Quantcast
The Rise of BS - Star Wars Epi 9 SPOILERS

Forums - Movies Discussion - The Rise of BS - Star Wars Epi 9 SPOILERS

Jaicee said:
d21lewis said:

The male version of "Mary Sue" is called a "Gary Stu" and the term came from some fanfic about a character named Mary Sue who met the Star Trek crew, everyone instantly fell in love with, and was great at everything. She dies heroically at the end of the story (I think it was self sacrifice) and everyone mourned her death. There was no depth to her comically bad character aside being perfect.

Males can also be called "Mary Sue" instead of Gary Stu. It had nothing to do with women. Just the name of the character.

-I haven't read the rest of your post. Gonna do that now.

*Edit* Read the rest of the post. I respect your opinion and I don't think we despise you. In fact, I think you're pretty awesome. We're just having a discussion and, while I can't speak for anyone else, I don't mean to come off as abrasive.

Name one use of the term Gary Stu you have seen before. Use a link.

I request as much because, so common is this apparent male version in usage that I have never heard of it before in my life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

BUT let me say that with character flaws and obstacles that Rey had to overcome in RoS, I no longer see her as a "Mary Sue" and there were actually moments I feared she would die. 



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Around the Network

Just finished listening to this video at work and I have to say, IT MADE THE WHOLE TRILOGY BETTER! It explained so much and pointed out so many little clues. I want to watch all three again with the knowledge it shares. It doesn't make the writing better or anything but it shows that Palpatine wasn't just pulled out of JJ's ass. If only the writers had done a better job of following the path and developing characters...

https://youtu.be/hzG3m-ZW198



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Jaicee said:
thismeintiel said:

You give that film WAY too much credit.  None of those things were in the film.  There was no character growth, only regression.  Rey goes from a powerful Mary Sue to a much more powerful Mary Sue.  Poe learns he is to obey orders without question, just like a Stormtrooper.  Finn goes from a potentially interesting character, to the bumbling comic relief.  He does learn that animal cruelty is wrong, and is more important an issue than child slavery.  Kylo went from an troubled villain who loses his cool sometimes, to a whiny emo.  Snoke goes from the big bad, who could have been a great character who could rival Palpatine in power, to a moron who doesn't even know what his ship is capable of doing and dies from an easily seen betrayal from Kylo.  Leia became Mary Poppins.  And Luke's character was completely raped for the sake of some jokes and subversion.

In my observation, the term "Mary Sue" is a misogynist term that functionally just means "strong female character, and that intimidates me and therefore deserves stigma because she should be a damsel in distress, preferably without pants, or else not present at all so that I don't feel emasculated and cry 'male tears' all the way home from the theater". Disprove me. Seriously, THERE IS NO MALE ANALOGY TO THAT TERM!! Nobody stigmatizes male fiction characters simply for being strong, even in ways that are 100% superficial and arbitrary (e.g. Superman). Why is personal competence and strength only intrinsically bad when it's female? Why do women have to always be crying in a corner somewhere to be sympathetic or semi-nude or better yet both to be worth seeing?

Sorry for going off on that, it just pisses me off.

Speaking of Rey, I do feel that her being drawn to the Dark Side was something that merited fleshing out fully in the Rise of Skywalker for sure. But I definitely don't feel that the explanation should have been that she's Palpatine's granddaughter somehow (and RoS notably does not explain how she is, so full of it is the suggestion). I feel that way for the sort of reasons that L.D. Nolan laid out in his article for CRB negatively comparing the story in The Rise of Skywalker to that in The Last Jedi. Among other things, he makes this point:

"Originally choosing to have Rey be outside of those bloodlines hammered home The Last Jedi's theme -- as emphasized in its final shot of a young slave using the Force to pull a broom towards him -- that one's origins don't matter. That's not what makes someone a powerful Jedi Master or a Sith Lord. Kylo sees Rey as an equal in strength not because of her bloodline, but because of her power and who she is. This communicates to viewers that their origins don't matter. What matters is the path one chooses and the will with which they pursue their ultimate aims. The Force definitely plays a role in this, but the mystical entity does not particularly care about family names."

Being powerful in the Force simply because she was born in the lineage of Palpatine completely undermines that whole message, which I liked a lot better. Much of the reason I liked it better that way is...well, to be frank, there are whooooooooooooooooole lot of people in this world who "come from nothing" in one sense or another, and in the financial and social senses, I'm one of those people myself. I related to Rey as a character like that who struggled with darkness seemingly as a result. That her background and struggles didn't make her a weak or evil person was, I felt, a more uplifting a suggestion. It's much tougher for me to relate to her as instead a royal of sorts who is apparently only strong and important because she's a kind of princess.

Anyway, I don't really agree with much else that you wrote above except in the case of Finn's character, who I do agree was reduced in significance in The Last Jedi in a way that was unfair to the character. For example, I always perceived Kylo as something of an overgrown baby who was intended to be that way, even in The Force Awakens. If one hasn't noticed, the more authoritarian tyrannical figures of history and world are quite often sort of that way. They're disproportionately composed of big babies with fragile egos. (I could cite a certain American president that you appear to admire as an example, but the examples are really endless.) The important thing about that for Kylo is that he's not portrayed in a one-dimensional fashion as a result. He's not simply a punch line, but an often legitimately sympathetic character who resists doing the wrong thing because it's too hard on him, who really is bullied and mistreated (which is why he's as touchy as he is). This was true before his portrayal in The Rise of Skywalker, wherein his conversion to the Light Side feels what I'd call less than fully developed. I felt that he deserved a more convincing and heartfelt transition.

I could offer a much longer response running through the movie in some detail, but honestly I simply don't feel like it. I feel like any old crack against The Last Jedi will get lots of up-votes and any defense will just get me even more isolated and despised than I already am.

You're feelings on the name are more over defensive than anything. One reason you dont hear the term used for guys is because writers are clueless on how to write a strong female character. Usually, males have a back story that explains their ability. James bond is a spy who has been trained and has a license to kill. Bam, back story that explains his ability. Anakin has a higher concentration of Midichlorians than Yoda. Even though this is true he NEVER uses a force ability before training. BOOM, back story that explains his ability. Luke is the son of the guy, and again, despite that he never uses a force ability before training. Wam, backstory that explains his ability. Yoda is a few hundred year old jedi master who was studied ancient texts and has far greater knowledge of the force than anyone.

Showing up and being able to wield a lightsaber before ever touching one (even luke needed to be trained to use it) and being able to take on one of the strongest force users we ever see on screen (he freezes a blaster mid air and keeps it there until he leaves). Being able to use force techniques because she saw it is idiotic (ben should have just used force lightening to fuck up the knights of ren because he saw it). Everyone accepting her (and apparently knowing she's a Palpatine) while they are at war is beyond ridiculous. 

PS both anakin and Luke needed to be saved by stronger allies before they defeat the threat... which, luke never does. He just convinces his dad to turn again

Last edited by DarthJarvis - on 25 December 2019

Jaicee said:
thismeintiel said:

You give that film WAY too much credit.  None of those things were in the film.  There was no character growth, only regression.  Rey goes from a powerful Mary Sue to a much more powerful Mary Sue.  Poe learns he is to obey orders without question, just like a Stormtrooper.  Finn goes from a potentially interesting character, to the bumbling comic relief.  He does learn that animal cruelty is wrong, and is more important an issue than child slavery.  Kylo went from an troubled villain who loses his cool sometimes, to a whiny emo.  Snoke goes from the big bad, who could have been a great character who could rival Palpatine in power, to a moron who doesn't even know what his ship is capable of doing and dies from an easily seen betrayal from Kylo.  Leia became Mary Poppins.  And Luke's character was completely raped for the sake of some jokes and subversion.

In my observation, the term "Mary Sue" is a misogynist term that functionally just means "strong female character, and that intimidates me and therefore deserves stigma because she should be a damsel in distress, preferably without pants, or else not present at all so that I don't feel emasculated and cry 'male tears' all the way home from the theater". Disprove me. Seriously, THERE IS NO MALE ANALOGY TO THAT TERM!! Nobody stigmatizes male fiction characters simply for being strong, even in ways that are 100% superficial and arbitrary (e.g. Superman). Why is personal competence and strength only intrinsically bad when it's female? Why do women have to always be crying in a corner somewhere to be sympathetic or semi-nude or better yet both to be worth seeing?

Sorry for going off on that, it just pisses me off.

Speaking of Rey, I do feel that her being drawn to the Dark Side was something that merited fleshing out fully in the Rise of Skywalker for sure. But I definitely don't feel that the explanation should have been that she's Palpatine's granddaughter somehow (and RoS notably does not explain how she is, so full of it is the suggestion). I feel that way for the sort of reasons that L.D. Nolan laid out in his article for CRB negatively comparing the story in The Rise of Skywalker to that in The Last Jedi. Among other things, he makes this point:

"Originally choosing to have Rey be outside of those bloodlines hammered home The Last Jedi's theme -- as emphasized in its final shot of a young slave using the Force to pull a broom towards him -- that one's origins don't matter. That's not what makes someone a powerful Jedi Master or a Sith Lord. Kylo sees Rey as an equal in strength not because of her bloodline, but because of her power and who she is. This communicates to viewers that their origins don't matter. What matters is the path one chooses and the will with which they pursue their ultimate aims. The Force definitely plays a role in this, but the mystical entity does not particularly care about family names."

Being powerful in the Force simply because she was born in the lineage of Palpatine completely undermines that whole message, which I liked a lot better. Much of the reason I liked it better that way is...well, to be frank, there are whooooooooooooooooole lot of people in this world who "come from nothing" in one sense or another, and in the financial and social senses, I'm one of those people myself. I related to Rey as a character like that who struggled with darkness seemingly as a result. That her background and struggles didn't make her a weak or evil person was, I felt, a more uplifting a suggestion. It's much tougher for me to relate to her as instead a royal of sorts who is apparently only strong and important because she's a kind of princess.

Anyway, I don't really agree with much else that you wrote above except in the case of Finn's character, who I do agree was reduced in significance in The Last Jedi in a way that was unfair to the character. For example, I always perceived Kylo as something of an overgrown baby who was intended to be that way, even in The Force Awakens. If one hasn't noticed, the more authoritarian tyrannical figures of history and world are quite often sort of that way. They're disproportionately composed of big babies with fragile egos. (I could cite a certain American president that you appear to admire as an example, but the examples are really endless.) The important thing about that for Kylo is that he's not portrayed in a one-dimensional fashion as a result. He's not simply a punch line, but an often legitimately sympathetic character who resists doing the wrong thing because it's too hard on him, who really is bullied and mistreated (which is why he's as touchy as he is). This was true before his portrayal in The Rise of Skywalker, wherein his conversion to the Light Side feels what I'd call less than fully developed. I felt that he deserved a more convincing and heartfelt transition.

I could offer a much longer response running through the movie in some detail, but honestly I simply don't feel like it. I feel like any old crack against The Last Jedi will get lots of up-votes and any defense will just get me even more isolated and despised than I already am.

"In my observation, the term "Mary Sue" is a misogynist term that functionally just means "strong female character, and that intimidates me and therefore deserves stigma because she should be a damsel in distress, preferably without pants, or else not present at all so that I don't feel emasculated and cry 'male tears' all the way home from the theater"."

>Where are you getting your observation from?

"Disprove me. Seriously, THERE IS NO MALE ANALOGY TO THAT TERM!!"

>I think you meant 'equivalent'. The male equivalent is "Gary Stu".

"Nobody stigmatizes male fiction characters simply for being strong, even in ways that are 100% superficial and arbitrary (e.g. Superman)."

>Kirito was.

"Why is personal competence and strength only intrinsically bad when it's female?"

>Who's saying it is?

"Why do women have to always be crying in a corner somewhere to be sympathetic or semi-nude or better yet both to be worth seeing?"

>Who says so?



PS - i missed the superman jab. To me, superman is one of the most boring heroes because of how over powered he is. However, again, you're conveniently ignoring his back story and weakness that explains it. He's an alien from krypton that gains power from the sun and when in presence of fragments of his home planet his power is drained and leaves him weak.

We never got anything close to this for Rey. The defenders argued we need to wait for the last film because they might explain it. Well, there it came and here we're left. No explanation other than she's a Palpatine. Which, blood was never good enough before.



Around the Network

I dislike the term "Mary Sue" as it's an often abused term and oversimplification of what's really being expressed by these fans - which is that they feel said character is extremely pandering to a female audience by having the super-powered character who are flawless, completely righteous, and can seemingly do anything or has few, if any struggles. I'd say there IS a male equivalent of this to a degree with protagonists like James Bond or many superhero characters (though even many of them seem to have more struggles than Rey, at least in more modern films).

With Rey, I think people are responding more to the fact that she's more like a cardboard cutout superhero character (and I'm not keen on cheesy superhero characters fyi, male OR female) rather than a flawed, struggling hero who fights and climbs their way to the top. She's just sort of already almost perfect at everything from the getgo. She even apparently knows more about how to fly Han's own Millenium Falcon than he does!

I just think it's much easier for viewers to identify with an underdog, a character with struggles, of which Rey seems to be lacking on both fronts. Of course it's great to be motivated and/or entertained by a super-powered hero but if they come off as shallow or unrelatable then really what's the point? This is why I feel a protagonist like Katniss from Hunger Games is far more interesting. She has real struggles, real motivations, real weaknesses, real things that make her tick - and yet she does ultimately overcome and grow both physically and mentally. I see little real depth or growth with Rey (well really MOST of the characters of the SW sequels for that matter).

This form of pandering, ironically I see THAT as a sort of soft form of misogyny as artists seem to think they can't create a female character with weakness or flaws anymore. Like they feel women NEED to have these overpowered characters in order to feel strong or something, but I disagree with that. I think women want dynamic, realistic protagonists they can relate to just like men do. I believe even the fantasy writer Brandon Sanderson mentioned something about this common misconception and how it's actually patronizing in a roundabout way. 

Joseph Campbell's "The Hero's Journey" also largely revolves around this concept of ironically having the more marred, underdog hero being more relatable and ultimately more impactful - which, funny enough, is a big part of George Lucas' original influence with Star Wars. 

And yes, on the other hand, you DO still have the weak, damsel in distress types who are seemingly powerless (though this is becoming far less frequent). With female characters it oddly seems to be one extreme vs the other - whereas dynamic female characters who are strong (or the potential to become strong and overcome) and yet are flawed and have trials and tribulations are few and far inbetween. Female characters should be treated the exact same as male characters but strangely many artists/storytellers seem to want to place them on one extreme end of the spectrum of the other. And oftentimes (in BOTH cases) the depth and relatability of these female characters tends gets lost as a result.

Female audiences are going to hard a tough time relating to the poor helpless girl who's just there do be the end "goal" for the male character to rescue, though on the flipside they're also going to tend to struggle identifying with the perfect superwoman who does no wrong.

Last edited by DarthMetalliCube - on 26 December 2019

Fallawful said:
d21lewis said:

I agree that TFA started things off on the wrong foot. I wanted to love it. I liked it okay but I personally wanted an original story before diving back into the familiar. When it was over, I said to myself "This is the new crew. Now that this is out the way, let's see where this goes..." and I was excited.

I saw TLJ review scores and I was even more excited. I saw TLJ and...I didn't enjoy it. As an audience member, it wasn't my job to write the story or say "They should have done this." My job was to watch the film and be entertained. I wasn't. I was actually bored and couldn't even turn off my brain and enjoy it in any capacity.

BUT based on your challenge, Luke could have just said something like:

-"I've been expecting you."

-"There are forces at work that you don't yet understand."

-He could have gone there to train at this sacred Jedi training ground to get more powerful for the unknown threat out there. He was "The Last Jedi" and Kylo and his Knights were looking for him.

All pulled directly from my ass in thirty seconds. Probably all sucked but I'm not a writer 

*On a different note, if I WAS a writer, I'd have had it be revealed that Finn was "Order 66'd" into joining the rebellion. That he was the reason the First Order was tracking the Rebellion in TLJ. He would spend the rest of the trilogy trying to redeem himself and that's what he would be trying to tell Rey. That's my personal fanfic, though.

As a random guy on the internet, I will let you know that I feel completely entitled to re-write a movie for the professional writers

These are honestly not bad. He could have totally been training - and I was thinking that he could have easily created a new Jedi academy in hiding after Kylo wiped out the previous one. The biggest issue remains, though, is that he is unnecessarily not communicating this with anyone in the resistance - or at least helping them while they are actively getting pummelled out there. Even if he had good motives it's very uncharacteristic of Luke to not be there in the first place. 

I take a stab at this just for fun.  After the academy was destroyed by Kylo he came to a realization that the history of the silth and jedi have been for millenniums this same story of back and forth destruction.  The force continuously trying to keep balance between the dark side and the light side.  He search out Exegol as to further learn the history of both the silth and light side.  Eventually the force gives him a vision of the past and how before there was jedi and silth there was the Je'daii Order (https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Je%27daii_Order) and the only way to truly return balance to the force is to go back to the ancient teachings.

He goes to that planet to try to find balance between the light and dark within him self which explains why he cut him self off from the world and that where Rey finds him.  Then going forward it could be about rey also finding that balance and helping others and in the end both the Jedi order and the silth order become a thing of history as balance is finally returned and rey start a new order based on the ancient Je'faii Order.

Last edited by Cyran - on 26 December 2019

I had a revelation as to the key difference for me when it comes to RoS (and to an extent TFA) vs TLJ -

RoS was stupid and fun
TLJ was stupid, and also NOT fun

It's the same differential I make between RotS vs TPM and AotC
RotS = stupid and fun
TPM/AotC = stupid and also NOT fun

ESB and ANH were rare and somewhat lightning in a bottle, as they managed to be both smart AND fun.



TPM and AOTC were both fairly entertaing flicks, except for the middle arc of AOTC which brings some really contrived plot points and poor dialogue.

But TLJ and ROS bombard you with one midichlorian/clone army/ dying of sadness-tier plot point about every five minutes, instead of once or twice per movie.

Edit - I might also be slightly biased in favor of TPM and AOTC since the dubbing in my country was exceedingly well done, and made characters with cringy voices like Jar Jar and the Federation aliens bearable and even interesting at times. So YMMV.

Last edited by haxxiy - on 26 December 2019

 

 

 

 

 

My main problem with new star wars films is the main bad guy is a pussy.

Oh and just about everything else. Don't give a damn about any of the characters.  Frankly they can all die and empire rules the universe.