ST Rey Skywalker/Daisy Ridley Discussion Thread

I really wanted more of Poe TBH, in this 'new' type of non-Jedi protagonist. Even if Poe was never the central protagonist, obviously.

My early theories were that he'd have to become the new leader of the Republic, where each of the OT heroes had their own heir - of sorts. Luke/Rey. Han/Finn. Leia/Poe. He was the King Arthur type. Someone that Luke/Leia would find, and teach or mold, into being a new Chancellor that inspires everyone.

That clearly never happened that way, even though Poe does eventually step up to lead the Resistance.

 

The problem with Poe is basically Oscar Isaac... in that Isaac is a much better actor, and has much more 'on-screen' charisma than the part actually allows... as he's written as a very tertiary and throwaway character. By far the best chemistry of the entire ST (IMO) is that between Finn and Poe in those initial scenes in TFA. The issue is that this is only circa 15 mins of circa 6 hours of total ST screen time. The sequels would have been better if that dynamic (Finn and Poe) would have been developed to match the on screen chemistry of Boyega and Isaac.... but clearly neither Abrams nor Johnson could see that.

 

I think we're still talking past each other. I've never disputed that Star Wars follows Campbell's hero's journey - of course it does. My point is specifically about how the narrative frames its protagonists from their first appearances.

The original claim I responded to was that "Anakin was a nobody too." My argument is that Star Wars doesn't present Anakin (or Luke or Rey) as true "nobodies" in narrative terms. The films immediately establish their exceptional nature through specific storytelling choices.

This isn't about whether the hero's journey "works" with or without special lineage. It's about recognizing that Star Wars consistently chooses to frame its protagonists as inherently special from the start, rather than as genuinely ordinary people who become extraordinary solely through their choices.

The distinction matters when discussing how Star Wars positions its heroes in relation to their worlds and how it approaches the concept of heroism. It's not a critique of Campbell or Star Wars - just an observation about a specific narrative choice the franchise consistently makes.

 

"Immediately"?

Not really. Again, you are placing your own view of importance on the character because you are watching the movie and KNOW they are, or must be, important.

For the first 20 minutes of Luke's on screen narrative/story, he does NOT FEEL important. He feels like a nobody.

Why? Because he has lived his first 18 years of life --and now 20 minutes of this movie -- as a lowly unimportant farmer's assistant, living far away from the center of anything exciting or important. He believed he came from nothing important. He believed he was missing his chance at an important destiny because he had to work another season on the farm. He believes hes just a nobody. No one in the grander galaxy - outside of Obi-wan and Yoda (who he doesn't even know about) even know that Luke exists.

And even when something important stumbles upon his life, and he decides get the droids back because his uncle will be mad, even when Obi-wan finally tells him a portion of his truth, he refuses to believe it. He refuses to even join. He refuses to even think that this is his chance. Its only after Owen and Beru are killed, that he starts to get it. That he accepts Obi-wan's offer, and then ... "IMMEDIATELY" after we see his world open up and he starts in on the adventure to becoming someone important. Even though he's important to Yoda and Obi-wan, Luke still has a choice in the matter. Obi-wan would have left him there if he had refused, even knowing how amazing he might be at the Force, and how he's Vader's kid. Luke HAD to make the choice on his own.

The same goes with Anakin. The first 40 minutes of the movie make no mention of him. He's living on Tatooine, as a slave, and doesn't think he has some important destiny ahead of him. He too is presented as a nobody in the galaxy. He has - so far - lived an unimportant life. Despite being the Chosen One, which he doesn't even know about, he is a slave and nothing more. And once again, you have placing your knowledge of who Anakin will be, or MUST be, because of future narrative. Not the character's narrative as it is initially set up.

And the same even goes for Rey. Her first 20 or so minutes are mundane and unimportant. She is literally a nobody in her life story up until she decides to rescue a droid and leaves the planet.

You continue to breeze past, or simply outright ignore, the opening narrative and foundations in order to defend your own POV. You continue to skip over their intitial place in their lives before they accept the call to adventure. Sorry, but that's doesn't work that way.

 

We're just recycling the argument and you're underlying the point that the criteria for what constitutes a "nobody" is a totally arbitrary one on your side. At the start of TPM, Anakin is a slave on a backwater planet, who lives a humble, humdrum life. He isn't a famous Jedi Knight... he isn't the King of Tatooine and he isn't Supreme Chancellor. He's a slave. TPM and ANH. respectively, DO NOT "immediately" establish the exceptional nature of Anakin and Luke. That is developed over the course of the film like every story does that involves a hero's journey. It's circa a full quarter into the film before Anakin gets behind the controls of a podracer... and it's even longer before Luke does anything one would deem as "exceptional". And as I've been at pains to state previously, that they are force users in a galaxy where 'the force' is a thing, normalises it and gives it the context. That they prove to be exceptional is developed as the respective stories unfold.

Within the context of the story, as in the internal world of it, Anakin is most definitely a "nobody" (if we're using that term to describe a lowly, humble character)... externally, in terms of the audience, we know he's Darth Vader. So if you're arguing that Anakin can't be a "nobody" because we know he's also Darth Vader, I think (with all respect) that kind of misses the point, as this has all been based around the 'internal world' of the story and not the external.

In so much that all protagonists are shown to be special and are framed as such in their respect stories. I think you're conflating the notion of 'having the force' (which is specific to Star Wars) with other protagonists from other franchises whom have 'superpowers' e.g. Superman etc. But of course in SW, many characters have the ability to use the force, it isn't specific to Anakin or Luke, but granted they became exceptional as they develop their skills... which again reflects the hero's journey aspects, where they transform into 'knight' or other.

As an 'observation' it's fine... but it's a bit like observing that all the protagonists of the films lose or have lost parents. Point being, I think you're getting hung up on a distinction where the relevance is less than you think. Ultimately, in terms of SW, there's very little difference between how Anakin/Luke are framed, at the start of their respective stories, and how (for example) Jyn Erso is framed in hers. Take the 'force' out of it, and the basic constituents are pretty much the same. It's their personal qualities and the path taken that ultimately make the difference IMO.

 

You seem to be missing the point about Luke and Anakin's true nature in Star Wars. Look, their situation at the start (farmer's nephew, slave kid) doesn't change who they actually are.

You're mixing up "feeling like a nobody" with actually being a nobody. That's the whole point of Star Wars storytelling - these guys look ordinary on the surface, but they're actually super special underneath.

Luke and Anakin aren't going from zero to hero - they're going from "special person who doesn't know it yet" to "special person who steps up." Their choices matter exactly because they have powers and abilities most people don't.

I'm not ignoring the opening narrative - I acknowledge what it's actually doing.

Yes, Luke and Anakin start in humble circumstances, but these beginnings are essentially a narrative misdirection. They're temporary states that quickly give way to reveal their true extraordinary nature.

The films deliberately establish these ordinary beginnings precisely to create contrast with the swift revelation of who they really are. It's not that they transform from nobodies into somebodies - rather, their seemingly ordinary facades quickly fall away to reveal their inherent specialness.

The narrative doesn't keep this pretense for long. Their exceptional nature is exposed almost immediately - through impossible abilities, prophetic significance, and special lineage.What appears as a "nobody" beginning is actually just the first beat in revealing who they've been all along.The call to adventure doesn't make them special - it reveals what was already there.

Again, I acknowledge and agree with what you are saying. Yeah, Luke/Anakin both have humble beginnings and of of low social stature from the outset. What are you arguing to me other than that? That they are true nobodies? They aren't.

Yet, you seem incapable of admitting that these humble beginnings are a narrative misdirection...quite common in Campbell's Heroic Journey.

You seem unable to acknowledge the fact that both are, in fact, very special somebodies before we are even introduced to them...regardless of if they are aware of this or not. The fact that this revelation comes 15 minutes into meeting them does change the narrative, nor the story being told. Neither, Anakin nor Luke, are narratively positioned as "nobody." Quite the opposite....

 

Maybe we should start over? What do you think makes a character a "nobody" in literary sense in a narrative? I really am not trying to be obstinate, I just don't agree that Luke, nor Anakin, truly fit this description within the narrative.

Anakin is a slave. He's also the only human in the entire galaxy that can podrace. Above all else, Anakin is he is the chosen one that will bring balance to the force, born of an immaculate conception. This last one puts him in the same category as Moses, Jesus Christ, King Arthur, Perseus, Buddha, Krishna, Hercules and maybe Superman. Nobodies, right?

Okay, "immediately" is a bit strong. I get it. Yet, it's not some slow reveal. Within minutes of meeting these characters we learn that these characters aren't actually "nobodies" and never really have been.

For Anakin:

• Before he even races, Qui-Gon tells Shmi: "He can see things before they happen. That's why he appears to have such quick reflexes. It's a Jedi trait."
• Qui-Gon immediately suspects Anakin is Force-sensitive during their first conversation
• Soon after introduction, Shmi reveals Anakin has no father: "There was no father. I carried him, I gave birth, I raised him. I can't explain what happened."
• Watto explicitly states "He's the only human who can do it [podrace]" - making him exceptional by definition

For Luke:

• Within his first few scenes, Obi-Wan tells him his father was a Jedi Knight
• Obi-Wan immediately connects Luke to the Force, giving him his father's lightsaber
• Luke shows natural skill with the lightsaber during his very first training scene

These are developments that are established early in meeting these characters. The Force may exist in this universe, but the films explicitly frame these particular characters as special even among Force-users.

Their humble circumstances are deliberately contrasted with these early revelations of their exceptional nature. This isn't about audience knowledge of Vader - it's about how the narrative itself quickly signals their importance within the story world. More importantly, the narrative is telling us that these character's are anything other than "a nobody."

You're mixing up a character having powers with how the story introduces them. It's not just that Anakin and Luke have Force abilities - it's that the movies immediately establish them as special ...in Anakin's case...even amongst Force users.

Anakin isn't just another Force-sensitive kid - he's got the virgin birth thing, he's the "only human who can podrace," has the highest midi-chlorian count ever, and is literally the subject of a prophecy. Luke isn't just another Force user either - he's specifically Obi-Wan's hope, the son of a powerful Jedi, and someone Obi-Wan's been watching over since birth, and potentially the last in destroyed line of Force users/Jedi Knights.

Additionally, this isn't about protagonists being "special" in some generic way...or in the sense that all protagonists are special because of being our main character. It's about how the story frames them as inherently exceptional right from the start, well before they develop any skills. Their humble beginnings are just there to create contrast with who they really are, not to make them actual "nobodies."

This difference is more significant than noting protagonists lose parents. Your example of Jyn Erso actually reinforces my point - she's not a strictly "nobody" either, but the daughter of the Death Star's designer, positioned with a special lineage that makes her narratively significant from the start.

Ultimately, I brought the distinction that Luke and Anakin aren't truly "nobody" because that distinction changes what type of hero/archetype they are, thus it alters how we see what Star Wars is saying about heroes and potential.

Looking at Luke, Anakin, and even Jyn not as true "nobodies" but as special people from humble beginnings raises important questions about what the saga might be suggesting about who gets to be a hero. It's not just splitting hairs - it affects how we might read Star Wars' take on heroism, whether it leans more toward destiny or choice, and what different messages we might take away.

Example: Han Solo actually represents a hero that rises from being a legit "nobody" and is therefore....a completely different archetype. Solo is much closer to a true "nobody" who builds himself up without divine destiny, special powers, or important lineage - he embodies the self-made hero journey in contrast to Luke/Anakin's "chosen one" narratives.

Thus, he affects the narrative/story differently, and reacts against it's elements accordingly. This stark contrast with characters like Anakin and Luke makes the distinction even more meaningful. The way the saga positions these different character types side by side suggests something interesting about its view on different paths to heroism.

Now, if you (or @DarkGingerJedi) don't care about this...if you don't think the distinction is worthwhile discussing, or that different archetypes change our views of the heroes journey/films/stories or Star Wars....that's cool. Just say you don't care. That is different thing than not acknowledging that these distinctions really do impact the stories, themes, ideas being presented to us in Star Wars, etc.

 

A kind of Chicken or the Egg. Lol.

Poe is largely undeveloped and thrown away in much the same way that Finn and every single character who isn't Kylo Ren is, in the ST.

The character could have been every bit a central player, with stronger background and developed arc, in the same way that the OT3 had in their trilogy. For all the talk that Han is left with nothing to do in ROTJ, he still has growth. Hell, he's matured so much that he's willing to let the women he loves go, freely, if that's what she wants. He's a bit jealous of Luke, or at least of the idea how he's the action hero and planner that he always wanted to be, or at least bragged about being, but ... he accepts it. That's a long way from the selfish showoff in ANH. (JJ clearly doesn't understand that growth either, considering what they did to Han in TFA)

None of the ST characters were so thought through. Even in small overlooked ways.

OI does a lot of the heavy lifting through sheer personal charisma, for sure. But....Poe could have been written better to actually demand those acting chops from someone like OI. In some other, more well-planned trilogy, a character like Poe could have been used in some manner that shows the larger governmental narrative going on around the heroes or resistance.

We just don't live in that universe.

 

Poe is developed a fair bit really. Whether you liked how it was written doesnt mean he didnt actually get a decent amount of it. Considering he wasnt even meant to survive TFA. We learn a bit about his past, we know he is ultimately going to take over from Leia and he does. And he has also had the most added material to his character outside of the films too.

 

The sky is blue.

Daxon: Matter of fact the sky is red. Just because you didn’t get the sky you wanted doesn’t mean it’s not red.

Yeah Poe had some great character growth with his Palpatine Returned Somehow line.

Oh and they fly now, certainly a changed man after that.

 

Good job on picking out some lines and saying ah see he had no growth. Totally ignoring everything else

 

I know the thread is about Rey, but I think he developed into a less selfish leader in TLJ and TROS. Leading in Leia’s absence. I remember the TROS novelization had Leia’s point of view in that Rey continued her Skywalker lineage and Poe represented her Organa lineage. Viewing them as her children.

anyway TROS had too many new characters in it — more time on existing would’ve worked.

Anyway, I know where I’m posting so I’m ready. As for Rey — I liked Rey nobody better.

 

I must have a different understanding of the words 'growth' and 'arc' then. But then again, just like repeating Candyman 3 times in a mirror, as soon as anyone has anything remotely critical of the ST you appear. And using the excuse of theres material outside a film just doesn't cut it. Thats a niche market that the average movie goer isn't going to go to or is aware of. You shouldn't have to go and find some comic or book because the film makers couldn't be bothered to give one of their main characters any kind of decent story or development.

I actually thought that in TFA that Rey, Poe and Finn were likeable actors, with something to build on going forwards. But their arcs and relationships clearly never happened to the same degree that we saw with the OT big 3 (the benchmark IMO). But they could be lucky enough to get a second chance of doing something decent with these characters if they appear in the Rey movie or a TV show together.

Sums it up very well.

 

Poe was setup as the new Han Solo in the beginning of TFA but the later films never gave him much importance at all. The ST trio doesn't feel like the OT trio at all because Rey got both the force and romance plots whereas in the OT Luke got the force plot and Han got the romantic plot.

 

We've actually gone around this several times. The character whom starts the 'hero's journey' inhabiting the 'ordinary' world, whom is living an 'ordinary' life... they are not initially seen as the hero or the saviour of the galaxy/kingdom by those within the 'ordinary' world. They are lowly and from a humble background.

Within the narrative, they are seen as "nobodies" or 'ordinary' by those around them in the world they exist in. They are not, at first, self aware and via the quest/journey, they go through a transformation.. be it becoming a Jedi, hero of the rebellion or saviour of the kingdom etc. etc. This is all text book Campbell.

This is part of the issue... You are now trying to define an arbitrary duration of when something in a plot is/should be revealed, in order for it to align to the idea of something in your head. That it is not immediate is the point... that it is something that is a revelation and is revealed within the course of that characters journey, is. Anakin does not start his journey in TPM as a Jedi Knight sitting on a chair in the Jedi Council with Yoda, Windu et al. bending the knee in reverence. He starts his journey as a slave boy, and ends the first film being taken on as a Jedi Padawan. If Revenge of the Sith had been Episode I, you may have had more of a valid point about Anakin's 'framing' being incongruous with Campbell.... but it wasn't, it was obviously TPM, which shows Anakin at the start of his journey i.e. a slave boy living a humble life on a back water planet in the middle of nowhere.

I'm mixing nothing up. I'm making the point that you're conflating Anakin and Luke having the 'force', in a fictional galaxy where literally half the characters have the 'force', with them having the force in 'real world' where they'd be literally one of a kind. That, in this instance, Anakin "may be" the chosen one, and have higher force potential, is something that is revealed whilst the story unfolds... all in keeping with the hero's journey.

That can be applied to pretty much every fictional hero that goes through the hero's journey... again you're conflating the skills/abilities that exist within a specific genre, science fiction/fantasy, with that of the real world. In Star Wars everyone has force potential.... some are naturally predisposed than others, just as in a 'real world' setting, some characters are more predisposed to being able to think faster, act faster, outwit/outsmart, out fight their adversaries.

That's not correct. Luke and Anakin are not shown as inherently exceptional right from the start... we've already been through this... and this is where this is all becoming a distraction as you are arguing the same things ad infinitum.

I'm highlighting the fact that everyone is a "somebody" in reality, even those whom are not force users... and that them being a "nobody" is not a *literal* description, but a *figurative* one designed to show the characters initial standing within the "ordinary world".

I think it highlights that you're arguing semantics. You're disagreeing on a choice of word, because in your mind a character who is talented, and or has generic skills, cannot be a nobody. I don't agree.

It kind of is splitting hairs, because the idea of them being "nobodies", in this instance, is directly linked to them undertaking a hero's journey... and those 3 characters undertake a hero's journey.

I'm assuming you're talking about Han Solo in the film Solo, and not Han Solo generally? Either way, Han Solo has natural talents... he's a gifted pilot/racer. He's quick witted etc. Replace Han Solo with Burt from the IT department, and that story ends in the 1st act on Corellia, which makes Han 'exceptional' by design (indeed anyone else would have literally died in the first scene of the film). So what is it exactly that excludes Han Solo from the others?

How so??? Han Solo in Solo: ASS has an arc that conforms to the archetype (specifically that seen in SW). He's just not a force user... but he's an ace pilot... and ace fighter, shot, card player etc. etc. He's shown to be rather exceptional, at what he does, quite quickly... why do you apply a different rule to him?

 

As @Samuel Vimes explained. This is quite different than a nobody. In Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne goes on the classic heroes journey as detailed by Campbell. He is not a nobody. Same with Harry Potter. Same with Tony Stark. Bruce Wayne's ordinary beginning "ordinary" world involve him being a "somebody".

While Luke and Anakin start in humble circumstances, this is not the same as being a nobody. This isn't about how characters in their world perceive them initially - it's about how the narrative frames them for the audience. The films deliberately establish their inherent specialness early, not as a gradual revelation but as a contrast to their current situations. That said, if we are taking perception of "those around them" into account it is a matter of perspective. Obi-Wan Kenobi certainly doesn't view Luke as a "nobody" neither do Owen and Beru. Anakin is known locally as the only human that can Podrace...certainly more than a nobody.

Campbell's framework doesn't require characters to be true "nobodies" - it simply requires them to begin in an ordinary world before receiving a call to adventure. The point is that Luke and Anakin aren't ordinary even within the Campbell structure - they're exceptional beings whose specialness is established very early in their narratives. Again, this is like Harry Potter: Yeah, he's living under the stairs in England, but he's far from ordinary. That's the point.

This misrepresents my argument. I never suggested that Anakin's journey is incongruous with Campbell's work. I never suggested Anakin should start as a Jedi Knight. My point is that Anakin's exceptional nature - virgin birth, highest midi-chlorian count ever, only human who can podrace, subject of a prophecy - is established quite early in TPM, not gradually developed through choice and action.

I'm not conflating anything. The narrative explicitly positions them as exceptional even among Force users*. Anakin isn't just "force-sensitive" - he has the highest midi-chlorian count ever recorded and is the subject of an ancient prophecy. Luke isn't just another potential Jedi - he's presented as the galaxy's last hope and the son of Anakin Skywaler This goes well beyond having abilities that are common in their universe.

*Episode 4 actually positions Force users as exceptional as the Jedi are "all but extinct" which is to say, rare, unique, special.

They absolutely are. Within the first act of both films, we learn Luke is the son of a Jedi Knight and Anakin is a virgin-born chosen one with the highest Force potential ever. This is before either accepts the call to adventure. These aren't gradual revelations that come after character development - they're foundational aspects of how these characters are introduced.

If "nobody" is so figurative it can include immaculately conceived chosen ones with the highest Force potential ever recorded, then the term has no meaningful analytical value. There's a notable difference between characters who are inherently special from birth versus those who become special through choice and development. You don't agree?

This isn't about semantics or "generic skills." There's a fundamental difference between a character who has skills and a character who's narratively positioned as cosmically significant from birth. Anakin isn't just talented - he's literally born through immaculate conception as a prophesied chosen one. That's not a semantic distinction - it's a completely different character foundation that shapes the entire narrative.

Undertaking a hero's journey doesn't automatically make someone a "nobody." Again: Tony Stark, Bruce Wayne, Harry Potter. The hero's journey can apply to many different types of characters. The distinction matters because it affects what message the story conveys - is it saying "anyone can be a hero" or "destined special people must recognize their inherent specialness"? These are fundamentally different narrative approaches.

I'm referring to Han Solo throughout the saga.
Han Solo represents a fundamentally different heroic archetype.

Yes, he has talents, but there's a crucial difference between having skills developed through experience versus being born as part of a prophecy or cosmic destiny. Han isn't framed as inherently special through lineage or destiny - his abilities come through choice and development. Having natural talents isn't the same as being "the chosen one" or having a predetermined special place in the universe.
Yes, he has skills, but there's a crucial difference between having natural talent that's developed through experience versus being born as part of a prophecy or cosmic destiny. Han isn't framed as inherently special - his abilities come through choice, experience, and development rather than predetermined specialness or lineage.

First of all, Solo: Ass? Hilarious.

Secondly: The difference is in how these characters are framed narratively. Han is exceptional through abilities he's developed and choices he's made - not through inherent lineage/nor cosmic significance. His narrative isn't about fulfilling a predetermined destiny or embracing an inherent specialness - it's about a self-made character whose significance comes entirely from his choices. This creates a fundamentally different relationship to the theme of heroism than characters whose exceptional nature is presented as an inherent quality they were born with. As said, he's a different type of hero that communicates different themes of heroism.

Again, the fundamental distinction I'm highlighting is that Star Wars presents two different heroic archetypes that convey different messages about heroism.

Luke and Anakin aren't "nobodies who become special" - they're inherently exceptional individuals (chosen one, immaculate conception, highest Force potential ever, special lineage) in humble circumstances who must recognize and embrace their predetermined significance.

Han Solo, in contrast, represents a true "nobody" whose heroism emerges entirely from choices and development rather than cosmic destiny. This distinction matters because it shapes what message we take from Star Wars about heroism - whether it's about fulfilling inherent specialness or creating significance through choice alone.

Why does this matter? This fundamentally changes how we interpret Star Wars' view on destiny versus choice, and whether the stories present an inclusive or exclusive perspective on heroism. These aren't merely academic distinctions - they reflect deeper cultural perspectives about merit, potential, and what makes someone worthy of being the protagonist in their own narrative.

 

Ugh. Actually Bruce does start out in.mundane ordinary world. He’s a student. A regular guy. A extremely wealthy one, but regular none the less. One filled with not ninjas and magic. He travels to that world to get trained as Batman and then returns home a different person than when he left, so that he can enter and fight in that bizarre criminal underworld

But I don’t think - once again - that anyone here said that the protagonist in ALL heroes journeys are about nobodies,

My argument so far is that Anakin, Luke, and Rey, along with others like Tom Anderson, Mikey from the Goonies, and even Michael Corleone are nobodies before their acceptance of the call and transformation.

 

Bruce Wayne is a "regular guy?" Okay.
Bruce Wayne is never presented as a "regular guy" in any meaningful narrative sense.

From his first appearance, he's established as the heir to the Wayne fortune - one of the wealthiest and most influential families in Gotham. His origin is defined by extraordinary trauma - witnessing his parents' murder as a child. The narrative immediately frames him as exceptional through his intelligence, determination, and resources.

Pre-journey, Bruce Wayne is literally referred to as "The Prince of Gotham" by other characters in his world and they mention he'd have to travel far thousands of miles away for people to not recognize him. This completely contradicts your argument about "how others perceive them" or "how the feel about themselves." Wayne is universally recognized as exceptional and important - not just by the audience, but by the citizens of Gotham themselves.

Batman's journey isn't from "nobody to somebody" - it's about someone born into exceptional circumstances who transforms his inherited advantages and personal trauma into a specific kind of heroism.

Like the Star Wars protagonists, Bruce Wayne is narratively framed as inherently special from his introduction. His "ordinary world" isn't ordinary at all - it's a world of extreme privilege and resources that most people could never access. The narrative never allows the audience to see Bruce as a true "nobody."

Again, I'm not arguing against Batman following Campbell's Heroic Journey framework. He clearly does. Yet, he doesn't start as a "nobody." Quite the opposite.

I'm not sure what you're even arguing when you claim that a famous billionaire like Wayne is a "nobody." Are you using "nobody" to mean "not yet a hero"? If so, is that really the best equivalent word? Because by both the dictionary definition and common understanding, being one of the most famous and wealthy people in your city is the opposite of being a "nobody."