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

Yep. If mom is alive in the ST, there will be all the time you need to establish her on screen, as you would any new character.

And you know what? If she's already gone, all I would need is a line from Junior saying to Luke "I only wish... Mom were here."

Knowing Luke, Dad would say something comforting and that's literally all the exposition I would need for the film to work (and anything more than that would be gravy, sure). I see Luke has a child and I think, "Oh, I wonder about Mom?" If we learn that she's already gone, I say "Oh, she passed away. I understand." A simple acknowledgement of his mother's fate could be enough for this particular story to keep moving forward.

Ah, but the real benefit of a move such as this is that it comes with the added advantage of piquing my interest for a standalone about this mysterious character. "Who was this woman?" "What is she all about?" "Who was she before she met Luke?" "How did she and Luke meet?" "What led to them falling in love?" And of course, "How did she die?"

To me, leaving us with questions like that wouldn't be a failing of Episode VII, rather a strength for the franchise moving forward. An opportunity. There are going to be any number of other films, other books, other television series, other comics, other video games, etc., all released under a new 'unified canon' approach. If there's a mother, we'll learn about her. She will have the chance to shine as a great new character in her own right.

That possibility excites me.

 

Yes! This.
I maintain that the future of Star Wars is in the future timeline, but there are a huge number of people who either want to revisit the post-RotJ EU they remember, have it confirmed, updated, and improved upon; or who never liked the EU and want to see if the new continuity can do better.
Luke's future wife and the mother of future Skywalkers, whether she's Mara or someone else, is the perfect vehicle for this exploration. She has enough connection to the big 3 to attract otherwise casual fans, but she could have enough of her own story to avoid recasting the iconic characters. I'll say again that Mark Hamill is a tremendously talented voice actor capable of playing younger, and having him in either an animated feature or just on a radio call with her in a spinoff would do wonders to tie the periods together without recasting or obvious CGI de-aging.

 

To each his own. Personally, for a hero we watched grow from farm boy to the last Jedi knight, that wouldn't work for me at all.

Imagine if Rocky did NOT meet Adrian in the first 3 movies and we jump to Rocky Balboa as is.

I think most people would want something deeper. But it's just a matter of preference. I think the preference has a great deal to do with that fan's personal status in life and whether they have a family of their own or not.

 

Agreed. If they decide to give Luke a wife, it doesn't have to be some big involved process with flashbacks and 30 minutes wasted on exposition. One line of dialogue like you mentioned would be fine. Or they could even put something in the crawl: "30 years have passed since the Rebellion was victorious at Endor. During this time of peace and prosperity, Master Luke Skywalker began training a new order of Jedi Knights and started a family of his own." Or whatever. If the wife is alive, she can be a supporting character and if she's dead, a line or two is all that's needed to explain her.

Though I'd like Luke to have a family, I'm still about 50/50 on whether it'll actually happen. I really hope JJ takes pity on us and tells us who the new people are soonish. I don't think I can make it until 2015.

 

He carried it, gave birth . .. There was no mother. Skywalker "prophecy" continues.

 

The wonderful thing about a galaxy as large as Star Wars is that she can be a hugely important character in the galaxy without being important to Episode 7 at all. If they don't want to devote much screentime to another older character, they can easily deal with it in a number of ways.
The "Hero's mother died, raised by his warrior father" trope is a classic for the protagonist, and they could use far worse. We don't really need to know how she died, because it's the story of Luke and his son, and it's easy to convey how they feel about her death. It does raise important questions that don't detract from the film, but will encourage audiences to be interested in a spinoff that answers those questions.
Alternately, she can be a minor character (Say similar screentime to Owen and Beru). Again, it's her son's story, so we don't need much more than a nice interaction, then she goes off for her own missions and the heroes go on their journey. Maybe we check in with her again in episodes 8 or 9. Again, it doesn't harm the story of "Luke and his Son", but it sets up the stories of "Luke and his Wife" or "Skywalker son and his Mother".

 

Well, I agree in that I'd want to learn more about her, too.

And yes, personal preference and expectations color our opinions (the bulk of this thread is a testament to that, if I've ever seen one!). But to be clear, in no way, shape or form am I saying the mother isn't an important piece of the overall puzzle.

I just maintain that the deep character study doesn't necessarily have to be in Episode VII for it to work.

If she's alive, she could have all of the ST for character growth, perhaps with a greater focus in Episodes 8/9.

And if she's gone, there's no reason we can't have our questions answered in a future film/series of films*.

* Or books, television, etc. You take my meaning.

 

Let mixed Skywalker / Solo family rise, so selfishness and selflessness ca collide and lightsaber with blaster unite.

 

I guess where I'm coming from in hoping that we'd get a bit of an explanation if there is/was a wife for Luke stems from my view of the saga as being the story of the Skywalkers. If Luke Skywalker is/was married, that has pretty big implications on that story as a whole and shouldn't just be glazed over. And sure, if it's just a mention, that does open the door to a spin-off film or books or comics, but I don't think that story should be removed from the main saga. Plus, do we really want to open the door of them re-casting a younger post-ROTJ Luke for a spin-off?

 

My bet is no biological son, just an orphaned kid who became Luke's apprentice and the name Skywalker. Why? Because an apprentice can be a love interest for Han/Leia's daughter and then their kids would get both the Skywalker bloodline (through Han/Leia's kid) and the Skywalker surname (through Luke's orphan apprentice) and the Skywalker legacy can continue on into future generations despite Luke not having any biological kids himself.

 

One idea is that they kill off Luke's wife in the first few minutes of the film and how that impacts Luke/son's relationship and impacts the direction of the film as well as immediate hatred for the new baddie. Luke and his wife could even share a moment reminiscing about how they met.

Been there done that (this has been done in several movies but oh well if it works it works). But it satisfies the identity of the mother while also setting up internal personal conflicts for both father and son and setting up the overall conflict of the film. Problem is that some may see that as repetitive and also WAY too sad for a SW movie.

True-however it's more for the sake of Luke's further development than for his wife's. That's why I think the above scenario could work although DANG what a way to start a SW movie and cause controversy.

 

I get that, and I understand the impulse to attribute greater significance to the Saga. But Lucasfilm and their Story Group have been pretty adamant that it's all one big story now. Everything, every story, whether it be inside or outside of the Saga (or even whether it be a film or not) now carries with it a weight equal to everything else.

It's their new approach. If you want to know the whole story, you've got to invest in it all.

I hear you. Luke's my favorite character, after all -- my childhood hero -- and Mark Hamill is Luke Skywalker.

That said, I'd love to one day have the film (or trilogy) that the ST could have been had George Lucas made the sequel to the Star Wars Trilogy c. 1989/90.

Abadacus had an interesting thought about still using Mark in a limited capacity, but if we're ever going to have the type of film or television series which gives us the adventures of the Big3, roughly five years after the events at Endor, recasting is all but a foregone conclusion at this point.

But hey, they could always go the animated route. I hear they've a very talented voice actor in the employ of Lucasfilm.

 

Star Wars Episode VII: The Ancient Fear............................which is revealed to be incest

 

If an apprentice who takes the name Skywalker (adoption assumed) marries an actual Skywalker (Leia's daughter) that makes them cousins. Even if not blood related, that's a bit icky.

 

If Daisy is playing Han and Leia's daughter, what if she decides to take the Skywalker name on her own for some reason?

 

Well, it's consistent with the OT and Luke being in love with his sister.

"It's like poetry...it rhymes."

 

except it was a secret until VI. This is advocating full knowledge and getting married. Huge difference

 

I'll grant you that's a theory, although one that makes no sense to me. For several reasons, but I'll just list three.

1. There is no precedence for a Hollywood studio to list the actors in "the order that they were cast" in a major press release. This isn't just something that was thrown together at the last minute by Disney. This is a major announcement for a billion-dollar franchise, and yes, the billing order matters. Status is extremely important in Hollywood.

2. Gleeson, supposedly the final actor cast, was NOT listed last of the new actors. Von Sydow was.

3. Following your logic, the OT actors also should have been listed in the order they were cast, and clearly they were not. Look again at the list for the OT actors:

"Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker"

Clearly there is a hierarchy there. We can quibble about Harrison and Carrie being named before Mark, but the Big Three are named first, followed by Daniels (the only other member of this group who has a speaking role), then Mayhew, with Kenny Baker bringing up the rear. There are clearly at least two tiers here.

Your assertion that the second-from-last actor in the first group is actually playing the lead is analogous to saying Kenny Baker is the lead from the OT group. If Dom was in the top three names listed, maybe I could agree with you. But he's clearly in the "second tier" group.

 

I think the best route would be Heir to the Empire (or the equivalent anyways) animated, followed by Mara (or equivalent, film spinoff) and Luke animated (Maybe a new equivalent to Young Jedi Knights and the successor to Rebels, Mark Hamill as the mentor and the future heroes of E7 as kids).
That leaves recasting the big 3 for the NEXT trilogy / era, when the original actors aren't around anymore and the younger generation is forgetting the OT.

 

See, I wouldn't presume adoption beyond the spiritual sense (ie. if he refers to Luke as anything other than 'Master Skywalker' I'd be shocked) with the surname being given because of some circumstance (maybe just because the orphan wanted a last name).

Further, I think its a mistake at this stage to presume the sort of familial closeness we got in the EU. If Luke has gone reclusive hermit for the last decade or so then Han/Leia's kid might have never even met Luke's apprentice before it occurs in the movie, which removes just about all the 'ick' especially if the apprentice's 'adoption' was entirely informal rather than a legal one (ie. he's a biologically unrelated twenty-something who happens to consider your long lost uncle to be their father figure).

 

I hear what you're saying and so do most people here. But the average viewer? They're reaction would be "ewwwwwwww" and it would remind them of Luke/Leia's kiss.

 

1. This has nothing to do with whether Luke has a son.

2. This is a casting announcement and is not a BILLING ORDER.

By May 19, 1997 the majority of the main cast of the first “Star Wars” prequel had been unofficially announced by Variety, including Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, and Samuel L. Jackson, as well as what parts they’d be playing. Though Jake Lloyd was rumored for the part of young Anakin Skywalker, he wasn’t officially confirmed (along with the rest of the cast) by Lucasfilm until early June.

Pretty sure Jake was more important than SLJ. Why was he announced a month later? Don't know. Pretty Sure Neeson was billed above Ewan. Why is Ewan listed 1st? don't know.

It doesn't matter because it is a press release and not billing.

 

Again, a lot of that reaction will depend on how it's framed.

One big factor making it easier is that Boyega's appearance (the most likely candidate for Luke's apprentice if its NOT a biological son) is so clearly different from Luke's that its instantly apparent to the causual viewer that they aren't biologically related in any way (akin to Po and Po's dad in 'Kung Fu Panda').

Likewise, if they start the story as strangers then it removes the close relatives raised together dynamic from the equation.

Basically, it comes down to what Luke's been up to these last 30 years and how close he's stayed to Han and Leia in that time. If they're portrayed as close as they were in the EU then I'd agree, such a relationship would be icky.

But a lot of sequels with large time gaps often start the sequel with the former companions estranged from each other for some reason or another and their reconnection plays a key role in resolving the new conflict introduced by the sequel (this is largely because it provides a natural vehicle to cover what happened during the time-skip via the characters telling each other what they've been up to since they last saw each other). If the Solos and Luke haven't seen each other in twenty years at the start of the story then there would be no prior cousin-like relationship to make it feel icky.

 

A wife/girlfriend for Luke is too big of an story and character opportunity to pass up. If Luke does end up having a significant other (which I'm sure he will in the ST), she'll have some kind of bigger role to play, not just a story-starter. I doubt they'd kill her off in the first few minutes of the film. Hasn't Lucas even said this much, anyway?That the plan was always for Luke to find a girl and that we just haven't seen her yet? I'm betting that she's been cast and hasn't been revealed yet, or she doesn't show up until Episode 8 or 9.

I suppose Luke taking in an orphan is also possible...but, if you ask me, Gleenson or Isaac or Ridley as Luke's biological child is a more likely scenario for the ST than Boyega as Luke's adopted son.