THREAD FOR THOSE WHO HATED THE MOVIE

I find this confusing. You argue that TLJ is subverting TFA and then you propose a scenario where there's a different story. That's a subversion. TFA says Luke walked away, but as you point out that could be changed. That would be subverting.

It's certainly consistent with what we were told in TFA and Han's perception of events.

 

I just want to say how much I appreciate this post and that I’m completely with you in everything you felt with these films.You just explained perfectly, I think, why and how SW films manage to work so very well for most of the audience. How, rather than about plot or internal coherence, these films are about character and character development like that of Kylo’s. It is precisely this emphasis on character what makes these stories so engaging: the inner conflict, the good or bad decisions, the gestures. It is easy to feel invested in characters so well realised. And then, of course, we have the conexion to the old characters, which is much more important for Kylo’s than for Rey’s, since it makes us care for this villain. After all he’s the son of Han and Leia. He’s family. How could we not want to redeem him?

These words in particular really resonated with me. It is really the audience faith in Luke what holds his ark together, our belief in his judgment. I never thought that was a valid option, but really, nothing else makes more sense than that: It is not difficult to believe that, f Luke decided to leave everything, there was good resano for it, right? If Luke was tempted to kill Kylo it is because what he saw in Kylo’s mind was truly awful.

I think I might have fallen into the trap of trying to rationalise something so simple... But really, if I think with my heart, I know I trust Luke too, and understand why he behaved in the way he did and how he couldn’t forgive himself afterwards.

 

It's been great reading everyone's opinions here (even those I don't necessarily agree with), but I must say I'm most interested to know the thoughts from one guy in particular--a guy whose opinion carries so much heavy weight amongst the Star Wars community I'm told it's basically indisputable fact...

Without a doubt, the WORST. BACKSTORY. EVER!

Just kidding.

But in all honesty, Ben’s turn felt far from straightforward for me. I'll repackage my post I made from the backstory thread to explain why:

Luke’s idea that Ben was already committed to Snoke and the Dark path just wasn't convincing to me. The context of it all just seemed completely lacking. For example, Luke tells us he wanted to kill Ben because, “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.” However, it seemed Ben’s heart turned the moment he realised he was soon to be ripped apart by a maniacal, back-stabbing uncle and not before it.

But here's what I really don't understand about Luke's thinking--How did he come to the conclusion that Ben had to die (someone he cared deeply for) rather than Snoke? Why didn’t Luke, you know, try to kill the guy actually responsible? Are we even told at what point Luke became aware that Snoke was grooming Ben? That’s pretty crucial information to know. Are we shown anything of what Ben or Snoke did to get a real sense of Luke's fatalistic mind-set in the face of such potential evil?

By the way, fatalism is the last thing I would've associated with Luke's character. This is a guy who adamantly disagreed with Yoda and Obi-Wan that the Dark Side had destroyed his father and nothing could be done to prevent it. He simply refused to believe any of it. Luke rebelled against the fate and destiny imposed upon others.

I find this new trilogy frustrating because it is not prepared to fully delve into the basic motivations to the premise of its own story and it's only been explained superficially. As Disney have based their new trilogy on the same basic foundation that drove the conflict of the first 6 movies, I had hoped they would've devoted proper attention into explaining exactly why this new story is something just as authentic, just as believable and just as creative as the one that came before it. Unfortunately, all we have to go on are the briefest of flashbacks raising more questions than answers I doubt this trilogy will ever fully resolve.

The truth is we are given very little context about the flashback (about Luke, Kylo or Snoke) to make a true judgement about any of it. The crazy thing is Ben's fall to the Dark Side is essentially the premise of the Sequel's conflict and it's equivalent to Vader's backstory to the Originals. But the craziest thing is George Lucas devoted three entire movies to explain what Disney tried to do in brief flashbacks and few lines of dialogue.

 

You make excellent points, and there's one I've thought of before that you mention that I'd like to elaborate on.

When do Luke and Leia realize Snoke has been poisoning Ben? I don't recall that ever being addressed in the movies. Yes, Leia says Snoke had seduced him since he was a child or something, but I don't know if Leia and Luke were aware of Snoke's involvement at that time. Maybe it's covered in a book and if so, please let me know. However it's possible that Luke never knew about Snoke until after that fateful night in Ben's bedroom. I'm not sure if this is by design or just sloppy writing/editing. Everything I recall hearing concerning Snoke and Ben, never do I recall a comment that points out Luke or Leia were aware it was Snoke specifically at that time.

For the story to make any sense, they'd have to be unaware of Snoke until after the flashback, because as you say, Luke should have sought out Snoke instead of blaming Ben. However, I'm of the impression that's not the story RJ told, and that Luke was aware of Snoke at that time. I'm not saying that's fact, just that that is the impression I have watching the movies.

I believe there are more lose ends like this that JJ can expose in IX to help justify Luke's actions. As I stated before, I'd really like if he did, but I have very little hope that he will. It's what I liked the most about JJ after TFA and what I dislike the most about RJ, is that JJ shouldered the criticism while RJ is rejecting it outright.

 

The 'ol butterfly-effect future-vision blind-spot paradox?
I don't see this as likely but can we clearly rule out that Ben wasn't sleeping on a nasty plan already in place?

FWIW I think Luke has a dangerous Dark Side to him which is why he struggles so hard and why he can get the fear.
For all his talk of balance he's a Dark Side teetotaler and craps his pants when he see's Rey go straight for the Dark.
These Jedi may go on about peace and seem sane most of the time but they are a downright scary bunch of characters.

I often forget how Luke's reaction isn't an instantaneous one.
For a good while there he thinks he can stop all this pain by killing his nephew.
We can read this as him (or the writing) being weak and repetitive but I read that situation as some serious Dark Side sh*t.

No wonder Ben's so messed up.
If these Skywalker's can't defeat all the darkness all the time then the darkness becomes inevitable.
Once it's inevitable it's a short step to seeing it as acceptable.

And we don't really know the facts either.
Technically all we have to go by are some claims by some of the characters and they're not infallible.

 

Negative on you last, I argue TLJ subverted Luke; feel free to go back and check. You said his subversion started in TFA. I said Luke wasn't materially in TFA and his absence was explained as the result of losing a student. Losing a student has an established precedence in SW; if Luke lost a student it wouldn't necessarily constitute a subversion of his character profile. Contemplating killing one of your students that compels them to join the Dark Side is a subversion of Luke and Master Jedi and only happens in TLJ.

But it would not be subverting Luke. And the point of even elevating this observation is to put to rest the notion that ,what Rian chose to write actually wasn't a choice but rather something that TFA proscribed. He had freedom to take the characters where he wanted, and he did.

 

This is correct.

I said that Luke walking away from "everything" is in The Force Awakens. Han Solo's quote in the film confirms my claim. The rest of our disagreement is a matter of opinion. You think you know Luke well enough after the OT to make it impossible for him to have a crisis of faith. I think we really don't know Luke that well after 30 years. Seeing what his nephew would become, the instability to prevent it from happening, and the shame of almost acting preemptively seems perfectly reasonable to me.

The only way The Force Awakens makes sense as a film to me is if Luke has suffered some kind of huge change. Otherwise the fact he doesn't come back to help his friends doesn't make sense. The Luke we knew from the OT isn't some hermit hiding away from the action. Luke didn't come back because of profoundly personal reasons. Luke wouldn't just walk away over losing some students. We know how important family is to Luke and his failure with Ben would be soul shattering.

 

I suspect that it might seem perfectly reasonable to a lot more people if we don't see Luke on screen show greater restraint, with less maturation and training (at that point in his life), in dealing with an infamous force user who is actually responsible for the death of an untold number of lifeforms compared to how he confronted Ben Solo.

It's almost like the pro TLJ crowd are arguing, "X, Y, and Z flow logically to me". And what I'm trying to impart is that it's not merely whether X, Y, and Z flows logically... from a local stand alone view, you can make the case that they do. From a global Anthology view point it doesn't work. We watched A, B, and C first. We left him at point C. If you want us to believe this Luke in X, Y, and Z, we needs points D - W. Because you are asking us to accept a hard left turn in a person on faith, when the explanation for the turn not only seems out of character for the character and the behavior of a Master Jedi (established over 6 movies), but actually mimics a far harder test that he has already passed with LESS growth. When I say this movie asks the audience who have followed the anthology to be FAR too generous in accommodating this particular story arc, it is probably an understatement.

It is true that I don't think the Luke that was developed over the course of the entire OT is capable of murder. It is also true that I don't think the Luke that was developed over the course of the entire OT (for argument sake) could be shown now struggling to use the Force. That's not where we left this character (in either regard). If you wanted me to believe either of these versions of Luke, you are going to HAVE to invest in the back story and not ask me to take it on faith that it could happen. Anything is mathematically possible. Hell Luke could have become a Sith, but you don't just say 30 years have passed and things could have changed. You tell the story, and don't ask the audience to invent it on your behalf to complete the vision you wanted to tell. That's my opinion anyway.

So a couple of things:

1. Given in the actual movies, Luke doesn't come back, how do you feel about his momentary concern in asking where was Han? More specifically, why should Han's death matter to a man who walked away from it all? He came to Ach-to to die. He wasn't keeping in touch with anyone, he went where he thought he wouldn't be found or contacted - so why would it matter if Han died? I know why OT Luke would care, I don't know why TLJ Luke would.
2. You say we know how important family is to Luke. How can that be, when Rey shows up and says Leia sent her because she needed his help and Luke tells her to go away?
3. Do we know that it would soul shattering if Luke failed with Ben? He found out the greatest scourge in the galaxy was his father - but it didn't cause him to give up on Anakin. But it makes sense to you that he gave up on Ben? How could that be if family were important to him? I know in the OT Luke cares about family - TLJ Luke? I'm not seeing the case for that.

 

This is where we split. I don't need his backstory for this trilogy. I'd love to learn more about Luke, but it's not necessary for this trilogy. This trilogy isn't about what happened to Luke for 30 years. This trilogy is about Ben and Rey. Luke plays a big part in the shape of these two characters, but I need Luke's 30 year backstory to know people change. I can just look around. I'm almost 40 and I'm not the same person I was 20 years ago. My Dad isn't the same person he was 30 years ago.

Obi-Wan and Yoda went into exile for 20 years when they could have been training two powerful force users. That makes less sense to me than Luke's failure.

 

I agree.
Where I saw TFA take us was that either Luke...

• couldn't help:
  • imprisoned
  • Force drained etc.

• or could help but wouldn't:
  • retrospection or new information led him to believe the Jedi are flawed and/or dangerous
  • he's made a mistake or become a catalyst to the stories biggest problems

You could argue a case for either course and the filmmakers chose what they thought made the best SW-style space opera.

Speaking of arguing...hey @Rayjefury old friend.
I'm feeling particularly contrarian today and want to jump in and provide a counter-narrative to some of your post!

I thought we got some of those points although the order can be a little unclear.

A-B-C-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-?-U-V-?-X-Y-?

? – Luke starts a training temple.
? – Leia and Han sense trouble with Ben and send him to Luke.
U – Luke makes mistake, his nephew turns and destroys Luke's legacy (physically and metaphorically).
V – Luke undergoes an existential crisis and isolates himself to prevent further damage.

The points above are clearly not enough for some or not what some fans want but I don't see how it's possible to be open to someone's story while not being open to all those unknown areas and the possibilities they can represent.

The way I see it it's not about inventing content to bolster the story or make sense of it but about parking expectations and assumptions that might provide obstacles to the writers' story.

But does it?
Frankly I'm surprised that anyone who has watched the SW saga thinks that...

1. 'too old to begin the training' Jedi are somehow immune to acting rashly out of fear (let alone a typical Master).
2. that it's “out of character” for Luke Skywalker to struggle with control when his loved ones are threatened.

And seriously, less growth?
In the OT Luke realizes his mistake in the middle of attacking Vader.



In TLJ he's grown enough to hold back before attacking.



I don't even think the story points are really that risky.
If you take SW tropes and trends and extrapolate them forward you're bound to get something like TLJ Luke.

Luke only walked away and stayed away because he felt he was doing more harm than good.
Almost every decision Luke makes in SW (rightly or wrongly) is not because he doesn't care for his loved ones but precisely because he does.

True that.
Changing and acknowledging change is a part of growing up.



And who knows older Luke that well anyway?
About 3 times more time has passed than all the time we had ever known him!

Edit:grammar

 

I've never thought that Luke was in incapable of a ugly deed. Both "A New Hope" and "Return of the Jedi" proved that he was. But we're talking about characterization here. I can Luke giving in to anger or evil as a reaction to a loved one being killed, harmed or threatened. The two OT movies made that clear. But calmly contemplating the murder of one's nephew as a "means justify the need" situation doesn't seemed to be Luke's forte. I can see Obi-Wan contemplating this, but not Luke.

And is Johnson trying to tell us that Luke's brief contemplation of murder is a good reason to blame him for Kylo Ren embracing evil?

No one can defeat all the evil all of the time. Perhaps in a story solely for the kiddies, but not in what is supposed to be a well written story.

 

you think that it was calmly contemplated? i didn't see that at all.

just to pinch a gif from @Moral Hazard..

this shows you everything. gritted teeth and pure rage.. then he catches it and turns off his saber.

he didn't have a long think about things and come to the conclusion that he needed to march in there and kill his nephew. He went to Ben to look into his mind to see how bad it was - and he already knew it was pretty bad..

he didn't just see a vision of Ben bringing 'destruction, pain and death' - he was brutally exposed to the dark side when he looked into Ben's mind. He lost control.. overwhelmed with the dark side and visions of losing everything he loved.
'the briefest moment of pure instinct'.. he was tapped into someone who is surging with the dark side. his nephew who he loves.. and he sees god knows what horrors. there is a reason why the Jedi are supposed to avoid this stuff peeps.. did we learn nothing about it from Yoda?

looking into his mind like that was a mistake.. he should have trusted his instincts that it was bad and tried to save his nephew as part of his training.
but.. taking on a relative to train in the first place? well that's gotta be against umpteen Jedi rules. for an order that knows the danger of attachment and emotional ties.. that's a pretty big no-no to be training your sisters son. I can't believe that nobody is talking about this?

these mistakes led to an inevitable bad ending in my opinion.

go through the different scenarios.. If Luke couldn't prevent Ben from turning - every other outcome other than what we saw is Ben & Luke fighting and Ben or Luke dying. from the information given in TFA, the only story arc (in my opinion) that gives us Luke bringing the spark of hope to the Galaxy AND Ben retaining empathy (not with all of the audience mind) was exactly how it all happened.

I still believe that we have a lot still to come in episode 9. we will see further into Ben's soul in the last movie, and i believe we will learn more about what happened at the academy.


just my humble opinions as always

 

I like this post, even if I tend to have a very hard time rationalizing Luke's characterization.

For example. Luke may have gotten a glimpse, or many glimpses into the future... but these visions were all pre-Rey, so maybe every vision he had of Ben was him and Ben fighting or him running away and not having to face his nephew in a duel to the death, and not having to see Ben hurt those he loved (him fighting Ben could have involved Luke having battles with Han and Leia as well, on top of Ben hurting or killing his parents). I could see that struggle being extremely difficult for Luke (or anyone) to handle.

I can extrapolate on that further, but even as I struggle to accept Luke's decisions based on these possibilities, I'm feel I'm left writing for RJ again. I mean, I get that RJ wanted the story to be from Rey's pov, but I think he underestimated fans confusion because Luke is/was the main character before (I think RJ would have needed to add more to those scenes and give the OT fans more of a bone so they can follow along the main story, the one he wants to tell, the one about Rey's struggle with Kylo). I kind of get that RJ may have intentionally kept Luke's characterization ambiguous, because Rey doesn't have our history with him. So the story comes from her perspective and thus could cast Luke in a harsher light. So on some level I understand, on the other I hate his creative decision. It's not so much that I wanted Luke to be perfect, I wanted the story to be more 3rd person and offer us more insight into Luke and his thinking then focusing more narrowly on Rey's pov.

So as many have been saying, this story isn't about Luke, it isn't from his pov. Which is a big reason why I and many others can't relate to Luke, because we're not getting to see his thought process, because the story isn't about him. We see what Rey sees, and Luke being a legend but otherwise unknown, she doesn't have the same trust we have in Luke. So the flashbacks we're given, that may also be Rey's interpretation of events as she processes what she's told by Luke and Ben.

So in this sense, I can see how those who love TLJ could accept Luke. For me however there are a few points.

I don't like that RJ ignores Luke's pov. Another point is I wish RJ had made a statement to this effect soon after the movies' release to quell the backlash, because even as I jump through the necessary hoops to see things differently, I still mightily struggle because I feel I'm creating head canon. What's worse I now have months of disliking the movie as momentum, and as others have said, the movie has other flaws (I see the movie as largely flawed and confusing not because it's too intellectual, but because I have a hard time situating myself on who's eyes to see through.) and even if I can admit that maybe I watched the movie with a perspective that RJ maybe didn't anticipate, I don't feel he did a very good job at explaining his intentions in his story telling and the perspectives he focused on. In this sense I find the movie confusing maybe as much because I simply don't relate as much to the new characters as I do the old.

So I think I understand RJ's intentions, I simply don't like his decisions and his intentions and I think he underestimated how strongly many SW fans identify with Luke and the struggle that comes from mostly ignoring his perspective and instead focusing on Rey's.

That's assuming that was RJ's intentions at all, which is also frustrating because I very much feel even as I create and accept this rationale from others, I'm not sure this was his intention because I feel he failed in making his intention clear to the viewer. In short I feel like I'm reading others head canon and I'm trying too hard to rationalize something that may not even have been RJ's intention, and may have simply been bad writing and lack of direction on RJ's part.

 

But to paraphrase @Sparafucile , believing that Kylo is who he is, is largely contingent (I would argue) on believing Luke is who he is. And the moment you tug on that thread, the Failed Master Luke tapestry falls apart.

And this is where I assert that the movie begs your charity. Sure anyone can change and anything can happen. Snoke could have turned from the dark side in TLJ, and if they didn't provide an in-movie explanation for it, you could generate your own reasons why it might have happened on their behalf (despite what you saw in TFA). But would you be inclined to? Or even better - should you be expected to?

Obi Wan and Yoda went into exile because they were being actively hunted; the killing didn't end after Order 66. And maybe you all disagree but to me, the remaining Jedi didn't appear equipped to raise Luke and Leia from infancy. Not sure what else they could have done but hide the children. Because if Yoda or Obi Wan were ever discovered with children in tow, it would not take much for Vader to figure out they were his.

I think a more readily available and acceptable alternative is that the writer could write an installment in an anthology (as opposed to a stand alone product) that requires him to work within the existing framework instead of asking us to provide head canon filler in order to make his chosen story work.

The development and catalyst that Rian asks us to accept defy too much existing canon to be accepted on faith (IMO).

Ok but...

1. Luke wasn't merely acting rashly, he was contemplating murdering a family member in his sleep based on a vision
2. I am still waiting for someone to show me precedence for Master Jedi contemplating murdering a student
3. What does it mean, with respect to this conversation, if Luke struggles with control when his love ones are threatened... when in this instance Luke WAS the threat to his loved one?

I don't think it's an invalid stand alone observation that Luke begin training at a time that was traditionally considered too late, or that he struggled with control of his emotions when in battle with Vader in ROTJ, but if we aren't going to contextualize this - what does it all mean? What is their relevance? Luke had trouble lifting the X-wing out of the bog on Dagobah in ESB, does that somehow make it believable that Luke would contemplate killing his nephew years down the road? I think you all are having to extrapolate, interpolate, and theorize an awful lot and work very hard for one particular movie to "play well with others" in the anthology. And ultimately, no matter what you do, at the end of the day Luke is a Master Jedi when he contemplates murdering Ben Solo.

Yes less growth. I'd be surprised to find that this is considered debatable. OT Luke was less developed in every way possible, patience, wisdom, ability to use the Force, ability to understand the force. Every way.

And there it is. LOL, there again riseth the popular but ultimately (I believe) unfounded notion that this Luke was inevitable. This argument makes a special guest appearance in this thread at least once a day. We have the quote provided by Rian himself. The only thing that made TLJ Luke inevitable was Rian writing it. The assertion that his development trajectory was somehow destined to reach this point, and this point alone, is not one that stands up to scrutiny. Didn't you postulate in your post that Luke may have been out of the fray because he was imprisoned or Force drained? If that would explain why he was away from the present conflict, we don't need the shame of "contemplating murdering Ben" as a pretext for his absence. I think the bottom line is: TLJ's Luke is Rian's Luke, no one else's.

Luke didn't go to Ach-To to "stay out of the way". He went there to die. He didn't leave a forwarding address, didn't try to contact his friends and family occasionally, he didn't go some place he thought they'd find him. He went to Ach-To to die. That's what the movie said. I believe you are laboring on behalf of the movie to make it make sense, whereas if the movie had actually invested in it's own development of story points, you wouldn't have to.

 

not how I saw the scene at all.

he went into where Ben was sleeping and put his hand out to read his mind (like Kylo did in TFA) and he then immediately lost control and lit his saber.. then immediately realised what he was doing and stopped himself.

there was no ‘contemplating’ and it wasn’t a vision.

watch the scene again.. watch Luke’s eyes and see him grit his teeth as he lights the saber. I’m my opinion he was consumed by the dark side coursing through Ben when he force connected to his mind.

Being subjected to the dark side AND seeing horrors (which Luke described as losing everything he loved).. anger took him for a moment.

It’s just how I see the scene, and.. well.. I’m no Jedi

 

The same way I'm contemlating running away when I hear a dog barking... Then, a moment later, I'm reminded that this dog is a chihuahua and is jumping on the opposite side of the fence and the only thing left for me is the feeling of shame that once again I got surprised by a barking dog...

 

I think George Lucas was going in this direction except we would have seen much more of this version of Luke in Episode VII had Lucas been in control. Instead it was pushed to Episode VIII in order to help establish the next characters. The Art of Star Wars: The Last Jedi book supports this thesis.

It's my theory that Lucas was going to have Rey/Ben as brother and sister with the Luke/Ben moment revealed in Episode VIII to Rey. She would have to choose sides with Kylo or with her master who contemplated killing her brother. Then we'd have Leia/Ben's confrontation in Episode IX. Just a guess on that part, but all Lucas had was a treatment. He didn't have scripts.

 

I like your theory here. I would have enjoyed that playing out in TLJ way better than what we got. Not only would you have Rey having to choose between Luke and her brother, but you also have the fact that she would have watched her brother murder their father. Now that would have been a powerful and emotional moment. I know it's only your theory/guess, but I can't help but to think of what could have been.

 

If you have the video in your library collection I'd invite you to count how many seconds elapse when they show Luke's face realizing Snoke had corrupted Ben until the moment the show Luke's face ablaze in green (due to his ignited light saber) and awash in shame for contemplating murdering his nephew. This process is not immediate at all. It is anywhere from 12 - 15 seconds depending on where you start your count. There absolutely was contemplation. Remember the sequence was long enough for Luke to narrate what happened in explaining it to Rey.

From my reading of the article I gather that it was an idea on the table; and it might not actually have been proposed by George Lucas himself. It sounds like they were considering a number of ideas. Who knows what direction Lucas would've ultimately gone? That said, Luke training Rey in Ep 7 (I think) would at least eliminate anymore talk of Rey having power and the ability to defeat Kylo with no training and also eliminate his conspicuous absence in Episode 7

I doubt we would get the TLJ Luke under Lucas, but I do suspect that he would have Luke overcoming some challenge (whether it was working out a new tenable Jedi ideology, achieving some Force ability, or maybe dealing with the loss of a child or wife). There would have been some additional challenge Luke had to overcome as well (at least that's my theory)

 

Yeah I'm with @Rayjefury on this.
Maybe not "calmly" but he had a good moment.
On a few occasions I had wondered about a knee-jerk reaction or PTSD but after quick referrals it never really seemed like the editing lends itself to that reading.
I don't think it's pre-meditated but I don't think it's reflex either.

What head-canon do we need to add to make the story work?
The details are all in the films.
All that's required is the absence of assumptions about the character.

The OT took place over 4 years.
Luke's been around for over 50.

I don't see how anybody can claim to know what 54 year-old Luke Skywalker would have done or be like in the ST without either living 30 years in the past or sitting on a mountain of head-canon.

The relevance was your claim it's out of character for a Jedi and the point is contextualization.
The only two Jedi we've seen struggling with self-control due to attachment to loved ones happen to be the only two Jedi described by Masters as too late to begin the training.
It would be negligent of us not to acknowledge this when comparing Skywalker actions to other Jedi Masters.

Your words not mine!
I said “something similar” and was referring to a struggling or weakened Luke not specifying a contemplating-murdering-nephew Luke!

We can't have Luke introduced straight away and focus on all new protagonists otherwise the problem is placed in his hands and not the next generation.
Therefore the writers have to either put off his appearance or handicap him and then explain why the space wizard hasn't saved the galaxy already.

Hairsplitting.
They're not mutually exclusive though and his motivation is the same - he thinks he's liable to make things worse.

I'm not sure which elements are “laboring on behalf of the movie” though.
I thought that Luke's motivation to protect loved ones from harm was obvious.
Perhaps it was just me?

Edit:grammar