books 30+ years ago. They filmed what I remembered of the books (apart form the boring Tom Bombadil bits). I couldn't think of anyone that I'd want replaced (okay Gimli as a character was a bit jokey) but what really did it for me was Legolas walking on top of the snow while everyone ploughed through it at waist height. I suppose it didn't help my friend's wife's enjoyment when we spent half the film every time Elrond was on-screen muttering "Soooo Mr. Baggins It appears you lead two lives..."
I thought the books were horrible. I could barely make it through the one. The second one took me almost a year to read. The movie was only an improvement on them. ~String
