ST TFA was first movie lightsaber duel with a female.

I really like them too

 

Haven't seen Spectre yet, but I think the Daniel Craig movies have had a pretty high level of Bond girls, so I look forward to that.

 

Yeah, having a strong female lead in general seems to be improving, they seem to be more willing to allow for male/females to share the lead rather than just one

 

More like maybe progressive George Lucas wasn't so progressive. Notice that the moment his franchise was passed to other hands, we got a woman in a lightsaber fight, and as the lead, no less.

 

Well we did get Leia back in the 70's and 80's. So credit where credit is due. On the other hand, we ONLY really good Leia, which is less good. And the we got Padme, ugh.

 

The thing is, though, I don't think there needs to be a rule that says, "Women in your war movie or GTFO."

There are perfectly good military/action movies that don't rely on female characters fighting, or even being in the movie at all. The Thing, Master and Commander, Rambo, U-571, Hurt Locker. If it happens naturally, it happens, which it usually will. In the rarer cases when there's no natural place for a large female role, I don't think one needs to be created for quota reasons.

 

I agree but regrettably we live in a world where everyone gets offended by everything. Plus too studios especially Disney looked at marketing and potential of making $$$ above story. Therefore whatever sells the most snd offends the least will be the story going forward.

Personally I didn't even think about Rey as being a female lead, just the lead. Some people make stuff out to be bigger then it is both in a positive and negative ways.

 

I'm going to assume the OP is a troll, and it's not a serious post?

There is nowhere in the previous six movies where it would have made a lick of sense to have a female light-saber battle, let alone some kind of situation where it was purposefully held back due to sexism or something.

 

It didn't exist before because Star Wars was based off of old romantic mythos. Knights and Princesses. It's called cultural heritage.

By the way, Star Wars, and Star Trek for that matter, were two of the first sources of major bad-a female characters.

Rey makes sense in this movie because it's a different story being told, and no one likes a sausage fest. Daisy Ridley is a great actress and really pulled off the fight scene (with the help of her stunt double, who, by the way, is a girl, so that's x2 women power). I suspect this is partly why they made Ren such a skinny guy, so that Rey would not look too silly grappling with him.

You can't start off your movie with, "OK, it has to be a girl because progressive." That's anti-progressive in itself. If gender isn't supposed to matter, then stop making it matter. If it does matter, then don't go criticizing something like Star Wars that has actually been really epic for female characters and cosplays! What, were they gonna make Anakin a girl in the prequels? Obi-Wan? Yoda? This is their first chance to develop a wholly new story without the restrictions of the prequels.

I have a dang Rey funko bobblehead doll right next to the globe on my desk. My favorite PT Jedi are Shaak Ti, Luminara Unduli, and Depa Bilaba. I actually find most of the male characters boring. Oh, and those Mikkian characters from the Clone Wars episode I just watched. They are so cool looking. Speaking of those. Those Mikkians were developed off of an unused female Sith character proposed for AOTC. I dunno why they didn't use her. Speaking of female Sith characters... Ventress. One of the coolest characters ever. Almost like the Snape of Star Wars.

 

It's easy to say that, when you're not part of that group. I'm a straight white guy, I have PLENTY of representation in these types of films. But can I understand why some women like to have characters like Rey, because women in action roles like this are still quite rare overall, absolutely.

And this is SW, a universe that's predicated on mystical powers, tons of different planets, races, species, etc. So even the "believable in a war movie" idea doesn't hold up. If anything, it's LESS believable that in this universe, with ALL of those factions, races, etc, that we HAVEN'T gotten a character like Rey before. Or that there's only been one prominent women per trilogy. That's truly "unbelievable" actually.

 

Well, regarding women getting hurt, wasn't Greedo played by a woman? Of course, I assume the character was male. Poor Greedo, shoulda shot first.

Although it happened offscreen, Shmi got messed up pretty badly.

 

Women got blown up, drowned, shot and died other imaginative ways in family-friendly James Bond movies all the time.

 

Ah! Forgot about poor Shmi. Good catch.

 

"But I bet you forgot just how bad ass she was?"
Forgot? Who is the target of that video? Oh that's right, the generation that can completely relate to Dory in Finding Nemo.

Sometimes people assume too much about that, like thinking a girl won't be interested unless a main character is a female, or someone of whatever race won't be interested unless a main character is too. I have never had a reason to think either.
The prequels also had a lot of female characters with potential or at least were expected to have bigger parts because they were prominently described at the official site and in other materials, like Aurra Sing and Zam Wessel. Amy Allen is more popular at conventions than some actors with bigger parts. Lucas wasn't interested in having anyone beyond the core five characters per movie say anything though, or even get much recognition though, and that's something that goes back to Return of the Jedi. Lucasfilm kind of made up for that in The Clone Wars while making up for everything else, doing more with the female Jedi and characters like Sabine and Bo Katan.

 

Well for one he always planned that the third trilogy would be a female lead anyway so on the off-chance he ever did it then that would make it all the more special. The closet he can to a villain was for AOTC but ultimately the idea of Christopher Lee was far better as a character than the Sith Witch.

Exactly. Leia and Padme (especially Padme) get a whole lot to do but for some odd reason even some Star Wars fans tend to totally overlook this. Why I don't know. The only reason seems to be that somehow the ability of Rey to use the Force makes her "better" than Padme or Leia. I don't subscribe to that idea.

That is a function of her being the main protagonist of this trilogy but there is only one per trilogy and Anakin and Luke were already in play for the first 2 trilogies.

To show her as the one of the strongest people ever in Star Wars in heart, character and emotion is insulting?

We can only hope Rey is similiarily insulted in one of the next 2 movies.

Beautiful women looking great and sexy is a part of Star Wars as well.

 

Qui-Riv-Brid

No. You don't get to do that. Take issue with what I said by all means, and explain why you think I'm wrong. But do not impose your opinion as if my own opinion is simply a misunderstanding of your world view. Your opinion, strangely enough, isn't the starting point from which I need to make a point. It's exactly the sort of twisting of other people's posts that you do all the time, and I won't indulge you; I won't even answer. If you want to have a conversation about it, start with something like, "I disagree. I'd argue that Padme was a strong character in ROTS because..."

I'll repeat, since you do it on every thread: your viewpoint isn't a default, and so your own opinion isn't a refutation of someone else's opinion.

 

IIRC, her treatment in the novel was a bit more graphic.

This post should be a sticky!

 

Fairly certain that the strength and character of Rey is now established enough (and with GL also no longer around) that Rey won't be subjected to having her outfit shredded at strategic areas to show off her midsection, or be an accessory to murder, or wear a metal bikini, or get her hair done by Ewoks. I'd be willing to bet that the next writers and directors will be much smarter than that. *keeping fingers crossed*

 

Confronting her murderous husband took a lot of guts, but I do feel her portrayal in ROTS is a step down from both TPM and AOTC where she is shown as brave, self-determining, and independent. I like Padme's quiet strength in both TPM and AOTC. In TPM she takes it upon herself to save her people, despite the odds, but she does it in a very hushed way. She doesn't yell. She doesn't lose her cool.

In AOTC she starts to let her emotions for Anakin take hold, but their relationship proceeds on her terms. Anakin doesn't ultimately decide that they become a couple - she does. Though her feelings for Anakin are often a source of scorn and derision by many, I think it's easy to see why she's attracted to him. Anakin is awkward, but he's a nice guy who saved her skin in TPM and he's grown up to be very attractive and it's abundantly clear that he respects and appreciates her. People focus on the her not being comfortable around Anakin at first, but they forget their scene in the meadow(she assumes Anakin is teasing about being pro-dictatorship, so please spare me the "she was horrified by Anakin's political views" speech), or the dinner before the fireplace scene, and the scene aboard the refuge ship where Anakin defines love as something that's essential to a Jedi's life revealing that he has a softer, more romantic side to him. I think Padme is also attracted to Anakin's strength and take-chargedness. People like to point to the Tusken Slaughter as the ultimate red flag for Padme, but honestly and I know this sounds bonkers, but I think that solidified Padme's feelings for Anakin. Here's a guy whose mother was kidnapped and he went on a one man journey to rescue her, and even though he wasn't successful his passion and bravery were admirable. Yes, he slaughtered the whole camp, but all Padme knows of the Tuskens is that they're "mindless monsters" who kidnapped Shmi for god only knows what purpose, and they were a threat, plus Anakin does show remorse for killing the women and children.

Now we get to ROTS, and I think, and I could be reading into this too much, but Padme's docility isn't exactly uncommon in women after settling down. I dislike that she doesn't have an expanded role, but the evolution of her character does make sense. Often women/men change in a relationship and become very co-dependent. She's also with child, and who wants to raise their child in a broken home? I think it's a little extreme to get that apoplectic over the turn her character takes. In reality it's a product of the films myopic focus on Anakin's turn, but if you look at the nature of relationships and how people evolve within them her characterization makes sense, even if it isn't the most feministic.

I don't mean to come off as condescending, but do people that were offended by Leia and Padme being sexualized understand what Star Wars is based off of? It may seem gratuitous, but honestly it's part of the genre. Leia's metal bikini is something straight out of A Princess of Mars. Geonosis and much of Star Wars is inspired by the author of that book as well. It may seem simplistic and sexist, but it's a part of the Star Wars motif.

 

Yes. I appreciate that many people do not like it when women in movies wear skimpy outfits; I get that. But still, it's not like pretty women in sexy clothes is this weird intrusion, alien to all that Star Wars is about.

 

But I'm saying her behavior isn't exactly an outlier...

I didn't say that she becomes a better person, but the person she becomes is reflected in society. I'm not going to site studies, but men and women do become co-dependent. No, it's not healthy. Women and men do stay in abusive/unhealthy relationships because of this.

The broken heart part is a part of the overall Shakespearian motif painfully present in ROTS. It's practically a stage play.

No, I agree, but my point is it wasn't gratuitous when Padme and Leia were being reduced to sex objects. There was narrative purpose to it.