1 hour ago, Firespray-32 said:

This gets repeated a lot but I've yet to hear a convincing case for it. Someone who grows up a scavenger is going to good with tech. Upon flying the Falcon Rey proceeds to crash it then fails to outfly the pursuing TIE fighters. She defeats Kylo Ren only after Kylo Ren's been emotionally torn apart by killing his father and physically torn apart by being shot in the side by a weapon that the film repeatedly establishes hits hard enough to send people flying.

The sequel films are far from perfect but the Mary Sue accusation doesn't hold up.

I quote from an interesting (and I think very well written) review of TLJ (emphasis mine):

Lucas was a devotee of Joseph Campbell, a scholar of comparative religion and mythology at Sarah Lawrence College, who had spent his career exploring what he called “the monomyth.” This is the great story which, despite all sorts of different accents and emphases from culture to culture, remains fundamentally the same and which conveys some pretty basic truths about nature, the psyche, human development, and God. It customarily unfolds as a “hero’s quest.” A young man (typically) is summoned out of the comfort of his domestic life and compelled to go on a dangerous adventure, either to secure a prize or protect the innocent, or subdue the forces of nature. In the process, he comes to realize and conquer his weakness, to face down enemies, and finally to commune with the deep spiritual powers that are at play in the cosmos. Usually, as a preparation for his mission, he is trained by a spiritual master who will put him quite vigorously through his paces. Campbell was particularly intrigued by the manner in which this story is concretely acted out in the initiation rituals among primal peoples. Lucas’ mentor was Campbell, and Campbell’s teacher was the great Swiss psychologist, C.G. Jung, who had spent his career exploring the archetypes of the collective unconscious that play themselves out in our dreams and our myths.

N ow one would have to be blind not to see these motifs in the original Star Wars films. Luke Skywalker is compelled to leave his mundane home life (remember Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru?), and under the tutelage of Obi-Wan and Yoda, he overcomes his fears, discovers his inner strength, faces down the darkness, and learns to act in communion with the Force. Attentive Star Wars fans will notice, by the way, that Yoda pronounces a number of the well-known sayings of C.G. Jung. I referenced the philosophia perennis (the perennial philosophy) above. This is a standard set of philosophical and psychological insights shared by most of the great spiritual traditions of the world, and it provided the inspiration for Jung, Campbell, Lucas and hence the Star Wars films .

Coming from this point of view, argue why the Rey character is not a "Mary Sue". I found this to be a pretty compelling argument for her character to be labeled as such, and I was initially very taken by her character. My daughters love her, and we don't mix politics and Star Wars at my house (although Disney doesn't have the same scruples, I'm afraid) so this is my only outlet. My daughters are too young to be jaded. I love their idealism and their innocence, and I'll protect it as long as I can.

I am not labeling you as an ignoramous, so please don't take what I am going to say as an insult, but I find many Star Wars fans are guilty of the same lack of understanding of the driving force behind that mythos as they are regarding JRR Tolkein's. Many fans of the SW franchise don't really have a full understanding of the influences on Lucas (or Tolken, fwiw) and his story.

I find it hilarious that Kathleen Kennedy gets criticized as a dictator, yet, Kevin Feige is often lauded for his approach. I love Gareth Edward's three movies, but it sounds like he got bumped up to major blockbusters too fast. Especially doing two back to back. Trank outright decided he didn't want to work for a major studio anymore. It sounds like Lord & Miller were shooting Solo like a Jump Street movie, and ended up changing Lawrence Kasden's script a ton. Who was the only reason why the movie was being made. You may want to look up who he is, and realize why Kennedy would side with him over Lord & Miller. As for Treverrow, looking at Book of Henry, yeah, giving him Rey would be very, very bad for the character.

And it is pretty clear you are white, when Leia and Lando are enough representation for you. Just look at Black Panther if you want to see the potential that is lost with that view. Heaven forbid Aphra ever makes to the screen. I can just imagine how that will blow up the scum within the fanbase.

6 hours ago, Scopes said:

Coming from this point of view, argue why the Rey character is not a "Mary Sue".

You'll have to argue why she is first. There's no argument in either direction in your post.

11 hours ago, Firespray-32 said:

This gets repeated a lot but I've yet to hear a convincing case for it. Someone who grows up a scavenger is going to good with tech. Upon flying the Falcon Rey proceeds to crash it then fails to outfly the pursuing TIE fighters. She defeats Kylo Ren only after Kylo Ren's been emotionally torn apart by killing his father and physically torn apart by being shot in the side by a weapon that the film repeatedly establishes hits hard enough to send people flying.

The sequel films are far from perfect but the Mary Sue accusation doesn't hold up.

To be fair, on the strictest level Rey isn't a Mary Sue since she is likely not a self insert character for either J.J. or Kasdan, that said she does meet pretty much every other point. And at this point Mary Sue has sort of been broadened in understanding by most to not completely an authorial insert character.

Rey starts TFA as a scavenger who has never flown off planet. She lives on her own and lives day by day never knowing if she will get a full meal, but despite that she helps a random BB unit and even isn't really tempted by the offer to sell him off for more food than she has likely seen in her whole life. She is liked by every person she meets, BB-8 likes her, Finn likes/crushes on her, Han and Chewie both think she is the greatest person they met in years, Maz Kanata was interested in her, Kylo is drawn to her, and Leia liked her so much that she ignored Chewie who had just lost his best friend and gave her a hug instead. She flies the Falcon not just well but pulls off some pretty impressive moves and even went into a cramped space like the downed SSD which was likely as difficult as trying to fly through the second Death Star. She is so great she even lines up Finns shot up just for him. She knows how to fix the Falcon faster than Han did and he owned the ship for decades and had worked on or replaced most parts of the ship. She is given a blaster and aside from missing one shot is able to perfectly hit every stormtrooper she sees with it before being force-chloroformed by Kylo. She learns about the force and that day and is able to resist Kylo Ren's abilities and even beat him later, granted he was wounded. She was able to use the force for the first time without any effort with the mind trick and was in the process escaping, she likely could have gotten off of Starkiller Base all by herself at the rate she was going. And this is all just from the first film, granted a little bit of it is nit picking. Unlike in the previous films where we had casts that worked together and saved each other she doesn't need saving or really anyone's aid she can do everything on her own and is often the one saving them.

The main point though is in the end, Rey has more in common with a modern day super hero than Luke or Anakin. If not a complete wish fulfillment character rather than being a character herself. She gets powers with little effort or understanding of them and is suddenly amazing at using them and great at pretty much anything she does.

But, my entire point in my first post was more about how these films are reflections of the times they were made, and the environment around them. And how that is an interesting concept to see how the films are approached, how the capitalize when they were made and yet of the three trilogies only one really seems timeless.

Quote

And at this point Mary Sue has sort of been broadened in understanding by most to not completely an authorial insert character.

A Mary Sue used to be a character who is implausibly perfect. Nowadays the definition gets broadened and twisted so much that it's ceased to be a meaningful term: it's an empty perjorative which people redefine as needed to fit the evidence.

I'll address the "implausibly perfect wish fufillment character" definition.

"despite that she helps a random BB unit and even isn't really tempted by the offer to sell him off for more food than she has likely seen in her whole life"

A hard life doesn't make you unable to decide not to betray and sell someone else.

"She is liked by every person she meets, BB-8 likes her, Finn likes/crushes on her, Han and Chewie both think she is the greatest person they met in years, Maz Kanata was interested in her, Kylo is drawn to her, and Leia liked her so much that she ignored Chewie who had just lost his best friend and gave her a hug instead."

• BB-8 likes everyone who doesn't give him a reason not to.
• Finn likes her because she was the first person to look at him without seeing a Stormtrooper and how that made him feel. This is said at some point in either TFA or TLJ. TFA I think.
• Han offers Rey a job because he's impressed by her familiarity with the Falcon. I can't think of any evidence for Chewbacca thinking " she is the greatest person they met in years".
• As for Leia ignoring Chewie, even JJ Abrams admitted that was a serious oversight.
• Counterpoint to "liked by every person she meets": Unkar Plutt. As established by the flashbacks he's known her since she was a small child.

"She knows how to fix the Falcon faster than Han did and he owned the ship for decades and had worked on or replaced most parts of the ship."

This is again addressed in the script. Han lost the Falcon and the series of owners it's had since he lost it have modified it: his problems all stem from modifications he didn't make. Rey's familiar with the ship as it was in Unkar's junkyard.

"She is given a blaster and aside from missing one shot is able to perfectly hit every stormtrooper she sees with it"

Finn does the same with a blaster rifle that takes two hands while running. Han does the same without even looking at his target. Poe wipes out practically a whole squadron of TIE/fos in one flyby. Pretty much every character in TFA is absurdly combat effective.

"She was able to use the force for the first time without any effort with the mind trick"

Not without effort. She fails the first attempt. It's the only time in the entire saga so far we see a mind trick fail on someone who isn't immune to it.

"is able to resist Kylo Ren's abilities"

We don't know how hard that mind probe is for a force user to resist: it's only seen used on Poe and Rey and Poe's not a force user. It's clearly difficult for Rey to resist but we don't know if that's lifting heavy furniture difficult or lifting a train difficult.

"and even beat him later, granted he was wounded."

Wounded is a major understatement. The film takes every opportunity it can to set up how powerful that bowcaster is.

You are right, the definition has been expanded. To female lead character. So please don't use it.

Man, so many politics...

If people think Star Wars has a "feminist agenda" they should just leave. We don't need them here anyway. The original poster to this thread has added nothing positive to the X-Wing community in his brief time here, not sure why we're giving him so much attention.

Many of my friends are feminists and many of my friends are conservatives. I like all of my friends. We need to stop fighting about women doing stuff, because the real narrative in this country is the systematic oppression of men and women, left and right, by the 1%, the corporations, and the government.

Get your anti-feminist garbage out of here. I don't care about it at all.

4 hours ago, Kieransi said:

Get your anti-feminist garbage out of here. I don't care about it at all.

Where am I 'anti-feminist'. I am only stating that Kathleen Kennedy has a Feminist Agenda in her direction of Star Wars. Do I comment on that in the slightest? I agree that Star Wars SHOULD NOT have political agendas AT ALL including anti-capitalism and feminism. But the latest movie clearly has political agendas intertwined into the movie. This is one of the MAJOR reasons its failing at the box office and WHY it was removed from theatre's in China only after 2 weeks.

If you want to direct your hate at someone, direct it at Disney. They are the one's who have inserted their own political ideology into the films NOT ME. And if you want to narrow your hate, do so at Kathleen Kennedy as she is the one in charge over Star Wars.

4 hours ago, Kieransi said:

We need to stop fighting about women doing stuff, because the real narrative in this country is the systematic oppression of men and women, left and right, by the 1%, the corporations, and the government.

I never claimed anywhere in my post about 'women doing stuff'. Are you making this claim about me or about the general public?

4 hours ago, Kieransi said:

because the real narrative in this country is the systematic oppression of men and women, left and right, by the 1%, the corporations, and the government.

Star Wars was never about politics so I would like Kathleen Kennedy to remove its current political agendas from the new movies. Also, Star Wars is a global brand not just in the United States. If you want to have a political discussion about corporations and governments, please do so but not in this thread please.

Quote

A Mary Sue is an original character in fan fiction, usually but not always female, who for one reason or another is deemed undesirable by fan critics.

A character may be judged Mary Sue if she is competent in too many areas wrg, is physically attractive, and/or is viewed as admirable by other sympathetic characters. Mary Sues are generally presumed to be idealized self-inserts rather than true characters, although they may actually be intended as point-of-view characters for the reader. In fan fiction, it is considered extremely gauche, or at least very immature, for an author to create characters based on him- or herself.

"Mary Sue" is an extremely subjective value judgement. One fan's Mary Sue may be another fan's awesome woman action hero. Someone at TvTropes observed that "Mary Sue" is actually the reaction that fans may have to a work that "is unduly favoring a character by changing other characters or the environment in inappropriate ways. When the audience calls "Mary Sue" on a character, the author has shattered their Willing Suspension of Disbelief." ^[1]

Mary Sue type characters do exist in both fan fiction and canon . The main difficulty with true Mary Sue stories is that they often cause canon characters, established story lines, and the very inner consistency of the canon's reality, to behave wildly out of bounds.

The male version of a Mary Sue is a Gary Stu or a Marty Stu .

https://fanlore.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

I think many viewers of Ep 7 & 8 view Rey as a Mary Sue. Its clearly a subjective matter.

Either

• You think Rey is an Awesome Women Action Hero

or

• You think Rey is a Mary Sue

I think BOTH are correct. Rey is a Mary Sue & she is an Awesome Women Action Hero. The reason both are correct is that many of the audience believes she is an Awesome Women Action Hero AND many of the audience believes Rey is a Mary Sue.

I think the problem comes from the camp of people who believe Rey is 'An Awesome Action Hero'. They actively deny Rey is a Mary Sue and attempt to challenge those that believe Rey is a Mary Sue. When someone provides EVIDENCE of Rey being a Mary Sue, they attempt to explain it away and try to invalidate it. This is the problem. Instead, they should accept the person's reasons for thinking Rey is a Mary Sue. They do not need to agree with them, but they cannot deny that person's opinion or classification of Rey being a Mary Sue.

No. I reject the Mary Sue title. Period. It has been hijacked by the sexists and misogynists in the fandom. Who have done an amazing job of coming out of the woodworks of late. Criticize the character. But don't use lazy terminology that has been hijacked.

Quote

I think many viewers of Ep 7 & 8 view Rey as a Mary Sue. Its clearly a subjective matter.

There's a world of difference between subjective and badly defined.

If you clearly define the term "Mary Sue" then it's objective: a character either is a Mary Sue or they aren't.

If you don't clearly define the term it means nothing more than "bad." And if that's what you mean by it just say "bad". Don't use ambiguous terms to dress up an expression of emotion as a logical argument.

7 minutes ago, Firespray-32 said:

There's a world of difference between subjective and badly defined.

If you clearly define the term "Mary Sue" then it's objective: a character either is a Mary Sue or they aren't.

If you don't clearly define the term it means nothing more than "bad." And if that's what you mean by it just say "bad". Don't use ambiguous terms to dress up an expression of emotion as a logical argument.

Do you disagree with the definition?

Quote

A Mary Sue is an original character in fan fiction, usually but not always female, who for one reason or another is deemed undesirable by fan critics.

A character may be judged Mary Sue if she is competent in too many areas wrg, is physically attractive, and/or is viewed as admirable by other sympathetic characters. Mary Sues are generally presumed to be idealized self-inserts rather than true characters, although they may actually be intended as point-of-view characters for the reader. In fan fiction, it is considered extremely gauche, or at least very immature, for an author to create characters based on him- or herself.

"Mary Sue" is an extremely subjective value judgement. One fan's Mary Sue may be another fan's awesome woman action hero. Someone at TvTropes observed that "Mary Sue" is actually the reaction that fans may have to a work that "is unduly favoring a character by changing other characters or the environment in inappropriate ways. When the audience calls "Mary Sue" on a character, the author has shattered their Willing Suspension of Disbelief." ^[1]

Mary Sue type characters do exist in both fan fiction and canon . The main difficulty with true Mary Sue stories is that they often cause canon characters, established story lines, and the very inner consistency of the canon's reality, to behave wildly out of bounds.

The male version of a Mary Sue is a Gary Stu or a Marty Stu .

https://fanlore.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

The definition is clear to me. What is unclear in the definition?

5 minutes ago, Rexler Brath said:

Do you disagree with the definition?

https://fanlore.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

The definition is clear to me. What is unclear in the definition?

You've linked an article explaining how it's a nebulously defined term.

If the definition is clear to you then provide a definition of "Mary Sue" that is completely unambiguous.

Just now, Firespray-32 said:

You've linked an article explaining how it's a nebulously defined term.

If the definition is clear to you then provide a definition of "Mary Sue" that is completely unambiguous.

I have already provided the definition. Its up to you if you want to engage in conversation around the already defined definition.

She’s not really a Mary Sue. I don’t find her very interesting as a character (nor do I find the acting very good), but she is no more ‘Mary Sue’ than a lot of protagonists. People generally don’t like seeing protagonists fail all the time.

Star Wars is popcorn. If people are making a conscious effort to put more women in the big popcorn roles then good. I honestly don’t see why it’s a problem. If you’re happy with the diversity ratio of the old films, then no one is stopping you watching them again as much as you like.

I’m happy that for now my daughter might grow up and equally decide whether she wants to dress up as Leia one day, Jyn another, or Rey the next.

Or f’ing Darth Vader if she wants; the point is I don’t care and neither should you. You’re putting a lot of effort into your ‘argument’ but aren’t explaining why it’s a problem.

1 hour ago, Rexler Brath said:

They are the one's who have inserted their own political ideology into the films NOT ME.

I never claimed anywhere in my post about 'women doing stuff'. Are you making this claim about me or about the general public?

Kathleen Kennedy has her own politics. It's you and people like you who are assuming that she's inserted her politics into Star Wars. And by doing so, you're the one who's made this a political thing.

Quote

I have already provided the definition. Its up to you if you want to engage in conversation around the already defined definition.

A lengthy article on how the term "Mary Sue" doesn't have a clear definition is not a clear definition.

If you want the term to have any value in this discussion you need to succinctly and unambiguously define it. I'm not asking for a universal definition I could put in a dictionary. I'm asking what you mean when you use the term Mary Sue.

For example, if you asked me to define the term for the purposes of a conversation I'd say "A Mary Sue is a character which is implausibly flawless."

4 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

Kathleen Kennedy has her own politics. It's you and people like you who are assuming that she's inserted her politics into Star Wars. And by doing so, you're the one who's made this a political thing.

There is NO ASSUMPTION NEEDED. Watch the films. The film makers clearly made it a political 'thing'. They do so by making statements ABOUT their own movies. This is NOT the audience's fault. Why do you defend the movie makers and try to blame the audience?

I’m also wondering, worst case scenario thinking, let’s do an experiment making some assumptions;

-Kathleen Kennedy is an ardent feminist.

-She’s subtly inserting this into the Star Wars films.

-Millions of children watch and enjoy these films multiple times.

-These children take away this message and...then what? Whats the problem there? What does that lead to that upsets people so much? Will boys maybe start, I don’t know, being nice to girls and see them as potential heroes too? Or will women simple stop settling down and creating homes? Will girls suddenly take your jobs away and leave you destitute? What are you afraid of?

Just now, Rexler Brath said:

There is NO ASSUMPTION NEEDED. Watch the films. The film makers clearly made it a political 'thing'. They do so by making statements ABOUT their own movies. This is NOT the audience's fault. Why do you defend the movie makers and try to blame the audience?

"The film makers clearly made it a political 'thing'" is a conclusion without an argument. If you make this claim you need to say how they politicised the Star Wars films.

Just now, Rexler Brath said:

There is NO ASSUMPTION NEEDED. Watch the films. The film makers clearly made it a political 'thing'. They do so by making statements ABOUT their own movies. This is NOT the audiance's fault. Why do you defend the movie makers and try to blame the audience?

I am the audience, just as much as you are, and I didn't see a political narrative. I just saw a somewhat silly sci-fi movie where the Jedi happens to be a girl.

Leia was kind of old and weak, Holdo was indecisive and a poor leader, Rey was emotionally vulnerable, Rose was overconfident and inefficient. I didn't see women taking anything over or being unrealistically powerful or whatever.

And yeah, like Sbloom141 said, is it the end of the world if a little bit of feminism does get inserted into the movie?

8 minutes ago, Sbloom141 said:

She’s not really a Mary Sue. I don’t find her very interesting as a character (nor do I find the acting very good), but she is no more ‘Mary Sue’ than a lot of protagonists. People generally don’t like seeing protagonists fail all the time.

Star Wars is popcorn. If people are making a conscious effort to put more women in the big popcorn roles then good. I honestly don’t see why it’s a problem. If you’re happy with the diversity ratio of the old films, then no one is stopping you watching them again as much as you like.

I’m happy that for now my daughter might grow up and equally decide whether she wants to dress up as Leia one day, Jyn another, or Rey the next.

Or f’ing Darth Vader if she wants; the point is I don’t care and neither should you. You’re putting a lot of effort into your ‘argument’ but aren’t explaining why it’s a problem.

What is my argument and what is the problem? You seem to imply I have a problem with diversity in the new films, is that correct? Because where do I claim I have a problem with Diversity?

Rey is a Mary Sue because she is good at everything she does. She does not fail. She does not need help from others. Everyone likes her (even her enemies). She is a boring character BECAUSE she is good at everything. There is no reason to care about her b/c you know she is always going to win.

Quote

Rey is a Mary Sue because she is good at everything she does. She does not fail. She does not need help from others. Everyone likes her (even her enemies). She is a boring character BECAUSE she is good at everything. There is no reason to care about her b/c you know she is always going to win.

Rey is not good at everything she does. She's a terrible judge of character. She's deeply affected by her parents abandoning her and not in a good way. She's the only character ever to fail a mind trick on a non-immune target on screen. The first thing she does after getting behind the controls of the Falcon is crash it.

"Everyone likes her" also isn't true. Throughout TFA she's referred to as "scavenger" as if it's an insult. Unkar's at best indifferent to her, Snoke thinks she's a joke, Luke thinks she's a fool. The only characters who express a positive opinion of her beyond common courtesy are Finn, Han and Kylo and they all have good reasons.