Movie Trilogies That Don't Have A Single Good Film

Including "The Mighty Ducks" might seem like sacrilege for some people, as the film has become something of a cult favorite over the years, but there's little arguing that it failed to make any sort of impression on critics when it first hit cinema screens in 1992. In fact, the movie wasn't even a huge financial success, making just $50 million at the box office. None of that stopped Disney from releasing two successive films and, more recently, a television spin-off series in the form of "The Mighty Ducks: Game Changers."

The first entry in the series follows Gordon Bombay (Emilio Estevez) as he is forced to carry out community service by helping to coach a local children's ice hockey team. Although he initially dislikes his new responsibilities, the attorney quickly comes around and finds enjoyment in helping the young players win the championship against all odds.

If that sounds like a fairly predictable plot for a sports film, you wouldn't be wrong — and that was behind much of the criticism against "The Mighty Ducks." 1994 saw the release of "D2: The Mighty Ducks," which was then followed two years later by "D3: The Mighty Ducks," neither of which fared much better in reviews or at the box office. In fact, the only well-reviewed release has been the recent television series.

Ever since Ayn Rand's classic novel hit store shelves in the late 1950s, there has been interest in adapting the story for the big screen. That time finally arrived in 2010 with the release of "Atlas Shrugged: Part I," the first in a three-part film series based on the book. The movies take place in a dystopian future where resources are scarce and the authoritarian government is increasingly taking control of powerful industries. This eventually prompts a strike by prominent industrial leaders, bringing the United States to a crippling halt. The first film was panned by critics and was a box office flop, grossing just $4.6 million against a budget of $20 million. 

Even with those huge losses and a negative reception, producer and writer John Aglialoro continued to fund two further sequels. However, "Atlas Shrugged: Part II" and "Atlas Shrugged: Part III" both had smaller budgets and completely switched the cast for each release, meaning no actor portrays the same character across the series despite the fact that they were released just three years apart. The two sequels' performances at the box office were worse than their predecessors, grossing just over $4 million between them, and were even more harshly criticized for poor writing and wooden acting.

For those born in the last 30 years or so, it might seem inconceivable that between the time that the original "Star Wars" trilogy ended in 1983 and the start of the prequels in 1999, there were almost no "Star Wars" screen projects. After all, we are now used to a world filled with dozens of TV shows, video games, and movies based on the franchise. But that is exactly what happened, and this only increased the anticipation for the prequels to the point of near-mania, with fights even breaking out between fans as they tried to secure toys ahead of the launch of "Episode I — The Phantom Menace."

The prequels take place several decades before the original films, charting the demise of the Old Republic and the Jedi, along with Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader's rise to power. But even with unprecedented excitement and a story that fans had always wanted to see, the prequels were a disappointment. Out of the 12 "Star Wars" movies that have been released so far, the prequels account for three of the six worst-rated on Rotten Tomatoes. Whether it is the laughably bad dialogue, the expansive use of CGI, or a story that focuses too much on politics and trade disputes, the "Star Wars" prequels pale in comparison to their predecessors.

You might think that a film with an all-star cast that included Martin Lawrence in the lead role and the likes of Paul Giamatti, Nia Long, and Terrence Howard in supporting roles would be a surefire winner. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case, and "Big Momma's House" is not exactly remembered as one of the best comedies of the 2000s. The movie follows Lawrence as an FBI agent who disguises himself as the grandmother of a key witness in order to find out information about money missing from an armed robbery.

There are some funny moments in "Big Momma's House," with Roger Ebert even noting that he laughed out loud at several points in his review. But the overall reception to the film was one of disappointment, with a feeling that the comedy quickly starts to drag due to its boring plot and one-joke mentality. However, the fact that it made $173 million against a budget of $30 million convinced the studio to release two additional films.

Considering that the entire concept of "Big Momma's House" had grown tired by the end of the first movie, basing two sequels on the same jokes and humor perhaps wasn't the best plan. "Big Momma's House 2," which saw Lawrence and Long reprise their roles, was a modest financial success but fared even more poorly with critics. The third entry in the series, "Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son," made just over $80 million and faced almost universal disapproval.

The film rights to Veronica Roth's young adult post-apocalyptic book series were snapped up not long after the first entry, "Divergent," hit store shelves. The franchise seemed like a sure hit since action-heavy films aimed at teenagers, like "The Hunger Games," "Harry Potter," and "Twilight," were already finding plenty of success. The three movies take place in a dystopian future where humanity is split into five distinct groups, with protagonist Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) existing outside these classes as a Divergent, prompting her to start an uprising.

The trilogy got off of a rocky start and soon fell apart completely. 2014's "Divergent" grossed just $288 million and was panned for being too predictable, using tropes that were all too common in the young adult genre. Lionsgate pushed ahead, though, releasing "The Divergent Series: Insurgent" in 2015 to similar box office results and an even worse critical reception. The third and final entry, "The Divergent Series: Allegiant," was an even bigger disaster, just barely creeping over its production budget of $110 million.

Things got so bad by the time the third movie was released that Woodley claimed the experience almost made her quit acting altogether. Meanwhile, co-star Zoë Kravitz told Dax Shepard's "Armchair Expert" podcast, "I think as we went on, the story really kinda got lost and nobody really knew what we were doing anymore." It's little surprise then, after all of those issues, that a planned fourth film was shelved, leaving the series incomplete.