View Poll Results: Favorite type of franhise
Episodic
7
58.33%
Serial
5
41.67%
Voters: 12. You may not vote on this poll
Favorite type of franchise
#1
Favorite type of franchise
This was lifted from the Phantom Menace thread. Episodic or Serial...
Serial:Star Wars, LOTR, Alien, Back to the Future
Episodic: James Bond, Star Trek, Dollars trilogy
What sort do YOU enjoy most?
Serial:Star Wars, LOTR, Alien, Back to the Future
Episodic: James Bond, Star Trek, Dollars trilogy
What sort do YOU enjoy most?
#3
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Went with Episodic because Serial doesn't work well with a LOT of horror franchises.
#4
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Wendy's.
Since that's not a valid choice, given the descriptions I'll have to go with serial.
That being said, it's funny how Star Wars is considered serial while each film is an 'episode'.
Whatever...
Since that's not a valid choice, given the descriptions I'll have to go with serial.
That being said, it's funny how Star Wars is considered serial while each film is an 'episode'.
Whatever...
#5
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Episodic
Last edited by Ash Ketchum; 01-25-12 at 09:35 AM.
#6
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Still though, while I feel that episodic franchises are easier to count on my favorite movie franchises are all serial (LOTR, Godfather, Harry Potter, BTTF).
#8
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Serial.
Episodic only works if the whole thing is written in advance. Otherwise writers get into the problem that they blew up the Earth for a hyperspace bypass in the first story and want it back for the third story. In a serial structure the need for continuity is a lot less, which gives writers a lot more latitude.
Episodic only works if the whole thing is written in advance. Otherwise writers get into the problem that they blew up the Earth for a hyperspace bypass in the first story and want it back for the third story. In a serial structure the need for continuity is a lot less, which gives writers a lot more latitude.
#14
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Serial.
Episodic only works if the whole thing is written in advance. Otherwise writers get into the problem that they blew up the Earth for a hyperspace bypass in the first story and want it back for the third story. In a serial structure the need for continuity is a lot less, which gives writers a lot more latitude.
Episodic only works if the whole thing is written in advance. Otherwise writers get into the problem that they blew up the Earth for a hyperspace bypass in the first story and want it back for the third story. In a serial structure the need for continuity is a lot less, which gives writers a lot more latitude.
#18
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Serial
it's how I like my TV shows too. I actually like TV shows better than movies, mostly because you get new material week-to-week, rather than wait 2-3 years for the new movie in a franchise.
it's how I like my TV shows too. I actually like TV shows better than movies, mostly because you get new material week-to-week, rather than wait 2-3 years for the new movie in a franchise.
#19
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Fixed.
If I had to break it down:
Serialized franchises will reward the viewer with a greater experience, but could tarnish the quality of the original film especially if not built in advance.
Episodic franchises might not know where to end, but there happens to be a more consistent quality and rhythm to them allowing for a more enjoyable experience.
One of the reasons why the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings franchises worked so well is that the story was already made for the filmmakers to follow. That's why there's more consistency with (and more love for) those two franchises than say the Back to the Future, The Godfather and Star Wars franchises which have (numerous) weak entries inside of them. For example: as amazing and great The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are, The Godfather Part III is a steaming pile of shit that should've never been made.
If you're making a serialized franchise, know your endgame. If you don't know your endgame in advance and write it in (i.e. Back to the Future Part III, The Matrix Revolutions and Return of the Jedi), you've just hit creative bankruptcy.
However, there are times where making it up as you go along works as long as you have the right people in place. Like I enjoyed the last two Saw films more than some of the entries that came before them (i.e. VI and V) and Paranormal Activity 3 was a cinematic equivalent of a fun house.
As history has shown, it's easy to take an episodic franchise and mold it into a serialized franchise that could work as long as you have the right crew. Look at Fast Five which follows the events of Fast and Furious, but also wraps the stories of the first three films into the mix. Most would argue that Fast Five is one of the best, if not the best, entries in that specific franchise.
Speaking of fifth entries, look at the Final Destination franchise which has been mostly episodic (except the first sequel). Final Destination 5 was a blast that critics actually enjoyed unlike the first four (and happens to be the only film in said franchise with a fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes).
For great episodic films, Ash used the Gamera and Godzilla films as an example. What's interesting to note about those two as while one can jump in anywhere in the series, some portions of those films have their own "serialized" storyline (i.e. the 90s Gamera trilogy and the Godzilla Millennium series). Same thing could even be said about the James Bond films (based upon which era: Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan or Craig), the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, and our friend Indiana Jones.
... and that's why I choose episodic.
If I had to break it down:
Serialized franchises will reward the viewer with a greater experience, but could tarnish the quality of the original film especially if not built in advance.
Episodic franchises might not know where to end, but there happens to be a more consistent quality and rhythm to them allowing for a more enjoyable experience.
One of the reasons why the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings franchises worked so well is that the story was already made for the filmmakers to follow. That's why there's more consistency with (and more love for) those two franchises than say the Back to the Future, The Godfather and Star Wars franchises which have (numerous) weak entries inside of them. For example: as amazing and great The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are, The Godfather Part III is a steaming pile of shit that should've never been made.
If you're making a serialized franchise, know your endgame. If you don't know your endgame in advance and write it in (i.e. Back to the Future Part III, The Matrix Revolutions and Return of the Jedi), you've just hit creative bankruptcy.
However, there are times where making it up as you go along works as long as you have the right people in place. Like I enjoyed the last two Saw films more than some of the entries that came before them (i.e. VI and V) and Paranormal Activity 3 was a cinematic equivalent of a fun house.
As history has shown, it's easy to take an episodic franchise and mold it into a serialized franchise that could work as long as you have the right crew. Look at Fast Five which follows the events of Fast and Furious, but also wraps the stories of the first three films into the mix. Most would argue that Fast Five is one of the best, if not the best, entries in that specific franchise.
Speaking of fifth entries, look at the Final Destination franchise which has been mostly episodic (except the first sequel). Final Destination 5 was a blast that critics actually enjoyed unlike the first four (and happens to be the only film in said franchise with a fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes).
For great episodic films, Ash used the Gamera and Godzilla films as an example. What's interesting to note about those two as while one can jump in anywhere in the series, some portions of those films have their own "serialized" storyline (i.e. the 90s Gamera trilogy and the Godzilla Millennium series). Same thing could even be said about the James Bond films (based upon which era: Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan or Craig), the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, and our friend Indiana Jones.
... and that's why I choose episodic.
#20
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
One of the reasons why the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings franchises worked so well is that the story was already made for the filmmakers to follow. That's why there's more consistency with (and more love for) those two franchises than say the Back to the Future, The Godfather and Star Wars franchises which have (numerous) weak entries inside of them. For example: as amazing and great The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are, The Godfather Part III is a steaming pile of shit that should've never been made.
Star Wars is a bit of a different case as the original trilogy is loved by most but the prequels/alterations to the original trilogy have definitely divided fans.
I do agree overall though that a story that is already made for film makers whether based on a series of books or just a pre-planned story in mind is easier to work out because the direction the films will take is already determined to some extent.
#21
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
I can somewhat see your point but I think Back to the Future and The Godfather are bad examples to use as weak franchises. They both seem pretty beloved by audiences both past and present even though both have weaker entries. Really in my opinion though Back to the Future as a whole tells an entertaining story and while Part III may get some hate I never found it all that bad. The Godfather Part III on the other hand is overall pretty disappointing though.
Star Wars is a bit of a different case as the original trilogy is loved by most but the prequels/alterations to the original trilogy have definitely divided fans.
I do agree overall though that a story that is already made for film makers whether based on a series of books or just a pre-planned story in mind is easier to work out because the direction the films will take is already determined to some extent.
Star Wars is a bit of a different case as the original trilogy is loved by most but the prequels/alterations to the original trilogy have definitely divided fans.
I do agree overall though that a story that is already made for film makers whether based on a series of books or just a pre-planned story in mind is easier to work out because the direction the films will take is already determined to some extent.
I love the first Back to the Future, but in terms of overall storytelling, you can see the wheels falling off early on into the second act of Back to the Future Part II. To note, critics were actually mixed on the film when it was released in 1989. Back to the Future Part III got better reviews, but I know fans usually fight about if II or III being the weaker entry (I personally believe III is the weaker outing).
I think Star Wars is a great film, but The Empire Strikes Back is an amazing film. Everything after that doesn't exist. Return of the Jedi had some great moments, but the Special Edition butchered any resemblance of quality the film once had. The less I think about the prequels, the better.
#22
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Favorite type of franchise
I'm sure most people don't really like The Godfather Part III the best, but on a whole the trilogy stands pretty strong and has a loyal fanbase. I agree though it's not very good.
Personally I agree with you on Back to the Future and say Part III is the weaker entry. I always liked Part II, it was different and a bit darker than the first but I thought it had some cool ideas and liked that they went back into the first movie from a different perspective.
I guess the thing for me though is those movies are such a huge part of my childhood and I must've seen them all dozens of times. Even if Part III is weak I guess I enjoy it because frankly Michael J. Fox and Christoper Lloyd on screen together were just the perfect duo and I think the entire trilogy creates a nice story .
Also totally agree with your sentiments on Star Wars. The first two are gold and while I liked Return of the Jedi growing up it's not very high on my list anymore. Although to be truthful those movies I feel are pretty much forever ruined for me personally. I really don't have much desire to watch them at all anymore.
Personally I agree with you on Back to the Future and say Part III is the weaker entry. I always liked Part II, it was different and a bit darker than the first but I thought it had some cool ideas and liked that they went back into the first movie from a different perspective.
I guess the thing for me though is those movies are such a huge part of my childhood and I must've seen them all dozens of times. Even if Part III is weak I guess I enjoy it because frankly Michael J. Fox and Christoper Lloyd on screen together were just the perfect duo and I think the entire trilogy creates a nice story .
Also totally agree with your sentiments on Star Wars. The first two are gold and while I liked Return of the Jedi growing up it's not very high on my list anymore. Although to be truthful those movies I feel are pretty much forever ruined for me personally. I really don't have much desire to watch them at all anymore.
#23
Re: Favorite type of franchise
Fixed.
If I had to break it down:
Serialized franchises will reward the viewer with a greater experience, but could tarnish the quality of the original film especially if not built in advance.
Episodic franchises might not know where to end, but there happens to be a more consistent quality and rhythm to them allowing for a more enjoyable experience.
If I had to break it down:
Serialized franchises will reward the viewer with a greater experience, but could tarnish the quality of the original film especially if not built in advance.
Episodic franchises might not know where to end, but there happens to be a more consistent quality and rhythm to them allowing for a more enjoyable experience.