CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 16years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
From miniSRD's perspective, having grown up with Episodes 1, 2 and 3 in place, and The Force Awakens would present as no.7 in that series.
For big people, for whom Episodes 1, 2 and 3 were new, fun storytelling but ultimately junk filmmaking, and thus understandably forgettable, The Force Awakens is rightfully no.4 in the 'proper SW films' series.
ST films are easier, miss out the alternating ones and remember to start counting at 2 in all cases.
KAAAAHHHHNNNN!
I guess that's logical at least...
steveo, yes, it used to be that simple (odd bad, even good) but then Nemesis came along.
I've watched the new ones once each. I had to put the second one on again because I fell asleep half way through.
We were always late for everything as a child so when we arrive at the odeon in renfield street in Glasgow the queue for Star Wars met the queue for close encounters at the rear f the cinema, they queued different directions round the block. The employee said does not matter which queue you join, you won't get n. We had to go to see pink panther two at the ABC on sauchiehalll street.
I did see the fourth film in George Lucas's triple trilogy (the first film made) and it is good, loosely based on kurosawa's seven samurai. It was good. The next two made were OK, well the third one made had a lot of little pixie woks which were keech.
I then had to endure the next trilogy, all three that were made with my son. Happy the seventh film made is quite good, being as it is the first film repeated wth a younger cast and the older cast from the first film made which as we know is the forth film n the nine film sequence.
To help SRD' just put the word made after the numeral. So say first star wArs made etc. Then everyone will know which movie s being referred to.
Seventh Star Wars made is the first in the third trilogy for sure and for sure it is therefore the fourth with chewbacca, etc. But Lucas clear he always imagined three separate trilogies.
The third Star Wars they made, episode VI, has Leia in a bikini and a mariachi band. It's not good. They ruin a perfectly good story about blasters, space ships and sabres. I've never watched episode VI but I saw that bit in passing when the boys still like Star Wars.
Now they watch Deep Space Nine.
Top tip for those who have never seen any Star wars films, which prevents plot reveals being seen in the wrong order and wondering who the f the ghost is standing with Yoda and Obi Wan at the end of Return of the Jedi, is to watch them in the following order:
IV, V, I, II, III, VI
This gives some back story after episode V, and III (the least worst of the prequels IMHO) sets us up nicely for VI. Also, there is the "Machete Order":
IV, V, II, III, VI
which avoids most of Jar Jar Binks' utterances and the whole trade war drivel, but does not significantly detract from the overall storyline.
Then add VII to the end of either of those and you're sorted :)
@geordiefatbloke while Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like ****** Shaft, if any of the prequel trilogy is to be missed out for quality reasons it is surely Episode II...
@jdanielp Whilst many would agree with you, missing out Ep II leaves too much plot out apparently. Personally I'd say miss out I-III entirely, but unfortunately Lucas' post-release tinkering with IV, V and especially VI makes this not really feasible. Damn you Lucas.
@geordiefatbloke I suppose so. Hopefully Disney will see financial sense and release properly remastered versions of the unaltered original triology at some point soon...
Got to keep milking that cash cow!
Rogue One teaser trailer out in an hour or so.
I guess that one doesn't get a number....
@Coxy Episode 3.5? Although it does have one in the title.
The appearance of Hayden Christianson at the end of VI annoys me so much I always make sure I switch over / hit stop before it gets to that point (and then the extra fireworks going off in all of the CGI cities and planets). Grrr.
Almost as bad as Han not shooting first, then clunkily walking over Jabba's tail in I.
Oh, oh, and when they first come into Mos Eisley and suddenly there are CGI animals throwing their keepers off their backs and all sorts. And in VI the additional little CGI alien that farts.
And then Lucas has the gall to complain about VII?!?!?!?
Vader's 'noooo' at the end of VI means I will never buy a Blu Ray of it!
Considering all the villains, have the Minions appeared yet?
Whilst many would agree with you, missing out Ep II leaves too much plot out apparently.
Episode II had a plot? :-/ I must have slept through that part..
I believe the plot was something along the lines of "nuzzling with little conviction or chemistry in long grass after riding on some sort of hippo aardvark cross beastie".
or is that III.IX ?
Given that VII is a sort of IV reboot, I suppose that SRD could attempt to cling to the notion of calling it IV:II.
I believe the plot was something along the lines of "nuzzling with little conviction or chemistry in long grass after riding on some sort of hippo aardvark cross beastie".
Then I definitely slept through it. That sounds WAY more exciting than the film I saw. ;-)
And dialogue Yoda terrible the forget don't.
"Then I definitely slept through it. That sounds WAY more exciting than the film I saw. ;-)"
I am, of course, assuming that I am remembering the real thing, and not some bizarre dream I had while dozing through it myself (which would account for the presence of Natalie Portman, but I'm not sure what my subconscious would be telling me by including the horrible beast... Or the hippo-aardvark).
Is SRD now boycotting this thread?
Can I just check if the argument has been settled?
How about Windows version numbers?
1, 2, 3, 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10.
Yeah, they try to forget ME and Bob, don't they?
Is the talking paperclip the equivalent of Jar Jar or the Ewoks?
@Wilmington's Cow it looks you're rebelling against the Empire. Would you like help?
@Wilmington's Cow it looks you're rebelling against the Empire. Would you like help?
ROFL!
which would account for the presence of Natalie Portman, but I'm not sure what my subconscious would be telling me by including the horrible beast...
That's a bit mean. I like Natalie Portman.
More importantly have any of the films ever explained why the princess is Lee-ah in Star Wars and Lay-ah in the others?
Luckily my family is not a democracy. Despite all this, I simply do not think 'a new hope' when someone says 'number 4'.
And MrSRD says that the whole Darth Vader backstory - and the idea that he is Luke's father was a much later development - it's not mentioned at all until '78. So it's not some grand theme that GL always has at the back of his mind.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts