Rey is a Mary Sue. So was Skye in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Is it a flaw? Absolutely, why does it bother you so much DIB? It's a very common problem in action films. James Bond is a Gary Stu, that doesn't stop Dr. No from being the greatest thing.
It's the double standard applied to Rey versus Anakin/Luke that bothers me, in addition to selectively ignoring evidence that opposes that conclusion. As you said, it's a common occurrence.
I just argue the idea she's a Mary Sue because there are clear hints about her past at Luke's academy witnessing Ben Solo/Kylo Ren's turn to the Dark Side/slaughter of the Jedi trainees. There is clear evidence of her having Force training, through those visions. That's, to me, why she shouldn't be considered a Mary Sue. If I end up being wrong and Episode VIII reveals "it was the Force" or something and that she never was training at Luke's academy, then I'll be wrong, and I'll admit as much.
But Rey's likely training makes her like Bourne or Bond or Black Widow: they're not necessarily Marys or Garys just because they're capable. I think using that term for any character who regularly gets out of jams by the skin of their teeth is incorrect.
It should apply to characters who inexplicably portray skills or abilities. That CAN apply to Rey if she hasn't had Jedi training, but the little evidence we had makes it pretty clear she did.
Again, I think you're incorrectly mislabeling a character's capability (due to training as is the case with Bond, Bourne, and Rey) as unbelievable abilities, i.e. Mary/Gary label.
You claimed Bourne was a Gary Stu despite that not at all being the case.
Captain America is a Gary Stu. His physical powers come from a secret formula, not years of training or innate skill as can be argued about Bond and Bourne (and Rey once Episode VIII reveals her previous Jedi training).
That's an important distinction that you and Mole continually ignore with the Mary/Gary label. Almost EVERY fictional character could have the label applied with the broad swathe you're using, is my point, and I'm not sure that's fair.
I felt rey had NO risk + NO flaws. Cool If you saw. I don't. To me she's a mary sue. Meh
Right. Ok. You don't feel that way. I did specifically point out the couple flaws they gave her (how many did Luke have?), but you're dismissing it as not being there? I mean, opinion is fine, but those were clearly presented as character flaws and moments for her to overcome. Did she? Yes. But that's kind of a common thing for protagonists to do in stories, so I don't get why Rey is singled out for doing what literally almost every fictional protagonist does.
Sure, I'll give you realistically he should have been cut/scratched.
But again, watch it. It's door windows that open as he busts through, with the glass breaking as he does so. Watch it again in the slo-mo portion, he jumps through feet/legs first and ducks and lands, and is moving forward before the vast majority of glass shards begin falling down. Keep in mind he's wearing a thick jacket and denim pants. It's not like he jumped through in his underwear or something.
I feel ridiculous even arguing about this, but this is NOT making your case for you.
