Am I REALLY the only one disappointed with TFA?

See R.P. this is were I think you are dead wrong. Look at the world today. The USA brought down Hussein and now the Taliban has taken his place. The Empire was around for 30 years. Before that many of the people that came into power for the Empire were already high ranking officials in the Republic. To think just because you take out the Emperor and the second Death Star that what is left of the Empire is just going to give up is kinda silly. These people were power hungry with the Republic and they got even more power hungry with the Empire. They would not give this up without a fight.
 
I've never understood why everyone posing at the end of Jedi meant "peace throughout the galaxy!"... Which is why I hated even more that George added everyone celebrating on coruscant "WEESA WON!"... uh huh. Even if they could see the Death Star explode from there (they couldn't), where did all the imperials NOT on the Death Star go during the celebration?

Riot troopers would be bashing in heads...
 
Because it's a fairy tale too. One of the reasons I guess Disney gets a pass making attractions for children about warfare.
 
See R.P. this is were I think you are dead wrong. Look at the world today. The USA brought down Hussein and now the Taliban has taken his place. The Empire was around for 30 years. Before that many of the people that came into power for the Empire were already high ranking officials in the Republic. To think just because you take out the Emperor and the second Death Star that what is left of the Empire is just going to give up is kinda silly. These people were power hungry with the Republic and they got even more power hungry with the Empire. They would not give this up without a fight.

I'm glad you agree that the OT didn't matter.

I'll say it again, it's not about a "happy ending." You must have conflict. I would have preferred a more creative conflict that at least acknowledged the successes of the OT. I would have preferred seeing the rise of the First Order against the established successes of our heroes rather than being plunked down right in the exact situations of the OT.

To each their own. If it's going to be "history repeating itself" over and over then what does any of it matter?
 
What is this Mary Sue stuff? This is a term I am unfamiliar with.

Here's a link to an EXCELLENT article explaining why Rey is a Mary Sue:

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-29/-the-force-awakens-has-a-perfection-problem

And if you can't open it for some reason, here it is. (Open the link if you can, cuz the fontsize below is kinda small.)

'The Force Awakens' Has a Perfection Problem


844 DEC 29, 2015 1:38 PM ESTBy Megan McArdle


Like pretty much all of the rest of you, my family saw "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" over Christmas week. I emerged from the screening into a lively Internet debate over whether Rey, the main hero, was or was not a “Mary Sue”: an author's wish-fulfillment character, perfect in every way, beloved by children, dogs and everyone around her. Plotwise, this character is improbably central to everything -- the bride at every wedding, the corpse at every funeral.
I will pause here to provide the requisite SPOILER ALERT. We cannot shield your eyes from it forever; at some point, we are going to have to be able to have an adult conversation about this movie. If you have not yet watched the movie and wish to with an unsullied mind, then best to depart this column right now.
The answer is that of course Rey is a Mary Sue, though not in this case for the author; she is a stand-in for every 10-year-old who imagined themselves into the Star Wars universe, and particularly the women who wanted to be Luke, not Princess Leia. J.J. Abrams has taken all the skills of the main characters of the first "Star Wars" cast and rolled them into one: She is a pilot as good as Han Solo, also a mechanic; she is apparently fluent in multiple languages; she is a terrific hand-to-hand fighter, a good shot and, oh, she knows how to use a lightsaber the first time she picks one up. Also, mid-movie, she discovers that she can do Jedi mind tricks without having any reason to know that they even exist -- apparently not content to make her Luke, Abrams also had to make her her own Obi-Wan Kenobi.



What Abrams left out is twofold: first, the sense that these are skills that have to be trained and developed, not simply inborn traits one has, like blue eyes. Second, and more important, he’s omitted the weaknesses that made the original characters so appealing: the genuine streak of nasty self-interest in Han Solo, Leia’s bullheaded arrogance, Kenobi’s wistful sense of being past his prime, Luke’s needy, whining sense of entitlement to greater things than he has gotten from the universe so true to actual teenage boys.
Rey, by contrast, is kind, self-sacrificing and, along with everything else she has going for her, the ineffable moral center of this little universe. Her “weakness,” which feels bizarrely tacked on and utterly out of character, is that she’s afraid of the revelation she gets when she first touches Luke Skywalker’s lightsaber. Why is she like this? What regrettable human tendency or personal life history has made her recoil from it? Ummm, who knows? Rey has no personality traits that are not there to move the plot forward, or attach her halo to her head more firmly.
I’m not arguing that the original "Star Wars" is going to go down in history as one of the great in-depth character sketches of all time. But the people in it felt like people -- stock characters, to be sure, but ones painted in 3-D and vivid Technicolor. You could imagine what these people would be like if you ran into them down at your local bar -- Luke complaining that the bartender wouldn’t serve him, Leia arguing passionately about politics, Han Solo berating the bartender about the quality of the hooch, while Kenobi and the Wookiee look on in gentle bemusement. What are Rey, Poe Dameron and Finn like in a real-life situation -- say, dealing with an obstructive clerk at the DMV?
Impossible to say for the first two, because they don’t have actual personalities, only plot necessities. Finn is a little better fleshed out, because he does do something actually, endearingly human -- pretends that he’s a member of the Resistance to impress a pretty girl. But this stands out only in comparison, because otherwise he’s as flat as the others. Not wanting to have had any of the new characters do anything actually wrong, Abrams made him a stormtrooper who refuses to fire in his first engagement. Why? Because it’s bad! They’re stormtroopers! How does Finn, raised from birth to do exactly what he’s refusing to do, come to realize that it’s bad? How does he decide to give up on the only home he’s ever had, the closest thing to a family he’s ever known? We have no idea; it’s over in five seconds so we can get on with watching Rey be awesome. Rey’s backstory, meanwhile, consists of some longing glances at the desert.
None of these characters makes a single decision that is a) wrong or b) actually costly -- such as, say, Leia’s decision that they should all dive down the trash chute in the original "Star Wars." None of these characters is ever credibly irritated by the others, or significantly at odds.
The question is whether any of this is a problem.
Not every movie has to be a deep character study. There are plenty of male Mary Sues walking around in action films, guys who are inhumanly and inexplicably awesome. Why does it suddenly bother folks when it’s a woman?
One answer is that some of us are bothered by it in men -- I find the "Mission: Impossible" movies, for example, basically unwatchable. Another answer is that there’s a pronounced tendency toward flattering characters in movies these days, as a result of the internationalization of the market, which rewards visual spectacle over anything involving dialogue, and this tendency is lamentable. And a third answer is that Rey’s Mary Sue tendencies are going to create a significant problem for the movies going forward.
The original "Star Wars" film was not a “lone hero against the world” story; it’s an ensemble piece. They need Solo’s ship and his familiarity with the underworld, Leia’s connection to the rebellion, Luke’s droids and his skill with the force. Abrams has replicated the structure of that story, but he has forgotten to give the other two main characters any actual reason to be there. Ten minutes of rewrite could have removed them entirely without significantly damaging the plot. Han Solo was more vital to the story -- not to mention vastly more interesting -- than either of his putative replacements.
It’s even harder to say what Rey needs them for now. She’s got the lightsaber, she’s presumably also going to have the Millennium Falcon in the next movie, and she’s found Luke Skywalker. Will she be building a sewage treatment plant that will require Finn’s extensive experience in the field of stormtrooper sanitation? Will she ditch Chewbacca and make Poe Dameron her copilot? If Abrams doesn’t find something for them to do besides show up at critical plot points, they’re going to be a drag on the future movies.
And while perhaps this is wishful thinking, I also tend to believe that this undercuts the longevity of the films. Kids will like it, because kids love action-packed CGI stuff. But how many people who watched this movie as a kid will keep coming back to it as an adult, the way my generation has with the original? The movie is fine for what it is, but what it is is, as my friend Terry Teachout noted, “an homage to an homage,” missing much of the charm that made the original so enduring. If the three prequels had not been so downright terrible, people would be being much harder on "The Force Awakens." The fawning critical reaction is mostly just a vast outpouring of relief that George Lucas hasn’t been allowed to inflict more damage on his own creation.
But then, I’m probably asking too much of the seventh sequel in a series, since sequels have a natural tendency to become weaker and weaker copies of the things that made the original great. Building a truly iconic story like Star Wars is a bit of alchemy, requiring unpredictable lightning strikes of creativity. You can’t do it over and over on an assembly line. The question, then, as movies move more and more toward “pre-sold” properties such as comic books andsequels, is where we are going to get new icons to adore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Mary Sue stuff is the stupidest thing I've ever heard until "MaRey Sue".

People can't stand a strong female lead.

Rey would only be a *insert stupid title* if she wasn't flawed. And she's deeply flawed... in fact she has one of the biggest flaws any hero can have...

SHE DENIED THE CALL TO ADVENTURE.

She's more of a JANE WICK, if we want to use stupid terms, being dragged into a conflict.

She didn't take up the hero mantle until the end of the movie... until then she was running away from everything.

Gorramit I'm tired of hearing this stupid term.

It's all friggin Max Landis's fault for bringing the term to the front lines... Love him, but frak man... you're also wrong (as Max often is)
 
Dan destroyed the Rey/Mary Sue nonsense a while back.

To be fair, we didn't really know what Luke's abilities were. We saw him deflect three blaster bolts. Then we saw him "use the Force" instead of his computer to make a shot on the Death Star that was "one in a million" (and which we'd already seen couldn't be done with the aid of a targeting computer). Oh, and we saw Vader say "The Force is strong with this one..." Luke also mentions bullseying womprats in his T-16 back home, which was later interpreted to be evidence of Force abilities or something, but it's said in passing and never really explored within the film.

How is any of that "earned"? For that matter, how is it any more earned than Rey's apparent abilities?

All I see with Rey is that she's able to do some stuff without understanding it really. She's clearly strong in the Force. Probably as strong as Luke, or maybe stronger. She doesn't understand her power, and she's not really in all that great control of it.

But both of them had equal "earned" abilities from what we saw in their respective first outings.

Oh, and this all says nothing of Anakin the Messiah who has stronger midichlorians than even Master Yoda, and who apparently can do what LITERALLY NO OTHER HUMAN CAN DO in flying in the pod race, at the age of NINE, all because "Well, the Force, duh." And then he goes on to pilot a starfighter in the Battle of Naboo, blow up a Trade Federation droid control ship through dumb luck (or the Force), and somehow survive it all, without any benefit of training. Not even a single session with Qui-Gon saying "Close your eyes and feel the Force" like the other two had.


They're all powerful. It's weird an unexplained and hereditary, as we later learn (except Anakin, whose Force sensitivity could have been manipulated somehow or something). They all pull off amazing feats through the use of the Force in their first, untrained outings.

That's the point. They're powerful for a reason within the narrative, not just as a plot solution.

Mary Sue/Marty Stew/Gary Stew characters usually exist as a form of wish fulfillment for the author (and often serve as the representative of the author). Their powers usually manifest in some "Get out of trouble free" way, kind of like Batman's shark repellent or James Bond's gadget that was given to him by Q which serves no purpose other than to get him out of this exact situation.

Rey is powerful because it's part of her backstory, her identity, all of which has been created as a mystery (to us, the audience). Is she more powerful than Vader? Or Luke? Or Obi-Wan? It's unclear. We don't know the extent or limitations of her power because we know next to nothing about her.

Look, I agree that Rey's ability with the Force is surprisingly strong. I think that's done on purpose to lampshade that there's something mysterious and special about her, which will be explained later. I'd also venture that we'll discover that Rey has some inner flaw or weakness as well that she will have to overcome, since, you know, that's a pretty classic part of the hero's journey.

None of that = Mary Sue. Merely being powerful does not = Mary Sue. Being powerful for no reason other than wanting to have a powerful character who can do anything = Mary Sue. But that's not what's happening here.


If you just don't like the movie, I mean, cool, it's art, and art's subjective. But if you're gonna claim that she's a Mary Sue, you're either missing what's going on, or intentionally ignoring it. Either way, the claim is wrong on the facts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agree completely with the above... If Rey is a Mary Sue... here are a few others...

John Wick
John Maclean
Furiosa
Mad Max
William Wallace
Tony Stark
Obi Wan Kenobi
Buffy Summers
Eggsy
Wolverine

goes on and on... being powerful alone doesn't make a *insert stupid title*...
 
Last edited:
I look at Rey's sudden exposure to the Force as a bird learning to fly. At a very specific point in a baby birds life (usually at the nudging of the mother) the baby bird realizes it must leave the nest and learn to fly. The baby bird instinctively spreads it wings and leaves the nest. It doesn't know why it does this or attempts to reason with this decision to fly... it just does it. The bird falls, struggles to get back up and tries to fly again and again and again. That's how I see Rey discovering her Force ability. She doesn't know what's happening but she accepts and quickly embraces this sudden and very powerful instinct. She reacts and moves because of the Force.

Maybe? Maybe not? :)
 
The Mary Sue stuff is the stupidest thing I've ever heard until "MaRey Sue".

People can't stand a strong female lead.

I've loved many a strong female leads, such as...

Ripley
Buffy
Sarah Connor
Mrs. Robinson
Eve (All About Eve)
Elizabeth Swann
Maria Von Trapp
Holly Golightly (batschit crazy, but still, she called every shot in that story)

...to name a few.

The Wook
 
How is Ripley any different than Rey?

In Aliens she's with well trained Marines... and out thinks, out maneuvers and is the only survivor of the lot of them.

She's right about everything... she drives the land rover thing when the guy panics and rescues everyone. She gets trapped in a room with a facehugger and survives, she goes into the belly of an Alien infested colony and rescues a little girl, destroying an entire colony of aliens, and then destroys a Queen alien with a fork lift...

Without having a single day of battle training.

Ripley Sue.
 
I've never understood why everyone posing at the end of Jedi meant "peace throughout the galaxy!"... Which is why I hated even more that George added everyone celebrating on coruscant "WEESA WON!"... uh huh. Even if they could see the Death Star explode from there (they couldn't), where did all the imperials NOT on the Death Star go during the celebration?
You answered your own question. The celebration scenes - from Coruscant to Tattooine and Bespin sealed that deal. You might not like what Lucas had done, but the implication is clear.

I don't think it means that overnight, the Empire's remnants were just gone. But, that's just what they were - remnants.
 
I don't think it means that overnight, the Empire's remnants were just gone. But, that's just what they were - remnants.

Well with parties like that, they better have instantly dissolved... cuz man, there would be a blood bath.

Just cuz George went nuts and added stupid stuff 30 years later, doesn't make it ok.

I'm just not one of those Greedo shot first guys.

There was a teddy bear party, then everyone woke up with hangovers, and went home to deal with the complete chaos of a Galactic Empire suddenly losing their leader and struggling to regroup.

Those Grand Moff's didn't just hang up their hats and go work at Cantinabucks for 10 credits an hour.
 
I've loved many a strong female leads, such as...

Ripley
Buffy
Sarah Connor
Mrs. Robinson
Eve (All About Eve)
Elizabeth Swann
Maria Von Trapp
Holly Golightly (batschit crazy, but still, she called every shot in that story)

...to name a few.

The Wook


I gotta agree and call foul on not liking strong female leads too.
I love TONS of 'em!
 
@R.P. Dude I think you completely mis understood what I said. The first trilogy really counts. It is what started it all. It's like your saying the American Revolution didn't count because of the War of 1812. The OT got the ball rolling but that doesn't mean that the battle was completely done.
 
I don't really mean YOU guys... just that Rey is so under the microscope for it in the media... Attention a guy in the same position wouldn't be getting.

I accept your apology.

But you are right, NeoRutty, that the media hung the Mary Sue tag on Rey, not just because she is one (she is), but because it's provocative, and makes for juicy headlines and articles.

The Wook
 
Well with parties like that, they better have instantly dissolved... cuz man, there would be a blood bath.

Just cuz George went nuts and added stupid stuff 30 years later, doesn't make it ok.

I'm just not one of those Greedo shot first guys.

There was a teddy bear party, then everyone woke up with hangovers, and went home to deal with the complete chaos of a Galactic Empire suddenly losing their leader and struggling to regroup.

Those Grand Moff's didn't just hang up their hats and go work at Cantinabucks for 10 credits an hour.
What did Hitler's Generals do after WWII?

Now, I know there are differences - WWII was a World War and this was the Empire against a Rebellion. However, we do know that Rebellion was growing stronger and stronger - and it's not hard to fathom that many of the Empire's underlings had seen the writing on the wall - the tide was turning. To add to that, we know that Palpatine and Vader ruled with an iron fist - killing a high ranking Imperial officer didn't seem out of the ordinary for Vader. It's not unreasonable that many of the Imperial hierarchy were glad those guys were gone. Sure, some seized that opportunity and went for a power grab.

It's also not hard to see that the Empire's infrastructure would've been shattered. The Emperor, Vader, some of the Emperor's best men (who we saw board the Death Star II) are now dead and parts of the Imperial Navy destroyed (including other high ranking officials). It's not hard to see that the Empire was left reeling and on its last legs.

Sure, some might try to regroup. I think it's just as likely that they're going to go into hiding, seize a planet for their own uses or just do their best to disappear rather than be held accountable.

George went nuts? Pfft. Lucas knew what he was doing - he was completing his story by adding those celebration scenes, nothing nutty about that.
 
Isn't TFA based loosely on post WWI Germany? Germany was decimated by the end of the war and, as a result, it gave rise to the Nazi Party. In 20 short years we had WWII. It can very easily be said that just because a country (or Empire) is defeated doesn't mean it wont give way to something more terrible.

I'm sure there are some history buffs who can shed some light and draw some comparison(s)? :)
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top