ST Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker) in the ST

Agreed, and here's an example.

This is not Kylo Ren's attack, it's Hux's. Kylo is barely involved in the plans or execution of usage of Starkiller Base, as far as we can see. He can't even be bothered to go down to the base for Hux's big Hitler speech and the subsequent firing of the weapon, and his masked face hides whatever reaction he does have above while watching it happen. I'm not saying he's thinking "this is wrong!", but he doesn't seem to really be on board with the whole thing either. The point is that he is not the same as the FO in every regard, nor are their goals necessarily the same (much like Vader and the Empire). So while Kylo is obviously responsible for a lot of Bad Stuff, everything that the FO does is not automatically somehow pinnable on Luke's perceived failings with Kylo.

 

I am coming in late to this discussion, but I agree with absolutely everything you have said here and in all of your other posts on this topic, @Alliyah Skywalker . I didn’t like what the filmmakers had Luke do the night that Luke went into his sleeping nephew’s room. It was stupid and totally out of character. If Luke could still find some good in the father who had committed evil acts for over 25 years, I find it ridiculous that he would give up on the nephew who supposedly hadn’t even committed one truly evil act yet. Luke was sometimes referred to as “ the Great Redeemer” in story discussions about the old EU because Luke always believed in second chances, even with people like Kyp Duran. He didn’t just write people off as lost to the dark side. And I don’t see Luke doing such an evil and dumb thing as invading his nephew’s mind without permission either. That’s just what villainous Kylo did to Rey.

However, that was one mistake, and though I disagree that it’s one that Luke would make, I could roll with it IF it was just that one thing. It’s the fact that Luke ran away like a coward for six years and did nothing that is unforgivable. He not only allowed the evil first order to arise and grow powerful in his absence, but he didn’t lift a finger to help Han, leia, the resistance or the galaxy for SIX years!! And he was the only Jedi. That means that he was the only one capable of facing stoke and Kylo. But the worst part of it all, in my opinion, is not only did he NOT try to bring Kylo back to the light or deal with him if he couldn’t, but Luke seems to have totally forgotten about and not cared about, the other Jedi apprentices who went off with Kylo. Maybe Kylo was permanently lost to the dark, but that doesn’t mean that all of the others who were influenced by him were. They were his students; his responsibility. He should have either attempted to return them to the light or kept them from causing harm to the galaxy. In TLJ, Luke didn’t show that he cared about them at all. In fact, he didn’t show that he cared about anyone at all, including his own sister. When given the opportunity to help, he refused. That’s NOT Luke Skywalker. In fact, the only time I saw even a tiny bit of the Luke I knew and loved was in the one scene between Luke and Leia. Other than that, the character with Luke ‘s name in TLJ didn’t seem like Luke at all.

 

As someone who also believes in the above quote there are a couple of thing that mitigate it in my eyes. Firstly Luke has suffered an experience where I can truly understand and empathise with his mental breakdown. Secondly this mental state has caused him to genuinely believe that he will make the situation worse if he gets involved. Therefore I view Luke's inaction differently than I would someone who looks upon evil dispassionately.

Finally he does the right thing in the end which is important.

 

The trouble being again, that doing the right thing in time, comes far too little too late and offers very little in redemptive value or impact upon further scrutiny.
Luke's gambit to stall Kylo makes little sense narratively, as he's been out of the fight so long, he can't possibly have an idea of what the full impact of his actions are. To wit, his main motives for finally going seem to be to make peace with Leia and threaten his nephew that he will curse him from beyond the grave if he strikes him in anger. His giant gesture to 'save' the Resistance essentially allows a beaten army to limp off into obscurity, their numbers drastically thinned by their final attempt to try and make some kind of dint in the FO's front, which is pretty much shown to be impossible. Keep in mind this isn't a situation like in Empire where there's still a fleet and a fighting military body to retreat to. This is high command turning tail and boogieing away in a camper to avoid total obliteration.

Luke's actions are done in this vein to essentially forgive himself and go out in a way that feels totally unearned based on his behavior. He hasn't taught, he's given in to fear and anger and this final halfhearted swing at 'heroism' is supposed to clear his ledger? NO. Had Lucas been in charge of this thing, you can bet Luke would have received a thorough dressing down and would have had to put in some serious effort to redeem himself. He was cut no such breaks as a green novice, where he should arguably have been granted a bit more leeway, though his teachers never spared him the rod. For a man now having the gall to go by the title of Jedi Master and behave in this fashion? Not excusable. Not in the slightest. We're not dealing with A New Hope Luke. We're not dealing with Empire Luke. As much as Johnson might not like it, we're dealing with a Luke who has faced down similar adversities in his past and even at dark moments, dug in and found the good in himself and pushed forward. Johnson chose to ignore this and it had harmed not only Luke's original arc, but has severely hampered the project that he was supposed to have been a part of in favor of the selfish nature of his personal vision. All other concerns be damned,

 

Been reading these last pages.

'Think global, act local' is useful to understand Luke (OT and post-OT)

After the hut, 'act local', for Luke, was facing Ben again. There was no escaping that. It was Luke's responsability -the only one he explicitly took. Thinking global (saving the galaxy, joining the fight, etc') without acting local (facing Ben) was the equivalent of saving the world without cleaning up your room first. Without taking care of those things you took direct and explicit resposability for.

Also, joining the fight without joining the part of the fight which was yours and yours only would have been dereliction of personal duty. What's to be learned from that kind of 'master'?

And that's not OT Luke at all. OT Luke helped the cause but never at the expense of the persons who were close to him. In TESB, Yoda ('if you honor what they fight for, yes') tries to convince Luke of acting otherwise and fails. That's who he is. Things doesnt change only because you are older and a jedi master (also, Ben was Leia's son) and the person who is close to you is evil (that's at the core of his relationship with Vader in ROTJ)

In ROTS, Obi-Wan put 'think global' first.

It was a disaster:

This is an absolute. Obi-Wan wasn't a Sith but, pragmatically, he behaved like one several times in ROTS. It was about saving the galaxy from that threat called Vader.

And then: 'you were my brother. I loved you'. Once you mutilate a Sith Lord, he's ready to be your brother again.

'Hypocrisy, hubris', says TLJ Luke, and you cant say hes 100% wrong.

After the hut, Luke was not walking that path. That wasnt him.

But he was trapped. He couldnt walk his OT path either. This time, turning the villain was not a possibility. Ben/Kylo had closed that door. Vader had not in ROTJ.

Ben/Kylo confirms that and scorns OT Luke:

Luke was more like ANH Obi-Wan when he faced Vader:

On Crait, Luke's trick was to act like ROTS Obi-Wan while really acting like ANH Obi-Wan.

Also, after the hut, there was no plan B. Obi-Wan and Yoda had Leia. At the end of TFA, the plan B presented herself at his door.

This is all in TLJ. I think there's more, and that Ben/Kylo story will shed some light on Luke's, but it will be Ben/Kylo's story, not Luke's.

 

If someone saved the world, I couldn`t care less if their room was not clean. Conversely, I would think they are a trash-heap of a person if they sat out saving the world for any reason.

I would have given Luke points for trying to help in an active way in some, any capacity. Doing what he did, nothing, is indefensible to me. On Crait, Luke did a troll job that created a little diversion. He just stood there for a minute and dodged once or twice. Nothing more. And this was basically what he attempted: create a little diversion. I mean, he didn`t actually save anyone with it. Rey did that. If not for her, Luke`s little diversion would have been pointless and the 20 survivors would have simply died 2 minutes earlier. Big whoop.

And even Kylo Ren will get over being trolled in a day or two. It`s not like Luke dealt him a crippling blow of any kind. So Luke confronting him was supposed to be a narrative pay-off of the Kylo-story from TLJ but in the end, it remained pretty empty. Did the encounter give actual catharsis to either character? I guess Kylo could rest easy in knowing Luke was finally dead afterwards. And obviously Luke for some reason thinks it wipes his slate clean and he is entitled to peace and purpose now.

The movie tried to make it more epic via the tacked-on slave kids scene that pretended it was something legandary he did. Would have worked better for me if I didn`t see it. I`m not into the message that false legends and heroes are this great thing that has merit because something something inspiration. If there isn`t the genuine article at the center of it as the kernel of truth, I find it pretty empty.

 

Sure. Luke would have agreed with you. Vader's room was not clean and yet Luke rooted for him. The same with Rey and Kylo.

 

There's a difference here. Luke didn't root for him. He condemned him before confronting the Emperor when Vader kept pushing his offer to walk away from further bloodshed. Luke realized he had zero power to impact what Vader had already done, but there was still a chance that Vader could find it in himself to do right. He showed such a possibility in not simply destroying Luke outright after cornering him on Bespin. And Luke was a huge threat, not only to Palpatine, but Vader himself should he somehow ascend to his Master's place. It would put him in direct conflict with the Jedi in his son and neither would be able to rest as long as the other was around.

Furthermore, we know from multiple sources that Anakin was a good man prior to his fall. That he was tricked, seduced and betrayed into evil. The exacts of which came later, but still the seeds were there. Ben is not given any such graces here. He's frequently described as Vader-esque, even by his own father and even Luke admits to frequent dark surges in the boy during his training, but no mentions of him having other merits, just a strong impulse towards malice, not fear, which would at least be something that could be relatable, but hate. And for no known reason. He grew up in a position of incredible privilege, with a family who loved him and powerful Force Sensitivity, in addition to being connected to the best possible teacher for him to realize his potential. And he chose to burn everything to the ground just out of sheer spite and hate. Anakin's fall came from a place of love and a desire to do good. Kylo has nothing clean on his slate that gives the audience or the characters in the movie any reason to ask for his redemption, other than this being Star Wars and it's an expected plot point that has to be touched on for 'classic' feel

 

I guess this is fairly subjective, and it's probably not aided by the fact that TLJ chose to not spend any time emphasising how the loss of his students that affected Luke, but for me I can extrapolate that if someone lost six students in such a way (and they partly blamed themselves) that it could break them and send them into a lifelong depression.

For me this depends upon whether or not Luke initially attempted proactive action which proved fruitless. It important to remember that Kylo isn't running around the New Republic causing havoc - he's disappeared. In this way I don't think he can be regarded as any more negligent than Obi-Wan and Yoda. Basically their decision was to not take any action against the Empire until they could train one of Anakin's children to confront him upon their behalf. They forwent other options - like training other force sensitives or ganging up on Vader together - for this long game option. All of this while the Empire is in active control over the galaxy, not off hidden.

A small thing which could have helped is emphasising that Luke saw a new light rising, that wasn't him, confronting Kylo, and that he put faith in this (or that by removing himself it 'caused' Rey's awakening).

I think that this depends greatly upon how much you think Luke transgressed, how his final action compared and whether you consider that he'll still be actively helping Rey as a Force Ghost. I really don't think that it matters to what extent the Resistance is able to continue the fight compared to the Rebellion (we have yet to see to what extent there are still allies out there for the Resistance to rally). To me the wrong way to look at it is the number of people saved by the action. Is a solider who gives his life to save his squad 'better' than someone who gives his life to save his entire army. Although one may have a greater temporal impact (you have to consider however that saving a squad could have a disproportionate impact depending upon the future actions of that squad) the act of giving ones life is equal in both instances in heroism.

 

Even as a kid, watching the ended of ROTJ, it seemed obvious to me that Luke would rebuild the Jedi and do it better this time. Because he realized where his predecessors had failed and won where they'd lost. I mean this:






Is about as conclusive as you can get (Anakin, you can now RIP). So when TFA came out there was an obvious "WTF?" quality in it to me. But I defended it because it was at least entertaining, I liked the new cast, and there was potential moving forward and I assumed that Disney/LF MUST have some master plan for all of this.

Oh how naïve and foolish I was sadly.

 

As I said in my overall film review, I don't have a problem with Luke's lapse and "redemption" with the help of Yoda. He's a human being, not a god. It gave him a way to develop rather than remain a static character in the film.

However, I don't like that his arc ended so soon after his epiphany. Yes, he reunited with Leia, and he did face the First Order, but he died when there was more potential to explore with his involvement.

I could say the same about Han but one OT big three death did provide an appropriate tragedy to tug at the heartstrings. Han died a tragic hero believing in Ben's inner goodness.

At least there was Luke and Leia to continue, keeping the presences of characters that we know well and love.

Not anymore.

 

Y’all do know the Ewoks captured Luke, right?

 

True, but Luke also had trouble dealing with low level grunts on speeder bikes as well.

 

I think in the novel and in the film, he only expressed some displeasure in Snoke's order in the second firing to wipe out the Resistance Base on D'Qar where his mom was. Which was also carried over in TLJ, when he could not bring himself to fire on the capital ship containing his mother.

 

This could have been an amazing story. For me, watching the ST sometimes feels surreal because you can see the ghosts of a trilogy that could have happened. Seeing Hamill come within inches of that fascinating character but never get there is both aggravating and infatuating.

Perfectly stated, and I would say it a ruder way: TLJ has a bad script. The way the flash-backs play out is inorganic and conceptually disconnected from the earlier Luke/Rey scenes where he was supposed to set up the moral dilemma which frightens him into depression. The New Luke is never actually introduced to us, he just hovers around Rey and occasionally hints at who he might be. He never feels like a real character imo, and Johnson's astro-turfed humor doesn't support the process. There was no need to conceal who Luke *really* is until the end of act 2, and it would have been more interesting to get to know him earlier so that Rey (the only person he really speaks to for some reason?) could have meaningful drama, not chronic confusion.

 

Just watched TLJ again a few days ago, I really can't understate how much I love Mark's performance. Whether you love or hate TLJ, you have to tip your hat to the job that Mark did.

 

Last Jedi may be Mark Hamill's best performance in the role and he's fantastic in the OT playing the character the right tone for each movie. If anything, Johnston probably broke Luke down so he could get dramatic bits out of Hamill. If everything from Luke was hunky dory there wouldn't be as many scenes where we get to watch him.

Personally, I totally view The Last Jedi as a Bonus Luke Skywalker movie we got snuck into the ST so technically Luke now has 4 movies about him, outpacing any of the Star Wars saga main protagonists. (Quibble debate if Han has 5 movies about him but I think he's supporting enough in some of those for Luke to still come out on top)

 

Maybe it's because "Broken Luke" does not have any T's or I's, therefore RJ said "well we don't need to cross every T and dot every I"?

Now if he had gone for Defective Luke or Split Luke, it would have been better.

Or you know, as I am sure we have mentioned many times in this thread. Luke did not have to be broken. At all.