Indiana Jones 3 is as good, if not better, than any other movie in the series.
Back to the Future 3 is nowhere near on par with 2.
This is some ragebait right here
Wtf do you mean, part 3 is awesome and has some of the best humor in the series. Sure it’s a bit derivative, but that doesn’t stop it from being a better 3rd in a trilogy than most others. It’s also got a lot of quotable moments, I quote this for just about anything that’s hot
Well, I suppose if you had a straight stretch of track with a level grade, and you weren’t haulin’ no cars behind you, and if you can get the fire hot enough, and I’m talkin’ about hotter than the blazes of hell and damnation itself… then yes
1 and 2 are about even. 3 is a little lower than them, but not by much.
The first two really are parts 1 and 2 of a story. The 3rd completely changes the scenery, which gives some people the impression it’s not as good. It is though , and it ends the story well.
Then there’s the fun fact that parts 2 and 3 were filmed at the same time. So the impression the films give is backwards from how they were made.
I’m considering it better. Not that part 2 is bad, but I like part 3 more.
I disagree with the Indiana Jones ratings. The third movie was better than the second, and possibly better than the first too.
Hmm for me 1 and 3 are about equal (both fantastic), but 2 is my least favourite.
The second was so much more sexist and racist than I remembered that I gave up
I agree. Watched the second one the other day after years and this movie did not age well. The portrayel of the woman was unbearable, a massive downgrade from the first one. The racism also made me feel uncomfortable. Nonetheless, I finished that movie again, but even plotwise and in terms of overall cinematic quality, it is the weakest of the three.
Awman, I didn’t think matrix 2 and 3 where that bad.
I remember enjoying them.
They made viewers work to understand. Viewers largely rejected that.
Which has led us, irrevocably, to spoon fed trash that plays to the dumbest person in the audience.
I disagree, the more texture the ‘real’ world gets the less portent the message. Same with John wick, one they start making it into a movie about the honor system in this world wide assassin network it loses its urgency.
The power of both is the mystique of the superimposed world, you don’t understand it, but it lends an excellent backdrop to the movie, that is really about something much smaller, self realization and vengeance.
Once the first movie concludes, the narrative cycle is basically over and a new, more convoluted, plot line gets drawn up that doesn’t feel as important as before.
The mystique gets filled in with additional detail, which rubs the wrong way with the metaphor, as a new rule system gets put in place in order for the protagonist to re-live the exact story arc of struggle and eventual victory as in the first movie.
Yet with every iteration it feels more hollow, the emotional pay off subsides. There is no resolution as three needs always be narrative room for the next sequel. It leaves you emotionally drawn out and no expertly choreographed fight scene can fill that hole.
As it wasn’t about the fight scenes, it’s storytelling.
Don’t understand why people dislike those movies so much. Even enjoyed the 4th one.
They didn’t deliver on the promises that Neo made at the end of the first movie. They’re quite different than the first film. The 4th one was an obvious cash grab by the studios. The Wachowskis didn’t want to make the movie, and they straight-up tell the audience in the movie that they were forced to do it, or let someone else do it.
The fourth was sort of hilarious on that point. HERE’S YOUR STUPID MOVIE! I’d have been pissed if I was expecting something different, but I laughed my ass off.
I don’t agree with most of those.
