ST Will Luke Have A Child? If So, Where's Mom?

Seems like (at least nearly) everyone who's on board with adoption is on board with adoption under the assumption that Luke's not married. Not the case with Han and Leia (presumably).

 

Luke is my favorite character, and to be honest, I'm not really big on him having kids. I always assumed he was celibate, even before the prequels came out I thought he was celibate. When I first saw ROTJ as a kid, I was like, okay, Han and Leia have one another, Luke has his religion and that's what he cares about. So it came to no surprise to me when it was established in the PT that Jedi were not supposed to marry and have children. So Luke not having a kid in VII isn't a problem for me. What is a problem for me is people like the writer of the EW article saying that Han is the best SW character and celebrating that he and not Luke seems to be the focus (of the original 3) in VII. Especially since VII is supposed to be the last hurrah for the original big three, so there's not gonna be a make up movie for Luke-VIII and IX will be carried by the kids, with the older characters in supporting roles at most.

 

well viii and ix better give every new character enough character development.

 

Luke having a kid is no big deal. he's so decent no kid of his would go bad. I hate it that the whole thing is simplified to "Anakin bad, Luke good." Anakin's life was so profoundly different from day one. Too much pressure for a kid to succeed and life in a fishbowl at the galactic capitol and the ruler\sithlord's unending gaze and influence. Luke was free to become his own person with only 2-3 observers.

I think Han might have a big build up here but also may die. Like Harrison wants him to. That'd be a total shocker and cliffhanger for the first one.

 

I'm a Han and Leia fan. But I have always known that Luke was the main character and the OT was primarily his story. I love Luke (and Mark Hamill, who I think is very underrated) so that was always fine by me. This is a manufactured argument. Whether or not Luke has a biological child is a completely separate issue from whether or not he has a good story in the ST. Luke could have a bio-son and die in the first ten minutes of the film. Or he could have surrogate/adopted son and have a huge story that lasts throughout the ST. The idea that Luke has to have a biological child to have a large or meaningful story in the ST is completely fallacious.

For the record, I do think Luke's son will be the main character of the ST. I just think it will be his adopted/surrogate son, played by Boyega.

Yes, I can understand wanting your fave character to have a biological child to carry on the name as the story moves forward. But I repeat: I'm just not seeing it based on the information we have. All the Gleeson-is-Luke's-son fans keep glossing over or ignoring the billing credits in the press release, like it's no big deal. It's a very big deal.

Look at it again:

The Star Wars team is thrilled to announce the cast of Star Wars: Episode VII.

Actors John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, and Max von Sydow will join the original stars of the saga, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker in the new film...

http://starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-7-cast-announced.html

Why did Disney choose to bill the actors in that order?

Clearly the order is not alphabetical.

Clearly, it's not according to star power, since at the time of release Serkis and Von Sydow wedre much bigger stars than Boyega, and Ridley was a complete unknown.

So why this order of billing? Do you honestly think Disney announced the new cast for their billion-dollar tentpole franchise and chose the billing order at random?

Maybe the final billing won't match this release, but it's almost certainly going to be in the same ballpark. If Gleeson was listed third or fourth, maybe I could buy that he is playing a major character in this film. But he was listed sixth. Second-from-last out of the entire new cast. That's significant, and that's the main reason I don't think Luke has a biological son in this film.

 

I really find the comparisons between Anakin and Luke fascinating. To me, Luke is all throughout the PT, because you see Anakin faced with similar challenges and choices that Luke later came up against, and Anakin just made the wrong decisions.

My hope for Luke in the ST is that he is allowed to pass on what he has learned, and that he can help those he cares about from suffering fates similar to his father's. I think we can all learn from a person like Luke, even if he is a fictional character. Through him, not only can the ST tell a great story, but it can actually do some good and show the decency in humanity. As the success of the current Captain America series shows, there is a place for a pure and good character like Luke.

 

ChildOfWinds I take exception to your generalization. Han is actually my least favorite character in the entire saga, and I've always been a Skywalker fan through and through. My distaste for the idea of Luke having kids simply sprang from not wanting such a departure from the previous storytelling style of the saga that him developing a love interest and having a child between episodes would represent. Considering that we've already seen a romance develop onscreen with Han and Leia, the probability of them having children 30 years down the line has already been set up, whereas that isn't the case with Luke. I don't see how him adopting a child would require anywhere as much explanation as that, and it doesn't seem like nearly as egregious of a betrayal of the storytelling style to me. After all, the Jedi Order essentially adopted children all the time. The only difference is that as one man it's a little more personal for Luke. And I'm not even saying Boyega has to officially be his adopted child, but if Luke takes him to be his apprentice then that's what he would basically become, whether or not in name. Honestly at this point in the saga the name Skywalker isn't very important to me anymore. The bloodline is still being carried on and that's what matters to me, along with the fact that Luke is "passing on what he has learned". Add to that the fact that the female characters have pretty much been wasted throughout the saga so far and I'm looking forward to that changing in the ST, with Leia's daughter having a greater focus and importance than either of the women in the previous trilogies were afforded, and that's why I feel the way I do about it.

 

Major Han and Leia fan here and let me reassure you that I would be sad if Luke didn't have a family of his own in this movie, I would really love him to have at least a son, preferably biologically, but adopted is fine, if they set it up well. Don't want Luke left out, and he deserves some happiness.

And other people I know in the Han and Leia community are certainly NOT opposed to Luke having kids, most of us actually welcome this.

 

Those aren't billing credits. Why people don't understand that the announcement is not the movie billing is beyond me. As for order, maybe they were listed in the order they were signed? Ever think of that? Explains why Boyega, long rumored is first, and Gleeson, signed last is last.

Ok. So you based this on nothing official since we don't have anything official, and rumors that include:

JJ/LK changed focus from Solo and kids to Luke and Skywalkers
Gosling, Plemons, et al. were auditioning for the role of Luke's son, as were several other actors sharing physical characteristics.
EU templates are being used for certain characters
an actor was cast that matches the EU description of Luke's son
that actor was sitting next to LFL president and AD and MH

seems to me there are more rumors pointing to a Skywalker son than a Solo daughter, yet everyone is 100% sure we have a Solo daughter and want to discount the Skywalker son.

I think we have both, for the record.

 

^Too true. It seems some people cannot see past their own bias. It's pretty clear if you have seen episodes 1-6 that these 3 (maybe 6) films will be about the Skywalker bloodline and continue the Skywalker saga. The future of Star Wars films will most likely take place far in the past, with TV shows filling the gaps between trilogies. That also will leave ample room for people who want make Star Wars reflect their own social/political bias and agenda. Star Wars and it's fans deserve more than that PC nonsense creeping into the film just to make every demographic happy. True fans want a good story bottom line, we don't need Arnold, Stallone, Sam Jackson or anyone else to make someone feel like they are "represented". I actually hope Lando's son(Boyega) is Force-sensitive, and is converted to the dark side of the Force by Driver(possible Solo son?), it would be cool and something we haven't seen before. Imagine it, Lando's son, raised by Han but follows the path of the dark side maybe he becomes apprentice to Driver, who in turn has his own teacher aside from Luke. Also Luke might not even know he has a son, this could be a big plot point. GL once said around the release of ROTJ that the future saga would be about Luke trying to turn his own son away from the dark side much like he did with his father and that his life would come full-circle. This could be the greatest Star Wars trilogy yet.

 

I understand and respect that many people really want Luke to have a son and will have a very hard time if he doesn't.

Here's a challenge I propose. Come up with a very short summary/synopsis about how that will work to make for an interesting and dramatic plot other than (a) the same old father or son turns to the dark side , (b) something that doesn't require a Skywalker spin off, or (c) a SW rendition of Andy Griffith with C3PO as Barney Fife.

 

How many Wupiupi's did Luke pay in child support?

 

There's plenty of decent people that produce kids that go bad, and vice versa - in fiction and probably in the real world as well.

 

FWIW, I adore Luke (and consider myself a 'Luke Fan', if you will) and don't want him to have children in the ST - (Ironic considering that in my own little 'legends/parallel universe fan fiction galaxy', he has three, and even funnier, if her hair were curly, Daisie whaternoodle could pass for a grown version of his eldest!) It doesn't 'flow' with the onscreen narrative and the whole 'Read the ties ins/she cacked the big one between films' (and no, it's NOT just the Anti-Mara streak in me) just doesn't sit well.

*shrugs* I'm iust as fickle as the next fan - if it's handled well, I'll buy more into it - if not.... to each their own.

 

This is exactly why I would love Boyega to be playing an adopted Skywalker. It's not your bloodline that matters, it's your choices.

 

"Will Luke Have A Child? If So, Where's Mom?"

He shot a wad of midichlorians into a test tube. 9 months later Bob's your uncle.

 

jedijax - It's clear many people have offered all sorts of different theories of what could go down in this new film. The more cool/level headed theories feature Skywalkers and Solos by blood and name, because of course Anakin's bloodline is what this is all about, in this Skywalker saga. I'm not going to write you a summary to explain to you why Skywalkers/Solos by blood and name need to be the leads of this trilogy, I will simply refer you to the first 6 films. I would love to write all my thoughts down but I'm already at work and shouldn't be doing this lol, so I will try to give you my thoughts quickly. This trilogy will mirror both the PT and the OT., just as they mirror each other. We don't need adopted kids with two Skywalker heirs capable of breeding. Luke might not even discover that he has a son until sometime during 7 or 8 which would be a reverse mirror of TESB as Luke finds out he has a son and tries to turn him from the dark path he is on. This was GL's original idea for where things would go after 6 which is why it is the basis of my position. The bloodline of father/son and the relationship between them is central to Star Wars (George let his own son have a role as padawan in both AOTC and ROTS), always had been and always should be when it comes to Skywalkers. The best way to see where someone is going is to look where they already have been, same thing with these films. Honestly if you don't think that eventually Disney is going to make animated spin-offs featuring Luke, Leia, and Han between 6 & 7, then you haven't been paying attention and you got another thing coming. So anyway, need to get off now and actually do some work lol. Here is a challenge for you, give me a good reason (a) why Boyega should not play Lando's son, or (b) why Boyega should not play Jar Jar's son (relax this one is a jest) , or (c) why Boyega should not break new ground and be the first black villian in Star Wars?

 

Well yeah that's the thing. If handled well-go for it. I'm excited to see it. If it is just a rehash of the others where either the son or the father goes to the dark side, they'd better come up with a twist or irony to make it different.

Luke not knowing he has a son? Hmmm....it's different but does that make Luke da playa of da month?

I too am trying to come up with a unique story line for Luke's son that doesn't make one say "well what happened in the past 20 years?". Not impossible-just haven't come up with it yet-that's mainly because it's hard not to want to include Luke's wife. I really cannot come up with ANYTHING that doesn't involve some sort of flashback scene, but that would really be too similar to the opening of Star Trek 09 or a back story for Harry Potter.

 

was there a huge explanation as to how Shmi married Cliegg in between TPM and AotC? Or what happened to his 1st wife? Or how Owen and Beru met?

Nope, none at all. Yet everyone accepts that Shmi married Cliegg and that Owen and Beru are married.

If Luke's wife is present (as rumors have said) then they have a few options. Go the Shmi route and give a 15 second dialogue about it or go the Owen/Beru route and just accept that they are a couple.

If Luke's wife is dead a 2 second line by the Skywalker son that she died when I was really young could suffice. It worked in the OT.

as for the unique storyline, you already have it. George Lucas has said it numerous times from 1980 on. Luke passes on what he learned. Make it to a loving son and you have your unique - NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN STAR WARS - character arc.

I love how people want a sassy rebel Solo daughter, like that is something new, and ignore the possibilities for a Skywalker son.

 

But isn't it a lot easier to "just accept" that two characters who appear on screen for the first time together as a married couple (Owen and Beru) are married than it is to "just accept" that Luke Skywalker, whom we've seen as the main character of an entire trilogy of films now, has a wife? If you're going to throw a wife into the mix all of a sudden for a character like Luke, there needs to be a bit of explanation (and I'd argue that 15 seconds of dialogue is a nice start, but may not quite cut it).

 

Not for me. I can accept that a person that I haven't seen in 35 years fell in love and started a family. It is a pretty natural process.