Talk:Trilogy

Comments

I removed "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" from the list of trilogies because (a) it's not really a trilogy, and (b) it's mentioned in the article already, as a humerous aside, which seems a better way to bring it in than in a list. - DavidWBrooks 18:14, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

L|bek's Thr | elogy |=u, e

b o oks.google.com/b o oks?id=t y pSAgAAQBAJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.97.46.151 (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

geeky examples

Boy, are the examples in this article a perfect example of the geek/nerd/computer-fan bias inherent in wikipedia! - DavidWBrooks 02:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

A few months later, following the wonderful example of an editor who created a main article about movie trilogies which allows cutting down the list here, I have trimmed some reptetive examples from the text (e.g., several sets of video games) and tried to expand the cultural reach further beyond sci-fi and fantasy - by, for example, removing the Scream movies from the famous list and putting in the Apu trilogy. - DavidWBrooks 16:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Trilogies that aren't

Just how many "trilogies" are there with more than three parts? Most importantly, are there enough to make a separate list? At the moment the only ones I can think of are:

Hitchhiker's Guide (a trilogy in four/five parts) Xanth - where the original trilogy was extended to 9, then a new trilogy was started, but then (at around the point I stopped reading) someone pointed out that he could stretch it to 3^3 = 27 parts and call that the trilogy Scary Movie - the latest offerring advertised as "The fourth and final part of the trilogy".

Can we expand this trilogy to a few more examples? Confusing Manifestation 05:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Video game trilogies

The list of video/computer game trilogies is getting pretty darn long: They seem to be the norm in the industry. Can somebody with some knowledge of the field trim it a bit - we only need really notable examples here, as with books and movies - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, one example I know is the Mass Effect trilogy (Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3) which together add up to a good 45 GB of hard disk space. Another example would be the Dead Space trilogy, spanning a still good 21 GB. Also there's the Max Payne trilogy, with the latest game in the series, Max Payne 3, being the heaviest at 19 GB or so. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 14:58, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

trilogy differs from triptych

"A trilogy is different than a triptych" — How are they different? - Puck (talk) 15:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Er, did you read the article? It describes a trilogy in the opening sentence, and describes a triptych directly after the phrase you quoted above. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 21:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've read the article and that's why I still don't know exactly what's the difference. A triptych is three related or connected paintings that are created at one time and designed to be viewed as a single work. But a trilogy could also be created at one time and could also be viewed as a single work. - Puck (talk) 22:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

(A very belated response) I think this line from the intro about trilogy explains the key difference: "...can be seen either as a single work or three individual works." - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Lord of the Rings

How can anyone take Wikipedia seriously when Lord of the rings is listed here as a famous trilogy of Movies and not a famous trilogy of books. Tolkein's is the definitive modern trilogy - why is it only mentioned in passing as just another movie franchise? He must be turning in his grave! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.106.255 (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The article talks about this very subject. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 00:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Halo Trilogy

I find it quite stupid to have a section for video game trilogies in this article and omit the Halo trilogy. 76.69.168.223 (talk) 04:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Rationalle / Motivation behind

A major theme lacking in this article is the theory behind the trilogy. Why three rather than four or two? why do writers / directors talk about "making it a trilogy" as though it were special but they don't talk about quadrilogy or [insert word for a series of two here]. I would find theory behind this much more interesting than lists of trilogies, which honestly serve very little purpose. -170.215.46.84 (talk) 04:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC) What about Beverly HIlls COP? That must a be a tiriology too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.178.123.161 (talk) 14:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Star Trek movies

Technically the Star Trek movies II, III and IV form a kind of sub-trilogy in the overall hexalogy of the TOS movies, as the plot of III builds directly on that of II and the plot of IV builds directly on that of III. Furthermore, if you look at the entirety of the Star Trek TOS movies as a hexalogy, the TNG movies also form a trilogy. These facts should be amended in the appropriate section. - 217.235.156.170 (talk) 21:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Strange, I didn't notice I was logged out at the time of writing that. - Bell'Orso (talk) 17:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Logic behind a trilogy being an effective marketing tool

This article lacks answering a question many of us non-sci-fi people have: What is the logical reasoning behind having things come in three? Why not four, or two, or five? Obviously, the formula for delivering things in three's works, but it would be interesting to know why the formula works. groink 10:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it time to ditch the example lists?

Is it time to get rid of the lists of famous/notable trilogies? The video game list is ridiculously long, the movie list keeps getting filled with pop-trilogy-of-the-month, and it borders on pointless trivia. Any thoughts? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 23:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't ditch the lists completely - although they definitely need reducing. It is mostly anons who keep adding more and more to the lists; I guess you could delete some of what's on the lists, and then revert people who try to add more. Darth Newdar (talk) 06:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Then we (the wiki-editorial "we", meaning anybody who wants to join in) need to articulate at lest some vague standard as to why the High School Musical movies shouldn't be included but the Scream trilogy should; why Dick's VALIS trilogy is worthy but a zillion other scifi trilogies aren't; and I have no idea what to do with the video game list.

But even more, we need to articulate what value is added to the article by these lists. They're not needed to show what a trilogy is or to demonstrate the range of works that can constitute a trilogy (those are done within the text of the article). So what's the point? Without knowing the point, it's hard to say what should and shouldn't be included. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, after much thought and fiddling I've gone ahead and removed the lists, after all. They were growing like Topsy - more than 100 items! Ridiculous. I couldn't figure out a way to article why some books/movies/videogames should be listed but not others, and I think the text of the article itself has enough example scattered through it to serve the role that examples serve.

Others, of course, may differ. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 02:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree - I just wonder what should happen to Tetralogy, Hexalogy (Talk:Hexalogy) and Heptalogy too. Personally I think they should point here.. Robsinden (talk) 14:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Egad; I didn't know about those articles. At least the number of examples is less than the number of existant trilogies! - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Added other numbers

I've added a table of how people create words from the Greek to make up words for other series, in the hope that articles for Tetralogy, Hexalogy (Talk:Hexalogy) and Heptalogy will eventually point here. Robsinden (talk) 14:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

A correction to the table: "Although not to be found in any dictionary, words to describe sets of another number of works of art other than three are sometimes created". This may be true of the other numbers, but tetralogy should be found in any reasonably sized dictionary, as its equivalent tetralogia already existed in Ancient Greece. It's in my 1983 edition of the Shorter OED, for a start. 91.105.54.23 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC).

Dilogy or Duology

The modern two in Greek is dio [thee-oh], don't know the old greek two. The german wikipedia mentions "dilogy" and not "duology" for the number two. This does not exclude that "duology" has been in use. But I guess in the Greek ethymological context Dilogy matches better.

In chemistry we also find the Di- prefix (for example Dichlormethan). But some lexica give it additional meanings. Like word repetition or ambiguous speech.

Best Regards

References: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweiteiler

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dilogy

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dilogy

Janburse (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Neither of these are real words in the English language. Well, dilogy is, but it means something different. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

What about movie series like James Bond or Columbo, or even tv series? Are these N-logies as well?

If there are like 17 James Bond movies, does it make it a "seventeenlogy", or whatever would be the actual word coming from latin numbers? What about tv series like ER, CSI, Law and Order, are these like "fivehundred-fortyseven-logies"?

I've always thought that the "logy" part entailed that the parts are more intertwined, the sequels being highly dependent on the previous works rather than working individually, connected to each other than just by some character or a group of characters, like "back to the future" when at the very end of the first movie the second starts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.13.143.9 (talk) 17:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'd agree that when you talk "trilogy" or the like, there is an implication that the whole work is premeditated. i.e. If you make a trilogy of three films, then if they are successful you decide to makes some more, that does not automatically make a "tetralogy", etc. So if Back to the Future gets a part 4, this would not be the case. It's a tricky one, because some editors like to compartmentalise things. A couple of years back, we did have articles like List of film heptalogies, but these are now List of film series with seven entries, etc. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Can I change one paragraph adding a word and replacing another?

The specific paragraph I would like to change is contained in section 3, titled "Unofficial or mistaken trilogies", and now, without any changes, reads as follows:" Terry Gilliam has dubbed his films Time Bandits, Brazil and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen as "The Imagination Trilogy",[2] in that each movie has to do with the imagination of humans in the three stages of life: child, man, older man." I would like to change the word "humans" to "humanity" so as to not confuse it with the word "humane" which is used in the name of the animal care-centered charity American Humane, and the phrase "older man" to either "old person" or "elder". What do you think? --Marce 10:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

My justification for the latter change would be the following: if we leave it as it is, readers would realize (or "realise", if they're British) everyone in the world is male, when it is not true because there are also women in this world, right? --Marce 10:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fandelasketchup (talk • contribs)