Crazedwraith wrote: 2018-02-15 04:26pm
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2018-02-15 02:49pm
And I reiterate- Rey fails at every major objective she has in TLJ, aside from the final rock-lifting scene. She fails to persuade Luke to come with her or train her (Yoda does that), but ends up dueling him and then leaving instead. She fails to uncover her parentage, and ends up being told that her parents were dead drunks who sold her into slavery. She is easily manipulated by Snoke and Kylo and the Dark Side. She utterly fails to take on Snoke, or kill Kylo (funny that- she woke up first, so did she just assume he was dead, or could she not bring herself to lightsaber an unconscious man?). She only survived her trip to the Supremacy due to Holdo's intervention and pure luck. She gets credit for ultimately resisting the Dark Side when Kylo tried to turn her, but was only in a position to be tempted to begin with because of her own insecurities and inexperience.
You could make a "Mary Sue" argument (as offensive and largely meaningless as I find the term) if you looked at just TFA, and interpreted the evidence in an uncharitable light (though even then, her panicked reaction in Maz's castle lead to her getting captured). Factor in TLJ, and it just doesn't hold up. Mary Sues don't fail that badly and repeatedly.
If you're going to be uncharitable to the TLJ as well, I can see why you might not be convinced. Yes, she doesn't persuade Luke to train her or fight the rebellion specifically
herself. But she's already so awesome she doesn't need training (according to Yoda) and Luke does come out of hiding to save the rebellion it may have be Yoda's pep talk that did it immediately but Rey's presence and status as heir to the Jedi is what instigated it.
I... did not get the impression that Rey instigated Luke's change of heart. Unless you mean "She pushed Luke into deciding to BURN IT ALL* in despair, and that prompted Yoda to step in and set Luke straight." Its still Yoda cleaning up Rey and Luke's mess.
I've also read that there's a brief shot of the Jedi texts in the Falcon at the end (meaning that Rey took them instead of destroying them, and that Yoda didn't actually burn the Jedi texts to make his point to Luke). But I don't have a clip on-hand to confirm that.
I guess you could say in that case that Rey is responsible in that by stealing the books, she enabled Yoda to burn down the tree to convince Luke. But that's
really tenuous. Like saying I'm responsible for a car crash if a car slows down to let me cross the street and then hits someone else five blocks later. Certainly not something that appeared to be intended on Rey's part.
Likewise she didn't outright best Snoke in anyway but her being their is what allowed him to be killed.
Partially, yes. Kylo was the one that killed him, however, provoked by a combination of his interest in Rey, and probably anger at Snoke for manipulating him. Rey's actions were only one of numerous factors leading to that outcome.
Its funny- Rey's critics complain about how she's supposedly too perfect- then bend over backwards to attribute additional achievements to her in order to bolster that argument.
Kylo could never have done it in the end. Her failing to convert Ren also is hard to count against her because a) it's Kylo's failing more than hers b) if she hadn't failed there'd be no movie three and c) She wasn't exactly trying very hard. She and Kylo were both counting on prophecy and turns out she wasn't as close to the truth as Ren.
But my point is that Rey
did fail to turn him, and that that happened because she allowed herself to be fooled by Snoke's manipulations and a false/misleading vision, because of her insecurities and desire for a family/someone to explain her place in relation to the Force.
This is part of my frustration with the "Rey is a Mary Sue" crowd. No matter how much counterevidence you present that Rey isn't "too perfect", it seems that they'll either dismiss it outright or contort themselves to great lengths to say how it "doesn't count". Its that, in part, which makes me inclined to suspect that they have ulterior motives (and yeah, I know you're just playing devil's advocate here, but its still irritating).
She still swans about the universe with impunity including effortlessly getting and out of the First Order's flagship. (Likewise in TFA, she may get captured but this leads her to reversing Ren's mind wipe, mind tricking a stormtrooper and ninja-ing about Starkiller with impunity)
She got on the Supremacy because
Kylo Rey was expecting her and wanted her to come aboard, so he could turn her. This was no display of skill or good fortune on her part. Shear guts, yes, but not skill or luck. It was her
falling into a trap. And you count this as a possible point in
favor of the "Rey is a Mary Sue" argument?
She escaped the Supremacy because the ship was falling apart thanks to Holdo's sacrifice, and she was lucky enough to wake up first and be in a position to steal a shuttle. So yeah, lucky, but not really at a level beyond what action movie protagonists tend to enjoy.
As to TFA- she suffered a set-back due to her own (admittedly understandable) actions, and then was able to (partially) get herself out of it (she'd have died on Starkiller Base without the Falcon, Han, Chewie, and Finn to rescue her). I'd call that a wash over all.
I mean, isn't the ability to learn from and recover from one's mistakes part of what we expect from a protagonist?
Again this is me intentionally being super-uncharitable to her for devil's advocate. That's why I don't call Rey a Mary Sue but do sympathise with the idea she isn't greatly written. It's all in presentation and a person's subjective reading of what showed. You can't just run down a check list and if you tick off a certain number of boxes... Mary Sue! It doesn't work like that.
To some extent, maybe. But I don't care how "subjective" you want to call it- you can't "interpret" "Rey walks into an obvious trap and gets captured" as "Rey effortlessly gets aboard the enemy flagship." That's not subjective interpretation- its ignoring evidence.
*Oh that's kind of funny now that I think of it. Given the way the Joker was described in the Nolan films ("Some men just want to watch the world burn."), and who Hamill is most famous for playing after Luke Skywalker. I doubt that was in any way an intended reference (its too tenuous a connection for that), but it amuses me in hindsight.