A Theory on Trilogies

The Dark Knight and The Empire Strikes Back have a few things in common.  First of all, they are the second film of a trilogy.  Second, they are the most loved films of their trilogies.  I personally have a theory on why the second film could easily be the most well liked film of a trilogy.  But first, there are a few points to remember.
This theory best applies if there is an over arcing story to the trilogy.  Second, this is not a hard fast rule.  Various factors can affect for good each film is.  The Star Wars prequels weren't super great and Revenge of the Sith was just lucky to be the best one.  If the prequels were done well, Revenge of the Sith might have been the best prequel.  Third, there is a level of subjectivity when evaluating film.  I personally have a bias towards a good climax, so my personal bias towards a third film.
To understand why the second film is often the most well liked, you have to understand why three many film series have three films.  Any story has a three act structure.  This includes a novel or movie.  The beginning sets everything up.  The middle advances the plot.  The end solves the problem and ties up loose ends.  Another way to look at it as one of two cycles.  There is the cycle of introduction, rise, fall.  The other possibility is the cycle of introduction, fall, rise.
So here is how this translates into a trilogy?  The first film introduces the characters. The second film has the most plot development and character development. It moves to set everything up for the final film. The final film just ties up loose ends and shows how the hero's journey ends.
A New Hope introduces Luke. The Empire Strikes Back develops him through his training and confrontation with Vader. The revelation of Vader as Luke's father and Luke's defeat set up for Return of the Jedi. Return of the Jedi shows that Luke becomes a Jedi, chooses good and redeems his father.
Batman Begins sets up that Bruce Wayne wants to be a symbol of good for Gotham. The Dark Knight takes a deep look into his character. It sets up The Dark Knight Rises by having Batman take the blame for crimes he did not commit. The Dark Knight Rises shows Bruce moving on and Batman becoming that symbol of good.
In all, the second film often has the most story and character depth. Please note that this is not a hard core rule. This often applies only if there is an arc spread across all three films.  The consequences is that the third film can be underrated because it gets compared to the second film.

Topics in Narrative- Foregone conclusions

So I watched this show called Gotham.  It's the back story of many of the Batman characters; including Jim Gordon, Catwoman, Penguin, Riddler and Batman.  The problem with the show is that you know where the characters end up.  Gotham becomes crime ridden.  Bruce Wayne becomes Batman.  Selina Kyle becomes Catwoman.  This makes the show an example of a foregone conclusion.  Foregone conclusions are stories in which you go in with the ending already known.  The challenge is how to keep a story interesting if the ending is known.  For that reason, I will analyze what makes a successful story with a foregone conclusion and how some stories with foregone conclusions don't work.
Please note, I was going to talk about backstories, as they are a type of story that have foregone conclusions by their nature.  However, I'm including (500) Days of Summer and How I Met Your Mother.  Those particular foregone conclusions do not tell the backstory to a familiar story.
The first element of a good foregone conclusion is interesting characters.  If you are doing a back story make sure the character is iconic.  One example is the Star Wars prequels, which is the back story to what is arguably cinema's most iconic villains.  This is a problem with the Darth Plageius novel.  Darth Plageus is not even seen on film.  He is only referenced.  Gotham is an interesting example.  Catwoman and Batman are iconic.  While I like Jim Gordon, he is not the most iconic character in the Batman franchise.
Even if the character is not iconic, we should identify with him.  This is why I like How I Met Your Mother.  It is easy to connect with someone who just wants to get married.
Another question is whether there is is some type of change.  In Bates Motel, Norman Bates changes from a caring kid to a not job.  How I Met Your Mother and (500) Days of Summer work on a basis of change.  500 Days of Summer starts out by letting you know that the guy does not get the girl.  How I Met Your Mother starts out by letting you know that the guy will get married and letting you know it won't be a particular girl.  However, both stories involve drastic change in the protagonists.  How I Met Your Mother involves more change because it is a television show and can get more stories in.
This gets into another criticism of Gotham.  Jim Gordon starts out as a good cop.  Gotham starts out with a good bit of crime.  The show should start with Jim Gordan being different than the character we know and Gotham should be peaceful.  The murder of the Waynes should not have happened until later in the show.  Then we see Jim Gordon become the character we love and Gotham slowly become crime ridden.
James Tuttle