See, now this is the kind of stuff I'm looking forward to in the new timeline. The writers get to take the scraps of characterization thrown at the supporting roles and develop them properly!
Mary-Sue Analysis of Nu-Kirk
- Thread starter Feofilakt
- Start date
- Status
See, now this is the kind of stuff I'm looking forward to in the new timeline. The writers get to take the scraps of characterization thrown at the supporting roles and develop them properly!
Yeah exactly how dare you try to change his mind!!! Dont you know his always right! Because god told him so!
Actually, I've used this in writing up characters and adventure-story lines in my games. It's actually a pretty useful tool, particularly when you start clicking five or six things in a row and can go 'oh, crap'.
It's not a popularity poll, just a listing of character features which mark the character as either too unusual or too skilled and powerful within the context of the story you're writing. For Star Trek's leads, you're going to have to expect some of it, and I would push up the ranks by one for making more reasonable characters.
And, as I said, as bad as NuKirk is in the movie's story, he's got nothin' on Prime Spock.
The test, bizarre as it is, pretty clearly establishes Kirk as being the hero of an adventure movie. Indiana Jones, Luke Skywalker, most incarnations of James Bond and Jason Bourne would fare worse than Kirk. I'm surprised that Feofilakt couldn't divine that.
I know a better online test that will tell you which Care Bear you are.
I know a better online test that will tell you which Care Bear you are.
Yeah, Prime Spock is pretty bad
You. Are. Missing. The. Point.
He is a protagonist and almost completely exempt from Mary Suism. A Mary Sue is a character almost everyone except the original author despises, because the character is like a black hole on the plot and dynamics of the story. You can't have a Mary Sue who happens to be incredibly popular. If the character is incredibly popular, it's because the character is well-written, dynamic, and complex. A Mary Sue is by definition a bad character.
And, here's the kicker, a protagonist can be a bad character. You do realize the site is a guide for writers about their own story protagonists, right? I mean, what you're saying here is that there's no such thing as a Mary Sue, since Mary Sues are protagonists and therefore are immune to being Mary Sues...
Norman! Coordinate! NORMAN!
Screw you, Norman, I'm getting a Mac next time.
Yeah, Prime Spock is pretty bad
You. Are. Missing. The. Point.
He is a protagonist and almost completely exempt from Mary Suism. A Mary Sue is a character almost everyone except the original author despises, because the character is like a black hole on the plot and dynamics of the story. You can't have a Mary Sue who happens to be incredibly popular. If the character is incredibly popular, it's because the character is well-written, dynamic, and complex. A Mary Sue is by definition a bad character.
Incorrect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue
Yeah, Prime Spock is pretty bad
You. Are. Missing. The. Point.
He is a protagonist and almost completely exempt from Mary Suism. A Mary Sue is a character almost everyone except the original author despises, because the character is like a black hole on the plot and dynamics of the story. You can't have a Mary Sue who happens to be incredibly popular. If the character is incredibly popular, it's because the character is well-written, dynamic, and complex. A Mary Sue is by definition a bad character.
You know, oldTrek Kirk would score about the same on this test as Pine's Kirk. I don't guess Feofilakt tried that, though.
Yeah, Prime Spock is pretty bad
You. Are. Missing. The. Point.
He is a protagonist and almost completely exempt from Mary Suism. A Mary Sue is a character almost everyone except the original author despises, because the character is like a black hole on the plot and dynamics of the story. You can't have a Mary Sue who happens to be incredibly popular. If the character is incredibly popular, it's because the character is well-written, dynamic, and complex. A Mary Sue is by definition a bad character.
You know, oldTrek Kirk would score about the same on this test as Pine's Kirk. I don't guess Feofilakt tried that, though.
Where the fuck are you getting this? I already informed someone else I compared the two, as did Vance. Check page one, I gave my results for THREE runs of Kirk trying out different parameters.
You seem to like to read what you want to read instead of what has actually been stated.
Fine, a protagonist can be a bad character. Prove to me that Prime Spock is a bad character.
Scoring high on a subjective litmus test doesn't mean jack shit about the quality of a character. Spock is one of the linchpins of the quality, popularity, and enduring mythopoeic resonance of TOS. There are dozens of other protagonists who score ludicrously high on similar litmus tests, and yet nobody accuses them of being Sues, let alone bad characters. Being the hero of the story affords exemptions from almost all of the nitpicky little checkboxes on those ridiculous quizzes.
Oh, and here's a far better write-up of Mary Suism: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue
Scoring high on a subjective litmus test doesn't mean jack shit about the quality of a character. Spock is one of the linchpins of the quality, popularity, and enduring mythopoeic resonance of TOS. There are dozens of other protagonists who score ludicrously high on similar litmus tests, and yet nobody accuses them of being Sues, let alone bad characters. Being the hero of the story affords exemptions from almost all of the nitpicky little checkboxes on those ridiculous quizzes.
Oh, and here's a far better write-up of Mary Suism: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue
that's because any opinion contrary to his own is heresy. Or havent you got the memo?
Uhm, I wouldn't say being a sue is inherently bad, especially if the character is an integral part of the series and his nature doesn't detract from the story. In Spock's case, it is occasionally a little much, but I don't think it wrecks the story. In the case of nuKirk, uhm... it is a little off-putting and I do think it hobbles the story somewhat and seems awfully contrived.
And no, being the hero does not afford exemptions from those checkboxes. It is how well the nature of the character meshes with previous installments of with the whole world. I don't think nuKirk is a very good mesh, for example.
You do realize that Spock's popularity is owed heavily to Nimoy's portrayal of him (because, let's face it, if I just described the character and his history to you, it's pretty fuckin' rediculous) .. and also that his Mary Suisms come over around 80 episodes and seven movies, so we're never deluged with it?
You really miss the ponit of the test, nor do you get the idea that having Mary Sue traits doesn't neccessarily mean the character is a badly written character. It is a tool for writers to avoid a lot of the genre-traps that can reduce the quality of the character. (Did you not even read the page you're bitching about?)
Really? You mean how Anakin was loved and exempt from those little 'nitpicky issues' for the Prequel trilogy? Oh, and how no one ever got sick of how 'special' Wesley Crusher was? And let's hear it for the ending to Harry Potter while we're at it.
Jeeze, you act like someone killed your dog. NuKirk is a Mary Sue, completely, totally, and utterly. Sorry. Did you enjoy the movie anyway? Yes? Good, then don't give a rat's ass and move on. But please don't try to sell me on the idea that NuKirk was anything more than a walking combination of 'Sci-Fi Channel Drama Hero' mixed with 'Uncertain Memories of Classic Kirk', and all the tropes therein.
Because, dammit, even Abrams admitted that's exactly what he was going for.
Last edited:
No, but you'd have to do better than that for your opinion to interest me.
Your assertions and performance on the test are biased by your hostility to the movie, and are meaningless.
My assertions are biased by my fondness for it, and are meaningless.
Shall we move on to the fact that the vast majority of people who have actually seen this movie think that it and the characters in it are good? Or shall we take a Quizilla exam next to find out which of Strawberry Shortcake's pals we each are?
I thought Vance had done with Star Trek fandom.
Dennis, why not take the test, with your honest bias in it, and try it for yourself. See what you get.
For the record, I skipped all the questions about comparisons to the authors or any that assumed that -I- was the author, which kept the score for the runs for all three characters a little low, I suspect.
I'm honestly curious what score you'll get for NuKirk if you take it under the rules I followed (listed above) as well as the rules listed on the site.
Besides, we all know that you can't fairly judge something unless you've completely gone through it yourself, right? Just like what you say about people who didn't see the movie because they didn't like the marketing for it?
For the record, I skipped all the questions about comparisons to the authors or any that assumed that -I- was the author, which kept the score for the runs for all three characters a little low, I suspect.
I'm honestly curious what score you'll get for NuKirk if you take it under the rules I followed (listed above) as well as the rules listed on the site.
Besides, we all know that you can't fairly judge something unless you've completely gone through it yourself, right? Just like what you say about people who didn't see the movie because they didn't like the marketing for it?
"Mary Sue" is a heavily loaded word with negative connotations all over the place. If the character is well-written but happens to be a genius and a great athlete and physically attractive (that last one in visual media is pretty much guaranteed and therefore irrelevant), then the character is not a Mary Sue but realistically an exceptional human being.
You still haven't proved, beyond the litmus tests, whether either Prime Spock or either Kirk are Gary Stu characters...
You can't "prove" a matter of personal opinion, whether it's a reasonable one or the kind of nonsense represented by this "Mary Sue" claim.
Logical fallacy of the popular argument, Dennis. Totally irrelevant. Millions of people liked Harry Potter and Eragon, too, does that mean they were skillfully crafted and not ridden with Mary Sue characters?
If you don't like how I did the test then take it yourself and let's compare the results. If you don't want to do that you are merely here to piss on the thread, as demonstrated by your lunging for me for the lack of an action I had already performed then you are simply pissing yourself off.
Now, are you going to discuss the attributes of the character, and by extension the movie, or are you going to act like a child?
- Status
Similar threads
