Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue — Page 2

RogueLeader said:

And George Lucas was the one who spearheaded the Special Editions and the Prequels. People back then wanted George’s head on a pike, but now people long to have George back and suddenly appreciate his “genius”.

Are you keeping track of the people who wanted “George’s head on a pike” to see if these same people are calling the prequels “genius”?

I myself have heard a small portion of overall critics of the new Star Wars, saying stuff like “at least the prequels attempted to do something different,” or “it had a good story, it just wasn’t executed well.”
I’ve only come across ONE Youtube video that was slamming the ST while playing up how good the OT and PT was. But it was like a 5 minute video from a channel that was pretty generic, and had other videos like “Top 5 cringe moments in Hollywood,” and “10 you didn’t know about Stranger Things” (ex: #4 the series is based on the stories of Stephen King).

So were the fans wrong then to criticize him enough to make George want to sell the franchise and not make his own sequel trilogy? Fans are quick to talk about how they miss George, but are so quick to forget who ran him off in the first place. If we were being unfair to George then, how can you tell me with any certainty that people aren’t being unfair to Kathleen Kennedy and Lucasfilm now?

George Lucas wanted to continue the series by focusing on the “Whills” and how the midichlorians worked.
Maybe it was good he sold it.

Mocata said:

I love that he goes on about Aliens so much (a movie I love) but then misses how laboured and on the nose the motherhood themes are after Ripley was just a straight edge pro in the original that was written without gender. If you wanted to be really silly about this it would be just as easy to suggest that like Terminator 2 James Cameron can’t help making his leads into simple child bearing stereotypes who must overcome very basic fears to become mothers/heroes.

Good point.
Also, the character of Ripley could also be accused of “pushing an agenda” since the lone voice of reason is a woman, arguing against a majority of stupid men.

RogueLeader said:

I don’t mean people saying “It is wrong for you to like the new movies.” But I think people trying to say these movies are objectively bad is a form of gatekeeping.

Oh, okay, I see what you mean.
Yeah, while I think there’s some faults here and there with the ST, Disney has definitely recaptured the spirit of the OT, and there good fantasy-adventure films. I went in, expecting to hate TLJ, and found it to be really good, better than TFA.

I think that a significant portion of the extreme criticism of the ST is due to politics and monetized Youtube videos.
Some people exaggerate the flaws of TFA and TLJ in order to get clicks and subscribers.
Instead of objective film criticism, some is just pandering to tell people what they want to hear.

Good points Mocata & Valtrez! Definitely feels like some arguments cherrypick to fit their opinion. I know this can go both ways though.

Regarding Rey “downloading” lightsaber skills to defeat Kylo, I see what you’re saying but I look at it like this: A big part of the Force is that by “letting go”, you let the Force partially guide your actions. This is how the Force is described in the OT. So when Rey closed her eyes, she let go of her doubts and her fears, and let the Force flow through her and guide her actions. I think it carries a strong message of believing in yourself to overcome the challenges you face.

I think by that point in the battle, Kylo was afraid, injured and unbalanced, only going off his learned skills, which is no match to the power and reflexes the Force can give you, which Rey had at that moment.

Also with the Jakku chase, the First Order had orders to capture the droid, so they might have been trying to disable the ship rather than simply destroy it, which might’ve made their job a little harder.

The mistake some people make is assuming a strong female character is physically strong. That is not what strong means. Leia has always been a strong female character. She was the classic princess in prison, but she grabbed the blaster and found her own way out. Strong means a character that is independent and realistic without being a stereotype. I think that fits Rey very well.

As to what her trials are, well, they are very internal. Yes, Star Wars has always been part action, but let’s remember that a lot of what Luke went through was also very internal. He had to overcome his disbelief in the force. Rey has to overcome her need for her parents or replacements. Luke was never weak. He was quite willing to pull out a blaster before he learned how to use his lightsaber. He learned the lesson of deflecting blaster bolts in just a short time on the Falcon. Learning force powers was so unimportant to his journey, we never even see Anakin train. Qui-gon gives him a tiny lesson and Anakin flys a Starship (after winning the pod race and we know he raced in at least one before that). So he could fly and he took out the droid ship by accident, not skill. Rey is more powerful in the force and she picks up everything she learns after seeing someone else do it. Her skills don’t come out of thin air, but from Kylo mostly. But the struggle of learning the skills has never been part of Star Wars. Luke had no trouble learning the skills, only in believing he could do them. Anakin’s struggle was in letting go of his mother. We never see anyone struggle to learn the force. Never. Their struggles are within themselves. Luke won, Anakin lost, and we have yet to see what will happen with Rey (though we can be sure she will win hers in the end). So while Star Wars in on the surface an action movie, it is much more and always has been. It is a legend/myth for the modern age and when we see how Rey’s journey ends, we will see again a very internal struggle that ends up saving the galaxy while at the same time a larger battle takes place the reinforced her victory.

Shopping Maul said:

NeverarGreat said:

RogueLeader said:

Man, I really don’t like Thor Skywalker. All of his stuff is very clickbaity. He speaks with this same tone in all of his videos, as if each sentence is some deep point he is making. It’s really manipulative, and makes people feel like they agree with what he’s saying without even thinking about it. But I guess that describes most clickbaity Star Wars YouTubers.

EDIT: And personally it seems a lot of female fans like Rey, and it gets kind of tiring hearing the perspective of male fans (or the one or two female YouTubers who have a large male audience). That’s personally why I like the Reylo community a lot. At least they actually have fun watching these movies, and their conversations are generally positive.

I generally appreciate the points Thor makes, though not the affected gravitas. However, I think there are far worse offenders in that category (Nerdwriter, I’m looking at you).

However, your point about the Reylo community got me thinking…most of the male critics of Rey like to point out how egalitarian they are by offering up Strong Female Leads, and they’re invariably Ripley/Sarah Connor/Furiosa/etc, in other words action heroines. They then compare Rey to these examples to show how easy her victories seem in comparison to these legendary badasses.

But maybe they have made the mistake of assuming that the Star Wars ST falls under the action genre, when the reality is that the ST could simply be a different genre altogether.

In a drama, especially a romantic drama, the female lead is rarely beset by physical obstacles, but rather mental/emotional ones. The most defining flaw of Rey’s character is a desire for belonging against the growing feeling that her every relationship is doomed. Rey would not be out of place as the lead in a drama, but since Star Wars has such a strong aspect of action there is also the expectation for Rey to be an action heroine and conform to the rules and limitations implied in its previous installments.

That’s where the disconnect seems to be - the Reylo crowd reads the ST as a (romantic) drama, while the ‘""""“True”""""""’ Star Wars fans read the ST as an action movie and a strict continuation of everything in the first six Star Wars installments.

I think the reason fans keep offering up Ripley and Sarah Connor as examples of their own egalitarianism is to counter the constant claim that criticism of Rey is tantamount to fostering misogyny. Then, of course, they’re accused of being misogynists for that very reason - the fact that they doubled down with Ripley and co. is supposedly proof of the fragility of their position. They simply can’t win.

We don’t get this with Jar Jar Binks. Plenty of fans hate Jar Jar and say he’s a childish and badly written character. Plenty of defenders counter with notions of mythical and psychological tropes to justify Jar Jar’s place in the saga. But no-one gets accused of being ‘anti-comedy’. If they did, I’m sure they would double down on Youtube and cite Charlie Chaplin and Monty Python as good examples of comedy in order to dispel the ‘anti-comedy’ position. Similarly no-one gets accused of being ‘anti-wildlife’ or somehow ‘speciest’ for hating on the Ewoks.

The problem with dismissing any comparison of Rey to action heroines is that Rey is portrayed as an action heroine, irrespective of whatever supposed emotional undercurrent is intended. The bare fact is that Rey goes around kicking everyone’s ass without breaking a sweat. Therefore it has to make sense both in the narrative and the canon as established. For many fans it simply doesn’t.

I haven’t seen any of Thor’s content beyond the above example, but I thought his position was entirely reasonable in this instance. And I certainly didn’t come away from it thinking that he has issues with women or is putting out cheap clickbait.

Great post Maul. I haven’t seen the video linked in this thread, though I had seen it in my feed multiple times I simply haven’t been interested in watching it. I have seen other videos by Thor though and always found them to be well thought out and considered, never clickbaity even while other channels at the same time are sliding into the pure clickbait territory more and more every day (such as G&G and Ivan Orgtega).

Val

Voss Caltrez said:

Mocata said:

I love that he goes on about Aliens so much (a movie I love) but then misses how laboured and on the nose the motherhood themes are after Ripley was just a straight edge pro in the original that was written without gender. If you wanted to be really silly about this it would be just as easy to suggest that like Terminator 2 James Cameron can’t help making his leads into simple child bearing stereotypes who must overcome very basic fears to become mothers/heroes.

Good point.
Also, the character of Ripley could also be accused of “pushing an agenda” since the lone voice of reason is a woman, arguing against a majority of stupid men.

Yes, also to further the subtext that she is the mother and they are children.

Voss Caltrez said:

joefavs said:

RogueLeader said:

At least they actually have fun watching these movies, and their conversations are generally positive.

This. When your relationship with Star Wars consists largely of railing against Star Wars, you’re doing Star Wars wrong.

I disagree.
Take for example the case of the heavy criticism against the prequels and the OT Special Editions, I’d argue it’s not the fans doing Star Wars wrong, it’s the producers literally doing Star Wars wrong.

^ This. Most people wishing George would take the reigns again stem from a place of “anything George might do would even if not great, would have to be better than this”.

While I think George would have put together a much more cohesive story that at its core still felt like Star Wars and would work well over an entire trilogy and tie in properly and respectfully to the existing saga (almost reasons enough anyway to want him back), I think at least initially it was exciting to see it sold to Disney and have the prospect of seeing new movies that shouldn’t have any of the issues that did come with George’s PT.

Unfortunately for those of us that don’t like TLJ or the ST altogether, that hasn’t worked out so well in the end and at this point I can’t wait for Ep9 to come out just so I can not watch it and start forgetting about the ST for good.

Val

Mocata said:

I love that he goes on about Aliens so much (a movie I love) but then misses how laboured and on the nose the motherhood themes are after Ripley was just a straight edge pro in the original that was written without gender. If you wanted to be really silly about this it would be just as easy to suggest that like Terminator 2 James Cameron can’t help making his leads into simple child bearing stereotypes who must overcome very basic fears to become mothers/heroes.

I don’t understand what you mean here about on the nose mother themes and being written as genderless in the original. Can you please expand on this?

Ripley is very much a woman in Alien with her femininity on display multiple times, all the while portraying a strong character that gets stronger through her trials towards the end of the movie.

In Aliens we learn she is in fact a working mother who learns her daughter has passed away as a result from being in stasis herself for so long. This is obviously a key setup for the events that happen later on and helps give insight and explanation into why she feels so strongly about mothering and later rescuing Neut considering how from Ripley’s perspective she has only just lost her own daughter.

That and Neut has survived against all odds and it would be inhumane to leave her to the fate they now know awaits those captured by the aliens.

I don’t understand what is wrong with any of this, it all plays into justifying her reasons and the events that happen in the movie, making her one of the most badass female characters of all time while also showing you can still be feminine and a mother with a full range of emotions.

Val

Voss Caltrez said:
Good point.
Also, the character of Ripley could also be accused of “pushing an agenda” since the lone voice of reason is a woman, arguing against a majority of stupid men.

Mocata said:
Yes, also to further the subtext that she is the mother and they are children.

The difference being in the case of Ripley is that the male characters aren’t shown as normal male characters that are dumbed down to make her stand out. Instead there are some actually dumb ones (that are essentially stereotyped grease monkeys) and there are smart and capable ones that work alongside Ripley in Alien to operate the mining vessel and later attempt to contain the alien. There’s a range of character strengths on display and her’s is just logically shown to be one of the strongest and most resourceful (and lucky at times) which earns her the right to be a strong female character amongst strong male characters. This is how gender equality is achieved - through the lack of inequality, not male characters purposefully written to bolster poorly written female characters and in doing so, making it clear an agenda is being pushed through the movie which can very easily take you out of it.

Edit: I think in Aliens it definitely can be seen more as a lone woman arguing against a sea of men that don’t try to understand and take advantage of her. Looking retrospectively at it in that light you can definitely see a topic of gender inequality being pushed in the movie, however in simply absorbing the movie as it rolls on this isn’t apparent, instead just seeming as if the men are the usual big company or military stereotypes that you wouldn’t expect to really give much credence to a lone civilian whether they are female or male.

And it that lays the example of how to do it right. The political issue is left to be discovered afterwards by means of critical analysis and introspection rather than the movie breaking the 4th wall to tell you directly about animal rights, capitalism and gender inequality as TLJ does and is so on the nose about it.

Val

Valheru_84 said:
I haven’t seen the video linked in this thread

Yeah I can tell.

My point was not saying these elements are “bad” but it was in counter to his idea that (and I paraphrase) that characters that are written properly act in a logical way, and not in way that betrays how the writer wants or feels they “should” act. To which my reply was to say that clearly Ripley changed from one movie to the next in a way that shows how Cameron likes to write female leads. Authorial intent is very apparent. So I’m not saying Aliens or the character is “bad”, but rather that if we wanted make his argument look flimsy it’s very easy to do. Which, as I’ve already said would be silly since I love Aliens.

Valheru_84 said:

Voss Caltrez said:
Good point.
Also, the character of Ripley could also be accused of “pushing an agenda” since the lone voice of reason is a woman, arguing against a majority of stupid men.

Mocata said:
Yes, also to further the subtext that she is the mother and they are children.

The difference being in the case of Ripley is that the male characters aren’t shown as normal male characters that are dumbed down to make her stand out. Instead there are some actually dumb ones (that are essentially stereotyped grease monkeys) and there are smart and capable ones that work alongside Ripley in Alien to operate the mining vessel and later attempt to contain the alien. There’s a range of character strengths on display and her’s is just logically shown to be one of the strongest and most resourceful (and lucky at times) which earns her the right to be a strong female character amongst strong male characters. This is how gender equality is achieved - through the lack of inequality, not male characters purposefully written to bolster poorly written female characters and in doing so, making it clear an agenda is being pushed through the movie which can very easily take you out of it.

I think in Aliens it definitely can be seen more as a lone woman arguing against a sea of men that don’t try to understand and take advantage of her. Looking retrospectively at it in that light you can definitely see a topic of gender inequality being pushed in the movie, however in simply absorbing the movie as it rolls on this isn’t apparent, instead just seeming as if the men are the usual big company or military stereotypes that you wouldn’t expect to really give much credence to a lone civilian whether they are female or male.

And it that lays the example of how to do it right. The political issue is left to be discovered afterwards by means of critical analysis and introspection rather than the movie breaking the 4th wall to tell you directly about animal rights, capitalism and gender inequality as TLJ does and is so on the nose about it.

Val

Fucking wow man. Good job being the poster child for “I liked this movie as a kid and dislike this other movie as an adult so it’s impossible for me to see how they are in anyway similar even when those similarities are glaringly obvious.”

Also, of all the ridiculousness here, I just have to say… Aliens not anti-capitalism? Hahahahahahahahaha

Generally trying not to reply to you Dom as most of the time what you say is so at odds with how I see, interpret or understand something that it’s not worth trying to discuss it with you as it will only result in an argument that goes no where.

In this case I actually have no idea what you’re on about to start with.

Val

Mocata said:

Valheru_84 said:
I haven’t seen the video linked in this thread

Yeah I can tell.

My point was not saying these elements are “bad” but it was in counter to his idea that (and I paraphrase) that characters that are written properly act in a logical way, and not in way that betrays how the writer wants or feels they “should” act. To which my reply was to say that clearly Ripley changed from one movie to the next in a way that shows how Cameron likes to write female leads. Authorial intent is very apparent. So I’m not saying Aliens or the character is “bad”, but rather that if we wanted make his argument look flimsy it’s very easy to do. Which, as I’ve already said would be silly since I love Aliens.

Ah k, I understand what you’re saying above and can see what you mean about Cameron. For me though I have no issue with the progression of Ripley’s character from Alien to Aliens and I’ve never noticed any examples in either that stands out as the writer trying to manipulate how they want you to feel.

Will have to watch the video when I can to understand what you are saying in respect to Thor though.

Val

Valheru_84 said:

Generally trying not to reply to you Dom as most of the time what you say is so at odds with how I see, interpret or understand something that it’s not worth trying to discuss it with you as it will only result in an argument that goes no where.

In this case I actually have no idea what you’re on about to start with.

Val

Fair enough and there have been many posts of yours I’ve made a point to just ignore (read: basically all of them).

What I’m on about is your lack of self awareness in that post was frankly hilarious. Don’t mind me.

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

Generally trying not to reply to you Dom as most of the time what you say is so at odds with how I see, interpret or understand something that it’s not worth trying to discuss it with you as it will only result in an argument that goes no where.

In this case I actually have no idea what you’re on about to start with.

Val

Fair enough and there have been many posts of yours I’ve made a point to just ignore (read: basically all of them).

Touché.

DominicCobb said:
What I’m on about is your lack of self awareness in that post was frankly hilarious. Don’t mind me.

Point out and explain what you find mockingly hilarious and I’ll see if I agree or respond in kind as to why I don’t.

Otherwise don’t post just to have a go at me, you were doing so well up to that point.

Val

Valheru_84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

Generally trying not to reply to you Dom as most of the time what you say is so at odds with how I see, interpret or understand something that it’s not worth trying to discuss it with you as it will only result in an argument that goes no where.

In this case I actually have no idea what you’re on about to start with.

Val

Fair enough and there have been many posts of yours I’ve made a point to just ignore (read: basically all of them).

Touché.

DominicCobb said:
What I’m on about is your lack of self awareness in that post was frankly hilarious. Don’t mind me.

Point out and explain what you find mockingly hilarious and I’ll see if I agree or respond in kind as to why I don’t.

Otherwise don’t post just to have a go at me, you were doing so well up to that point.

Val

I think I already did? There’s no discernible difference in the way Aliens and TLJ treats “politics” but you seem to be able to pretend that in one it’s only obvious when you go back and look really hard but in the other it’s “in your face.”

Yeah guys, sorry for initially going on a little rant, didn’t mean to start an argument.

Valheru_84 said:

The difference being in the case of Ripley is that the male characters aren’t shown as normal male characters that are dumbed down to make her stand out. Instead there are some actually dumb ones (that are essentially stereotyped grease monkeys) and there are smart and capable ones that work alongside Ripley in Alien to operate the mining vessel and later attempt to contain the alien.

That’s true. I think it was Lt. Gorman that was the dumb one, and it wasn’t presented as due to his gender, but because he had zero real life combat experience.
Burke is initially, one of the good ones (from the Company), since he’s the one who agrees with Ripley initially against Gorman’s objections.
Then there’s Hicks who sides with Ripley from the beginning.

And it that lays the example of how to do it right. The political issue is left to be discovered afterwards by means of critical analysis and introspection rather than the movie breaking the 4th wall to tell you directly about animal rights, capitalism and gender inequality as TLJ does and is so on the nose about it.

Val

You make some excellent points here too.
I thought Del Toro’s character challenging Rose and Finn’s belief that it’s not only the New Order that making the weapons dealers rich but also the Resistance was showing that the issue isn’t black and white. But yes, I think you’re argument that a more subtle and complex approach to these topics make usually make for a better story and discussion.

DominicCobb said:

I think I already did? There’s no discernible difference in the way Aliens and TLJ treats “politics” but you seem to be able to pretend that in one it’s only obvious when you go back and look really hard but in the other it’s “in your face.”

I like both movies, but TLJ does seems more heavy handed in the way it handles politics compared to Aliens.
In TLJ it felt specifically geared to the political beliefs of left-leaning millennials.
It felt like there were allusions to the 1%, animal rights, “mansplaining”, gender inequality, and men being threatened by women in charge.

I guess Aliens could be considered anti-capitalism, although at the time I thought it was more specifically a criticism of corporate greed. Other than that, I didn’t detect any overt political messages in it.

RogueLeader said:

Regarding Rey “downloading” lightsaber skills to defeat Kylo, I see what you’re saying but I look at it like this: A big part of the Force is that by “letting go”, you let the Force partially guide your actions. This is how the Force is described in the OT. So when Rey closed her eyes, she let go of her doubts and her fears, and let the Force flow through her and guide her actions. I think it carries a strong message of believing in yourself to overcome the challenges you face.

I think by that point in the battle, Kylo was afraid, injured and unbalanced, only going off his learned skills, which is no match to the power and reflexes the Force can give you, which Rey had at that moment.

Also with the Jakku chase, the First Order had orders to capture the droid, so they might have been trying to disable the ship rather than simply destroy it, which might’ve made their job a little harder.

The Jakku chase still seems a bit iffy-it’s been a while since I saw it-but what you said makes sense about Rey and the Force in her first showdown with Kylo. And there’s precedent with Luke in A New Hope. Obi-Wan just tells Luke to use the Force, and he’s able to blindly block the little floating sphere’s blasts. Same with him suddenly using the Force to target the Death Star’s weak spot instead of actual onscreen display schematics.
Plus, she already has experience fighting with a staff, so that, combined with allowing the Force to guide her actions, makes the scene work in hindsight.

Voss Caltrez said:

DominicCobb said:

I think I already did? There’s no discernible difference in the way Aliens and TLJ treats “politics” but you seem to be able to pretend that in one it’s only obvious when you go back and look really hard but in the other it’s “in your face.”

I like both movies, but TLJ does seems more heavy handed in the way it handles politics compared to Aliens.
In TLJ it felt specifically geared to the political beliefs of left-leaning millennials.
It felt like there were allusions to the 1%, animal rights, “mansplaining”, gender inequality, and men being threatened by women in charge.

I guess Aliens could be considered anti-capitalism, although at the time I thought it was more specifically a criticism of corporate greed. Other than that, I didn’t detect any overt political messages in it.

The argument is absurd. There’s nothing about TLJ that is overtly political. Everything you mention is as “subtle” in TLJ as it is in Aliens. There’s nothing in TLJ that’s has anything to do with “gender inequality” (literally only one reference to gender I can think of). There’s not a single instance of “mansplaining” or the calling out of such. There’s not a single instance of any male having trouble with a female in charge (Poe’s problems with Holdo have nothing to do with that). The “animal rights” message is barely anything (animal abuse being wrong is not a controversial or even liberal opinion, not to mention no one in the film even talks about it being wrong we just see it, and on top of that the Fathiers seem to be intelligent which makes this abuse specifically extra bad). Any anti-capitalist sentiment is extremely overstated. Much like how you view Aliens, it’s really more critical about greed and people profiting off war, which is also not that controversial (please show me where anyone says money=bad).

The arguments of TLJ being “shove in your face” political are some of the most annoying bullshit I’ve had to put up with talking Star Wars in this past year. I’m tired of the parroting of clunky, poorly thought out talking points. I try not to argue about this movie anymore but the Aliens comparison is particularly apt and really points out the extremely ridiculous double standard some guys apply to their analyses.

Just thought this… if you have a problem with scenes where guys act dumb and women act smart and a guy has trouble with a woman in charge and you think that’s too “gender politics for Star Wars”…