Great article about Luke

ROFL'd at this post. if you didn't liked this movie why do ya'll feel such a powerful need to beat it down 24/7?

 

wise.

 

No offense but the amount of spin-doctoring on behalf of Rian Johnson's Luke portrayal in Episodes 7 and 8 is interesting to say the least.

Mark Hamill made it abundantly clear that he disagreed with Rian Johnson's handling of the Luke Skywalker character. I doubt that Johnson really had in mind what Ms. Asher-Perrin came up with (in fan post-post-production).

But don't take my word for it and listen yourselves what Mark had to say, nothing what he learned remotely suggested a bigger plan or concept:

Jedi just don't quit. I don't mind characters that change (happens in real life all the time), but that change must be somewhat comprehensible at the end of the day.

 

Let me take a wild guess. The fact that Mark came around, to the point where he even stated the TLJ is the best film since ESB, it doesn't stick with you, right?

Also, Alec Guinness trash talked Star Wars during production (was he right?) but came around in the end.
And then we have Mark Hamill and Return of the Jedi, he wanted Luke to go dark side with a scar and an earring. Without knowing, I think he came around and really liked RotJ in the end.
Mark has also stated that it would've been cool if the ST had clone Luuke from legends.

Maybe we should let the writers do the writing, no?

 

I read this, too, but objectively it's inconclusive because the context of this statement isn't clear, i.e. whether he felt it was the best film from a story-telling perspective or whether TLJ provided him as an actor with better acting opportunities than ROTJ.

I disagree. Mark Hamill interacted in recent decades with many fans (and last but not least George Lucas) and most likely had a pretty good idea how his character 'ticked'. That doesn't make him 'naive' but IMHO rather competent to understand what his character is capable of and whatnot.

From everything I learned RJ wrote a script that essentially went unchecked into production. But you're free to show me where I can verify that "each decision was thought out and logical".

 

Here's probably a surprise for you: depressed Luke was George Lucas' idea

Besides Mark Hamill wanted a darkside Luke for ROTJ and after. They did this with Dark Empire, but that didn't work out very well at all.

 

This is a Star Wars fan forum you know. We kind of like Star Wars.

 

The argument that heroes are people is pointless because we actually saw that in OT.

The complaints about Luke's depiction has less to do with viewers being attached to stories that they love but because the last two films veer away from the development of Luke's character in OT.

The film is not supposed to examine heroism as some "concept" but is supposed to depict it. Essays are used to explain such concepts.

Luke's father became a villain in ANH and TESB but became a hero to him in ROTJ. That's why the ghosts of Obi Wan, Yoda, and Anakin appear before him. The arguments concerning TLJ somehow mirroring what took place to Luke ignores the ending of ROTJ. That also makes Luke's behavior prior to TFA (when he tries to kill Ben Solo) and during TLJ (when he abandons the world) bizarre.

The argument that Luke is compassionate and that that is his "superpower" contradicts the claim that heroes are people.

The argument that his compassion should not be confused with his being nice readily appears in ROTJ (which is pointed out in the article!), but that took place before he discovered the man behind the Darth Vader mask. If that is the point when his compassion dominated, then his behavior towards Ben and in TLJ becomes illogical.

In the end, I am not convinced by the reasons given for Luke's depiction in LJ. I think that's more logical is that the movie was written to impress upon audiences particular political arguments. In this case, it is to show that the mythical lore created by OT and PT are nonsense.

 

I think we could have had a Luke that went into exile same as here but for the opposite reasons.
His failure should have only been as a teacher, he fails to prevent Kylo from falling to the darkside(Snoke's influence on him had been too strong) and we avoid making Luke the catalyst.
Then his dilemma is he doesn't know how to bring Kylo back and he can't bring himself to kill him despite his terrible actions. He still believes in redemption so he goes in search of wisdom to find a way to defeat Snoke and bring his nephew back.

 

Don't mention "spin-doctoring" as an attack on Rian, and then continue on to use PART of Hammil's opinion of the film (and heavily edited at that), to support your own narrative. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Mark has made it clear. He initially disagreed with character choices, but came around. He respected Rian as an artist.

He's also said TLJ is the best SW film since ESB.

To EVERYONE doing this, please stop slandering Hamill to support your own opinions. Stop.

 

Good points but I don't think it's necessarily the only way:

1)Let's say it's not necessary to cut him off from the force to explain those events:
Regarding Han, he could have felt him in danger before his death but what could he have done? Han made the choice to put himself at risk and try to redeem his son. If Luke couldn't bring himself to kill Kylo and didn't know how to save him either what was he supposed to do?
Regarding Leia and the resistance he did come after all. Why he didn't come sooner? Well again what is he supposed to do?, fly his xwing together with Poe? Stand against the whole FO with a laser sword? I think we both agree the part were he helps Leia and the resistance is very well done and according to Luke's character.

2)Now let's say to cut him off from the force was mandatory like you said:
If you think failure as a teacher was not enough, let's simply add some shock value, let's say Luke had a wife and child and Ben killed them at the temple as well.

His attitude towards the jedi order is justified either way, they failed with Palpatine and Anakin just like he failed with Snoke and Ben.

 

Fantastic article!

There was definitely a big gap between what many fans expected of Luke and the Luke that we saw (even with many correctly assuming Luke would be a reluctant hero). That being said, though, the Luke we got was in many ways far superior to what I thought I had expected. To say that Luke does not act like a Jedi in TLJ is to compare him to the prequel Jedi, who we now know were extremely flawed. Luke strove to be something different and better, and he is no Jedi like those near the fall of the Republic- but that's because, in a way, they themselves had already diverged from the true Jedi path.

 

Let me head canon that for you, part of it at least, without changing the movie. And this is not an actual firm opinion of mine, I'll make it up as I go so bare with me.

So, Luke is still the catalyst, I can't head canon that part, but I'll try to make the reasons the opposite.
What if he retreated into exile not to give up and die but to get to the bottom of what went wrong and how to fix everything.

In the film he says "I came here to die" or something. In this head canon that was the short version he told Rey. The long version being "After years of meditation I realized I came here to die".

So why did he realize this?

After years of meditation, contemplation and studying the force in depth maybe he realized that every possible scenario without sacrificing himself led to disaster.
Always in motion is the future but perhaps, regardless of the motion, Luke could never see a way for him to redeem Ben Solo. Maybe others could potentially, but not Luke.
The visions showed him that if he confronted Kylo and died it would send Kylo even further down the dark path. And if Luke killed him it would send Luke himself down the dark path. He knew this since the night at the Jedi temple, that would certainly lead to utter darkness.

And what about confronting Snoke? If Luke didn't lose and die it would mean Snoke dies which would make Kylo Ren the new Supreme Leader. Snokes damage was already done, Kylo without a master was not an improvement.

The only possible way not to make things worse was to remove himself from the equation, to become one with the force.
But how could he do that in a meaningful way that not just left things in status quo (that would leave a smorgasbord for The First Order), but actually made things better. Better both for the fight against oppression in the galaxy and for the balance of the force in the struggle between good and evil.

This question was beyond Luke and he was just about to lose the hope he so desperately wanted to pass on as his legacy.

Along came Rey.


Best regards!
Nick

 

I could agree with that 100%, I have a very similar vision. However, the crossing line for me is Luke being the catalyst, I can agree with the rest of Luke's behavior beyond that point and I like your version even better.