ST Daisy Ridley (Rey) in Episode VII

and what if she ends up being related, what then???

 

Hmm, that's a good question. Then I suppose that's what the smuggled-in flask of Jameson is for.

 

I hear she's starring in her own spinoff called Rey's Anatomy.

 

I thought Rey was a spin on her last name Ridley. Remove the negative 'idle' part and you have the more positive Rey.

 

And there was me thinking the name was a tribute to Gadget in Rescue Rangers (Reyngers)....

...because she rescues Han, Poe and Finn...

...and the Galaxy.

 

There was me thinking cartoons were your arch-nemesis.

 

then he gives the popcorn to me.

 

Rescue Rangers was shown about 25 years ago . When I used to watch them with my daughter.

 

http://www.starwars7news.com/2015/01/star-wars-the-force-awakens-new-plot-and-character-rumors.html

New rumor about Rey being a Solo, (which seems to be speculation/assumption on the part of the "insider".)

 

Wow, it's so easy to fall behind on this thread. I can't remember who said this, but I agree with the poster that said that one of the plusses of making Rey Leia's daughter instead of Luke's, is that it would be one way of making Leia's heritage relevant. Because, let's face it, besides being used to taunt Luke to the Dark Side in ROTJ, there wasn't much made of that revelation. Giving Leia a Force-sensitive child would be one way of exploring this further. So, kudos to whoever said that.

Along the same lines, there's also the possibility that Rey will be the child of Leia but NOT Han. I mean, shoot. She was born several years after ROTJ, who knows what happened in the interim. I mean, don't get me wrong, I find that idea horrific, but it's possible….*stifles sobs, walks off*

 

I said several months ago on these boards that it made more sense for her to be a Solo but I doubt I was the first to say it. It greatly increases their relevance to the story for the reasons you give, if the central protagonist is theirs. Luke will always be important to the story even without kids simply because of who he is and what he represents. At least that's how I see it...

 

In the context of Star Wars and the ST, yes you have. You have stated again and again and again that the ST will make no "thematic sense" if the main hero (presumably Rey) is NOT the child of Luke.

You took it further than that. In response to one of my posts where I talked about Rey being Luke's niece and what a strong connection that would still be, you responded with:

(That was post #10364). That's a lot more than just saying a father-child connection is stronger than uncle-niece. That's putting Leia's children on the same level as the children of a minor supporting character.

Fair enough. I simply disagree with that viewpoint. Though I do agree that I don't want Rey to be some random orphan, I think she works equally well as the main protagonist regardless of which Skywalker twin she descends from.

Six films. One father-son story. One father-son dynamic. So no, that's not a pattern. Yet.

I disagree. Yes, we don't live in a world with force-powers and wookies. But if there is one element of the Star Wars movies that translates into our real world, it's the characters and relationships. Otherwise, the movies never would have worked in the first place. These films work because we relate to these characters -- we feel Luke's frustration to get off the farm and have adventures, we feel his longing to know his father, and then his shock and horror when he finds out that Vader is his father. The conflicted feelings that Luke has for his father, the deep love and connection he has for his sister -- these feelings have to resonate with the audience on a real-world level

Why wouldn't they be the same thing? Just because a movie is set in outer space and some characters have magical powers doesn't mean that every single element in the film has to be otherworldly. It can't be. If the audience cannot relate to the characters on a human (read, real-world) level, the greatest special effects in the world cannot save the story.

Nor do I have to justify why you're not persuading me.

I don't have to do anything. It's pretty clear we disagree on this point and neither one of us has convinced the other. I just don't appreciate the ad hominem comments.

My "huge problem" is with the dead wife trope, which I have discussed at length in the Gleeson thread and I don't particularly want to get into again here. Beyond that, I have no problem with Luke having a kid as long as Han and Leia have one, as well. If it's an either-or thing where only one character can descend from the OT3, then yes, I want the child to be Han & Leia's. Because, to me, that makes more sense.

It makes much more sense to me because this film is a continuation of a previous story. And the last time we left this story, Luke was single and had never even had a real love interest (cue the counter-argument that Luke could have found a woman in the 30 years between ROTJ and TFA) and he belonged to an order that was infamous for virtually every single Jedi in the saga being unmarried and childless (cue the counter-argument that Luke could do away with the no-attachment rule). On the other hand, we have Han & Leia. The last time we left the story they were a committed couple whom the audience watched fall in love over the course of the OT. They are popular, leading characters, and most importantly, Leia is a Skywalker and her children would carry Anakin's bloodline every bit as much as Luke's.

Add in the fact that Luke clearly loved Leia very deeply and would no doubt form a strong bond with his niece. To me, the narrative sense of that story far outweighs whatever extra bit of love you might get by making Rey Luke's daughter instead of his niece.

No doubt you disagree.

Squarely was my word, not yours. Your verbatim quote, one more time:

You give the reason that Vincent is "NOT the son/daughter of Michael" as your only reason why Godfather III didn't work.

We disagree. I would also point out that Mary Corleone was a major character in the film. The climax of the film is Mary's death. So if what the film desperately needed was a focus on Michael's child because the audience can't get invested in Michael's lowly nephew, then it should have worked anyway because Michael's daughter was a major character.

 

Not to mention that moment I think we can all expect. When Han dies and Rey screams "NOOOO!!!".

 

"I don't need to justify why you're not persuading me.
Nor do I have to justify why you're not persuading me."

So I guess that means you guys are pretty much done with this back-and-forth then, right? Also, I wasn't aware that Daisy Ridley had a part in The Godfather III.

 

her part was in the special editions.

 

That's fine by me.

Sorry for going OT with all the Godfather III talk.

starocean90

Thank you for posting that link. So how many code names does this chick have anyway? Maybe she'll end up like Prince...the character formerly known as Kira/Fawn/Rey.

 

I don't buy much said there. Though I will continue to believe her name is Kira Rey but only uses Rey. The production probably don't want to push the name Kira because 'Kira Rey' makes it almost obvious that she's Kylo Ren's sister. If there's gonna be a twist in her story that's what it'll be.

 

If Rey aka Kira aka Jaina is a Solo child and lineage of Anakin Skywalker (daughter of Leia and Han Solo, and I do think beyond a shadow of a doubt this will in fact be the case), then this offers Luke to be the crazy old uncle that everyone loves.

 

If Han does meet his fate then on his death bed he can tell Luke to "Train the Girl".

 

That is how I see that scene happening.

 

Amen Brother BBP.

 

I still feel Rey having brothers put in the "Cain and Abel" type scenario is very plausible.

She has to seek out "Crazy Old" Luke for training.

 

So now Rey IS a Solo!?!?!

So SW7 changes their information as often as the Kardashians change their....whatever, you get the point. Seems they tend to go in the direction of the discussion on these boards. Doesn't seem like they have a real lock and grapple over their sources.

Hope MSW/Jason has some input on this. I really would like for the latest rumor to be true, but that would be hypocritical to the fact that I did not want the former rumors to be true. So who's to say which good/bad rumor is true from a site that can't get their information straight!

 

IF she is related to anyone (and I both doubt she is and hope she isn't) then she must be on a mission of some sort to be on Tatooine. Some kind of space gap year? Trawling Sunday morning jawa boot sales with her old man?

 

Name: Rey
Code Name
-Kira
-Fawn
-Snow Girl
-Kera
-Sera
-Sally