ST Daisy Ridley (Rey) in Episode VII

mmm
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=108814
guess they are now shooting in la

 

That news was in September 2013. Check the date.

 

What do you guys think? Could Daisy's character had rebuilt this X-wing using scraps if she did and if she was mechanically incline?

 

Do you know where Daisy is right now?

 

Yes.

 

No.

 

why? What about fixing one that is damaged?

 

I can see a repair job maybe, if that's what was meant, just not so much a custom rebuild which was how it read to me across this and the other thread (if I misinterpreted, apologies!)

 

Actually, have to blow my own theory to pieces. Just looked up screen shoots of original Star Wars X-wings and they are just as mismatch as this one is. So unless this one has been sitting on Tatooine (or not Tatooine) for thirty years, it no worst then the ones before.

 

Do you guys think the new cast will generally play characters who are several years younger than they are, like 'The Big Three' did?

 

I think that, even if we know there is a third lead, he won´t be no where as important for the story as these two guys. Ridley and Boyega are THE leads. And then probably comes another character that is important too, just as a support for the other two.

 

Maybe, the previous movies never gave ages on screen - I'd imagine the same will be done in the ST unless it is necessary.

Depending on how much time is going to pass between each movie, story wise is mean, they be playing slightly younger in order for their real ages to match their character age on one or both of the other movies.

Or it may have no relevance.

What age do Boyega, Gleeson and Ridley look? Can Gleeson pass for 25? The others two for 18?

A third lead is a third lead.

 

Leia is a lead and he is much less important for the story than Luke, who is THE lead. Same for Padme. Girls have been the less important lead on both trilogies. This seems to be changing with this ST, where the female seems to be THE lead.

 

I disagree - Padmé and Leia are just as important as they others

 

I can see where Darth_Bertie is coming from on this tbh. Whilst I have absolutely no issue with seeing female lead characters as being every bit as important as their male counterparts, society as a whole often sees them as being there primarily as someone's romantic interest. Where there are exceptions to this (Ripley in the Alien franchise is a good Sci-Fi example), the character has an important and distinctive story arc of their own.

I'd like to think most SW fans don't think that way of course; Leia was a strong female archetype who is loved by both male and female fans alike. I'm convinced that Daisy is going to win our hearts and minds over primarily by being another strong character who knows her mind and is vital to the story for reasons other than the romantic subplot we are almost inevitably going to get. I'm pretty convinced that she is the lead, and that that will enable her character to fully develop in her own right. I really would like the hero's journey to be hers.

 

I love how Leia's sole focus in IV was risking her life for the freedom of the galaxy rather than dangle off a guy's arm. She's the only member of the Big Three to assist the Rebels from the start, and she didn't shy away from the blaster, also getting the first kill of the trio.

The only real reason why she initially became involved with Han was because he wouldn't leave her alone. Han even copped a feel twice - in V and VI!

With all the new female roles in VII, we're bound to get some who are free from romantic interests so they can focus on other areas of character development. I'm really excited to see how the new Star Wars films will help influence society as more and more groups of people begin to play a larger role in the collective myth.

Fingers crossed to one day see an Asian Han Solo-ish and/or female Jedi character.

 

Leia was less important? While she had less screen time in ANH, I'd say she was one of the most important characters. And not just in the first film but the entire trilogy. I mean, a big chunk of the first movie is about rescuing her. Plus she's one of the main leaders of the Rebellion. I guess it all comes down to what you consider important. I personally never viewed Leia as less important than Luke. Their importance just lies in different areas. Luke's the Force and Leia's the rebuilding of a free galactic society. Out of the big three Han would actually be the less important of the group.

 

Leia is every bit as important as Luke to the ANH plot, but something that has constantly surprised me over the years is how many non-SW fans view her; I could be wrong but I think that this is what Darth_Bertie was intimating. They often don't seem to remember her heroics, only as the damsel in distress and later the woman dangling off Han's arm. What I love about her character is that she was a break out female role at a time when this rarely happened to major female characters. It's one of the reasons there are so many female SW fans.

SW has always been a pioneer in changing movie culture. It ushered in the Blockbuster; it made Sci-fi/fantasy popular; it had breakthrough special effects technologies and it gave us Leia.

 

Star Wars has plenty of female characters without a romantic subplot, they are supporting characters but they get as much in screen time as anyone - Ashoka had a brief romance but she chose a different path.

The princess and the hero is classic fairy tale stuff - it is a part of the mythology - Lucas had unintentionally created a perfect match in Han and Leia and the love story is as much Han's as Leia's so it isn't all a girl going gooey-eyed for a guy as it is the other way around.

Personally, I would prefer that Abrams took a new approach and kept any new romance separate to the female lead - that Ridley be the action hero (like Alias and Fringe - which did have romance "eventually") and not fall into the trap of believing that all women and girls only want to see the heroine in a love story.

Because they don't.

They are all equally important.

 

This is actually conceivable, if as a Jedi she follows the non-attachment rule. Perhaps she has romantic feelings for John and is forced to make a choice rather than try and reconcile being a Jedi with being in love. We may not get our Jedi romance at all!

 

I'm all for that actually. I would like to see Daisy character (whatever her name is) be more interested in doing things then trying to kiss all the boys. Imagine, a female action lead who is not Xena the warrior princess (female action hero who is more manly then the men) nor Buttercup who is wait around for true love. Guys can be a action hero without romance, why not Daisy? We know Disney has no problem with that kind of character since the success of Frozen. Queen Elsa proves that strong female leads can still be girly and not waste time with romance getting in the way of their story.

 

That is still a live story though - the girl has romantic feelings for the boy.

What would be better is if Boyega, or whoever, is the smitten one but she has him in the friends zone. Or "love triangle" where two guys are competing, but she doesn't feel that way about either of them and is oblivious to the reason for their rivalry.

I was going to suggest that she gave no suitors at all, but I realised that is crazy thinking - of course the daughter of Leia and Han will be beating them back with a stick

Also, I think the attachment rule is out the window - Luke isn't going to have strict rules like the old days.

 

Bob rebuilt it for her.

 

As far as we know the Jedi are still extinct and a thing of the past, so we don`t know how these rules apply.

 

Hogsquattle said:

"What age do Boyega, Gleeson and Ridley look? Can Gleeson pass for 25? The others two for 18?"

I think about 4-6 years younger is reasonable, so yeah. Luke was about 24 when he played an 18 year old.

"Star Wars has plenty of female characters without a romantic subplot, they are supporting characters but they get as much in screen time as anyone - Ashoka had a brief romance but she chose a different path."

I was referring exclusively to the movies.

"The princess and the hero is classic fairy tale stuff - it is a part of the mythology - Lucas had unintentionally created a perfect match in Han and Leia and the love story is as much Han's as Leia's so it isn't all a girl going gooey-eyed for a guy as it is the other way around."

Thinking about it, I'm surprised how much more mature and secure Leia was about their relationship than Han. Until I started paying attention to their scenes, I never imagined Han as an insecure whiner. It loosely reminds me of Ross and Rachel from Friends.

"Personally, I would prefer that Abrams took a new approach and kept any new romance separate to the female lead - that Ridley be the action hero (like Alias and Fringe - which did have romance "eventually") and not fall into the trap of believing that all women and girls only want to see the heroine in a love story."

I'm definitely open to that idea. However, JJ may end up saving Daisy's romantic subplot for the middle movie, like Leia and IV. I can also see Disney being eager to get her shipped at some point. Can't blame them. One day we might see that for an entire trilogy.