I love all three films in trilogy, but Im sure Im not alone in thinking that the first is a cut above the other two. Thinking about it now, I just put my finger on one of the reasons why. I find the humor in Part I to be more subtle, based on character moments and fish-out-of-water situations. In II and III, everything seems a little more broad and exaggerated. The characters are goofier, the performances more broad, and the action a little more slapstick. I could get into specific examples, but I just wonder what other people think. Do you agree, disagree, hate me for dissing the sequels? :)
Posted on: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 22:19:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015