ST Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker) in the ST

Obi-Wan: You cannot escape your destiny. You must face Darth Vader again.

Luke Skywalker: I can't kill my own father.

Obi-Wan: Then the Emperor has already won. You were our only hope.

I think you really have to bend over backwards to deny that Obi Wan fully intended Luke to go kill Vader. You're adding the part about them trusting him to do the right thing once he got there. Yoda told Obi Wan to go kill his best friend. This was irregardless of what it might do to Obi Wan's soul. I don't think the Jedi see it the way you think they do.

 

But neither Obi-Wan nor Yoda want Luke to assassinate Vader. Their point is that he will probably be forced to kill Vader in self-defense, and if Luke hesitates in doing that, then he will be destroyed while Vader and the Emperor continue to reign. From the Return of the Jedi story conference:

Lucas: There are already people sending me letters saying Jedi don’t take revenge; it’s not in their nature; it’s just not the way that they are. Also, obviously, a Jedi can’t kill for the sake of killing. The mission isn’t for Luke to go out and kill his father and get rid of him. The issue is, if he confronts his father again, he may, in defending himself, have to kill him, because his father will try to kill him. This is the state of affairs that Yoda should refer to. And then Luke says, “I don’t think he’ll kill me because he could have killed me last time and he didn’t; I think there is good in him and I can’t kill him.”

The flaw in Obi-Wan and Yoda's thinking, if any, is that they lack the faith in Vader's goodness which Luke possesses. But even that, in my opinion, is up for debate. It's Dave Filoni's opinion, for instance, that Obi-Wan and Yoda intended all along for Luke to redeem his father but simply couldn't come straight out and tell him that was the solution; they had to let Luke figure it out on his own in order for it to work. And Dave Filoni has a better idea of Lucas's intentions than probably anyone other than Lucas himself.

 

The Obi-wan and Yoda from ROTS thought killing Anakin was the only way.
The enlightened Obi-wan and Yoda from ROTJ knew better than this, and it would have been a shame if they didn't since Obi-wan was part of the Force itself by that point.

These lines :
- You cannot escape your destiny. You must face Darth Vader again.
- I can't kill my own father.
- Then the Emperor has already won. You were our only hope.

They never meant that Obi-wan was disappointed that Luke was to coy to go and kill Vader. It meant that if Luke could only see this confrontation as a "kill or be killed type of situation", then he had failed in his jedi training, and all this was for nothing. Obi-wan expected better from him, and that's what he got in the end.
How hypocritical would Obi-wan be if he asked Luke to finish Anakin when he couldn't bring himself to do it when he had the chance. Now that he and Yoda are in tune with the Force on a deeper level, thanks to Qui-Gon, they know full well that "love is the answer to darkness".

As for Luke being a pacifist in the end, I think every true jedi should be ready to spare life everytime it is possible. That's what he does when he earns his rank of jedi knight. But, Luke definitely had to take a life of two after that. It is unavoidable in the life of a jedi that deals with an entire galaxy at war. And even TLJ confirms this with this stupid moment where he immediately turns on his saber to stop Ben from turning into Kylo. If he had truly renounced to every form of violence, his light-saber would have been stored in a box. Not ready to be used at any time.

 

Nobody said Luke was a pacifist in Return of the Jedi.

The point was him becoming a pacifist, thanks to his experience in Jedi, and later after his moment of temptation with his own nephew, is a natural extension of what began unfolding in the throne room scene.

Growth. Evolution. And it's all there in the DNA of the OT.

 

Nowhere is it communicated in either ROTJ or TLJ that Luke ever become an absolute pacifist. And I fail to see how Luke verging on murdering his nephew in his sleep is a "natural extension" of Luke facing the temptation of striking down a foe in anger and rejecting that temptation in order to become a Jedi. That isn't growth or evolution, that's bizarre character regression completely lacking in justification or context.

 

This mistake (or perhaps excuse) is the problem. If you left the film believing that the one time mistake that cost Luke his jedi order, temple etc was the ONE thing that caused his change of heart, then you need to rewatch with an open mind.

Do you really think that everything was going great, then one day Luke (for no reason) read Ben's mind and freaked out, made a bad decision and changed his whole outlook? I do not get that from the movie. I don't think it's a contrivance or lack of storytelling for us to GET that significant things led Luke to be in the hut that night. Are they critical to the movie? Nope. Should RJ have held our hand to get us through 30 years of character development? I hope not.

We don't see it all. We don't need to. I don't get the back-story obsession. I blame comic book movies.

 

Did you ever ask "why did Luke force choke that guard in Jabba's palace! That's not the Luke I know form ESB. Show me his character development and context or else it's bizzare

Leia and Han have some weird tension on Hoth. It's like things happened between ANH and ESB. It doesn't make sense unless I see it!

A guy who betrayed the leader of the rebellion suddenly is a general. Show me how that all happened or I will boycott these fake starwars movies forever.

Implied back story is also in the DNA of the OT (and most non-saturday morning cartoon story telling)

 

I liked Luke in TLJ very much. Sensitive persons who have to deal with lots of doubt, drama, death and so on can change a lot in 30 years. And, with age some aspects of your parents can manifest even more in yourself.

Where he resided and why was decided long before TLJ. If that's something one does not like, well, Luke is not the only OT hero who was portrayed in an underwhelming light in TFA.

But, Johnson turned what he was given in something very entertaining. I'm waiting to have the chance to give it a second viewing, while watching it, his journey was plausible. One of the best aspects were that his role, like the entire movie, was surprising. Stuff was not played safe. No fan service to people who have a hard time with new ideas. It was brillant to let him continue something that was hinted in earlier episodes: The Jedi were not perfect. Rey is the counterpart who says that faith is something helpful or something like that.
Like the portion about weapons and ROTS it's an intelligent, not distracting comment on the real world (religions are not perfect, yet it can be helpful to have faith). One of the best aspects in Star Wars are the little hints of wisdom. It's not just fantasy action or fairy tales.

I also liked that he mentioned the Sith - first time in a post PT movie. The ending was pretty badass and cool, he seems to be one with the Force and could either be gone or return as a Force Ghost.

Overall, Luke brings some aspects regarding him and the Jedi/Sith together, succeeds to surprise and glue the audience into their seats and is hence one of the best aspects of the ST.

Abrams likes Johnsons script, too. I hope he does not play it safe again in Ep. IX. Instead, I hope for a mighty cliffhanger (bad ending with a glimpse of hope) so that there could be episodes X - XII to fulfill the second 6 part movie cycle (like Ep. I - VI is).

Would I have changed something? I would have to change TFA completely in order to do so, the damage to the old heroes was done there. But, in TLJ I like everything I see from Luke and Leia so it was turned in something both worthy/mighty/concluding and yet surprising.

In short: Luke in TLJ is one of the reasons I now do look forward to further Star Wars movies.

 

But none of the OT movies created a character just to turn him 180 degrees in the next installment.

Imagine Luke/Vader in ESB. They meet again in ROTJ and suddenly Vader throws away his lightsaber and says. "Gimme a beer, I am sick of this ****. Btw. over there is Palps. Please let me know when you killed this loser"

That's more or less the turn of Luke between VII (The legend that lives at the first Jedi temple on a mystical island and wears a fancy noble jedi robe) and VIII (The mental wreck in the fancy Jedi robe that throws away the LS, bullies Rey to leave the island, milks the seamonster, drinks like a pig and gives a **** on his principles)

 

I think key to understand Luke is FEAR.

Fear is the first step towards the wrong direction. One example from the real world: Xenophobia.
“Fear is the path to the dark side…fear leads to anger…anger leads to hate…hate leads to suffering.” The Phantom Menace

This character trait from his father became too powerful. It's not someone random, it's Kylo who triggered this.

It's one thing that beautifully ties ALL sagas together.

 

Yep. Luke was giving in to fear. He was turning to the darkside, albeit briefly, and it cost him his temple and the lives of all those he was trusted to lead. I think that failure would break anyone.

When he throws the sabre on Ahch-to, he's doing the same thing that he did in ROTJ - he's making it clear that he's standing down; that he's not willing to kill again. Violence does not win wars. The difference is that, soured by his terrible experience, he's doing it from a position of defeat. But as Yoda points out, failure is how you learn.

Luke's lost his way in TLJ but his return against Ren is, for me, one of the very best bits of the whole saga. People really do change in time but they can also summon that missing part of themselves if an extreme situation calls for it. That moment when Ren realises that Luke isn't there but he's so powerful that he can project himself is awe inspiring. The music is stunning as well. It made my jaw drop at the cinema and I still haven't picked it off the floor. He's certainly come a long way even from his abilities in ROTJ.

 

While that is certainly true, I kind of dig the feeling of Ben's fall turning all of their lives upside down. It makes Kylo Ren enormously impactful.
I also like how Luke's failure mirrors the failure of the old Jedi Order, with him momentarily/almost giving in to fear the way Mace gave in to fear in his final moments, thereby tragically contributing to the rise of darkness.

 

A happily married Han and Leia living as aristocrats guarded by a new Jedi order headed up by super-Luke defending a new republic. Whatever new threat shows up would come across completely contrived and un-compelling.

I thought Han was used beautifully in VII. I think it made sense for the character to be a dad that had a strained relationship with his son, and whose relationship is hurt by it makes sense.

I don't think Leia was particularly regressed, probably the opposite. Just because shes not the chancellor of the new republic doesn't mean her character has had a backslide. I hate to say it but I think they got what they could out of the actor.

Most stories have to have turns of character or changes of heart to make them work. ROTJ kind of was a real end to a saga. Story told except for the happily ever after details. If characters had to only keep improving and becoming better without regression, I think we'd have nothing but superheros on adventures to see a story about. I know people say the didn't need superhero Luke, but with not regression or struggle (aka deconstruction as it has been called) we'd be left with some real amazingly perfect characters after 30 years.

We all wanted more, so the writers wisely had to re imagine "what if the aftermath wasn't that easy."

I agree that I'd rather have the original droids play a bigger role - they're kind of the anchor through the saga. Would have liked to have had the chance to see Luke be the Jedi we all expected him to be. Not sure it would have been the best for the saga. Not sure it would make much sense for the saga.

 

@Chorus:

The episode that hinted that the original heroes have failed was not TLJ, it was TFA. Ironically, many people did not understand that because they were too much overwhelmed by this kinda soft reboot. When TLJ arrived, it dawned on those who did not see it in TFA, that the original heroes were kicked in the balls by the sequels. But, there's joy: TLJ makes it all good. It's this movie where Luke and Leia are portrayed really strong and powerful. This is a huge leap forward compared to what could be seen in TFA. In TLJ they show what began in the movies before: They are strong in the force like only few. Luke even outmatches anything we've seen before. TLJ fixes the ST, it brings joy.

 

We're not asking for backstory. We're asking for story. I have no idea what comic book movies have to do with any of this.

Why are you so obsessed with creating this "super-Luke" strawman? I don't think I've seen a single person in this thread ask for Luke to be some sort of invincible He-man figure or anything like that. I've seen a lot of people upset with the fact that all of Luke's accomplishments were destroyed and his character reduced to a hopeless wretch. The fact that your counterargument always seems to be to present this whole thing as a false choice between two wild extremes is very telling. That's a classic bad argument tactic used to obscure the lack of a solid rebuttal.

 

I couldn`t disagree more. While I wasn`t wild about the set-up of TFA, it was TLJ that made me think Luke was now a huge loser. Sorry, that`s how the character came across to me. Not even close to powerful or strong. I was faked out for five seconds or so when he supposedly withstood the blaster barrage but then he just stood there, dodged, then turned out to just be a projection (so of course the blaster fire had no effect) and then he died.

I thought something epic would happen after suffering through that kind of Luke but then the movie ends, he dies and I rolled my eyes at the lameness of the scene. In terms of force powers, eh. Within the ST, they`ve only shown one impressive-looking force power and that came from the otherwise really weak Kylo Ren of all people. And it came early in TFA.

If TLJ did not give me one thing, it was joy.

Maybe JJ gives Luke a cameo where he can do something epic with the force in ep 9 but doubtful. Which admittedly does make me cranky. Three new movies and I don`t get one single badass scene from Luke that remotely works for me AS a badass scene.

I hated that especially. The point of the OT was "new generation new hope". The ST tells you: "psyche, they are just as bad, possibly even more pitiful". That would only work for me if I never had any desire to rewatch the OT ever again.

They could do exactly that with the ST characters and then I would rejoice.

 

Huh? These comparisons are silly. Luke force choked the guard because he was on a rescue mission where he couldn’t walk in and ask politely for Jabba to give him his friend back. Leia and Han don’t have weird tension in ESB. They’re just still fighting as they were in ANH, albeit with extra sexual tension. That’s a natural progression of their characterizations, not an inverse. Just like a rebel leader being promoted to general off screen is a natural progression.

Your analogies would actually work in comparison to Luke if, for example, Leia and Han started ESB in a cutesy wootsy relationship where they couldn’t stop declaring their undying love for each other in nauseating fashion, or if a rebel leader was suddenly an imperial officer with no explanation.

 

Why does TLJ act as if it needs to re-establish Luke's legendary galactic legacy? Given the evidence in TFA, Luke was already considered a larger than life hero. Rey assumed he was just a myth. When she first heard he was real, the look in her eyes implied she thought of Luke as something very special. And she lives on a planet considered nowhere. It would follow that people on more prominent planets would know even more about Luke. It appears as though Luke's reputation is already that of a legendary hero. But then in TLJ, Luke explains to us that his legacy is based on a falsehood. The Jedi are overrated and responsible for terrible things. Maybe, maybe not. But what does that matter? The entire ending of TLJ was the idea that Luke becomes the legend. Why does he need to re-establish this in the eyes of the galaxy? That is the meaning of the final scene in TLJ, right? Based on his now legendary actions at the Battle of Crait, Luke has inspired other young people to look to the stars and dream of becoming part of the Resistance or whatever. Unless there's more we haven't been told yet, which could end up being retroactively true, it seems like at best, Luke simply re-establishes his legacy for the sake of providing the movie with a lofty, inspiring ending that could've happened anyway. I think its cool to show kids in the SW universe playing with a Luke figure, that gets me pretty good emotionally, I connect to that. But I don't really understand why the events of the film needed to happen in order to set this last scene up.

 

Well, it oftentimes seems to boil down to
- one kind of folks have some concepts in their minds that they just can't accept to be challenged
and
- people who enjoy Star Wars open minded and as an overall piece of art.

Hence it many times is just stressful to engage in Star Wars discussions because these kind of people are too different in mindset. It's like righties vs lefties, there's rarely a lowest common denominator.

 

Luke’s legend has nothing to do with the Jedi Order. See: Legends of Luke Skywalker, published late October of last year and written by an author who - I’m pretty darned sure - had access to the full TLJ script.

Luke’s history and state in TLJ really don’t add up.

 

What Luke did in TLJ was not about becoming a legend. He already was one ("And I became a legend.").
It was about using his legendary status to inspire hope in the struggle against the First Order. What the last scene shows us is that it worked.

 

^Yes, maybe you're right.