CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Wish Fulfillment And The Mary Sue
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wish Fulfillment And The Mary Sue - Page 13

post #601 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

Nobody wants to be a kid with a bowl cut who's goes "yippee!" and accidentally saves the day.  

 

A Mary Sue isn't meant to fulfill the wishes of the audience but of the author.

post #602 of 626
so George wants to be a little moppet again?
post #603 of 626

In that case I would argue that lil Anakin is almost certainly NOT a Mary Sue.  

post #604 of 626
If the movie happening around Rey had been less of a pastiche of the first film, no one would be talking about her Mary Sueness. I didn't have much of a problem with the pastiche stuff because I didn't really notice it and have zero emotional baggage about it. That said, if Abrams had brought a bunch of new ideas that felt different but germane to the mythology, you people (that's right, I said *you people*) wouldn't be beating this dead horse with another dead horse on the floor of a glue factory.

As is, they effectively plopped this original character in the middle of a film you've seen before and you can't get over it.

Kylo Ren is good though. Best thing.
post #605 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

That said, if Abrams had brought a bunch of new ideas that felt different but germane to the mythology, you people (that's right, I said *you people*) wouldn't be beating this dead horse with another dead horse on the floor of a glue factory.

aw you overestimate us!

I always knew you had a soft spot for us behind that hard demeanor!
post #606 of 626

To paraphrase Dirk Anger: I don't have soft bits, I have hard bits. 

post #607 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post
 

 

A Mary Sue isn't meant to fulfill the wishes of the audience but of the author.

 

But Lucas already had his wish fulfillment character!

 

Luke S.!

post #608 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

Kylo Ren is good though. Best thing.

 

Kylo and Finn are the only two characters that don't feel like tired rehashes.  Just make the sequels about them.

post #609 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

If the movie happening around Rey had been less of a pastiche of the first film, no one would be talking about her Mary Sueness. I didn't have much of a problem with the pastiche stuff because I didn't really notice it and have zero emotional baggage about it. That said, if Abrams had brought a bunch of new ideas that felt different but germane to the mythology, you people (that's right, I said *you people*) wouldn't be beating this dead horse with another dead horse on the floor of a glue factory.

As is, they effectively plopped this original character in the middle of a film you've seen before and you can't get over it.

Kylo Ren is good though. Best thing.

Like I said, if Rey had been Finns characterization, or the Battlefront 2 badass Special Forces lady, nobody would blink an eye at her character.  Her being a competent badass would be entirely explained by "She's a special forces storm trooper."  She can fly, she can fight, she's incredibly intelligent etc.  

 

Also, it would go a long long long way for making the movie itself feel less like a New Hope retread.  The wardrobe design being Lukeesque, her home planet just happening to be very similar to Tatooine, Her profession being mechanically related, very similar in a way to Luke's daily grind on the farm...  JJ invited this all because he was afraid.  He clung to a New Hope in terror.  

post #610 of 626

Snore.......................

post #611 of 626

Hyperbolically casting aspersion on Abrams is silly to me. Look at the guy's work. He was all about riffing on Spielberg and Lucas before officially acting as the au pair for their old as shit babies. It's a process that makes sense to him, it's just not the best process for keeping something fresh and interesting.

 

I recall Spielberg quote about Super 8, where he stated, as a compliment, that it was (I'm paraphrasing here) the first truly personal, full-on JJ Abrams film. I've seen Super 8. It's ad hoc E.T. (and Close Encounters) if E.T. had Asperger's and took growth hormones. This is what Abrams does. Hell, he virtually remade DUEL w/ JOYRIDE. It's what he does.

post #612 of 626

Wait.

 

He made Joyride?

post #613 of 626
Abrams is credited as one of the writers.
post #614 of 626

Eh. 

post #615 of 626

you asked!

post #616 of 626

Candy Cane!

post #617 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

I was too distracted by how much I disliked Hardy's capital "P" performance to give Furiosa much attention. That character was fine, but that movie bored me senseless.

You're watching it wrong.
post #618 of 626
Let me guess, you're going to tell me that since Furiosa is ostensibly the film's hero, I shouldn't worry about Hardy's interpretation of an iconic antihero that I didn't care for and instead fall over myself in love with this other character whom I don't have three decades worth of an attachment to?

That is what you're saying, right?
post #619 of 626

I mean, it's true, Hardy is not playing Mel. 

post #620 of 626
He didn't need to. That's not my argument.

And to be clear, my issue is with Hardy's approach and not what Miller does or does not have him do. The character's reluctance is as it always was, so I have no issue with him basically supporting the story of a new character for a new movie. That's all fine. However, if one of four legs of a table is uneven, that kind of makes the whole table less attractive, yes?

I've said more than once that I can see Hardy's performance more than the character and watching the calculus of Hardy trying to bring in this feral, grunty, mumbly version of the character was a chore to sit through. It was the first time I've ever disliked Hardy in a film and prior to seeing it, I was all in on him playing Max.

Trust me, I know I live on a very, very small island of genre nerds who don't like the movie, and I'm fine. No one has to agree with me b/c I don't need anyone to agree. My issues are specific to me and my experience and I could not care less about "winning" any debate.
post #621 of 626

I liked the movie just fine.

 

But I feel alone in that I didn't love it like everybody else. It's a fun action movie. That's about it. I can't even really remember Tom's performance either. But I never got a sense he was actively doing the character as it had been in the last three movies. He was doing his thing, I guess. Impressionistic, but pretty one dimensional. 

post #622 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

If the movie happening around Rey had been less of a pastiche of the first film, no one would be talking about her Mary Sueness. I didn't have much of a problem with the pastiche stuff because I didn't really notice it and have zero emotional baggage about it. That said, if Abrams had brought a bunch of new ideas that felt different but germane to the mythology, you people (that's right, I said *you people*) wouldn't be beating this dead horse with another dead horse on the floor of a glue factory.

As is, they effectively plopped this original character in the middle of a film you've seen before and you can't get over it.

Kylo Ren is good though. Best thing.


I'm not that familiar with Star Wars so I don't know that it wouldn't have been a problem for me if the film weren't a pastiche - something that only came into greater focus once I'd already left the cinema. I guess a lot of the Mary Sue thing (which I very much agree with) was a feelings thing for me, which is why I find it a little hard to engage with the 10 million thinkpieces about it. Not that my feelings can't be rationalised or put into words, just that no matter how many people insist that she totally isn't a Mary Sue, I can't help the fact that when I was sitting and watching the thing I kept thinking "holy shit, does she have it easy!" which has never happened to me. It completely deflated any tension the film might have had.

post #623 of 626

The drama and characterizations in Fury Road are overrated.  They had little impact on me and the film works despite, not because of it.  The film works as a completely visceral setpiece in motion.  It's pretty unique in that sense.   

post #624 of 626

I thought both the characterisations and drama worked beautifully. They're pared down in the same way that a lot of the very best blockbusters are.

post #625 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

Let me guess, you're going to tell me that since Furiosa is ostensibly the film's hero, I shouldn't worry about Hardy's interpretation of an iconic antihero that I didn't care for and instead fall over myself in love with this other character whom I don't have three decades worth of an attachment to?

That is what you're saying, right?

I don't know precisely how or why this monumental cock up is occurring Johnny, but if it involved you failing to give one of the main characters much attention it miiiiiiiiiiight not be the movie's problem.
post #626 of 626

Fury Road was initially created as a bunch of storyboads before there was even a script.  So I can see why the drama had virtually no impact on me.  It seemed like an afterthought that the actors did their best with.  That aspect wasn't terrible, it just didn't do much for me.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Wish Fulfillment And The Mary Sue