ST Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker) in the ST

Luke lost his nephew to the dark side and that broke him. It would have broken me too. He broke because he loves.

 

Since that would basically what they did with Luke, nope, I'd find that infinitely more disappointing.

I'd honestly rather have the darkside guy than the one who runs away and does nothing. Be it for Anakin or Luke or any other character. I can't stand the quitter story and character in general.

 

The irony about some of comments in relation to what Luke does or doesn't do in the story is that they imply some sort of prescience or foreknowledge of what Lucas was going to do. And people have become angry and sad at TLJ failing to do that and doing something unthinkable instead.

Truly? See. To me, that's almost unthinkable. If it was done well enough though I'd have nothing to complain about because I don't expect filmmakers artistic impulses to only accommodate what I'm already thinking of.

 

Luke turning to the darkside would have been way worse than the Luke we got.

Also, re George - we know he was still involved when Luke's current backstory was in play. And we also know the PT were hardly universally adored. The level of writing and direction in the ST is several notches above anything he managed in the PT, so I'm glad they moved on from his ideas if they (all) felt that arangement couldn't work. He was the one who sold it. The only thing that's irritating about their decision to move away from his treatments (which would have changed hugely as well, I don't know if any of you have watched the PT or even the OT, but ideas and threads are dropped and not picked up again several times) is that we have to put up with the endless griping about how the version that never happened would have made everything right.

 

The milk is always greener in the other treatment.

 

People also seem to have forgotten that George was also fond of a) counter-intuitive narrative decisions and b) fan service - two of the main things people seem to hate about the ST.

But sure, keep on imagining he would have made the holy grail of a SW film - one everyone loves.

 

I only expect to be entertained and engrossed. If I'm not, the source material disappoints me.

As for the darkside thing, yes truly. Just my personal preference. I never like or sympathize with characters like RJ wrote Luke in the movie. Not just in Star Wars, I don't care for such characters overall. Evil characters in the other hand, they can work for me just fine.

 

Far better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven, eh?

 

Had Luke stayed in his funk and that's where his story ended, I'd be unhappy with it. As it's about him overcoming his demons - with more still to come - I think it's fantastic. Bold, unexpected and moving. The only thing I'd change would be to use that alternate take of him throwing away the saber that we can see in the Balance of the Force featurette, and I'd maybe add in a line or two to clarify his decision to exile himself rather than stop Ben. I think it's in the subtext, and I think we'll possibly get more on all that (along with Ben's fall) in 9, as we got more context Vader's fall/ Obi-Wan's lie in ROTJ - but it might have lessened some of the complaints from some quarters.

 

Well, I wouldn't say he served in heaven either. He didn't do much of anything and as I didn't find either reason for nor the depiction of it compelling and the intended redemption scene left me cold. I thought it was going out with a wimper than a bang. So what is left for me?

Granted, there is no guarantee a darkside story would have worked for me in execution but at least concept-wise it had a chance.

Equally, if this had been a new Star Wars Story with a new character with roughly the same beats, I would have disliked the character and wanted them to exit the story asap. But it wouldn't have effected me too much. Lots of stories have characters I consider cowards or annoying, that doesn't necessarily mean I dislike the stories. Normally there are characters around I can root for.

Just in this particular case that approach can't work for obvious reasons.

 

100% right. He literally stood on the abyss. Rey entered his life at the right time, regardless of how he behaved during their initial encounters. When Rey first met him he was just about to burn down the tree, as per the novelisation. But he didn’t follow through, and he never could.

 

I get not liking it. I do think the grieving process could be a little swifter.

 

I think I can confidently predict that if Luke's reaction to Rey's appearance at Ahch-to was to immediately and enthusiastically commence her training in the expectation that Rey's skills with a saber etc, was the deciding factor in prompting Luke to belatedly fight Ben and the FO - heads would have been going in ovens on here. Luke Skywalker is assumed to have no positive influence over his nephew or the power to defeat him, but Super Rey Somebody, a perfect stranger to Luke, is the natural candidate, clearly more suitable to turn or destroy Ben and his master.

 

They pushed the grieving process further than I expected them to, which was surprising but also realistically brutal. Someone who finds the most remote hiding spot possible doesn’t easily change his mind. The engaged Luke of Crait can take centre stage during IX.

 

No, I meant the grieving process of disgruntled fans. Move on already.

 

Bruce Wayne is by design no less selfless or heroic. And yet in HIS OWN TRILOGY following a traumatic event where he made a choice that had consequences he has to live with he allows his public image to be tarnished and stays away and wants superhero worship to end and for something better to rise in his absence. He doesn’t want to be found. He stops helping. And this happens for years. He lets himself go. Becomes more introverted. Instead of the what he wanted to rise the biggest threat to his universe rises instead.





John Blake is similar to Rey of Jakku in that both looked up to these heroes as legends and came from awful upbringings and still have lingering issues from their childhoods.

Here’s the differences:

1) This isn’t Luke’s trilogy.

2) The Last time we saw Luke was 30 years ago in his early twenties and in canon between then he did basically retire and teach and built a temple. It just didn’t work out. His hero days were largely done though.

3) He doesn’t want to kill the villain because he mentored him.

4) He doesn’t have the resources of Bruce Wayne and has shut himself off to such a degree through the Force and without having a ship to leave and there not being any TV or WiFi (I’m kidding but Wayne could actually see things weren’t getting better) that Luke literally has no idea how bad or good things have become at all.

5) His super power comes from a source that is tied to a religion that he has lost faith in and sees as a big contributor to the never ending cycle of religious wars that have occurred so he’s become preoccupied with some grand plan to end his religion in the hopes that a better one will rise. Batman believes something better than superheroes is needed to in order to end the cycle. He wants the public to become inspired by one of their own to take Gotham back but doesn’t seem as active in his exile at thinking about how the cycle could be stopped that lead him to thinking superheroes like him were part of the problem.

When you add it up I think there are more reasons for Luke to be how he is briefly than there are for Bruce Wayne to be as he was.

1) More time has passed since we last saw Luke. 30 years allows for a ton of personal, physical, emotional, spiritual and philosophical changes in a person. Especially following regret and trauma.

2) Beyond being away and hoping for the something better to rise Luke also has the power to end an entire religion that has been involved with religious wars and trained some of the worst people in the galaxy in recent memory. Bruce Wayne has no such burden or conflict or power to end something that he sees as connected to the cycle he’s observed. I suppose he could devote ALL of his resources to the issue he saw had the most potential to end the cycle but it doesn’t seem like that even comes into play in The Dark Knight Rises.

3) Luke doesn’t have an Alfred with him. He’s entirely isolated because he shut himself off from everyone and everything. That means nothing external has been able to influence him in any way for years.

4) He’s older and closer to the end of his life. He had been retired basically already. He was teaching and he’s now decided he’s a bad teacher. He has the right to retire from combat given his age and decorated history even if that was his single biggest reason but his reasons go well beyond that.

5) He spends more time explaining why he believes what he believes to Rey and the audience than what Bruce Wayne did for John Blake or the audience.

6) Because this wasn’t his trilogy and he was always going to be more of a supporting role even if he had gone earlier (and we know now that he eventually did) then if he had gone and he’s physically there he’s more likely to have to be killed in a manner where Ben Solo or Snoke get the better of him anyway. He’s at most in the Kenobi role and that means exiting one picture somehow someway and if you don’t want him to be outright killed by Snoke or Ben Solo then he has to do a heroic act of sacrifice that kills him and in the end that’s exactly what he did anyway but he did it in a way where he was able to deceive the villains and transcend time and space in a magical way to tag team with Rey and save the heroes of episode IX and the people who saw it spread the word and that increased his legend and the hope of people in all Jedi. Just as a new one is getting set to debut. It also hits on the Yoda comment about luminous beings and crude matter. It’s the spirit that matters most and is truly us.

7) His end of life arc ends up better mirroring his father’s arc, but with notable differences and less extremes, adding complexity to the entire father and son mythos and where they differed and were similar. Both express regret and seek to atone for their setback and become one with the Light with increased peace and purpose to help from beyond. Batman retires on holiday.

The Dark Knight rises is largely seen as a modern classic. It has a very high 8.4 IMDB score indicating that it’s popular among the general public. The Last Jedi has a strong IMDB 7.4 score with more than a third of a million human opinions factored in. The Last Jedi’s critical acclaim is slightly higher.

Some of the biggest issues the people angriest with the film have are Luke so I find it very fascinating how much expectation plays in some wanting to judge Luke harshly for his exile and act as though he never realized his mistakes or tried to help and atone for them in a saga where those themes are as big as anything in a family that’s dramatic and shows failure to teach and create myth.

The less expectations or theories or head canon or discarded canon stories for who someone should be or should have done the better the reaction to exile in general it seems. Even when the reasons for exile of a character that’s now in a supporting role in a trilogy may be as good or better than one of the most notable explorations of it with a hero in a modern classic that was his own trilogy.

The reaction to Luke’s story, excluding the often discussed political agenda haters of the film, is probably the single biggest reason for any reviews that are 4 out of 10 or less on a solid enough volume to make a difference. Beyond that we have people who have now sworn off Star Wars entirely or who feel the happy endings of the past and decades of galactic peace and balance are no longer meaningful to them. It’s pretty mind-blowing how 6 years of struggle can have that much of an impact in a story that ultimately shows those 6 years were indeed a mistake for the character that he learns from. It’s mind-blowing and it speaks to the different set of rules that go into trying to please our fandom as a whole.

 

What i'm saying is the laws of physics as we know don't apply for a GFFA, it's sci-fi, fantasy. It won't be, or shouldn't be the X-Wing from TESB for many reasons, not least as it was left behind and Luke escaped on the Falcon. But to say that in a GFFA that it would be suspect to corrosion or by removing a few panels from the wings would make it unflyable or even space-worthy is stretching it beyond what is seen in the actual movie. It may have been possible for Luke to repair it sufficiently to get him to Crait, but as he didn't we don't know if it would've been possible.

I know. You're not countering my points you're just addressing one or two rather than the wider point. You still haven't given me an explanation of why you think Luke has accomplished nothing in his life.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying he didn't accomplish anything but what he did has proven to be for nothing, it's worthless when you take into account everything that has happened since then and the fact that Luke believes it's down to him. Luke sees himself as a failure and what has he left behind to show for his achievements?

Obi-Wan's achievement is Luke, he watched over him, taught him and then guided him. Can you really count Rey with Luke? She knew him for 2 minutes, got a few tips then left, there was no relationship or even a rapport between the pair...just in the end a great sadness at what could've been.

 

Dark Side Luke would have been much worse for me. It would have gutted me and presented a message of an abusive evil father leading to an abusive evil son.

The bent but not broken Luke in TLJ who goes no further than the ROTJ dark Side daze works specifically because it’s realistic and hopeful for children of abuse. It’s true that the statistics are against children whose dads were psychopaths/evil/physically/emotionally abusive and that they will probably face more struggle in breaking the cycle and could have their own anger issues to work through but with hard work and self-awareness the mistakes of the father can be learned from and overcome. That’s exactly what Luke did.

At his very worst he didn’t rage out at others and abuse or kill. He regained control, took the pain inside and shut himself off and worked it out and overcame.

The bent but not broken Luke whose heart fights off the Dark Side each time is far more hopeful for me than Luke becoming exactly like Vader and hurting and killing others.

I also think the Luke that fends off the Dark Side and has guilt over even thinking dark thoughts who learns about teaching from failure speaks a lot more to generational progress in families. I have friends who are first generation immigrants and whose parents had very different ideas of marriage and punishment. As second generation immigrants their kids views are closer to mine but they still think Westerners are too soft in punishing their kids here. Their own kids might be even less extreme with punishment then either of the previous generations. What we inherit from our parents (either in our makeup or just from experiencing their thoughts and opinions) can take time to and each generation can be slightly different than the next.

That said, the ST in some ways may end up functioning as a parable for generational change around religious families in general because Ben Solo could just as easily represent the son of someone who was less fundamentalist and extreme on religion than their own dad but who later discovered fundamentalism and extremism through someone else and became radicalized and left and joined the equivalent of ISIL after realizing that their grandfather was formally the leader of an old movement.

 

Do people realise that "dark side" Luke means Luke would have killed someone close to him in anger/fear/hatred and/or been so consumed with it for the specific end of destroying and becoming the new Emperor/Supreme Chancellor/Tyrant?

It's not just going around showing folks how using the dark side a bit is no big thing as long as you're cool about it.

 

Batman is willing to sacrifice his own life to save Gotham City, which has millions of people living there. Luke sacrifices himself for the 20 Resistance members. Not exactly the same feat as some of you are saying.

 

The crazy thing is that Mark Hamill himself was fascinated by Dark Side Luke because he liked playing a villain and pitched it! Yet another reason why the ideas of many actors, regardless of how long they've lived with a part, may not be best for a saga overall.

 

Yeah and that's after who know how many died while he was doing nothing.

 

Luke should have been more like Bruce Wayne. A vigilante with zero compassion for anyone except for the supposedly righteous and a martyr complex.

 

Isn't that an even MORE selfless and heroic then? Risking your life to save some 20 lives seems more selfless to me. If you save a million you know no matter what you're going to die a famous hero and can let that carry you through the act. If you save 20 you're doing it out of love and compassion and because it's the right thing to do.

Besides, these are likely to be the heroes of episode IX. It would be like an old gun slinger who hadn't been seen in decades helping to free and save the people at the Alamo and those people, and the people he inspired, leading to the victory at the battle of San Jacinto and ending the revolution.