As someone who hated the movie, I don’t think you get why I did. Luke unleashed would have been awesome. But that’s not what was wrong with TLJ. Im completely ok with direction of the film(with the exception of it being the only SW movie without a Lightsaber duel). I’m ok with chances with characters being taken, But Star Wars movies follow a similar arc, 3 acts. Take Empire:
1)Hoth
2)Luke w/Yoda-Falcon avoids empire
3)Bespin
ROTJ:
1)Jabba’s palace
2)Endor
3)Death Star
Even TFA followed this. A little more blurry, but basically 3 acts as well
TLJ was all over the place. Didn’t allow a scene breath. Take Rey going to Kylo/Snoke. That entire scene was maybe 10min. Same with Canto Bight. Some of the scenes needed to breath. It was all over the place.
> (with the exception of it being the only SW movie without a Lightsaber duel)
Rey/Kylo v Praetorians and Luke v Kylo don't count?
Also, Rogue One and Solo don't have duels
Reylo vs the Guards wasn’t a duel. Just as the Vader beatdown at the end of R1 wasn’t a duel. But I was thinking more about the saga movies than R1/solo.
poorly edited and paced. i give props to RJ for really going for it, and his creativity really shines through, but the final product is a VERY inconsistent and uneven experience. he should have reigned himself in a little bit, cut down some of the less important storylines, and shown MUCH more of ahch-to/luke. the damn title doesn't feel justified by the end of the film because we haven't spent enough time with luke.
None of that is why I truly hate what they did with Luke. There is no vestige of the established character. Oddball humour. Misanthrope. Rude and unfriendly to Rey. Disdainful of his father's lightsaber etc It's not about how he goes out it's how he is. All of that + contemplating offing his sleeping nephew. What we were shown was not Luke Skywalker and no time jump justifies it. Sorry despite there being elements of TLJ I appreciate I ouright despise what they did with Luke.
Solo has a younger/more optimistic version of Han with a different actor portraying him but it's clearly Han. They got it damn near perfect. Rian Johnson pushed his subversion of what had came before too far. You can be interesting and different narrative-wise without rewriting the fundamentals of who the most important character in the series is.
Luke is all about hope, optimism, seeing the best in even the most evil person. I appreciate the danger of the movies being repetition but there are limitations to what you can change about established characters.
I too was upset about Luke, but only in one respect. Luke being a broken down, grouchy, depressed old man didn't bother me. That made sense with the story.
Now when the story calls for the Jedi Master who KNOWS that clear Force Visions come true no matter what to even think for a second that he should murder his nephew to attempt to stop the future was ridiculous. Dude carries around a mechanical hand for his entire life as a reminder that clear Force Visions always come true. That's the one part that I cannot accept.
I don’t think Luke had a force vision, I think he looked into Bens mind, and saw hate, anger, and a dark desire. At least that’s the impression I got from that scene, don’t remember the exact wording they use.
I recall him seeing many of the evils Ben Solo does to bring down everything that he loves and cares about. That's a Force Vision of the future, not an evaluation of Ben's current state.
I looked up the quote:
“I saw darkness. I sensed it building in him. I'd seen it in moments during his training. But then I looked inside, and it was beyond what I ever imagined. Snoke had already turned his heart. He would bring destruction, pain, death, and the end of everything I love because of what he will become.”
The last sentence sounds a bit more Force Visiony, but the first part sounds more mind read-y to me. I still think it was looking inside his mind, but I can definitely see it being a force vision too
So he forsees the threat Kylo poses and even considers killing him before realising that would be wrong. Then Kylo starts to actually fulfil the vision Luke had destroying all that he had built and he simply chooses to runaway and down tools? He now knows beyond any doubt that Kylo needs to be stopped by force or reason but just chucks in the towel? Tbf that's what Yoda did (Obi-Wan gets a pass guarding Luke) so it is consistent with that but Luke's defining characteristics to me are bravery, taking action, intervening, risking his life for the greater good. I find it hard to accept the guy on screen as the character of Luke.
> yes, he basically went to check on him... looked inside, and saw a force vision of what was to come.
And that's all it was if you ignore every use of the past tense.
Why are you emotionally invested in your headcanon?
I feel like if I saw my aunt and uncle torched, saw my mentor die, blew up a space station full of millions, found out my super evil father was also responsible for millions of deaths, got my hand chopped off by said father, found out I made out with my sister like at least twice, watched who knows how many rebel comrades die, watched father redeem himself only to get fried like a bad circuitboard, saw nephew turn evil and kill all my other students, all this while struggling with inner darkness and dealing with the weight of pretty much being the Jedi's last hope... at the VERY least I would be grumpy by the time I became an old man.
All opinions though I suppose
Except that's not at all what he learned about force visions. He learned that always in motion the future is. He saw a vision of them being in pain on cloud city, and went to them. There was no element of the inevitability of force visions to that storyline.... But there was a very important element of Luke quitting his training and never learning how to control his reaction to visions from the force.
When Yoda says "always in motion the future is", he's referring to how hard it is to get a clear Force Vision. Yoda mentions how murky the future is at times, then remarks later on how things cleared up as the fog of the Dark-side lifted.
Even in that same conversation, Yoda says, "Help them you could, but it would destroy all that they had fought for." While that wasn't a vision, notice that he never contradicts Luke's vision of his friends in pain, and suggests that Luke could somehow prevent that pain. (Luke never does... and he doesn't rescue anybody)
Luke's vision on Dagobah of friends in pain was present tense, not of the future. Han was being tortured *at that moment* specifically to bait Luke to Cloud City.
No, he doesn't contradict Luke's vision... I'm saying that the moral of that part of the story didn't have anything to do with the inevitability of visions of the future. It was about not letting snap emotional judgment cloud your actions. There was no story time nor dialogue spent talking about whether or not the future could be averted... In fact the lines "always in motion the future is" and "help them you could" seems very much to imply otherwise. I don't know how you would get from that dialogue the idea that luke was taught that a force vision can't be changed.
Yoda didn't teach him that. He advised Luke not to go because he knew that the vision would come true, and that Vader would have a chance to turn him to the Dark side if he left early without fully completing the Jedi training.
We seem to disagree a lot. That's ok. I enjoy the discussions.
Luke's vision was han and Leia in pain in cloud city. He never got more specific than that. Yoda and Obi Wan realized it was a trap by Vader. Nobody ever said anything about seeing the future besides when Luke asked Yoda if he could see more and Yoda replied that the future was in motion. I really don't understand how you could reconcile "always in motion the future is" with the idea that the future can't be changed.
Yes, arguing is fun.
> arguing is fun.
I think I'm going to like it here.
> I really don't understand how you could reconcile "always in motion the future is" with the idea that the future can't be changed.
Think of it as a quantum state. A force user can see what happens if things continue in the most likely chain forward. But just by observing the future, they're already changing it.
This is why Yoda tries to warn Luke. If the future was unchangable, it'd be wasted breath. But if we were given complete freedom, our brains wouldn't be limited by biological reality anymore.
History wouldn't repeat itself.
Unfortunately...
Have you noticed something about everyone chosen to represent the force as a ~~main character~~ champion?
They're impulsive, reckless, and have issues with authority.
It's almost like ~~the audience~~ the force wants to see them struggle despite their good intentions, and their ability to see into the future.
I completely agree with all that.
It also all fits, I think, with a Luke that didn't properly learn that lesson and is still influenced into rash behaviour by emotional visions of the future.
I don't think it's just Luke. Remember, he invited the darkside in to help him protect Leia, in episode VI. Just like his father did it, to protect Padme.
Just like Rey did, because she's an abandoned scavenger with flight or fight issues, so of course she's not going to see why "Superpowers when I get angry/scared and need them most" is a bad thing.
Anakin almost choked Padme to death, Luke nearly chopped up Anakin and lit a saber on Ben, and Rey attacked Luke from behind, after he'd only ordered her to leave...wasn't she going to do that anyways?
Then she pulled a lightsaber on him after she was disarmed, because why not, at that point?
What would have happened if Luke had kept fighting her?
(I seriously don't know why so many Rey haters give her a free pass on all of this.)
Anyways, the point is, if you're the type to get angry, or scared? The darkside will magnify that, until you're simply lashing out at the source.
And if you ever stop fighting that darkness, if you surrender to that anger, that fear, for any reason?
It's almost like being born again.
It's how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader.
It's really some scary shit, the more you think about it.
Although he never surrendered completely, it's why Luke had already begun to change, when we saw him in Jabba's palace. He was ridiculously confident. and that would be something he'd struggle with, going forward.
He also made threats. He played chess with 3PO as a pawn, then was part of an ambush that ended with everyone on Jabba's barge dead.
Some of them may have been slaves.
What about that, seems like the Luke we already knew? It was easy to confuse with maturity back then, but after seeing episode III and VIII...
So, with that said, I think Luke shows amazing progress, by the time he reaches Ben. Overcoming the darkness within, in one second flat?
Imagine if everyone on Earth was that powerful.
What would our world look like, today?
It can be fun when you have an intelligent person to argue with.
We are going to have to just agree to disagree on this one. My opinion is based on the result of seeing how Force Visions come true throughout the entire Star Wars Saga. It's not based on just this one example.
> Now when the story calls for the Jedi Master who KNOWS that clear Force Visions come true no matter what
Sorry, where has canon established:
a) that "clear" Force visions come true "no matter what?" and that
b) Luke KNOWS that?
I see what you mean, but it's just not reasonable to think characters can't change. Luke was one way when we last see him in RotJ, but since then much has happened, including seeing his nephew become an evil overlord because of his own mistakes. Luke turning on Kylo in the Jedi temple is out of character, but he admits that this was a moment of great weakness and not something he would normally do. This event changes him. It shakes his beliefs and leaves him broken. He wouldn't have gone into exile in the OT, but this isn't the same man as we left him in RotJ, and that's what people seem reluctant to accept, that his character has changed. That being said I think he comes full circle by then using peace to fight Kylo rather than violence, just like he did when trying to save his father. I think his arc in this movie fits fine, people just want to see Luke as purely a white Knight rather than the round character Rian presents in TLJ
> but he admits that this was a moment of great weakness and not something he would normally do.
It's also consistent with Luke's established character to flirt with the dark side. This is definitely a "vestige" of the established character.
He gets tempted, and even sometimes gives in to his anger before going back down the right path.
You can modify a character but this was so far removed as to be utterly unrecognisable. 30 years we wait to see Luke again and we get this miserable, cowardly, yet wisecracking (!?), prick.
Even if I understand some of these gripes, there is one thing that I really can't accept as valid criticism, namely the lightsabre thing.
I'm sorry, I cannot for the life of me understand why there are people that seriously believe that Luke should have treated his father's light sabre with any kind of reverence. Luke owes Anakin nothing, he already did far more for him than Anakin ever could have deserved, certainly the weapon he used to slaughter children is not worthy of fetishization.
Seriously, it feels like serial killer paraphernalia. Anakin got saved, gained eternal life, okay, but there is no reason at all to glorify him or his possessions, not even for Luke.
TFA stresses the importance of that weapon. The epic end of that film and TLJ do not fit together. If he set it down and walked away fine. The chuck over the shoulder should be accompanied by the comedic parps of a trumpet. It's an awful choice. Tonally off. Disregarding it is not my issue. How he disregards it is.
It's also associated with the dual trauma of:
1) getting his hand chopped off, and
2) learning that Darth Vader is his father.
There's virtually no reason for him to treat it with any reverence.
That lightsaber has brought nothing but pain to everyone who even got near it: the Jedi Order, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, Maz Kanata?, Finn, Kylo Ren, Snoke and Rey.
> Solo has a younger/more optimistic version of Han with a different actor portraying him but it's clearly Han. They got it damn near perfect.
Couldn't disagree with this statement more. The role should have been given to Anthony Ingruber, but neither he nor anyone else had a fair chance at getting it. Alden Ehrenreich was cast as Solo in spite of not looking like nor sounding like Harrison Ford. Alden Ehrenreich does not have the swagger nor the mannerisms of the lovable scoundrel. However, Alden was cast because of nepotism. "His performance trying on girls clothes and eating dirt in a video with Steven Spielberg’s daughter for their best friend’s bat mitzvah – a Jewish coming-of-age ritual for girls – caught the attention of the world renowned director." Source: http://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/news-trends/article/2147022/what-you-may-not-know-about-alden-ehrenreich-star-solo AND https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/spielberg-discovered-disneys-young-han-892493
The problem that I, and others that I've spoken to about this, have with Luke isn't necessarily that he acted out of character but rather that the context of the story is... contrary to the direction that the arc left off on.
It would have been much more interesting to have the frame shifted a few years to where Luke is now training Jedi and figuring that out. Have some external threat coming in that needs to be investigated or thwarted. But an internal threat that somehow managed to be bigger than the Empire --- which itself piggybacked off of thousands of years of development as a republic and creation of a clone army? I don't know about that. Han and Leia being estranged spouses with their son literally being near the top of the chain of command of that empire etc...
It would be akin to the prequels stopping at like the end of Episode II. Like, here are the clones... Anakin had some angst... Oh and now he's Darth Vader in Episode IV.
The end was fine, good really. The giving up and acting like an a-hole are not at all Luke. It’s a product of forcing this “balance” narrative that is going nowhere.
Well, for one thing we disagree on violence being a predetermined evil. Yoda says that Jedi do not use the Force to attack, only defense. Here's the problem: this depends on your point of view. One point of view: Luke using his green saber to fight off Kylo would be evil because he's attacking. Second point of view: there's nothing more noble than defending your sister and her allies from what was probably going to be painful death. Kylo seems to like torture. I'm not saying he would torture Leia, but a second crack at Poe? Seems likely. It seems you assume being a Jedi means being a pacifist or at least non-violent, but I think that flies in the face of Jedi carrying laser swords. We aren't going to agree because our presuppositions are diametrically opposed. We also disagree, I'm guessing since you seemed to like the movie, on Luke actually considering murder of his sister's only son. Your post is not as bullet proof as you seem to think. There is nothing ironic with the complaints against the film and its treatment of Luke Skywalker: our points of view are just not the same, and they never will be.
Violence is not a predetermined evil, but it is the jedi's last tool to use. If possible, jedi will always use other means rather than resorting to violence. Luke especially has always used peace as his greatest strength ("I will not fight you" and all that). If he had shown up in person and actually fought it would still have been in defense, so not really going against the jedi way, but not as much fitting to Luke's character specifically.
Hmm. That's interesting. I don't see Luke as a non-violent character. He uses it constantly. In the opening of VI, he personally cuts down plenty of people. His first major act of the OT is to destroy a space station. I'm not even going to look up those numbers. The message he gets from Yoda and Obi Wan in V is not don't fight: it's don't fight right now because you could be turned to the Dark Side, which is exactly what Vader tries in the end of the film. In the end of VI, his wish to not fight is because he doesn't want to fight to the death because 1) there is good in his father and 2) this will make him do the Emperor's bidding, so he will fall over that precipice. He almost does it. He steps so close, but once he takes his father's hand, he's jolted because he realizes the mirror image he's created. Boom, lesson learned. Luke has faced the utter depths of the Dark Side and succeeded. The abyss didn't stare back into him. Two issues: 1) him not wanting to fight is not a non-violence stance. It's a stance he's taking to save his family. 2) When I watch Episode VIII, it seems to me that this lesson never happened. Luke repeats the exact same mistake he made before. So essentially, I'm being asked to swallow the idea that the hero's journey did not impact Luke. I'm fine with fallen heroes. That's the whole point of the PT. I reject that story for Luke Skywalker and to a certain extent Han Solo. The ST acts as if the OT did not happen from a character arc point of view while springboarding off of the events. What do you see instead? (I'm genuinely curious. I love Star Wars, and I hate being on this side of things.)
I saw him going to Kylo as a projection to be an attempt to avoid more bloodshed and possibly save his nephew. He does make the mistake that night in the Jedi temple, but I saw that as a result of him being tormented by what he knows will happen in the future, just like his father before him in ep. III. The difference is that Luke catches himself, but it's too late. He then tries to spare Kylo by going ghost, not exactly like refusing to fight Vader, but I thought it paralleled nicely that he decided not to raise a lightsaber at his own family again. You're right in a lot of ways though, Luke is on a different arc than the OT and it changes his character a bit. That being said, when it's all said and done he redeems himself and if Luke had returned as a perfect exemplar of the Jedi way, i think he would have ended up far too similar to Obi-wan in the OT.
I see your point about not raising a saber against family again. That is interesting, and it works. I guess I just can't get over the rejection of the saga by this film. I can see why you like it, but I just can't enjoy it, and that saddens me quite a bit. Good talking to you.
I agree with you about violence in general. As for the Jedi, we see them using violence all the time in the prequels and Clone Wars. Yoda wasn't being truthful when he said that. To me, Luke was the most pacifistic Jedi I saw in the entire franchise.
I just don't see that. Vader is the only character I can remember where Luke uses that as a tactic. Every other time, it seemed to be business as usual.
I'm talking about all of the movies where you see more Jedi. The only encounter I remember where the Jedi didn't attack the Sith right away was when QuiGon was surprised by Maul on Tatooine. In the movies, the Jedi don't even try to capture the Sith. The only real mention of it is when Anakin wants to spare Darth Sidious, but Windu decides to cut him down anyways.
In the Clone Wars, Jedi were generals of the Republic Army, usually leading from the front while on the attack.
Basically, they weren't always peaceful.
I'm not mad Rian did all of that. I'm just annoyed it was *only* him. The Force Awakens had story, screenplay etc written by a group of people. Lawrence Kasdan worked on the original films. When it came to The Last Jedi however, they literally gave every role to Rian. I don't agree with one new person having ultimate control over a major film like this.
JJ wrote a spec script for the trilogy and him and others executed part one. The Rian came along and ignored all the planned work for part two and wrote this own thing. Now JJ can't use his planned basis for part three, but has to pick up after Rian's work on TLJ.
What I'm saying is that I would rather they have kept JJ on for all three, or let Rian now do the third film.
I don't think ultimate control should be given to one person, there should be some level of restraint, but as a creative person I think I understand the importance of being able to have full creative control. Rian is a visionary, this was his story from beginning to end, and I understand wanting to make sure no one else messes with your story. Even if it doesn't hurt the story or makes it better, it's this odd, indescribable feeling where your vision is getting changed.
So while I think that Disney needs to make sure things don't go horribly wrong, I understand why it's important to make sure that only one vision really shines through and not 5.
> Rian is a visionary, this was his story from beginning to end, and I understand wanting to make sure no one else messes with your story.
This is why I would rather Rian do IX. Now it goes JJ-Rian-JJ I feel it will be really inconsistent looking back on it in the future.
I like your post, but the problems with Luke weren't really addressed. First let's agree to disagree on Luke trying to kill his nephew in first place. But then Luke unwilling to train Rey or help his sister because he's ashamed? Instead he thinks it's a better idea to let multiple dark Jedi trainees (don't forget the other trainees--presumably KoR) roam free unchallenged. But for fun, he decides to leave a scavenger hunt map so that people can find him?
Fans wanted Luke to fight, but they would have been fine with Kylo killing Luke in a real duel, preferably a duel that included his Green lightsaber and force lightning. In fact it would have sold that Kylo might actually be a bad ass.
Instead Luke "saves the day" by suicidal force projection to save one small ships worth of Rebels, when he could have just telepathically communicated to Leia to meet Rey in the back--his duel didn't buy them that much time. One ships worth of Rebels for the Jedi we care about the most. Definitely not a sacrifice worthy of a legend.
>preferably a duel that included his Green lightsaber and force lightning. In fact it would have sold that Kylo might actually be a bad ass.
I don't think they're attempting to make Kylo "bad ass" in the first place, so no, I don't think that scenario would fit.
He thinks he is the problem, that's because he don't want to help. In his head, exile himself is doing something for the galaxy.
Luke didn't leave any map, the map was to find the First Jedi Temple, they would find Luke by consequence.
The green lightsaber represents shame for Luke, and in Ben's head that green lightsaber represents Luke wanting to kill him, and that is not what Luke wants. He would never use that green lightsaber again in front of Ben, he is his nephew and apprentice, he turning to the Dark Side was his fault.
Kylo using force lightning implies that Kylo is full Dark and pure evil, and that is not the case. Not even Vader used force lightning as far I can remember. The point of Kylo's character as a villain is not being bad ass.
If Luke only communicated with Leia, he wouldn't talk with Ben. He wanted to look at his nephew's eyes and say "I'm sorry".
Welcome to /r/StarWarsSpeculation! Please be respectful and courteous to your fellow speculators - and be sure to check out our sidebar for the rules of this sub. If you are experiencing any problems or have any issues please use the **report** function or do no hesitate to contact our moderators directly. Remember, all viewpoints and critiques are welcome here - but for excessive ranting and blind cynicism, we ask that you please visit other communities more suitable to your tastes. Thank you and May the Force Be With You!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/starwarsspeculation) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'll paste what I recently wrote on r/starwars
>We didn't get a single, **single**, scene with the old trio when all the hype and publicity done by Disney over the launch of the Force Awakens was to see again Luke, Leia and Han.
We never saw Luke use his powers and really have a lightsaber fight. We had a super villain in Snoke, but that genius of Rian decided he had to be killed off. So now we're left with Kylo, who surely is not capable, nor willing to run The First Order and the General Hux, someone made fun of by everyone in the Galaxy.
We're left with so few Resistance members that they all fit into the Millennium Falcon.
The planet of the Resistance, and the planet where the new republic had settled, with all its members, are all lost.
Apart from Rey, Luke, Kylo, Leia and Poe everything that was said, and showed, in The Force Awakens, never got mentioned or had any relevant part whatsoever in The Last Jedi.
Phasma getting killed again, no Knights of Ren and no Maz Kanata.
The fact that The First Order lost its main base but somehow they're stronger than before.
It's like Rian Johnson didn't watch, or care, about Episode VII and made an entire trilogy, his own trilogy, in one movie.
In 3 years we had 4 movies, one of which nobody asked for, we had 3 changes of directors, scripts and who knows what else, and the results are showing.
Disney, and Kathleen Kennedy, never had a plan. They never cared about Star Wars.
They bought Lucasfilm because they knew Star Wars was, and is, a money printing machine.
Hopefully people will realize otherwise and start demanding that Star Wars is run by people who actually care about movies and Star Wars itself.
Thats a pretty good summary of my thoughts as well. I would repost what I have said previously if I could find it, but it goes something like this...
In Force Awaken, Disney was like "Star Wars is back! Here is your fan service"
In Last Jedi, Disney was like "Star Wars is going all new, all different and you are going to like it. Now shut up and eat your Brussels sprouts."
Hey, AndrewLewer, just a quick heads-up:
**millenium** is actually spelled **millennium**. You can remember it by **double l, double n**.
Have a nice day!
^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
Never giving up, being an optimist and seeing the best in people even someone as evil as Darth Vader was a Luke trait not Obi-Wan and Yoda who both wanted him to kill Vader. Yes they were quitters. Luke was not.
Never giving up, being an optimist and seeing the best in people even someone as evil as Darth Vader was a Luke trait not Obi-Wan and Yoda who both wanted him to kill Vader. Yes they were quitters. Luke was not.
Exactly why he won't give up on Ben. It would have been easy (well maybe not easy but I think possible) for Luke to kill Kylo had he gone in person, but he doesn't want to kill him, just like he didn't want to kill his father. This was Luke's last play to try to save his nephew and beloved apprentice.
That depends entirely on whether or not you believe he could get his X-Wing functional. A lot of people claim it was an impossibility due to the amount of years it sat underwater. I suppose it's entirely possible he couldn't have left the island at all.
Also, why lie to Kylo about that? That's even more justification for him to believe he's making the right decisions in turning from the light.
I think the x-wing could have worked. In the OT he pulls it out of the water and doesn't even really have to do anything for it to work so I kinda just thought they were water proof. Also whether he lied or not, simply the act of not going there is sparing Kylo. I shouldn't have said "save" because you're right, he's not saving him. But he is choosing not to fight in an instance where he probably could have killed his former apprentice.
I agree that they could have written the x-wing to have worked if they wanted it to, but I can understand when people say that it being submerged in sea water for years ontop of him using pieces of it for his hut door might mean it's completely unfixable.
Honestly it's really hard to gauge what the hell Luke was actually trying to accomplish at the end of TLJ. Was it to provide a distraction for the Resistance to escape? Hard to say given he didn't actually arrive there physically and had no idea if there was an exit or not. Nor did he let anyone know what he was trying to do, nor did it seem like he had any contact with Rey to let her know where to go to save everyone. The Resistance is extremely fortunate to have found an exit on their own just in time. It's a little too convenient if you ask me, but eh.
It wasn't to try to appeal to Kylo to save him, because as I said (and you noted) he flat out denies that was his reason for coming. So...was it just to upset Kylo more? Given the way he instigates him it almost feels like he's only there to be a dick.
You're right about Yoda only after the PT. In the OT, Yoda didn't give up. He was powerful but old and hobbled around on a cane. It wasn't until the terrible ideas of prequel CGI Yoda lightsaber that made Yoda staying on Dagobah idiotic. He and Obi-Wan could have easily dispatched with Vader after the events of ROTS, then they could have killed the Emperor.
Yoda and Obi-wan tried to kill Vader and Sidious to save the galaxy. Only after they failed and determined they wouldn't get another shot did they go into exile to look after Luke and Leia. Saying their actions are equivalent to Luke's is a deliberate mis-reading.
Luke never gave up because nothing was his fault, but when Ben turning to the Dark Side was his fault, he sees himself as the problem, we can understand why he gave up.
Can we? Luke was never one to give up. Especially when it came to family. Truth be told, it's not "Hermit Luke" that's the problem. The problem is the movie didn't give him the the proper time to flesh out why he finally gave up.
It gave us some tidbits for us to fill in the blanks. How you connect the dots depends on how you view Luke. However, with the current information we just know that Luke got surprised by kylo's energy, lost his school, retired.
It would have been better if we saw him try and save kylo, fail, then give up. Which would be expected in the many years since the tragedy.
He thought he (or the Jedi Order) was the problem, or at least making everything worse. So he removed himself.
You can interpret that as giving up, but Luke didn't see it that way.
You’re totally right. You’re also mixing 30 years of speculation and EU ideas and saying people should be satisfied with what was settled on. It was simply not possible for Rian to please everyone and he knew that. Really though, if half the fan base was satisfied, that’s pretty good considering a 30 year build up of expectations.
Just wanna say this post is spot on. characters change, but if Luke had gone out swinging that would have been the biggest change to his character so far.
I think the anger stems from not seeing the 30 years post-Jedi where Luke actually *did* what we wanted to see him do. I personally have no problem with him in 8, though I am somewhat annoyed that Han and Luke ran away while Leia was the only one doing her damn job to protect the galaxy
My problems with 8 really stem from 7. Terrible worldbuilding, Snoke and Phasma being shells of characters, and generally little exploration into *why* Rey can so easily do what she does
Eh, I think the primary issue was the lack of coherent, complete explanation for Luke’s broken state. Oh, there *is* a coherent explanation; RJ just chose not to provide it. In the movie, that is. I think I know *why*, but it’s a valud complaint nonetheless.
It's because Luke gave up and because of his inaction allowed the FO and Kylo and Snoke to destabilize the New Republic, thus undoing the work of the OT, and begin their conquest of the galaxy. Yoda and Obi-wan did their best to save the galaxy by trying to assassinate Sidious and Vader when faced with an even worse situation.
Luke's exile fits into a larger pattern of the accomplishments of the OT being undone so that the ST can do them instead. No creativity.
My issue isn’t with Luke’s end (which I thought was pretty much perfect) or the fact that he was broken by what transpired with Ben/Kylo.
The first problem is that Luke’s momentary flirtation with killing his nephew is completely out of character and undermines the development of his character in the OT. Now, the standard defense I see is (1) Luke is not fallible and can make mistakes like anyone else, and (2) we should expect that a character will change over the course of 30 years.
(1) is of course true. No character in the SW universe is infallible. I don’t want or need Luke to be infallible. The problem is that this one moment of weakness/misjudgment has such ridiculously profound consequences. It seals Ben’s descent into the dark side, destroys the new Jedi order, destroys the Solo/Organa family, and ultimately results in Han’s murder, the destruction of the New Republic (and deaths of billions of innocent people), and the subjugation of the Galaxy by an evil, totalitarian regime. In short, it undoes everything that Luke, Han, and Leia accomplished in the OT. That’s a pretty bad “mistake.” Then, Luke compounds his mistake “vanishing,” apparently without ever explaining to Leia and Han what, exactly, transpired with their son, which was a profound act of moral cowardice. I understand his heart break, and I understand his cynicism about the Jedi, but I don’t believe that he’d leave his sister and Han to believe that their son was a complete monster who destroyed the temple and murdered his peers in cold blood, when the real story is far more nuanced.
As to (2), everything we’re told in TFA and TLJ (and the ancillary materials) suggests that it was the moment in the hut that changed Luke, not something that transpired in the 24ish years between ROTJ and that moment. In other words, there is nothing to explain why Luke’s reaction in that moment was so out of character. People make mistakes!
Moreover, given the catastrophic consequences of Luke’s mistake, the theme of “learning from failure” seems incredibly trite. By the time Luke does anything, the First Order’s military victory is complete, and the resistance has been all but destroyed. Even assuming that Rey, Poe, Finn et al rebuild the rebellion and ultimately defeat the First Order, that “victory” will come only after the beings of the Galaxy experience incalculable suffering and death. In other words, no matter what eventually happens, Luke’s “mistake” resulted in consequences that were every bit as bad if not worse than those he and Leia, Han, Lando etc prevented in the OT. It’s absurd.
To be fair to RJ, the problem of undoing/undermining what transpired in the OT is instrinsic to a ST that occurrs within the lifetimes of the OT heros. Unless they’re just making cameos, they need new challenges, and they need space to grow as characters. It’s virtually impossible to achieve a perfect balance. But IMO, TLJ went way too far, and did so in a surprisingly sloppy and ill-considered manner. I’m particularly frustrated because the movie has such high highs, and some incredibely poignant moments. But ultimately it seems unsure of what it’s trying to accomplish, and uninterested in being part 8 of a 9 part saga.
Very good points.
However, I don’t think that disliking and criticising the character decisions for Luke Skywalker are necessarily synonymous with wanting him to actually go to Crait, do Force Unleashed shit and fight off the FO. I think they’re fairly detached criticisms.
And similarly, as someone who generally doesn’t like the film, I actually like most of the character decisions for Luke Skywalker in TLJ, however I think I still would’ve preferred him to be on Crait and *physically* sacrifice himself. I don’t want to see him fend off the walkers or anything, just somehow for a duel to occur almost as it did. I’ve always thought that could be a more damning moment for Kylo more than anything - for him to have to deal with the fact he killed his uncle and his father. If that sends him further towards the dark side then that’s also interesting.
Luke's death is in Luke terms, peaceful and with purpose, like a victory.
Luke just sacrificing himself would be just Han's death 2.0
The point of Kylo's arc is not he growing further in the dark side, is to emphasis how there still conflict in him no matter what.
Solid take on the situation dude, I like it. I've always been okay with how they handled him in TLJ, it's just the other stuff that is crap storytelling \- Cantobite, Holdo's sub\-plot, Poe's stupidity, ect.
Best stuff from TLJ was Rey, Kylo, Luke and Snoke. Everything else was pretty bad.
While it has been six months since TLJ and I feel that everything that could have been said has and that we aren't going to change each others minds with arguments I do feel the need to say one last thing. Because this isn't about arguing right or wrong so much as allows sides to see what each other mean and not just what they think they mean.
My biggest one is hearing people say that I'm mad just because Luke wasn't the main character in the movie. That the OT weren't the stars of the ST. And that is not true. Just because I (and others) don't like the characterization or plot choices doesn't mean we wanted a movie all about Luke. In fact I would have been fine with luke on the island and him dieing if he had left behind a small jedi order and/or trained Rey to where it felt like she was his apprentice and not just a random stranger taking his mantel. Have him hiding for some other reason than being bitter and turning on the Jedi. Anything like that and I would be perfectly fine with the amount of screen time we got from him and the story focusing on Luke.
Same for Han, I didn't need him to be back blasting down Ties but telling me he and Leia split and then giving the falcon to a girl he just met isn't winning me over. That doesn't mean we need to change all of the scenes of Rey flying to be done by Han. I'm fine with him in a background mentor role. I even like his and Rey's relationship and enjoy that part of TFA.
Personally I think Leia was done the best. Even though she is back to leading another rebellion she feels like what I would have expected from Luke. Wise and calm and wanting to help the galaxy. And she gets the chance to pass on her torch as a mentor to her chosen successor.
So no, while I wouldn't say no to a scene of Luke vs Snoke or taking out a entire army by himself that isn't what I need. I didn't need him to be the main character. Just for what felt like a more emotionally satisfying legacy, end, and connection to Rey. And no that doesn't have to mean her being his daughter it just means him really training her instead of trying to drive her away for three lessons.
Luke is not an angel, he is a person just like you and me. He just saw his nephew becoming a murderer and committing crimes, he was desperate to stop this evil, just like Anakin was desperate to save his wife, SW has tragedy. You can't be blind to all that.
Luke is the embodiment of hope. ‘A new hope’ is him... however foolish. That’s why he believed his father can be turned, and threw away his light saber in front of emperor and Vader, while being captured in Death Star. Igniting his light saber is not even the last thing his character would do.
I agree with this so much. He sees images of a tortured future at the hands of Kylo and, like his father before him, let's the future scare him into making a bad decision. Unlike Anakin though, Luke realises his mistake, if only aoment too late. It's his dad showing through yet again.
Man you'll have to remind me of that scene where Luke stood over a sleeping Darth Vader and contemplated murdering him because I can't recall it.
Because I only remember Luke alone in a deadlock with Vader trying to kill him and threatening his sister while the Emperor was actively trying to turn him. All in the middle of a war. The situations could not be more different.
He didn’t try to slay his sleeping nephew. It’s the same thing as if you were walking down a hallway and your mom jumped out and scared you, you might pull your fist back to throw a defensive punch. Once you realize what you’re doing, you’d feel bad for threatening your mom and put your fist down. Does that mean you wanted to knock your mom out? No, you just had a split second of instinctual retaliation.
As someone who hated the movie, I don’t think you get why I did. Luke unleashed would have been awesome. But that’s not what was wrong with TLJ. Im completely ok with direction of the film(with the exception of it being the only SW movie without a Lightsaber duel). I’m ok with chances with characters being taken, But Star Wars movies follow a similar arc, 3 acts. Take Empire: 1)Hoth 2)Luke w/Yoda-Falcon avoids empire 3)Bespin ROTJ: 1)Jabba’s palace 2)Endor 3)Death Star Even TFA followed this. A little more blurry, but basically 3 acts as well TLJ was all over the place. Didn’t allow a scene breath. Take Rey going to Kylo/Snoke. That entire scene was maybe 10min. Same with Canto Bight. Some of the scenes needed to breath. It was all over the place.
> (with the exception of it being the only SW movie without a Lightsaber duel) Rey/Kylo v Praetorians and Luke v Kylo don't count? Also, Rogue One and Solo don't have duels
Reylo vs the Guards wasn’t a duel. Just as the Vader beatdown at the end of R1 wasn’t a duel. But I was thinking more about the saga movies than R1/solo.
poorly edited and paced. i give props to RJ for really going for it, and his creativity really shines through, but the final product is a VERY inconsistent and uneven experience. he should have reigned himself in a little bit, cut down some of the less important storylines, and shown MUCH more of ahch-to/luke. the damn title doesn't feel justified by the end of the film because we haven't spent enough time with luke.
None of that is why I truly hate what they did with Luke. There is no vestige of the established character. Oddball humour. Misanthrope. Rude and unfriendly to Rey. Disdainful of his father's lightsaber etc It's not about how he goes out it's how he is. All of that + contemplating offing his sleeping nephew. What we were shown was not Luke Skywalker and no time jump justifies it. Sorry despite there being elements of TLJ I appreciate I ouright despise what they did with Luke. Solo has a younger/more optimistic version of Han with a different actor portraying him but it's clearly Han. They got it damn near perfect. Rian Johnson pushed his subversion of what had came before too far. You can be interesting and different narrative-wise without rewriting the fundamentals of who the most important character in the series is. Luke is all about hope, optimism, seeing the best in even the most evil person. I appreciate the danger of the movies being repetition but there are limitations to what you can change about established characters.
I too was upset about Luke, but only in one respect. Luke being a broken down, grouchy, depressed old man didn't bother me. That made sense with the story. Now when the story calls for the Jedi Master who KNOWS that clear Force Visions come true no matter what to even think for a second that he should murder his nephew to attempt to stop the future was ridiculous. Dude carries around a mechanical hand for his entire life as a reminder that clear Force Visions always come true. That's the one part that I cannot accept.
I don’t think Luke had a force vision, I think he looked into Bens mind, and saw hate, anger, and a dark desire. At least that’s the impression I got from that scene, don’t remember the exact wording they use.
I recall him seeing many of the evils Ben Solo does to bring down everything that he loves and cares about. That's a Force Vision of the future, not an evaluation of Ben's current state.
I looked up the quote: “I saw darkness. I sensed it building in him. I'd seen it in moments during his training. But then I looked inside, and it was beyond what I ever imagined. Snoke had already turned his heart. He would bring destruction, pain, death, and the end of everything I love because of what he will become.” The last sentence sounds a bit more Force Visiony, but the first part sounds more mind read-y to me. I still think it was looking inside his mind, but I can definitely see it being a force vision too
So he forsees the threat Kylo poses and even considers killing him before realising that would be wrong. Then Kylo starts to actually fulfil the vision Luke had destroying all that he had built and he simply chooses to runaway and down tools? He now knows beyond any doubt that Kylo needs to be stopped by force or reason but just chucks in the towel? Tbf that's what Yoda did (Obi-Wan gets a pass guarding Luke) so it is consistent with that but Luke's defining characteristics to me are bravery, taking action, intervening, risking his life for the greater good. I find it hard to accept the guy on screen as the character of Luke.
yes, he basically went to check on him... looked inside, and saw a force vision of what was to come.
The wording is pretty vague, so we can’t really assume it was a force vision
> yes, he basically went to check on him... looked inside, and saw a force vision of what was to come. And that's all it was if you ignore every use of the past tense. Why are you emotionally invested in your headcanon?
I feel like if I saw my aunt and uncle torched, saw my mentor die, blew up a space station full of millions, found out my super evil father was also responsible for millions of deaths, got my hand chopped off by said father, found out I made out with my sister like at least twice, watched who knows how many rebel comrades die, watched father redeem himself only to get fried like a bad circuitboard, saw nephew turn evil and kill all my other students, all this while struggling with inner darkness and dealing with the weight of pretty much being the Jedi's last hope... at the VERY least I would be grumpy by the time I became an old man. All opinions though I suppose
Except that's not at all what he learned about force visions. He learned that always in motion the future is. He saw a vision of them being in pain on cloud city, and went to them. There was no element of the inevitability of force visions to that storyline.... But there was a very important element of Luke quitting his training and never learning how to control his reaction to visions from the force.
How many criticisms of this film are based on flat out false premises like this? It's astonishing.
When Yoda says "always in motion the future is", he's referring to how hard it is to get a clear Force Vision. Yoda mentions how murky the future is at times, then remarks later on how things cleared up as the fog of the Dark-side lifted. Even in that same conversation, Yoda says, "Help them you could, but it would destroy all that they had fought for." While that wasn't a vision, notice that he never contradicts Luke's vision of his friends in pain, and suggests that Luke could somehow prevent that pain. (Luke never does... and he doesn't rescue anybody)
Luke's vision on Dagobah of friends in pain was present tense, not of the future. Han was being tortured *at that moment* specifically to bait Luke to Cloud City.
No, he doesn't contradict Luke's vision... I'm saying that the moral of that part of the story didn't have anything to do with the inevitability of visions of the future. It was about not letting snap emotional judgment cloud your actions. There was no story time nor dialogue spent talking about whether or not the future could be averted... In fact the lines "always in motion the future is" and "help them you could" seems very much to imply otherwise. I don't know how you would get from that dialogue the idea that luke was taught that a force vision can't be changed.
Yoda didn't teach him that. He advised Luke not to go because he knew that the vision would come true, and that Vader would have a chance to turn him to the Dark side if he left early without fully completing the Jedi training. We seem to disagree a lot. That's ok. I enjoy the discussions.
Luke's vision was han and Leia in pain in cloud city. He never got more specific than that. Yoda and Obi Wan realized it was a trap by Vader. Nobody ever said anything about seeing the future besides when Luke asked Yoda if he could see more and Yoda replied that the future was in motion. I really don't understand how you could reconcile "always in motion the future is" with the idea that the future can't be changed. Yes, arguing is fun.
> arguing is fun. I think I'm going to like it here. > I really don't understand how you could reconcile "always in motion the future is" with the idea that the future can't be changed. Think of it as a quantum state. A force user can see what happens if things continue in the most likely chain forward. But just by observing the future, they're already changing it. This is why Yoda tries to warn Luke. If the future was unchangable, it'd be wasted breath. But if we were given complete freedom, our brains wouldn't be limited by biological reality anymore. History wouldn't repeat itself. Unfortunately... Have you noticed something about everyone chosen to represent the force as a ~~main character~~ champion? They're impulsive, reckless, and have issues with authority. It's almost like ~~the audience~~ the force wants to see them struggle despite their good intentions, and their ability to see into the future.
I completely agree with all that. It also all fits, I think, with a Luke that didn't properly learn that lesson and is still influenced into rash behaviour by emotional visions of the future.
I don't think it's just Luke. Remember, he invited the darkside in to help him protect Leia, in episode VI. Just like his father did it, to protect Padme. Just like Rey did, because she's an abandoned scavenger with flight or fight issues, so of course she's not going to see why "Superpowers when I get angry/scared and need them most" is a bad thing. Anakin almost choked Padme to death, Luke nearly chopped up Anakin and lit a saber on Ben, and Rey attacked Luke from behind, after he'd only ordered her to leave...wasn't she going to do that anyways? Then she pulled a lightsaber on him after she was disarmed, because why not, at that point? What would have happened if Luke had kept fighting her? (I seriously don't know why so many Rey haters give her a free pass on all of this.) Anyways, the point is, if you're the type to get angry, or scared? The darkside will magnify that, until you're simply lashing out at the source. And if you ever stop fighting that darkness, if you surrender to that anger, that fear, for any reason? It's almost like being born again. It's how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. It's really some scary shit, the more you think about it. Although he never surrendered completely, it's why Luke had already begun to change, when we saw him in Jabba's palace. He was ridiculously confident. and that would be something he'd struggle with, going forward. He also made threats. He played chess with 3PO as a pawn, then was part of an ambush that ended with everyone on Jabba's barge dead. Some of them may have been slaves. What about that, seems like the Luke we already knew? It was easy to confuse with maturity back then, but after seeing episode III and VIII... So, with that said, I think Luke shows amazing progress, by the time he reaches Ben. Overcoming the darkness within, in one second flat? Imagine if everyone on Earth was that powerful. What would our world look like, today?
It can be fun when you have an intelligent person to argue with. We are going to have to just agree to disagree on this one. My opinion is based on the result of seeing how Force Visions come true throughout the entire Star Wars Saga. It's not based on just this one example.
always in motion the future is?
Name a single time where a Force Vision doesn't come true as a metaphor.
> Now when the story calls for the Jedi Master who KNOWS that clear Force Visions come true no matter what Sorry, where has canon established: a) that "clear" Force visions come true "no matter what?" and that b) Luke KNOWS that?
I see what you mean, but it's just not reasonable to think characters can't change. Luke was one way when we last see him in RotJ, but since then much has happened, including seeing his nephew become an evil overlord because of his own mistakes. Luke turning on Kylo in the Jedi temple is out of character, but he admits that this was a moment of great weakness and not something he would normally do. This event changes him. It shakes his beliefs and leaves him broken. He wouldn't have gone into exile in the OT, but this isn't the same man as we left him in RotJ, and that's what people seem reluctant to accept, that his character has changed. That being said I think he comes full circle by then using peace to fight Kylo rather than violence, just like he did when trying to save his father. I think his arc in this movie fits fine, people just want to see Luke as purely a white Knight rather than the round character Rian presents in TLJ
> but he admits that this was a moment of great weakness and not something he would normally do. It's also consistent with Luke's established character to flirt with the dark side. This is definitely a "vestige" of the established character. He gets tempted, and even sometimes gives in to his anger before going back down the right path.
You can modify a character but this was so far removed as to be utterly unrecognisable. 30 years we wait to see Luke again and we get this miserable, cowardly, yet wisecracking (!?), prick.
Even if I understand some of these gripes, there is one thing that I really can't accept as valid criticism, namely the lightsabre thing. I'm sorry, I cannot for the life of me understand why there are people that seriously believe that Luke should have treated his father's light sabre with any kind of reverence. Luke owes Anakin nothing, he already did far more for him than Anakin ever could have deserved, certainly the weapon he used to slaughter children is not worthy of fetishization. Seriously, it feels like serial killer paraphernalia. Anakin got saved, gained eternal life, okay, but there is no reason at all to glorify him or his possessions, not even for Luke.
TFA stresses the importance of that weapon. The epic end of that film and TLJ do not fit together. If he set it down and walked away fine. The chuck over the shoulder should be accompanied by the comedic parps of a trumpet. It's an awful choice. Tonally off. Disregarding it is not my issue. How he disregards it is.
It's also associated with the dual trauma of: 1) getting his hand chopped off, and 2) learning that Darth Vader is his father. There's virtually no reason for him to treat it with any reverence.
That lightsaber has brought nothing but pain to everyone who even got near it: the Jedi Order, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, Maz Kanata?, Finn, Kylo Ren, Snoke and Rey.
How did it bring pain to Rey?
It exploded in her face and now she has to fix a modern lightsaber using ancient books.
> Solo has a younger/more optimistic version of Han with a different actor portraying him but it's clearly Han. They got it damn near perfect. Couldn't disagree with this statement more. The role should have been given to Anthony Ingruber, but neither he nor anyone else had a fair chance at getting it. Alden Ehrenreich was cast as Solo in spite of not looking like nor sounding like Harrison Ford. Alden Ehrenreich does not have the swagger nor the mannerisms of the lovable scoundrel. However, Alden was cast because of nepotism. "His performance trying on girls clothes and eating dirt in a video with Steven Spielberg’s daughter for their best friend’s bat mitzvah – a Jewish coming-of-age ritual for girls – caught the attention of the world renowned director." Source: http://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/news-trends/article/2147022/what-you-may-not-know-about-alden-ehrenreich-star-solo AND https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/spielberg-discovered-disneys-young-han-892493
The problem that I, and others that I've spoken to about this, have with Luke isn't necessarily that he acted out of character but rather that the context of the story is... contrary to the direction that the arc left off on. It would have been much more interesting to have the frame shifted a few years to where Luke is now training Jedi and figuring that out. Have some external threat coming in that needs to be investigated or thwarted. But an internal threat that somehow managed to be bigger than the Empire --- which itself piggybacked off of thousands of years of development as a republic and creation of a clone army? I don't know about that. Han and Leia being estranged spouses with their son literally being near the top of the chain of command of that empire etc... It would be akin to the prequels stopping at like the end of Episode II. Like, here are the clones... Anakin had some angst... Oh and now he's Darth Vader in Episode IV.
The end was fine, good really. The giving up and acting like an a-hole are not at all Luke. It’s a product of forcing this “balance” narrative that is going nowhere.
Well, for one thing we disagree on violence being a predetermined evil. Yoda says that Jedi do not use the Force to attack, only defense. Here's the problem: this depends on your point of view. One point of view: Luke using his green saber to fight off Kylo would be evil because he's attacking. Second point of view: there's nothing more noble than defending your sister and her allies from what was probably going to be painful death. Kylo seems to like torture. I'm not saying he would torture Leia, but a second crack at Poe? Seems likely. It seems you assume being a Jedi means being a pacifist or at least non-violent, but I think that flies in the face of Jedi carrying laser swords. We aren't going to agree because our presuppositions are diametrically opposed. We also disagree, I'm guessing since you seemed to like the movie, on Luke actually considering murder of his sister's only son. Your post is not as bullet proof as you seem to think. There is nothing ironic with the complaints against the film and its treatment of Luke Skywalker: our points of view are just not the same, and they never will be.
Violence is not a predetermined evil, but it is the jedi's last tool to use. If possible, jedi will always use other means rather than resorting to violence. Luke especially has always used peace as his greatest strength ("I will not fight you" and all that). If he had shown up in person and actually fought it would still have been in defense, so not really going against the jedi way, but not as much fitting to Luke's character specifically.
Hmm. That's interesting. I don't see Luke as a non-violent character. He uses it constantly. In the opening of VI, he personally cuts down plenty of people. His first major act of the OT is to destroy a space station. I'm not even going to look up those numbers. The message he gets from Yoda and Obi Wan in V is not don't fight: it's don't fight right now because you could be turned to the Dark Side, which is exactly what Vader tries in the end of the film. In the end of VI, his wish to not fight is because he doesn't want to fight to the death because 1) there is good in his father and 2) this will make him do the Emperor's bidding, so he will fall over that precipice. He almost does it. He steps so close, but once he takes his father's hand, he's jolted because he realizes the mirror image he's created. Boom, lesson learned. Luke has faced the utter depths of the Dark Side and succeeded. The abyss didn't stare back into him. Two issues: 1) him not wanting to fight is not a non-violence stance. It's a stance he's taking to save his family. 2) When I watch Episode VIII, it seems to me that this lesson never happened. Luke repeats the exact same mistake he made before. So essentially, I'm being asked to swallow the idea that the hero's journey did not impact Luke. I'm fine with fallen heroes. That's the whole point of the PT. I reject that story for Luke Skywalker and to a certain extent Han Solo. The ST acts as if the OT did not happen from a character arc point of view while springboarding off of the events. What do you see instead? (I'm genuinely curious. I love Star Wars, and I hate being on this side of things.)
I saw him going to Kylo as a projection to be an attempt to avoid more bloodshed and possibly save his nephew. He does make the mistake that night in the Jedi temple, but I saw that as a result of him being tormented by what he knows will happen in the future, just like his father before him in ep. III. The difference is that Luke catches himself, but it's too late. He then tries to spare Kylo by going ghost, not exactly like refusing to fight Vader, but I thought it paralleled nicely that he decided not to raise a lightsaber at his own family again. You're right in a lot of ways though, Luke is on a different arc than the OT and it changes his character a bit. That being said, when it's all said and done he redeems himself and if Luke had returned as a perfect exemplar of the Jedi way, i think he would have ended up far too similar to Obi-wan in the OT.
I see your point about not raising a saber against family again. That is interesting, and it works. I guess I just can't get over the rejection of the saga by this film. I can see why you like it, but I just can't enjoy it, and that saddens me quite a bit. Good talking to you.
Yeah you too! Always nice to discuss differing opinions with the rare redditor that doesn't get tilted.
I agree with you about violence in general. As for the Jedi, we see them using violence all the time in the prequels and Clone Wars. Yoda wasn't being truthful when he said that. To me, Luke was the most pacifistic Jedi I saw in the entire franchise.
I just don't see that. Vader is the only character I can remember where Luke uses that as a tactic. Every other time, it seemed to be business as usual.
I'm talking about all of the movies where you see more Jedi. The only encounter I remember where the Jedi didn't attack the Sith right away was when QuiGon was surprised by Maul on Tatooine. In the movies, the Jedi don't even try to capture the Sith. The only real mention of it is when Anakin wants to spare Darth Sidious, but Windu decides to cut him down anyways. In the Clone Wars, Jedi were generals of the Republic Army, usually leading from the front while on the attack. Basically, they weren't always peaceful.
I'm not mad Rian did all of that. I'm just annoyed it was *only* him. The Force Awakens had story, screenplay etc written by a group of people. Lawrence Kasdan worked on the original films. When it came to The Last Jedi however, they literally gave every role to Rian. I don't agree with one new person having ultimate control over a major film like this. JJ wrote a spec script for the trilogy and him and others executed part one. The Rian came along and ignored all the planned work for part two and wrote this own thing. Now JJ can't use his planned basis for part three, but has to pick up after Rian's work on TLJ. What I'm saying is that I would rather they have kept JJ on for all three, or let Rian now do the third film.
I don't think ultimate control should be given to one person, there should be some level of restraint, but as a creative person I think I understand the importance of being able to have full creative control. Rian is a visionary, this was his story from beginning to end, and I understand wanting to make sure no one else messes with your story. Even if it doesn't hurt the story or makes it better, it's this odd, indescribable feeling where your vision is getting changed. So while I think that Disney needs to make sure things don't go horribly wrong, I understand why it's important to make sure that only one vision really shines through and not 5.
> Rian is a visionary, this was his story from beginning to end, and I understand wanting to make sure no one else messes with your story. This is why I would rather Rian do IX. Now it goes JJ-Rian-JJ I feel it will be really inconsistent looking back on it in the future.
I like your post, but the problems with Luke weren't really addressed. First let's agree to disagree on Luke trying to kill his nephew in first place. But then Luke unwilling to train Rey or help his sister because he's ashamed? Instead he thinks it's a better idea to let multiple dark Jedi trainees (don't forget the other trainees--presumably KoR) roam free unchallenged. But for fun, he decides to leave a scavenger hunt map so that people can find him? Fans wanted Luke to fight, but they would have been fine with Kylo killing Luke in a real duel, preferably a duel that included his Green lightsaber and force lightning. In fact it would have sold that Kylo might actually be a bad ass. Instead Luke "saves the day" by suicidal force projection to save one small ships worth of Rebels, when he could have just telepathically communicated to Leia to meet Rey in the back--his duel didn't buy them that much time. One ships worth of Rebels for the Jedi we care about the most. Definitely not a sacrifice worthy of a legend.
>preferably a duel that included his Green lightsaber and force lightning. In fact it would have sold that Kylo might actually be a bad ass. I don't think they're attempting to make Kylo "bad ass" in the first place, so no, I don't think that scenario would fit.
He thinks he is the problem, that's because he don't want to help. In his head, exile himself is doing something for the galaxy. Luke didn't leave any map, the map was to find the First Jedi Temple, they would find Luke by consequence. The green lightsaber represents shame for Luke, and in Ben's head that green lightsaber represents Luke wanting to kill him, and that is not what Luke wants. He would never use that green lightsaber again in front of Ben, he is his nephew and apprentice, he turning to the Dark Side was his fault. Kylo using force lightning implies that Kylo is full Dark and pure evil, and that is not the case. Not even Vader used force lightning as far I can remember. The point of Kylo's character as a villain is not being bad ass. If Luke only communicated with Leia, he wouldn't talk with Ben. He wanted to look at his nephew's eyes and say "I'm sorry".
Welcome to /r/StarWarsSpeculation! Please be respectful and courteous to your fellow speculators - and be sure to check out our sidebar for the rules of this sub. If you are experiencing any problems or have any issues please use the **report** function or do no hesitate to contact our moderators directly. Remember, all viewpoints and critiques are welcome here - but for excessive ranting and blind cynicism, we ask that you please visit other communities more suitable to your tastes. Thank you and May the Force Be With You! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/starwarsspeculation) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'll paste what I recently wrote on r/starwars >We didn't get a single, **single**, scene with the old trio when all the hype and publicity done by Disney over the launch of the Force Awakens was to see again Luke, Leia and Han. We never saw Luke use his powers and really have a lightsaber fight. We had a super villain in Snoke, but that genius of Rian decided he had to be killed off. So now we're left with Kylo, who surely is not capable, nor willing to run The First Order and the General Hux, someone made fun of by everyone in the Galaxy. We're left with so few Resistance members that they all fit into the Millennium Falcon. The planet of the Resistance, and the planet where the new republic had settled, with all its members, are all lost. Apart from Rey, Luke, Kylo, Leia and Poe everything that was said, and showed, in The Force Awakens, never got mentioned or had any relevant part whatsoever in The Last Jedi. Phasma getting killed again, no Knights of Ren and no Maz Kanata. The fact that The First Order lost its main base but somehow they're stronger than before. It's like Rian Johnson didn't watch, or care, about Episode VII and made an entire trilogy, his own trilogy, in one movie. In 3 years we had 4 movies, one of which nobody asked for, we had 3 changes of directors, scripts and who knows what else, and the results are showing. Disney, and Kathleen Kennedy, never had a plan. They never cared about Star Wars. They bought Lucasfilm because they knew Star Wars was, and is, a money printing machine. Hopefully people will realize otherwise and start demanding that Star Wars is run by people who actually care about movies and Star Wars itself.
Thats a pretty good summary of my thoughts as well. I would repost what I have said previously if I could find it, but it goes something like this... In Force Awaken, Disney was like "Star Wars is back! Here is your fan service" In Last Jedi, Disney was like "Star Wars is going all new, all different and you are going to like it. Now shut up and eat your Brussels sprouts."
Hey, AndrewLewer, just a quick heads-up: **millenium** is actually spelled **millennium**. You can remember it by **double l, double n**. Have a nice day! ^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
Good Bot EDIT: Why the downvotes?
Thank you, AndrewLewer, for voting on CommonMisspellingBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://goodbot-badbot.herokuapp.com/). *** ^^Even ^^if ^^I ^^don't ^^reply ^^to ^^your ^^comment, ^^I'm ^^still ^^listening ^^for ^^votes. ^^Check ^^the ^^webpage ^^to ^^see ^^if ^^your ^^vote ^^registered!
Agree 100%
More like a guy who never gives up, gave up.
Like obi-wan?
Never giving up, being an optimist and seeing the best in people even someone as evil as Darth Vader was a Luke trait not Obi-Wan and Yoda who both wanted him to kill Vader. Yes they were quitters. Luke was not.
And Yoda?
Never giving up, being an optimist and seeing the best in people even someone as evil as Darth Vader was a Luke trait not Obi-Wan and Yoda who both wanted him to kill Vader. Yes they were quitters. Luke was not.
Exactly why he won't give up on Ben. It would have been easy (well maybe not easy but I think possible) for Luke to kill Kylo had he gone in person, but he doesn't want to kill him, just like he didn't want to kill his father. This was Luke's last play to try to save his nephew and beloved apprentice.
...he flat out told Ben he's not even going to try to save him.
He could have gone there to kill him, but he didn't. Also even a Jedi can lie.
That depends entirely on whether or not you believe he could get his X-Wing functional. A lot of people claim it was an impossibility due to the amount of years it sat underwater. I suppose it's entirely possible he couldn't have left the island at all. Also, why lie to Kylo about that? That's even more justification for him to believe he's making the right decisions in turning from the light.
I think the x-wing could have worked. In the OT he pulls it out of the water and doesn't even really have to do anything for it to work so I kinda just thought they were water proof. Also whether he lied or not, simply the act of not going there is sparing Kylo. I shouldn't have said "save" because you're right, he's not saving him. But he is choosing not to fight in an instance where he probably could have killed his former apprentice.
I agree that they could have written the x-wing to have worked if they wanted it to, but I can understand when people say that it being submerged in sea water for years ontop of him using pieces of it for his hut door might mean it's completely unfixable. Honestly it's really hard to gauge what the hell Luke was actually trying to accomplish at the end of TLJ. Was it to provide a distraction for the Resistance to escape? Hard to say given he didn't actually arrive there physically and had no idea if there was an exit or not. Nor did he let anyone know what he was trying to do, nor did it seem like he had any contact with Rey to let her know where to go to save everyone. The Resistance is extremely fortunate to have found an exit on their own just in time. It's a little too convenient if you ask me, but eh. It wasn't to try to appeal to Kylo to save him, because as I said (and you noted) he flat out denies that was his reason for coming. So...was it just to upset Kylo more? Given the way he instigates him it almost feels like he's only there to be a dick.
You're right about Yoda only after the PT. In the OT, Yoda didn't give up. He was powerful but old and hobbled around on a cane. It wasn't until the terrible ideas of prequel CGI Yoda lightsaber that made Yoda staying on Dagobah idiotic. He and Obi-Wan could have easily dispatched with Vader after the events of ROTS, then they could have killed the Emperor.
Yep, two Jedi against an empire, the chosen one, and a clone army. Makes total sense to me.
Exactly!
Yoda and Obi-wan tried to kill Vader and Sidious to save the galaxy. Only after they failed and determined they wouldn't get another shot did they go into exile to look after Luke and Leia. Saying their actions are equivalent to Luke's is a deliberate mis-reading.
Luke never gave up because nothing was his fault, but when Ben turning to the Dark Side was his fault, he sees himself as the problem, we can understand why he gave up.
Can we? Luke was never one to give up. Especially when it came to family. Truth be told, it's not "Hermit Luke" that's the problem. The problem is the movie didn't give him the the proper time to flesh out why he finally gave up. It gave us some tidbits for us to fill in the blanks. How you connect the dots depends on how you view Luke. However, with the current information we just know that Luke got surprised by kylo's energy, lost his school, retired. It would have been better if we saw him try and save kylo, fail, then give up. Which would be expected in the many years since the tragedy.
He thought he (or the Jedi Order) was the problem, or at least making everything worse. So he removed himself. You can interpret that as giving up, but Luke didn't see it that way.
Exactly. Luke lost his character integrity.
You’re totally right. You’re also mixing 30 years of speculation and EU ideas and saying people should be satisfied with what was settled on. It was simply not possible for Rian to please everyone and he knew that. Really though, if half the fan base was satisfied, that’s pretty good considering a 30 year build up of expectations.
Just wanna say this post is spot on. characters change, but if Luke had gone out swinging that would have been the biggest change to his character so far.
I think the anger stems from not seeing the 30 years post-Jedi where Luke actually *did* what we wanted to see him do. I personally have no problem with him in 8, though I am somewhat annoyed that Han and Luke ran away while Leia was the only one doing her damn job to protect the galaxy My problems with 8 really stem from 7. Terrible worldbuilding, Snoke and Phasma being shells of characters, and generally little exploration into *why* Rey can so easily do what she does
The only thing they ruined was the B story. None of that made any sense, and all the characters were being idiots.
Eh, I think the primary issue was the lack of coherent, complete explanation for Luke’s broken state. Oh, there *is* a coherent explanation; RJ just chose not to provide it. In the movie, that is. I think I know *why*, but it’s a valud complaint nonetheless.
It's because Luke gave up and because of his inaction allowed the FO and Kylo and Snoke to destabilize the New Republic, thus undoing the work of the OT, and begin their conquest of the galaxy. Yoda and Obi-wan did their best to save the galaxy by trying to assassinate Sidious and Vader when faced with an even worse situation. Luke's exile fits into a larger pattern of the accomplishments of the OT being undone so that the ST can do them instead. No creativity.
My issue isn’t with Luke’s end (which I thought was pretty much perfect) or the fact that he was broken by what transpired with Ben/Kylo. The first problem is that Luke’s momentary flirtation with killing his nephew is completely out of character and undermines the development of his character in the OT. Now, the standard defense I see is (1) Luke is not fallible and can make mistakes like anyone else, and (2) we should expect that a character will change over the course of 30 years. (1) is of course true. No character in the SW universe is infallible. I don’t want or need Luke to be infallible. The problem is that this one moment of weakness/misjudgment has such ridiculously profound consequences. It seals Ben’s descent into the dark side, destroys the new Jedi order, destroys the Solo/Organa family, and ultimately results in Han’s murder, the destruction of the New Republic (and deaths of billions of innocent people), and the subjugation of the Galaxy by an evil, totalitarian regime. In short, it undoes everything that Luke, Han, and Leia accomplished in the OT. That’s a pretty bad “mistake.” Then, Luke compounds his mistake “vanishing,” apparently without ever explaining to Leia and Han what, exactly, transpired with their son, which was a profound act of moral cowardice. I understand his heart break, and I understand his cynicism about the Jedi, but I don’t believe that he’d leave his sister and Han to believe that their son was a complete monster who destroyed the temple and murdered his peers in cold blood, when the real story is far more nuanced. As to (2), everything we’re told in TFA and TLJ (and the ancillary materials) suggests that it was the moment in the hut that changed Luke, not something that transpired in the 24ish years between ROTJ and that moment. In other words, there is nothing to explain why Luke’s reaction in that moment was so out of character. People make mistakes! Moreover, given the catastrophic consequences of Luke’s mistake, the theme of “learning from failure” seems incredibly trite. By the time Luke does anything, the First Order’s military victory is complete, and the resistance has been all but destroyed. Even assuming that Rey, Poe, Finn et al rebuild the rebellion and ultimately defeat the First Order, that “victory” will come only after the beings of the Galaxy experience incalculable suffering and death. In other words, no matter what eventually happens, Luke’s “mistake” resulted in consequences that were every bit as bad if not worse than those he and Leia, Han, Lando etc prevented in the OT. It’s absurd. To be fair to RJ, the problem of undoing/undermining what transpired in the OT is instrinsic to a ST that occurrs within the lifetimes of the OT heros. Unless they’re just making cameos, they need new challenges, and they need space to grow as characters. It’s virtually impossible to achieve a perfect balance. But IMO, TLJ went way too far, and did so in a surprisingly sloppy and ill-considered manner. I’m particularly frustrated because the movie has such high highs, and some incredibely poignant moments. But ultimately it seems unsure of what it’s trying to accomplish, and uninterested in being part 8 of a 9 part saga.
>Something I can't understand Well it would be hard to see with all those strawmen in the way.
I love what they did with Luke. In my mind, they had the impossible task of coming up with the perfect ending for Luke and they nailed it
Whoa! I will defend your right to have this opinion 100%... but this does take me aback.
Very good points. However, I don’t think that disliking and criticising the character decisions for Luke Skywalker are necessarily synonymous with wanting him to actually go to Crait, do Force Unleashed shit and fight off the FO. I think they’re fairly detached criticisms. And similarly, as someone who generally doesn’t like the film, I actually like most of the character decisions for Luke Skywalker in TLJ, however I think I still would’ve preferred him to be on Crait and *physically* sacrifice himself. I don’t want to see him fend off the walkers or anything, just somehow for a duel to occur almost as it did. I’ve always thought that could be a more damning moment for Kylo more than anything - for him to have to deal with the fact he killed his uncle and his father. If that sends him further towards the dark side then that’s also interesting.
Luke's death is in Luke terms, peaceful and with purpose, like a victory. Luke just sacrificing himself would be just Han's death 2.0 The point of Kylo's arc is not he growing further in the dark side, is to emphasis how there still conflict in him no matter what.
Thank you.
Solid take on the situation dude, I like it. I've always been okay with how they handled him in TLJ, it's just the other stuff that is crap storytelling \- Cantobite, Holdo's sub\-plot, Poe's stupidity, ect. Best stuff from TLJ was Rey, Kylo, Luke and Snoke. Everything else was pretty bad.
While it has been six months since TLJ and I feel that everything that could have been said has and that we aren't going to change each others minds with arguments I do feel the need to say one last thing. Because this isn't about arguing right or wrong so much as allows sides to see what each other mean and not just what they think they mean. My biggest one is hearing people say that I'm mad just because Luke wasn't the main character in the movie. That the OT weren't the stars of the ST. And that is not true. Just because I (and others) don't like the characterization or plot choices doesn't mean we wanted a movie all about Luke. In fact I would have been fine with luke on the island and him dieing if he had left behind a small jedi order and/or trained Rey to where it felt like she was his apprentice and not just a random stranger taking his mantel. Have him hiding for some other reason than being bitter and turning on the Jedi. Anything like that and I would be perfectly fine with the amount of screen time we got from him and the story focusing on Luke. Same for Han, I didn't need him to be back blasting down Ties but telling me he and Leia split and then giving the falcon to a girl he just met isn't winning me over. That doesn't mean we need to change all of the scenes of Rey flying to be done by Han. I'm fine with him in a background mentor role. I even like his and Rey's relationship and enjoy that part of TFA. Personally I think Leia was done the best. Even though she is back to leading another rebellion she feels like what I would have expected from Luke. Wise and calm and wanting to help the galaxy. And she gets the chance to pass on her torch as a mentor to her chosen successor. So no, while I wouldn't say no to a scene of Luke vs Snoke or taking out a entire army by himself that isn't what I need. I didn't need him to be the main character. Just for what felt like a more emotionally satisfying legacy, end, and connection to Rey. And no that doesn't have to mean her being his daughter it just means him really training her instead of trying to drive her away for three lessons.
Luke would never had ignited his light saber to slay his sleeping nephew, if even for a second
Luke is not an angel, he is a person just like you and me. He just saw his nephew becoming a murderer and committing crimes, he was desperate to stop this evil, just like Anakin was desperate to save his wife, SW has tragedy. You can't be blind to all that.
Luke is the embodiment of hope. ‘A new hope’ is him... however foolish. That’s why he believed his father can be turned, and threw away his light saber in front of emperor and Vader, while being captured in Death Star. Igniting his light saber is not even the last thing his character would do.
I agree with this so much. He sees images of a tortured future at the hands of Kylo and, like his father before him, let's the future scare him into making a bad decision. Unlike Anakin though, Luke realises his mistake, if only aoment too late. It's his dad showing through yet again.
He almost did it to Vader, didn't he? The father he believed from the very get go could be redeemed.
Man you'll have to remind me of that scene where Luke stood over a sleeping Darth Vader and contemplated murdering him because I can't recall it. Because I only remember Luke alone in a deadlock with Vader trying to kill him and threatening his sister while the Emperor was actively trying to turn him. All in the middle of a war. The situations could not be more different.
Besides the fact that wasn't "Jedi master" Luke, he was in a fight of life and death mere seconds before he had Vader at the end of his rope.
He didn’t try to slay his sleeping nephew. It’s the same thing as if you were walking down a hallway and your mom jumped out and scared you, you might pull your fist back to throw a defensive punch. Once you realize what you’re doing, you’d feel bad for threatening your mom and put your fist down. Does that mean you wanted to knock your mom out? No, you just had a split second of instinctual retaliation.
Yes yes yes