“Mission: Impossible III” (2006)
Franchise: Mission: Impossible
How Threequel-y Was It: After a notoriously prolonged development period that saw directors like David Fincher and Joe Carnahan come and go (along with writers like David Koepp and Frank Darabont), it was decided that J.J. Abrams, then primarily known for his cultish ABC spy series “Alias,” would direct the movie, which saw a larger cast and Abrams placing a greater emphasis on the private life of superspy Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise). The results are awkward and uneven – it has some of the best sequences of the entire franchise (like the Vatican setpiece) and one of the best villains in Philip Seymour Hoffman‘s evil arms dealer. But Abrams’ inexperience with a big canvas is painfully apparent, thanks to his insistence on television-sized close-ups and clumsy plotting. As a third film and potential cap to the franchise, it doesn’t feel definitive or spectacular enough (thankfully this installment would be followed with “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” overseen by Abrams but directed with more energy by Brad Bird), but Abrams still brought enough new blood and fine set pieces to make it agreeably enjoyable. There’s a reason Abrams has stayed on to shepherd future entries. It’s his mission and he decided to accept it.
Where does it rank in the franchise (to that date): 2/3. At the time it was much better than John Woo‘s almost painful second film, but didn’t match the class or elegance of Brian De Palma‘s sorely underrated original. “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol” might be the best of the whole bunch, though.
“The Dark Knight Rises” (2012)
Franchise: Christopher Nolan‘s Batman films
How Threequel-y Was It: Having already set himself an unenviably high bar with both “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight,” Christopher Nolan ratcheted the stakes even higher by insisting that “The Dark Knight Rises” would be the definitive end end, the final final installment of his Batman story. So arcs would close, contracts would be fulfilled and, whatever happened to the property next, these three films would always be a completed trilogy. What’s impressive is the degree to which he made good on those promises — “The Dark Knight Rises,” is to us a fantastic example of how to round off a trilogy while leaving enough canonical possibilities open for someone else to take it somewhere else, without cheating the audience of a sense of satisfaction and closure. Yes, we agree that Nolan does occasionally take his eye off the ball when it comes to plot plausibility (really? It’s the whole police department down there?), and sometimes skitters over details that a simple line of dialogue, or a tiny action beat could solve, but juggling so many strands simultaneously we cut him some slack. Especially considering that what he really nails is what sets this universe apart from that of other comic-based properties: there is a sense of time passed, lessons learned and people changed fundamentally that a more cartoonish approach could never really attain. More than a sequence of stories in which Batman works out how to defeat a bad guy, these films are about Bruce Wayne getting older, getting wiser and eventually, getting strong enough to leave Batman behind, and number 3 is where that agenda is writ largest.
Where does it rate in its franchise: Probably 2/3, though whether you consider it better than ‘Dark Knight’ and worse than ‘Begins’ or the other way round is a teensy bit more up for debate.
“Alien 3” (1992)
Franchise: Alien
How Threequel-y Was It: After the haunted-house scariness of “Alien” and the more go-for-broke thrill ride of “Aliens,” the franchise turned darker and more somber with “Alien 3,” which takes place on a prison planet inhabited by rapists, thieves, and murderers. (The original, painfully misleading – especially if you’re ten – tagline was: “On earth, everyone can hear you scream.”) The original version of “Alien 3” was set on a wooden planet inhabited by space monks, but this vision seemed too unwieldy for Fox, so they instead hired music video savant David Fincher, known for his charcoal-black aesthetic, to make his directorial debut. Fincher changed the setting to a prison colony and slathered the film in stylistically impressive grime, although the film didn’t really survive its abrupt tonal shift from the previous film — that was a rollicking good time Fincher literally deadened by killing off the surviving cast members — and was alienating to say the least. It added up to an unnecessarily dour experience, if one that, aethetically at least, intervening years have been a little kinder to.
Where does it rank in the franchise (to that date): 3/3 It’s a fascinating failure, for sure, but at the time was the least impressive of the three movies. It’s still more fun to watch than the fourth film, “Alien: Resurrection,” and we’ll leave last year’s kinda-prequel “Prometheus” out of the frame entirely, in the interests of internal Playlist harmony.
“Toy Story 3” (2010)
Franchise: Toy Story
How Threequel-y Was It: While “Cars 2” and “Monsters University” feel more like branding exercises than legitimate follow-ups, the “Toy Story” franchise has always served to grow the characters and find new ways to wring laughs from a premise that is essentially a bunch of talking toys getting into adventures. And “Toy Story 3” really brings the A-game. The scope is expanded, a few new characters are introduced to spice things up, but more crucially, it brings the story full circle. Andy is now all grown up, and the toys that were his companions for 18 years now need to find someone else to love and play with them. Easily the most emotional entry of the series, Woody and the gang nearly find themselves incinerated and contemplating their own mortality in one of the most intense sequences in the series (and maybe in any animated movie in recent years). But “Toy Story 3” is all about passing the torch, saying goodbye to past memories, and hopefully making room for new ones, wherever life takes you, and if your heartstrings didn’t tug a little when Bonnie embraces her new friends at the end, you have no soul. A truly satisfying, worthy finale to the series, that perfectly closes the loop on the three movies.
Where does it rate in its franchise (to that date): Well, no franchise is ever truly finished and “Toy Story” has lived on past the third installment with a handful of shorts and Tom Hanks saying himself “Toy Story 4” was in the works (though it doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon). But “Toy Story 3” leaves the series on a high note, and as the best of the bunch, so 1/3.
“Die Hard with a Vengeance”
Franchise: Die Hard
How Threequel-y Was It: Starting as an everyman cop in an extraordinary situation in “Die Hard,” each progressive entry in the series has seen John McClane become more of a superhero (seriously he should’ve died a zillion times by now) in increasingly outlandish and empty movies, with villains becoming more anonymous until whats-his-name in “A Good To Day To Die Hard” threatened to we-don’t-remember-and-it-doesn’t-matter. “Die Hard With Vengeance” represents the tipping point of the series, between its grittier beginnings and homogenized, pre-packaged latter day excursions. On the one hand, you have a scenery-chewing Jeremy Irons playing a guy named Simon who sends McClane around Manhattan on an overly elaborate and evil game of… wait for it… Simon Says. On the other hand, you have McClane in Harlem wearing a sign that says “I hate N*iggers.” It’s a weird mix of cartoony and provocative that never really works, though it’s not without its charms, either.
Where does it rate in its franchise: 3/3 Worst, (though there are Playlisters who would insist ‘Die Harder‘ is the lesser sequel). Third best in a series that has gotten worse and worse with each entry — maybe the developing “Die Hard 6” will buck the trend…but probably not….
