ST What will be Luke, Han, and Leia's biggest flaws?

Luke, Han, and Leia are not perfect.

And if they're in the ST, don't die in the opening scenes, and have more than cameo appearances... then we will see them for what they are: flawed human beings.

What do you think the biggest flaws will be, for each of them?

If we can pinpoint they're biggest possible flaws in the ST, then we'll probably be able to predict what their character arcs will be like, and might get some insight into the overall story too.

 

Hmm, interesting topic. Here's my stab at it:

Luke: Overly conservative. Assuming he is overseeing/rebuilding the Jedi Order, his flaw could be that he is too weary of repeating the mistakes of his predecesors, specifically what happened to his father. This could compromise him, and the Jedi at large, in other ways.


Han: Struggles with being an upstanding member of society. He spent a significant amount of his adult life as a smuggler, a two-bit criminal. Through the circumstances of the OT, he became a hero, but that doesn't change who he is at heart. If Han, 30 years later, has "calmed down" with Leia and is living as a law-abiding, relatively ordinary citizen, I don't see him being content with that.


Leia: Short-sightedness in leadership. Of the three, Leia played the most active role in the rebellion. Like her mother, she cares about aiding society. But her passion for it might overwhelm her when faced with participating in this relatively new, budding democracy. As someone who is used to being so decisive and driven, she could become flustered by the seeming lack of effectiveness her role in government has.

 

I'm gonna guess Luke is going to stumble and make some mistakes in his whole rebuilding Jedi order business which may lead to the antagonist emerging from his own students. Han and Leia may have a complicated romantic history by that point and possibly Han learning to be a better parent to his offspring which may be either the lead or supporting lead of the ST.

 

Luke = Selfless

Han = Daring

Leia = Short Tempered

 

I could see Han as still rebellious and unable to conform to average society. And not happy being 'normal.' It's in his character.

 

Age. I think Luke in particular will be in a similar position to Obi Wan in ANH wanting to pass on his legacy to the "next new hope" (to quote Lucas himself in regard to the ST).

 

Luke. If he's anything like the EU portrayed, maybe he's so good at what he is, a Jedi Master, that everyone depends on him too much.

Han. He will be the opposite of what he was when we first met him. He'll be honorable and respected. So maybe now he's too hard on his kid who is just like he once was: a rebel.

Leia. If she's had Jedi training she's probably more patient than she used to be. If she has any flaws it will probably related to Vader or the fact that she doesn't have enough time for her children.

 

Luke might be too naive and trusting, especially politically or when it is about a student. It's better than turning him into a conservative PT-Jedi.

Leia might find that she has a dark side, that power is more attractive to her than she wished. She always was a bit of a control junkie. And now so much power is shoved into her direction. Additionally, she could struggle with what she identifies as "Vader" in herself.

Han might feel like a caged animal, castrated and useless. Maybe his friendship with Luke, who is more powerful and useful than Han could ever dream of being, is full of tension.

 

Leia is the new baddie!

 

For me, one question that still remains open is, why did they chose to train Luke and not Leia? What was the reason for that? I would like to think it has nothing to do with midi-counts or any such nonsense.

 

Patriarchy?

Part of the issue is related to the retcon. But maybe one reason is Bail Organa and his wife wanted a daughter?

 

I don't think that Bail's wishes have anything to do with choosing Luke in TESB. Obi-Wan could've appeared to Leia on Hoth. Yoda could've decided he doesn't want to train Luke but would rather have "the other" as trainee. Or he could've trained both instead of just one.

History could've taken another course if it weren't for the decision of the Jedi.

We know the retcon is the reason, but you could still create some in-universe explanation for all that.

 

Yeah, I know the Bail thing doesn't cover it all. Maybe Yoda and Ben liked Leia where she was: as a spy for the Rebellion? She was well placed for many years being the daughter of a Senator.

You have something else in mind?

 

Maybe Yoda was afraid that she had even more of her father in her than Luke.

 

Yeah, that's a good explanation.

 

I see Luke as being too trusting. Maybe too self-confident, like in TESB. Reckless.

Han... I dunno. I think he genuinely liked settling down with Leia in ROTJ. Maybe his temper could be his flaw.

Leia... maybe too idealistic and not realistic. Frustrated that she can't get a new alliance together fast enough. Maybe too trusting as well, being so open to restructuring a government.

 

Leia was quite savvy in TESB and ROTJ. She knew that Lando was not to be trusted and she knew that the Ewoks could make a good ally. "Too trusting" is not how I would describe her.

 

Ghost, no offense, but I disagree with your basic premise here.

First, I can't fathom for a second that Disney would shell out the money it will take to bring back Ford let alone Fisher and Hamill just for them to have cameos or die in the first five minutes. I know your're not saying that, but I just want it to be clear to everyone we should expect a healthy dose of our favorite Big 3 in significant support of the new generation.

Second, we already know that the Big 3 are flawed and we saw said flaws right from ANH onward:

Leia = SNOB, egotistical, condescending, brash, arrogant
Han = COCKY, self-centered/selfish, shady, dusplicitous, egotistical, brash and arrogant
Luke = IMMATURE, whiney, fearful, short-sighted, imaptient

So my contention is that we knew right from the beginning the character's flaws but it didnt help really as to what the overall arcs would be, only that they would eventually change. The problem NOW is that we don 't know what the baseline is in order to make any kind of guesses as to what the current flaws are and how they will change.

Third, IF the Big 3 have the same flaws they did from the OT then that is piss-poor writing and diminishes the OT drastically as they never changed during their heroe's journies. I suspect that we are dealing with older, wiser version obviously, who are much deeper and developed. Will they have flaws? Most certainly. But I don't know how we're supposed to guess accurately what they are and then divine what their arcs will be.

 

I might also add that it doesn't MATTER what their flaws are, because whether they're killed or not, they're not going to be the people this trilogy is focused on anyway. This trilogy is meant to focus on the next generation of characters, and anyone who disagrees with that statement (which comes from LFL, not me) is in for a serious disappointment. This is NOT going to be fundamentally about Luke, Leia OR Han - even Echo-07, who genuinely WANTS a lot of the Big Three in his movie, said as much: "a healthy dose of our favorite Big 3 in significant support of the new generation" (emphasis mine, but it's important). They have had their acrs already; they have had their time in the spotlight already. Can we please all stop assuming this is just gonna be like the EU, where nothing changes about the Big Three except the numbers of their ages and they never yield the stage to anyone? It's patently ridiculous.

What we need to ask is: what are the new characters like? What are THEIR character flaws going to be? What makes THEM interesting? They're completely clean slates as far as the story is concerned, and that's what's really exciting. But this basic assumption that the OT characters are the only things worth our time and attention here, that attitude needs to just die, because it's only going to lead to disappointment. If we DO get a healthy dose of the Big Three, that's gravy; but do NOT go in EXPECTING it.

Plus, Star Wars really isn't about overcoming character flaws in the way this thread implies. You could make a case that the Back to the Future trilogy was in part about overcoming character flaws, or else everyone calling Marty a chicken was just there for laughs. THAT story hinged on him being able to stop reacting when someone calls him that. But Star Wars? The plot doesn't hinge on character flaws in quite that way. No, there, the character flaws are huge, universe-altering elements of the story, or they aren't considered relevant.

 

Even if they are not main characters, their flaws could matter a lot, like if Luke is too trusting of a pupil who then falls to the dark side or if Leia infuses her children with the hatred she feels for Vader.

 

Discussions about the new characters would be totally fine... but we also don't know anything about them yet. For them, it's all just theorizing at this point. And that would be a different thread anyway. This one is interesting, and nothing about it says that everyone having this discussion assumes that the Big 3 will be the main characters. I think most here realize that their roles will probably be secondary, especially in the ST as a whole.

While I'm at it... we've had enough "thread policing" by some posters here.

 

Very interesting topic.

I think the challenge in resurrecting Luke, Han, and Leia so many years later is that all of their "flaws" were effectively eradicated by the time Yub-Nub was echoing through the night skies.

Also, if this trilogy is set 30 or so years later, much of the logical post-Rebellion character meanderings would be totally inappropriate so late after the close of Jedi. Yes it would have been compelling to watch Han struggling to marry his rebellious streak with his newfound hero responsibilities, but with a Han pushing 70 wouldn't he likely have settled into that? 30 something Leia struggling to transition a rebellion into a fully fledged government is compelling, but if 50 something Leia hasn't figured it out by now than there isn't much to say about that. Do we really want to see middle aged Luke STILL struggling with coming to terms with Vader as a father?

By the time we roll into Episode VII I'd like to see the characters in pretty strong moral shape and very settled into who they are. Then, as we saw in the PT, a new threat rises and rocks their worlds. What will a mature Luke, Leia, and Han do when faced with the need to get back into action? How can they use their considerable strengths and history to protect those they love?

This kind of movie, which is not, and never will be, an in depth Ibsen like character study, won't be providing some deep character analysis of anybody, especially support characters like the big 3 are likely to be. I think sometimes, in discussing Star Wars, many of us forget this. Traditionally none of the older characters were given any kind of major character arcs. Once aged, they all stayed pretty much the same until their final appearances.

Luke, Han, and Leia are now the Palpatine, Yoda, and Obi-Wans of the series. The time to offer kitchen sink character study has long passed for them, in a series that has always spent the very little character growth and change it's offered on the young.

 

I would tend to agree with jaqen, but there is also the reality of handling the actors who were the stars of the OT to consider as well. Namely that they may not want to be involved without a satisfying arc for these films. We've already heard as much about Ford, in a rumor that has been corroborated by factual evidence. It wouldn't be right to just hit the reset button on their arcs from the OT, but who they were at their core could still play into what their flaws will be at an older age.

 

My thoughts...
I think it would be interesting to see Luke's failure as a teacher. Grand Jedi master who resurrected the order, well respected among the other masters and with aura of goodness, wisdom and knowledge, but with one of his former apprentices turning dark. Exploring those reasons could bring to front all those moral and philosophical problems and exploring the wisdom needed to distinguish the right from wrong while teaching the next generation of heroes.
Leia's flaw can be fear. I read here some posts about Leia not allowing her children to became a Jedi because of her father, and I think that could be nice feature if explored and settled right.
Han's flaw can be contumacy to the Republic along with his dissatisfaction to the system he helped to create. I imagine Han working something on his own, freelancing along the galaxy and when the plot thickens and when he gets asked to help, his flaws (along with overconfidence) does something... Not necessarily bad.