ST Rey Skywalker/Daisy Ridley Discussion Thread

I mean, they hired JJ Abrams of all people to play a huge role in planning the ST. That alone should tell you KK had no idea what she was doing.

Well, she had an idea, but it was just to reboot the OT, and JJ was perfect for that. Now instead of Luke Skywalker we have Rey Skywalker, and this could have worked if only the powers that be had taken the time and interest in solid character development. But no, this was too much for them and now the ST is essentially worthless, and even destructive because we once had characters we wanted to see again in other films, movies, and books.

She should be fired just for endorsing the reboot idea alone. That is the epitome of corporate hack.

 

Bob Iger is the one to blame for the reboot and safe movie and hiring JJ, i heard that JJ and KK didn't see eye to eye on the making of TFA, and Iger hired him again for TROS over ruling her. So while you may not like KK, It's Bob Iger who wnet for OT reboot after doing research of the prequel backlash.

 

Jesus. TFA started production six years ago. Kennedy has since greenlit groundbreaking films and TV shows like Rogue One and the Mandalorian - the latter of which has introduced one of the greatest innovations n filmmaking this century. She shouldn’t be fired due to making one safe choice six years ago. She has vision, and it shows. Certainly not a formula-pushing hack like Feige, who has zero interest in filmmaking and only cares about endless connectivity.

 

KK has vision and idea, and Iger had the money so they went with Iger idea of soft reboot and he hired JJ. Also just found out that The show being about the mandalorian was her idea while Faverou wanted Boba.

 

I think I may have just misunderstood exactly what "meaningless" meant in this case. If I were in the same boat as you I probobly would'nt use that terminology, hence my confusion.

Maybe, I don't know you so I can't make any concrete statements either way, it's simply that I would have had the same confidence about never liking Anakin coming out of ROTS, so make of that what you will.

I would'nt consider that specificly to be horrible for her. But then agian, unlike you and some others I don't view what happened to Luke as being him being "ruined" or "humiliated." I saw it as an interesting and daring take on the character that gave us an interesting look at his pysch and made him more belivable and Human.

I think Johnson *tried* to create one for her (a character and an arc), but it did'nt end up working for everyone, partially becuase Abrams did'nt really give him much to work with but also because some peaple just did'nt agree with his vision (either becuase it did'nt match what they had build up for her in their heads or simply becuase they just did'nt like it). If Abrams had'nt more or less "rolled her back" afterwards I think we'd probobly have ended the trilogy with a more well-rounded and devoloped hero, but...eh, that ship has sailed.

Personally I quite liked a lot of what they did - the Republic being unstable and failing to keep the peace is a nice mirror to real world revolutionary goverments (the NR was/is actually far more sucessful then most IRL goverments are), while Leia being the one to lead the fight when no one else was willing fits her character and Han going back to what he was good at in order to hide from the pain of what happened to Ben also made sense to me (do we actually know if Han and Leia were divorced, or just living apart? When they reunite in TFA they did'nt seem estranged, after all), and I already said above what I like about Luke.

But I defiantly agree they could have done it all much better.

I have faith she will. But that's not so much becuase of anything in the movie as it in the fact that I don't think they'd squander the potential for stories offered by the current setup - if the renewed Jedi fall post-TROS, I think it will be well after Rey's time (much like the purge of the Legends NJO happened well after Luke's time in the Legecy comics). Unlike Luke, after all, we're not going to be rejoining her after a thirty year timeskip and coming into everything in the aftermath of it all; her future stories will begin right after TROS ends, likely a matter of months or even days.

So maybe it's less faith in Rey that I have and more faith in the narrative and the future writers (none of whom, I'm sure, will be JJ Abrams)

This makes me throw up in my mouth a bit, but Abrams was the right choice. At the end of the day, all the issues with TFA and TROS aside, they were still hugely sucessful movies and TFA specificly kicked the renewed francise into high gear right away. Ideally Abrams should'nt have come back after that, and I think that's a big part of the problem, but an ideal situation was'nt what Disney was handed. They were on a time crunch after Fisher died, and with Trevarrow having departed and Johnson turned them down Abrams was the natural next choice and far better then an unknown - he did a lot wrong, IMO, and I don't agree with a fair amount of the choices he made, but the film could have been much, much worse and, irregardless of the choices he made, the situation he was handed was far from ideal.

Kennedy's not perfect and she's made mistakes, but objectivly speaking she's done a great job; Lucas also made mistakes (big ones, some would argue) and, like her, faced the same exact rage and over-criticism from the fandom, which in the end ended up fading as time went by. KK, being a longtime collaborate of Lucas, would probobly know this all to well, and I'm sure she's not to torn up over the hate - especially when she can take solace in so many successes both now with Star Wars and across her long career (I sometimes wonder if the peaple who aim so much anger at her are aware of just how many movies they probobly love that she played a major role in making*).

*just to list a few accolades (out of of many) she was an associate producer on Temple of Doom, an executive producer on Goonies, *batteries not included and all three Back to the Futures and a producer on The Color Purple, Hook, Jurassic Park and Munich

(Then agian, she was also an executive producer of The Last Airbender, so she's definatly not perfect)

 

But the thing is I kinda disagree with the implications of what you are suggesting. Sure everyone has their own tastes and reactions, but it's not like they're purely random. If their goal was for audiences to not find the ST depressing, they could have more successfully achieved that goal by making different writing decisions. So to some degree they're responsible for the outcomes of the decisions they made. Otherwise they should be paying me millions of dollars to make movies, and whatever I throw out there if people don't like it then that's their fault. In a well made movie the audience sees what the creators intend for them to see, and the subjective part is whether they like what you intended. I think a lot of unintentional implications made their way into the ST, and I think it's fair to say it's the writers fault for letting them slip into the movie more than it's my fault for not pretending I don't see them.

@Alliyah Skywalker has done a pretty good job of explaining what I'm talking about here.

Yeah that's my point. If Chewie was on that ship like she thought he wouldn't be any less dead because she didn't mean to. She killed because of a lack of control. I'm not talking about violating some Batman style no-killing rule, she 100% believed she was killing someone she was friends with. Luke never did anything like that in the OT but 30 years later he considered killing his dark nephew for one half a second and it destroyed his whole Jedi Order. I'm supposed to believe that won't happen to Rey now? Based on the ST I think she'd be more likely to actually deliver the fatal blow than to not react at all. The good news for her is she can always use Force Undo-Murder.

Well there's a slight difference in that any surviving members aren't wanted fugitives by the oppressive galactic authorities. If the New Republic isn't completely incompetent they can meet up there, otherwise they can always hook up with Leia and the Resistance. There's no need for them to go completely off the grid for however many years.

Once again I never said anything should be "about Finn" geez. Him being on the same planet doesn't require him to take over the scene, I specifically said he would be in the background. There's a lot of characters present in the Yavin ceremony who the scene isn't "about", it's not like it's that hard. Also I have to hard disagree about who gets lightsabers not being important in Star Wars. I'm probably near the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to how much Jedi/Force/lightsabers contribute to my love of Star Wars but even I can recognize they're one of the fundamental backbones of the franchise. There's a reason they gave Grievous 4 of them, and again, in my experiences with other fans on the internet it seems most people care waaaaay more about this than I do.

Building a lightsaber has never been step one on the path to becoming a Jedi, it's something you have to work up to. Rey's been reading the sacred texts and training with Skywalkers since before Finn even understood that he was Force sensitive. (or since the timeline there is a little unclear, at the very least before he did anything with this realization).

Well at least that solves my apathy towards TROS. And if it's not obvious by now I've thrown the whole ST era out of my personal canon long ago, so it can't get much worse at this point.

You're entitled to your opinion of course but I really can't see it. I would agree that "least natural scene in the movie" has some stiff competition though. Honestly the one scene I thought felt natural was Hux being executed for treason on the spot because it was so obvious.

 

One of the reasons I enjoyed TLJ was because RJ tried to do something different. He killed off Snoke, the Emperor wannabe. He had Kylo take over, only to discover that his victory was a hollow one - he lost the woman he loved, and his conflicted soul made him vulnerable to the likes of Snoke. He made Rey a nobody, rather than the descendant of someone important. He developed Finn into a committed rebel, thus hinting at a possible future where he started a stormtrooper uprising and took apart the FO from within. He developed Poe into the next General, maturing the character.HHe hinted at a Resistance that weren't quite perfect, hence the purchase of arms from the same dealers as the FO.
And you can complain that he made Luke into a coward - personally I don't think he did - but he gave Mark Hamill the chance to give the greatest performance of his entire career. My brother's a big Luke fan, and although he was dubious at first, he has nothing but praise for both the film and Hamill.

I know a lot of people hate TLJ but at least it was something new. I was looking forward to seeing where they went from there, which was why TROS, which simply retconned the whole thing into a rehashed ROTJ, was such a crushing disappointment for me.

 

I don't think much of that is really new.

Killing Snoke leads to another dark cloaked dark sider taking over the stormtrooper army.
Him having a hollow victory doesn't feel new to me. He barely knows Rey and the movie never says he loved her. I don't see how him being conflicted making him vulnerable to manipulation is different. I think that was stuff done in ROTS.
I think the movie putting Finn into rebel mode doesn't do much new. Characters becoming rebels has happened since OT. I think the movie not spending much time, to me, on building on the stormtrooper angle for the character, doesn't reinforce that story, to me, and, to me, at the moment, I think takes the potential momentum out of it.
I don't see the Poe angle as much different.
I don't know how them buying weapons is anymore a mark against the rebels as them having weapons has ever been. But the protagonists doing amoral things I think has been in TCW, I think the prequels, and I think, to me, Rogue One.
Mark Hamill giving what some may see as a strong peformance, doesn't mean it saves the character as they think it's written, for them.

I don't think there's, to me, much more new than what TFA and TROS gave us.

 

TLJ is a mutch better movie then both TFA and TROS.

 

I don't think it's written much better. In theory, I like the look of it. But I don't think it's particularly well written.

 

I think the wrtitng is better and story of Luke is better then JJ could do.

 

Yeah, I loved it when the guy who risked dying for his family then had an entire subplot where he supposedly fell as a result of contemplating killing his own nephew on the basis of a vision, which is precisely the least believable reason anyone writing the character could have come up with. You know, since the last time we saw him completely trusting visions of the future, he ended up fighting one of the most scarring battles he had ever fought that resulted in the loss of his hand.

I got so much insight into who the character is when he proceeded to blame his dead predecessors, a bunch of long-since dead Jedi, for his own mistakes. Because that's just who Luke is, right? A guy who blames the corpses of those before him for his own errors. That really just warmed the cockles of my heart.

 

Well, her being a nobody was the answer to the question posed by TFA. I get why peaple did'nt like it, but it was just as valid as any other answer Johnson could have given in absence of anything else (and personally I found it to be the more daring choice and one that sent a better message then what JJ changed it into)

I don't agree that Johnson tore anything down from TFA though. Abrams did'nt really give him anything to work with and it's been made quite clear (in statements from both Kasdan and Johnson) that there was no plan for the character and Johnson was essentially handed her and told "do whatever you want."

That's fair. They definantly could have struck a "middle ground" between the to-much political exposition of the PT and the just-enough that would be nessesery to flesh out the universe.

Well, in the OT she was a front-line fighter and a diplomat, and now she's the Mon Mothma-style leader figure, so that felt like a growth - to me, at least.

I dunno, I guess it's how you look at it - neither of them seemed to have any ill feelings towards each other and they seemed to still be very much in love and be happy to be reunited, so to me I don't look at them and see a "failed marriage" either way.

I'm sorry about what you experienced though, and I understand why that would make you feel ambivalent towards seeing something similer to two characters you love.

That's fair - I like a lot of how the ST presented things character-wise because I'm a person who grew up around a great many peaple who had bad turns in life but managed to find the best in it and come out stronger and I enjoyed how it presented things on the geopoltical front because I'm a student of history (if I wrote the ST I'd probobly end up dipicting the New Republic as being far more unstable, mixing the First French Republic with the Beiyang Government and Kuomintang of early-20th Century China).

I'm sure the future works will give that answer - just as I'm sure future works will flesh out Luke's order so it's not just all the depressing ending we got for it in TLJ. Personally I find it hard to be anything but excited going forward, but then agian my feelings regarding the trilogy are'nt the same as yours to begin with.

That's a matter of opinion, but one I agree with 100 percent. I truly belive, given the passage of years, the general concenous will be that TLJ was the best of the three movies and was underappriated in its time (it will become the TPM of its trilogy - hated when it came out but later redeemed as more and more peaple came to appriate it's story and quality relative to the other two films with time)

Just because Luke knows visions can't always be trusted and experienced one vision one time that turned out to be wrong does'nt mean he would'nt fall victim to beliving them agian - especially if he had almost three decades of hubris and arrogance built up where he came to think he knew better.

He also immedatly disregarded the impulse to kill Ben, so it's not like was entirely blinded by what he saw.

I agree, I also really liked that they showed that he was as capable as anyone else as falling victim to depression, dismay and misplaced frustration. Seeing the character be dipicted as so Human and failible made me love him even more then I already did and made me find him more, not less, belivable as a character.

10/10 for Johnson, and I'll take ST Luke over EU Luke any day of the week.

 

Hubris coming from what? I can believe Anakin having hubris and arrogance and could pretty easily infer where those qualities come from but from Luke? Well, that's kind of where this trilogy sorely needed work. When you're talking about the same character who achieved victory in the OT by putting his life in the hands of someone else, naturally, you're going to need to work at it a lot harder than TLJ did if it wants arrogance of all things to be Luke's fundamental flaw.

Because you can't just say he just randomly developed those two things over the course of time and leave it at that. Especially when what they went with was him literally forgetting every formative experience that made him who he was at the end of ROTJ.

There's no good reason that justifies him even being the slightest bit swayed by the idea. Let alone entirely.

 

I think they were pretty successful with that goal, as I did'nt find it depressing in the least, so I don't see a problem.

I guess, to sum up my point without pointing to any alternative interpretations of the other trilogies, it's that while some peaple might have come out of the ST feeling depressed by what they saw, plenty of others came out feeling varying degrees of happy and pleased, and both veiws are as valid to have if were discussing personal tastes - the film definitely did'nt want peaple to come out feeling the former way, but the film can't control how peaple feel about it.

"It's the writers fualt that I don't personally like the movies!"

No, it's not anyones "fault" - they made a movie and you did'nt personally like it becuase it did'nt fit with your personal tastes, that's all - it's no more their "fault" then its Lucas's "fault" that some peaple did'nt like the PT/OT.

Man, you guys really hate Rey, don't you?

It was'nt just a lack of control - Rey neither intended to shoot the lighting nor even knew she could do that. So no, she did'nt "100% believe she was killing someone she was friends with" becuase she did'nt even intend to do what she did; it was an uncautious display of power made due to her building fustration and the mounting anger she felt towards Kylo and she killed Palpatine using a purely defensive move, so there's that.

Well, she did'nt deliver the fatal blow to Kylo on the DS and instead chose to not only heal the wound she gave him but leave him alive.

Assuming you mean she could do what Kylo did with Force heal, she could but only once, and (based on how the ability is explained to work) only if she has enough vitality to spare. And only if the person is freshly dead and intact; she's not a necromancer who can raise rotting corpses.

Who knows? Maybe the FO/KoR were sending extrajudical hit squads after them, or maybe they made the conscientious decision to lay low until Luke resurfaced?

Heck, maybe they were'nt even in hiding and a few (or all) or them were working with the Resistence, it's just that they were out in the feild during TFA and were thus of no use to Rey and irrelevent to the story?

He was'nt in the background for the same reason the ghosts of Ben, Anakin and Obi-Wan were'nt standing with those of Luke and Leia. That scene had nothing to do with him.

There's no Finn in this scene...

for the same reason theres no Han or Leia in this scene...

I'm saying that it was'nt importent to the film that Finn be shown with one, becuase obviously if it was he would have.

Finn will get a lightsaber eventually, and I'm sure it will be super cool, all in good time - and what's more he'll have a real, personal connection to it becuase he'll have build it from scratch for his own possession rather then have breifly been the caretaker of a saber built by someone that was intended for yet anouther person for just part of one movie.

Constructing a saber was the centerpeice for the rite of passage at the end of being a youngling, so yes, it is a step on the path, and a pretty big one at that.

I see you have constructed a new lightsaber. Your skills are complete.

So then Rey and Finn could have just sat down offscreen and build their lightsabers together, with Rey showing him what she'd learned from the texts (assuming there was anything in their about building sabers) and them learning what was'nt together.

Being the great and mighty Luke Skywalker, secure in his power and luaded for his wisdom and heroics.

LUKE: Lesson Two. Now that they're extinct, the Jedi are romanticized, defied. But if you strip away the myth and look at their deeds, the legacy of the Jedi is failure. Hypocrisy, hubris.
REY: That's not true.
LUKE: At the height of their powers, they allowed Darth Sidious to rise, create the Empire, and wipe them out. It was a Jedi Master who was responsible for the training and creation of Darth Vader.
REY: And a Jedi who saved him. Yes, the most hated man in the galaxy. But you saw that there was conflict inside him. You believed that he wasn't gone. That he could be turned.
LUKE: And I became a legend. For many years, there was balance....and then I saw Ben. My nephew with that mighty Skywalker blood. And in my hubris, I thought I could train him, I could pass on my strengths.

He let his own legend and achievements go to his head; he got arrogant, and his arrogance blinded him

Who says he forgot it? Plenty of peaple learn an importent lesson, take it to heart and then, years later, make a mistake that said lesson should have prevented them from making. It's called being Human.

And Luke is'nt the same man he was at the end of ROTJ, that's the point - no more then he was the same man at the start of ROTJ that he was at the end of ANH - by the time of the flashback in TLJ twenty-three years have passed since the end of the ST; peaple can change in big ways in just a few years, to say nothing of over two decades (I'm twenty-eight, and I'm not remotely the same person I was just six years ago, so who knows what kind of man I'll be when I'm fifty-one?).

As the movie explained, he was arrogant and he made a mistake. They gave a justification for his actions, even if you and others did'nt personally like it, and some peaple not liking the reason does'nt make it not a good reason - I did'nt like Lucas choosing to portray Anakin the way he did in the PT, but that does'nt mean it was'nt a good choice.

And he was'nt entirely swayed - that's why he was only tempted to do it for brief moment and immedatly relized what he was doing and backed down.

 

I'm just saying that it's a lot easier for the whole hubris thing to fly with an Old Republic Jedi who have a millennia's worth of institutional strength behind them that would cause them to believe they can weather any storm while Luke would be vastly different just by virtue of the era in which he exists even prior to this. Also, there's still that problem of him contemplating striking down his own family that so many still can't provide a compelling argument for.

Maybe there's a reason that prior authors who wrote Legends Luke took a more tempered approach to this form of story for him since they knew how much critical context you'd have to entirely ignore in order to even remotely have this make sense.

 

I don't think it would - Luke would be even more susceptible to that, I'd say, becuase he'd have that millennia's worth of insitutional strength plus his own acomplishments and nobody to check him.

 

No, he doesn't since he's tasked with trying to show that this institution still can do good and can actually last after the previous Order fell. Which is a prime example of this trilogy trying to have its cake and eating it. Does Luke believe that the previous Order was flawed and that they should have done things differently after having to have fought a war which resulted from their own deficiencies or does he believe in them so wholeheartedly that he'd make a one for one replication of it in the New Republic era, knowing that it failed decades before?

Given what we saw of his journey in the OT, you can't have both. Well, unless you want to make Luke look like a complete moron but I think you already know my thoughts on that. It really doesn't help that Rey's journey as well as her actual relationship with him is so vapid compared to how his was with both Luke and Yoda. Maybe they could have ameliorated that by showing what his Jedi even were like to begin with.

 

We don't know that Luke's order was a "one for one replication" but, given what we know about it so far, it does'nt appear to have been. Even so I don't quite get what your getting at - even if he changes somethings his order is still the Jedi Order at its heart and heir to the same legacy as the one he reformed it from. He can still be doing his own thing and both be caught up in the legends and achivements of the prior order and be aware and critical of its failings (which A; he presumably did'nt start dwelling on until after the events with Ben and B; the movie presented as being misplaced and overly-critical criticism anyway).

Well, maybe the problem is your expecting it to be like Luke and Yoda's relationship, when its not; the relationship between Luke and Rey is the relationship between Luke and Rey, not the relationship between Luke and Yoda; its two totally different relationships with totally different dynamics and the one person shared between them has evolved as a person and character in the interim.

 

And why would he care about that only after what happened with Ben? This is what I meant by the whole "making Luke a complete moron" thing.

No, I didn't expect it to be like Luke and Yoda's relationship. I just expected it to be as good. Which it wasn't. All it consisted of was Rey finding Luke, finding out Luke kind of sucks and pointing out the obvious crap he's spewing, leaves so that she can share the pointless sequence with Kylo that goes absolutely nowhere narratively for her and then just ends up being Leia's apprentice in the last film.

She essentially learns absolutely nothing from him and we don't spend anywhere near the amount of time needed to understand why Luke's position is even remotely sympathetic. Then, on top of all that, we're expected to believe that Luke seeing that old transmission from Leia and Yoda giving him a pep talk was just enough to convince him to finally do something after years of isolation. Which really makes the idea that Luke was having this massive crisis of faith completely laughable, probably because deep down, everyone that was involved in making this film knew it was just him having to relearn the exact lessons that he already bled having to learn in the first place.

 

Um...

Becuase that was when he failed? Before then everything was (as far as we know and are told) smooth sailing, so he would have no reason to look back on the past so criticaly - before Ben fell he was wearing rose-tinted glasses, and when Ben fell he took those off and put on jade-colored spectacles.

Okay then, why does it have to be "as good?" Why can't it *just* be different?

I thought Luke's position was hughly sympathetic, and I found she learned a great deal from him (he gave her three lessons, all of which, the misplaced cynicism that was behind them aside, provided an importent and benafical perspective, and it's also becuase of him perserving the texts and sacrificing himself to ensure Leia survived that she has the tools and the teachers to learn more going forward) - not all lessons need to in Force ability and combat training, and at the very least Rey learned as much (if not more, arguably) from Luke in TLJ then Luke learned from Obi-Wan in ANH.

As for the interactions with Kylo "going nowhere" - they definantly were going somewhere, it's just that TROS chose to abandon that plot thread.

Makes perfect sense to me - the entire time he's been in exile he did'nt have R2 to show him that transmission and Yoda to talk to him, so it stands to reason that those things would'nt effect him until, you know, they happened.

Or maybe, just maybe, they told a story they told a story they wanted and were excited to tell and, not only did'nt think what your presenting above but felt that the Luke they showed in the film was a natural and belivable progression thirty-plus years on from ROTJ.

Step back from your own displeasure for a moment and look at this all objectivly and without bias - is it really so hard to believe that peaple (writers and fans alike) might have, and still do, feel that way? And what makes their take on Luke so much worse then yours, or yours so much better then theirs?

 

Again, you're completely missing the point. Luke's entire conflict with his own masters in ROTJ over whether or not Luke should kill Vader is an extension of the Jedi's entire idea behind detachment from one's own emotions in the PT. It's because of Luke's rejection of this that he manages to sway Vader in the first place. His compassion for his father and placing his life in his hands is what defeats Palpatine. So, again, why would he adhere to the ideals of the PT Jedi the way you're saying he would after this?

The two lessons he teaches her are completely unhelpful and not based in anything that was actually a part of the story prior to this.

He tells Rey that the Jedi don't own the Force but he says it as if his predecessors have long insisted that it was when that clearly wasn't the case. The Old Republic Jedi never asserted such a thing. What their ideological problem was concerned how one interacted with the Force in the first place, hence the whole idea surrounding either being in touch with one's emotions or detaching yourself from them completely.

The second is also completely unhelpful nonsense since he can say that the Jedi were not what they seemed as much as he likes but it's a comical assertion when one realizes he's saying that an order which helped preserve peace for a millennium was a failure, especially when contrasted with his own errors. None of these things have to do with her. He's just mewling for the entire subplot. The fact that you bring up the texts is also an issue considering that they just seem to be an "out" so that people can say that Rey somehow "learned" more things from him. It's lazy and does nothing to establish a compelling relationship between the two of them. Also, I'm not talking about Force ability at all in this instance since Rey seems to be perfectly capable of taking care of herself at all times and can just seem to pull advanced techniques out of her ass whenever she feels like it. I'm talking about actual lessons in regards to her own emotions and prejudices. Which is something the entire trilogy seems to neglect since it can never seem to decide what they actually are.

 

You know the PT was'nt made for over a decade after the OT came out, right - when ROTJ was made this "conflict" you speak of did not exist in the way your saying it does, becuase we did not yet have the PT to recontextualize it; this is all hindsight stuff your reffering to - prior to the PT we had no reason to think Luke was "rejecting" any ideals of the old order, and even post-PT he's not really doing that so much as he's refusing to follow the path Obi-Wan and Yoda personally (not the entire Jedi Order) thought he should take/was nessesery to take.

Maybe your misunderstanding what I'm saying, becuase I'm not saying he would adhere to all the ideals of the PT Jedi. He very clearly did adhere to some of them, though, becuase he would'nt have reformed the Order if he did'nt, and even if he did'nt adhere to any of them at all he can still lionize and idolize the old order and its sucessess.

Just becuase we never see them assert such a thing does'nt mean they never did; TLJ was just expanding on the lore of the universe (in the same way ESB did after ANH and the PT did after the OT) and not even without precident, as the EU presented the cosmic force in a similer way and had plenty of Force-based organizations that were neither Jedi nor Sith (some of which have already been carried over into the new canon).

Light or Dark, whichever side comes out on top the Force is just going to keep on chugging along, and neither the Jedi nor the Sith have a monopoly on its use.

It 100 percent has to do with Rey, becuase if Rey's going to presume to try the same thing he tried she's going to have to keep in mind both his failures and the failures of those before him, which is what he was telling here there - he made the mistake of letting it all go to his head, and he's telling her not to fall victim to the same hubris and arrogance.

And Luke's efforts where'nt a failure - the Rey is alive and a Jedi poised to contiue his legacy and and the emperor is defeated once more at the hands of her with the aid of Kylo/Ben, so the despite his stumbling and his death the Jedi Order is still getting rebuilt and its owes the fact in no small part to his efforts.

Just becuase you don't like it does'nt make it an "issue," and just becuase you personally found Rey and Luke's relationship uncompelling does'nt mean others did'nt find it compelling - I did, am I wrong to have thought that?

Telekinesis and healing are'nt "advanced techniques" since we know freaking infants can do them based on pure instinct, and we have no reason to think mind tricking mindlessly obedient brainwashed drones after three tries or shooting lighting from your fingers becuase your really angry is particulerly hard to do either.

Which is what the three lessons given by Luke (prejudices) and her experience on the Supremacy (emotions) were.