By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nuvendil on 14 August 2016
Edit Thread
Lawlight said:
Nuvendil said:

Taking down the Death Star after multiple veterans did is pretty impressive for a "crop duster", no matter how you try to spin it.  That medal he got wasn't a participation award :P

Didn't say Rey was perfectly written, just that you are being too extreme in your stance.  I am personally waiting to see what happens in VIII with regards to most of what you are saying.  

And on that last point...what does that have to do with anything?  Yeah, Star Wars was written in the 70s.  And Citizen Kane was written in the 30s and 40s.  And Hamlet was written centuries ago.  Time of writing is not an excuse for the flaws of any of the Star Wars films :P 

It's impressive but fact remains that he wouldn't have been able to do that without the veterans.

So, we'd have to wait for the movie to see if Rey is really a poorly written character?

Yeah, Citizen Kane and Hamlet are not sci-fi stories with major plot complexities. They're character-driven. You're the one using SW to excuse the major flaws of TFA.

I'm saying we should wait to see what happens in VIII.  Luke and Han's defeats in V are extremely important to character development.  Also, if the Veterans dying qualify as Luke being aufficiently aided to avoid being a Marty Sue (or Gary Sue if you're a rhyming man :P ) then what about Ren being injured?  Both Finn and Chewie injured him before Rey fought him so it's not like when Luke fought Vader in V when Vader was fresh and it was an even fight.  

And all I was pointing out is that great writing has been around for centuries so implying that Star Wars VII should have better writing cause it's the 2010s or waving off the original trilogy's flaws based on it being written in the 1970s is a fallacious argument.