ST Hayden Christensen (Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader) in IX

Its fair to say it would have been different, but i don't know if it would have been better. obviously the anakin and luke dynamic would be new, something we never seen before. while the Luke and Yoda dynamic is one that goes back to him training to become a jedi. so its well known dynamic. i think they both show merit. but they merit in different ways

 

It wouldn't be and many people have provided other justification for his involvement. It's entirely reasonable to think Anakin would have plenty to tell Luke because I am pretty sure he learned a damn good lesson during his tour with Sidious and since his death. We were discussing a page back about Anakin's potential knowledge about the rumored artifacts from TROS and what information he could give to Luke about them from his time with Palps.

I don't expect to see Anakin make amends with Leia. They barely touched on the father daughter aspect in Bloodline and I don't have faith that JJ could give us an emotionally satisfying resolution to that in this film. I highly doubt that is even on his radar. I mean, this is the trilogy where no meaningful mother son relationship has been established, or father (Han) and son for that matter. This part of the saga just doesn't have that same kind of heart to me.

 

I wonder whether a Force Ghost can decline a teaching assignment? If I'm Anakin, I'm thinking I'd defer a teachable moment to Yoda.

Anyway, this is truly a curious criticism. In universe, Yoda was the obvious choice for this one, and, if not him, then Obi-Wan. And out of universe, yeah. Merely because Yoda is a fan favorite doesn't make it pandering to the audience.

 

I don't know much about all these random websites but I just read this article someone sent me and hope to God the author is so far out in left field.
https://www.cbr.com/star-wars-skywalker-anakins-legacy/

If they bring Anakin back with the express purpose of resurrecting Kylo and claiming that it somehow saves Anakin's legacy and wipes clean the slate for the galaxy for all the lives he took...just no. How does saving Kylo or Rey absolve him of millions of murders? Kylo/Ben being allowed to live doesn't repay anything. As if that one life is worth more than numerous others. And then saying he has to give up the force?

So Kylo gets to do evil, reject outstretched hands of redemption, continue killing, have his grandpa come save him and then grandpa gets punished some more by having to give up what little redemption he earned?

 

It should have been all three force ghosts that came to talk to Luke in TLJ. While the Yoda scene was one of the few positive aspects of TLJ, it was same old same old. Having Luke in conference with Obi Wan, Yoda and Anakin would have not only made more sense, it would have fullfilled a sort of promise made by the end of ROTJ.

 

It would have been to mutch with 3 force ghost in TLJ, as we didn't get any of them in TFA. more sense in TROS.

 

I want to see force ghosts for every single Jedi, padawan and youngling ever seen on screen, including all the Order 66 victims.

 

We might, you've got a third of the trilogy left.

There's also the problem of not being able to use Shaw, and everyone's been b*tching about Hayden-as-the-ghost in the revamped RotJ version forever. I could see why they wouldn't want to tackle the problem unless they're really confident it'll work well.

 

That may be so, but it should be communicated to the viewer.

The way they've handled it, by not addressing Anakin's lingering presence as an eternal spirit in any way, shape or form, is ignoring it.

 

Only if you're wanting everything explicitly spelled out, I guess. Personally I prefer leaving a little mystery, viewer interpretation. Either way, there's plenty of rational reasons for Anakin not making force-ghost-y overtures of advice. After all, it's not like the guys have a lot in common, or Anakin being able to pass on wisdom of the same situation Luke finds himself in. Luke's led a more enlightened adult life than Anakin did anyway, don't know why he'd think he'd be bringing any sage wisdom to his son.

 

*sigh*

Would you please stop misrepresenting people's arguments?
Addressing something in any way, shape or form ≠ Explicitly spelling things out.
Furthermore, as a wise fan said on the previous page:

 

You're making a judgement call that it needs to be addressed, though.

Why don't we see ghost-Obi-Wan in the sequels? Real world answer: Guinness is dead, it'd be weird seeing Ewan at that point in the timeline, and you can get away with the passage of time better with Yoda due to being a puppet. In-universe answer: he could just feel he's passed on what he needs to and it's now up to Luke, or Yoda just got there first, or Obi and Yoda have been conversing in the netherworld and decided Yoda would be the one to do it, any number of rational explanations at play.

No different with Anakin. Real world answer: they know half the fandom's going to roll their eyes and whine incessantly seeing Hayden post-RotJ, the same way they did having it edited in. In-universe answer could be anything - as with Obi, maybe he & Obi & Yoda are all kum-bah-yah around some heavenly campfire and decided Yoda's the right guy for the job. Or force-ghosts might fade after time and Yoda's some wise exception.

It'd be nice to have an Anakin moment in the ST, no doubt. But it's not some checklist requirement of legitimacy. We know George was involved in this (and according to MSW may have been consulting all the way through production rather than just our assumed early-stages brainstorming) - if Anakin shows up George probably had something to do with it logistically, but likewise if he doesn't George may have been involved there too.

And regarding whether his only purpose would be to give Luke advice, sure, no, that's not the case. But you're also not going to spend narrative time on him just checking in to shoot the breeze, either, there has to be a reason for it. The reason last time around was a lesson, and evidently they determined Yoda fit that better. That's fine.

 

"I don't know who you aaarrrrrreeee, but I will fiiiinndd you, and teach you the true nature of the living forrrrce."

Quickly! It's a thermal detonator, there's no time!

*Ack. Freakin' meant to hit the edit.

 

After GL's Anakin-centric double trilogy narrative, which ends with him learning the path to immortality from Yoda and Obi-Wan, yes, it needs to be addressed. Not only that, but immortality needs to be a major theme going forward. We had one trilogy that leaves us with the cliffhanger of Jedi Masters beginning to learn about it, then one trilogy where we see them achieving it and bringing the Chosen One himself along. If there's a third trilogy, it really should take it one step further and show us that there's a purpose to this immortality thing beyond what we've seen so far. Having that theme continue to grow in importance is a natural development that just so happens to be a perfect lead-in to the Whills that GL wanted to introduce in this trilogy. There is no doubt that the Force ghosts are closely linked to whatever those things are up to.

A continued development and expansion of ideas that bring the story to new horizons and alters/challenges our perception of it is required, really, for the ST to be truly justified. Without that element, what's the point? And TPTB have been way too concerned about fan reactions to trust GL's gutsy vision. They opted for a soft reboot approach instead, which gave us movies that, while popular, are quite detached from GL's story and have offered VERY little of substance that wasn't already there.
The absence of immortality plot involving the Force ghosts is just one part of this, but it is a significant part.

 

I think Obi-Wan would've worked the best, he has the most consistent and longest relationship with Luke. He was the one that chose to guard him for 20 years, he was the one who emerged from the wilderness for Luke and ultimately he was the one who sat down and talked with Luke rather than at him. But it works because they can use the Yoda puppet when they couldn't use Alec Guinness without using a lot of CGI, Yoda is exactly like he was at the end of ROTJ.

 

Lucasfilm and Disney clearly don't care about criticism and upsetting a large portion of the fan base, considering they are giving RJ another trilogy. That's about as divisive a move as they could possibly make, and they're doing it. Upsetting some people who didn't like Hayden is nothing compared to that.

 

If that was true why bring George Lucas out of retirement to act as an advisor? Surely they would've carried on regardless.

 

This is . . . . wrong. They brought back cgi Tarkin and not even as a ghost. If there had been a story-driven reason bring back Obi-wan either as McGregor or Guinness then they could have done that but they chose not to make one. Luke had "cut himself off from The Force" whatever that means.

After bringing back force ghost Yoda and giving him unprecedented on-screen abilities, yes, I think it is required to either bring back the other force ghosts (including Anakin) or give a serious, well-thought explanation for why they're absent. Neither Luke nor Rey have turned off their Force receptors in TROS so that excuse is gone. It's not enough to say "maybe the ghosts are sad," that's just the same, failed TLJ-apologizing we've seen evaporate over the last two years. If Anakin is completely absent from TROS and they make up some explanation it will either be adequate or not, but failing to address it at all would be a mistake.

 

It's a bit like you have Kylo talking to Vader's helmet in TFA yet at no time has anyone thought why doesn't Anakin's ghost talk to the kid, so they say oh it's because Snoke acts as a barrier and blocks Force Ghost Anakin, that excuse loses all credibility the second Kylo cuts Snoke into four.

 

Exactly. These are kinds of problems that pop up when you write the story based purely off nostalgic inclinations rather than the actual characters/events of the saga. Vader's helmet looks cool and spooky sure, but why exactly is it their and what exactly is its function? Who knows, maybe Kylo is just a fanboy. Same with Yoda imo. He's a cute little gremlin of course, but does it make any sense that one little pep talk with Luke and blowing up the books would reverse years of debilitating depression? The film never sold me on that.

I'm still optimistic about TROS though because bringing back Anakin would kind of compel Abrams to create a thoughtful dynamic for him. He's not one of the "iconic" pillars of Star Wars that every American born after 1965 can instantly recognize (unlike Vader and Yoda) so I think Abrams will realize there needs to be more to it than just looking cool. At least I hope.

 

Then there is the possibility that Rey can raise Luke's X-Wing and fly it from Ahch-To when it was said Luke couldn't, just because the writer/director didn't want to put Luke into a position where he'd face Kylo for real. The desire to kill off Luke and have his dying moments set against a binary sunset both musically and visually seems to have prevailed over every other possibility and that thought process has seeped through into Anakin and Obi-Wan possibly appearing.

 

It would be interesting to analyze John Williams' scores of both TFA and TLJ as a critique of the films themselves. My immediate impression is that Binary Sunset is overused in both, almost as a placeholder for themes and emotions that don't really manifest from the shots, but I could be misremembering. I think the only time I really enjoyed it was when Rey gets the lightsaber on SKB. Obviously I'm not smart enough to pull off that kind of interpretation.

 

I have no idea what your point is, could you clarify? I'm not saying they don't want the movies to be good. I'm saying they aren't worried about upsetting a large part of the fan base.

 

Considering this fandom which complained about EVERYTHING in the past 30ish years I wouldnt worry about upsetting a certain group because of a certain thing eighter. No matter what you decide and what you do there will always be fans who feel offended because its not "their" STAR WARS.

 

Not sure why people think this, when you consider that only a few SW movies, three IMO, have ever received any kind of significant criticism. The OT was pretty much universally loved. Obviously TPM was heavily criticized, and AOTC had its share of criticism, but ROTS was pretty much universally loved like the OT. Then I'd say R1 and even Solo were generally well received. TFA, while it has some critics, also received generally positive reviews. TLJ ranks right there with TPM as being very unpopular amongst a large segment of the fan base at the time of their releases.

Not all SW movies were historically divisive. I don't remember anyone saying ROTS or R1 wasn't their SW. The goal at Lucasfilm and Disney should be to satisfy the most fans as they can. Given the diverse nature of the fan base, it's no easy task. But since when is making a huge blockbuster supposed to be easy.

This "you can't please everyone" thing is a total cop out. Of course you can't please EVERYONE. But you can please almost everyone if you do a good enough job.