Most Famous Gary/Mary Stu

Recommended Videos

oppp7

New member
Aug 29, 2009
7,045
0
0
Another group of less famous ones would be any of the good characters from any of the Redwall books.
 

Wadders

New member
Aug 16, 2008
3,796
0
0
Rolling Thunder said:
1. Actually, I've just finished 'The Founding' in between posting that, and your reply. But no, I've not read the Last Chancers series, though I intend to, after I finish 'The Saint'. I think that it seems to be a fundamental flaw of Dan Abnett's writing style that he, in creating such destructive and awesome environments, tends to populate them with characters who are equal to the inhuman fury being unleashed. And that's the problem. His characters often wind up being inhuman.

2. My point was that, really, they were awesome from the very start of the books. They seem to have been carved of this essence of purest black awesomeness that makes them far superior to everyone not wearing power armour and having no testicles. And even then, I wouldn't have picked up on it much if they hadn't been such a universally likeable collection of people.

3. Still, the books are awesome. However, in my opinion Eisenhorn is Abnett;s best work. Ravenor isn't that great, though.
Ahh, I've just finished the Saint Omnibus, and have started the following book, Traitor General. So far, so good. Also it's a good job that you mentioned where in the series you had got to, as I was going to make a point that would probably have resulted in spoilers :p .

As far as Ravenor and Isenhorn go, I have read neither, but probably will once I've worked through the next 3 Ghosts books. The Last Chancers really are worth a read. Its only a trilogy, so they dont drag on, and theres always new characters to keep your interest going, and theirs a fair bit of dark humor in there too. The author also does a very good job of writing in the first person, giving you a good idea of whats going on inside Lt. Cage's twisted mind :D
 

Robyrt

New member
Aug 1, 2008
568
0
0
Arguably the best-written Mary Sue is Margaret Weis' Maigrey Morianna, from the Star of the Guardians series. The only girl in the Boys' Academy, beautiful and skilled but approachable, tragic past, surrounded by minor characters named after Weis' real-life friends, loved by the two coolest male characters and mother figure to the hero... yeah, sounds like a Mary Sue to me.

The big difference is that Maigrey also has all the personality flaws of a real person. She does some very stupid things and the other characters aren't afraid to call her on it, and she ends up paying the price. So the story turns out fine anyway.
 

Skreeee

New member
Jun 5, 2009
490
0
0
I'd say Rose from Doctor Who. The only things imperfect about her seemed to be her grammar, and perhaps her inability to stay in one place when told.

Or maybe I was just annoyed by her and Martha's 'OMG soulmate!!!!!!1' outlook. I hate simpering female characters.

EDIT--She's more of a current famous one though. If we're talking all time famous I'm not really sure I could say.
 

Takoto

New member
Mar 25, 2009
700
0
0
Not sure if it counts as she is a fan-character, but there's Ebony from My Immortal (the infamous, "gothic-version", fan-fiction of Harry Potter. Including such amazing characters as Snap, Loopin, Dumbledork, Professor MacGoggles.)
 

Pendragon9

New member
Apr 26, 2009
1,968
0
0
My guess is it's a tie between Bella from Twilight, Ebony from My Immortal, and Shadow the Hedgehog.

Blatant stereotype gary stus and mary sues, all dark and somehow lovable, yet stupid and redundant.

There aren't enough words in the dictionary to describe their failure.
 

Axeli

New member
Jun 16, 2004
1,064
0
0
azurawolf said:
Inarticulate_Underachiever said:
Eragon Shadeslayer is the ultimate Gary Stu.
Not sure about that... he has plenty of flaws.
First, I have to admit I only read the first book, though in my defence it was enough to make sure the next time I approach another one is with a torch in my hand.

But anyway, what I was going to say that the very definition of Mary Sue/Gary Stu says that they may have flaws, but none that severe that they'd risk making the character imperfect (in the "sum of the parts" way).

That, and that while it's been I while since I read the book (and that I've actively tried to forget I read the book), I don't remember Eragon having a single real flaw.
(Ironically, that is the biggest flaw a character can have)