#star wars viii | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

david-talks-sw · 1 year

Text

Luke Skywalker in 'The Last Jedi' (1/2)

Luke in The Last Jedi... love it or hate it, it's a difficult subject.

I personally stand somewhere in the middle. I don't think Luke was "ruined"... I'd argue that, from a purely in-universe perspective, his subplot actually tracks with what was previously established in the original films.

There are issues, but I think they are mainly found on an out-of-universe/structural level (which I'll get into in post 2/2). For now, let's take a deep dive and unpack why this portrayal isn't all that problematic.

The most commonly-heard argument is that:

"They ruined Luke's character! He would never go into exile or abandon his sister and friends!"

Simply put, Luke used to be:

an optimist

so brave he'd risk his life to save his friends,

aspired to become a Jedi.

Whereas, in The Last Jedi, he's:

jaded and depressed,

hides/abandons his sister and friends, like a coward,

says the Jedi need to die?!

Now the fact is... Luke is 24 years older when he goes into exile, 30 years older in The Last Jedi. People change, with age.

In Luke's case, he matured from an impatient kid who'd rashly run to save his friends, like in Empire Strikes Back, to a grown-up who makes hard choices and restrains himself from doing that, even though he desperately wants to.

Luke tells himself this is a self-sacrifice, this is for the greater good.

"Because he’s the last Jedi and a symbol of that it then becomes this self-sacrifice, he has take himself out of it, when he knows his friends are dying, when the thing he’d most like to do is get back in the fight." - Rian Johnson, The Empire Film Podcast, 2018

And Rian Johnson didn't want Luke to come across as a coward, so he also gave Luke an argument that initially seems to make sense:

The Jedi way is flawed and inevitably leads to arrogance. Proof: the Sith originally came from Jedi. His own new order is no exception to that rule, even if he thought it was (in his arrogance, he believed his own legend).

So if he leaves and stays in exile? No more Jedi, no more Jedi-turned-darksiders that can mess up the galaxy.

The Force will keep trying to balance itself and a new, worthier source will appear (in the form of Rey).

But while his reasoning that "the Jedi are inevitably arrogant" seems sound and reasonable... it's wrong.

Just like Dooku's reasoning that "the Jedi are corrupt" seems sound, but is ultimately wrong.

Just like Anakin's rationalization that "the Jedi are evil" seems sound nope, that one doesn't even seem sound, it's just plain wrong.

Where is it wrong, in Luke's case?

Well, he's rationalizing his actions by blaming the Jedi religion, instead of admitting his own failure.

"The notion of, 'Nope, toss this all away and find something new,' is not really a valid choice, I think. Ultimately, Luke's exile and his justifications for it are all covering over his guilt over Kylo." - Rian Johnson, The Art of The Last Jedi, 2017

"In his own way, [Luke is] trying to disconnect, he’s trying to throw away the past, he’s saying 'Let’s kill [the Jedi] religion. It’s the thing that’s messing us up, thins thing right here, let’s kill it.’ And the truth is, it’s a personal failure. It’s not religion, it’s his own human nature that’s betrayed him." - Rian Johnson, The Empire Film Podcast, 2018

He fucked up, plain and simple.

But it's not because “he’s a Jedi and that made him arrogant and the Jedi mentality is flawed”, as he claims early on in the movie.

He failed because he's flawed. Luke is human and had a moment of weakness where he was scared shitless and acted on instinct.

Yoda's spirit helps him realize this, and he fixes his mistake by allowing Leia and the resistance to save themselves. And as he does it, he acknowledges the importance of the Jedi and their teachings.

And it's also why, in The Rise of Skywalker, he has the maturity to admit that he wasn't staying on the island out of some self-sacrificial gesture, as he kept telling himself. Truth is, he was afraid. Afraid he'd screw up again.

Do the movies go about this in an emotionally-satisfying way? That's debatable. But, on paper, I don't think Luke's behavior in The Last Jedi is too much of a shark-jump considering how

THE ORIGINAL IDEA CAME FROM GEORGE LUCAS!

In the couple of months after the Disney sale, Lucas developed the Sequels with Michael Arndt in late 2012/early 2013, and concept art was made by artists like Christian Alzmann.

Note: the image on the left got a “Fabouloso” stamp of approval from Lucas!

Lucas’ sequels would feature a Luke Skywalker who was a figure like the jaded, reclusive Colonel Kurtz in the movie Apocalypse Now (which, fun fact, Lucas helped write and was originally set to direct).

The reason why Luke was in self-imposed exile wasn’t specified, all we know is that he was:

hiding from the world in a cave,

haunted by the betrayal of one of his students,

and spiritually in a dark place.

Other concept artists, like James Clyne, tried to illustrate the First Jedi Temple and some of the designs were approved by Lucas, such as the one below.

Eventually, Kira the female Jedi-wannabe protagonist (who eventually became Rey) would seek him out so he can train her.

This Luke would be a much more prominent part of Episode VII (instead of only appearing at the end) but still died at the end of Episode VIII.

For sources and more information about George Lucas’ plans for the Sequel Trilogy, read this post.

The only part that wasn't detailed by Lucas were the specifics of why he went into exile. But all in all, this sounds pretty similar to what we got in The Last Jedi.

"Luke would never try to kill Ben!”

I agree. And he didn’t try to kill Ben. He stopped himself.

And this version of the event?

This didn’t happen.

What Kylo tells Rey is his version of the story. And he thinks he’s telling the truth... but his recollection of the event is warped as this was obviously a very traumatic event for him.

"I don't think he's lying actually. In my mind, that was his experience. [...] I think that it's probably twisted a little bit by Kylo's own anger and his own prejudices against Luke, but I feel like he's actually telling her the truth of his experience." - Rian Johnson, Star Wars: The Last Jedi commentary, 2017

The narrative frames the third version of the story as the one that’s objectively how events went down. Because Rey believes him, and Rey is both the protagonist and a stand-in for the audience.

Now, if you think Luke’s word is unreliable and you have an easier time trusting Kylo’s version of the story, go to town.

But I think that if you actually believe would Luke would never try to kill Ben, you’d take Luke's second retelling of the story at face value.

I know I do.

“Okay, but he would never consider killing a child, like Ben. He saw the good in Darth Vader!”

First off, Luke refers to Ben as "a scared boy" because, he's a middle-aged man. But objectively, Ben was 23 years old.

But also, I mean... with Vader, Luke actually had the luxury ignorance.

Do you think would have truly gone on that Second Death Star if he had actually witnessed Vader:

choke his Padmé,

kill Obi-Wan,

actively try to kill Ahsoka,

murder Jedi younglings,

betray and hunt down his other Jedi brothers and sisters,

and cold-bloodedly kill countless innocents, one by one?

There’s a difference between watching him kill Ben Kenobi (who still ‘lived’ as a ghost and talked to him seconds later) and hearing a couple of rebel pilots get blasted in the trench run, and actually seeing all the horrors he’s committed.

Don't get me wrong, Luke knows Vader is evil, absolutely. But if he had seen this side of Vader, the needlessly cruel side...

... I'm not sure he'd have been as compassionate.

Proof: Obi-Wan, someone who deeply loved Anakin (to the point where he could never bring himself to kill him), someone that genuinely wishes that Luke can redeem him... also feels that, realistically, attempting to do so would be pointless.

And hell, even without really seeing all the massacres Vader committed, the second the latter threatened his sister, Luke went berserk and almost killed him!

So the question becomes:

“What could make Luke - trained Jedi Master, long-time optimist and overall compassionate to a fault - consider killing Ben?”

All we’re told is that he looked into Ben’s mind and saw darkness and the destruction, pain, death, and the end of everything he loves.

The specifics are left to our imagination. They could include:

the sight of Kylo slaughtering his parents and Chewie with a smile on his blood-smeared face,

the smell of Han's burning flesh in the air,

the wails of Chewbacca as he's run through by Kylo,

the faint sound of Leia's tears hitting the ground,

the destruction of the New Republic's citizens and planets.

Whatever it may have been, it was intense. Because Force-induced visions are vivid as hell, as has been shown throughout the franchise.

It's not like watching something on a TV, you're there, all your senses are affected in an extremely powerful way.

And the vision Luke experienced scared him so much that even shortly after it, when looking at a sleeping young man, all he sees is that evil monster from the vision. So he tremblingly draws his saber.

But it's evident that Luke wasn't thinking clearly or rationally.

His base emotions had taken the wheel, he was being tempted by the Dark Side.

"He doesn’t give in to the Dark Side, it’s a moment of temptation to the Dark Side. It reminds me very much of when Vader is tempting Luke, when Luke is underneath the stairs in [Return of the] Jedi, lit with that very beautiful half-and-half, the duality of these two sides of him being pulled. And that’s really what that moment is for me, it’s a moment of temptation to the Dark Side for Luke." - Rian Johnson, IGN, 2017

And yet despite seeing all that... Luke catches himself.

It's not the first time that Luke almost does something horrible to a family member and catches himself. Again, 24 years prior, he almost murdered his own father in a fit of rage.

The scene in Ben's hut intentionally parallels that outburst he has in Return of the Jedi.

A terrible future is presented before Luke.

He reacts instinctively, is tempted by the Dark Side.

He snaps out of it.

Even the angle and framing of the shot is designed to match:

tumblr_video

"Some of these parallels are just “it’s a close-up of the same character” but this one was very intentional. It’s why I had him look down at his mechanical hand holding the saber." - Rian Johnson, Twitter, 2019

The only real difference is that, in Return of the Jedi, Luke only comes to his senses after a frenzied onslaught during which he actively tried to kill his own Dad.

24 years later, despite having witnessed that terrible future even more vividly than he did on the Second Death Star, he catches himself merely seconds later. Instead of going on a whole rampage, he stops the moment the lightsaber turns on.

I'd call that "progress".

"But Luke should've learned his lesson and known better than to give in to the Dark Side!"

Resisting the temptation of the Dark Side is by no means a one-and-done thing. It's not a power-up that you get, it's a constant struggle.

"I think it disrespects the character of Luke by treating him not as a true mythic hero overcoming recurring wounds & flaws, but as a video game character who has achieved a binary, permanent power-up." - Rian Johnson, Twitter, 2019

Dave Filoni says so too.

"In the end, it’s about fundamentally becoming selfless, moreso than selfish. It seems so simple, but it’s so hard to do. And when you’re tempted by the dark side, you don’t overcome it once in life and then you’re good. It’s a constant." - Dave Filoni, Rebels Remembered, 2019

Hell, even George Lucas stated something along those lines:

"The Sith practice the dark side and are way out of balance. The Jedi aren’t as much out of balance because they’re the light side of the Force. They still have the bad side of the Force in them, but they keep it in check. It’s always there, so it can always erupt if you let your guard down." - George Lucas, The Star Wars Archives: 1999-2005, 2020

Learning the lesson once doesn't mean you've learned it forever. Especially with the Dark Side, which poses a never-ending battle.

In-universe examples: Anakin learned to let go of his attachments during the “Padawan Lost” arc of TCW.

A year and a half later, he’s butchering kids because he can’t let go of his attachments.

And during wartime, Yoda found himself repressing his darker instincts and ignoring their existence. Thus, when he had to face them, he struggled to acknowledge and control them.

So considering Luke didn't go "rampage mode" with Ben, as he did when he tried to kill Vader, I think he deserves some credit.

Finally, I've heard this insane argument many times, as a response to the above points:

"Yeah but Luke wasn't actually trying to kill Vader! He was holding back, he was trying to keep him alive!"

And, uh... no. He wasn't.

He lost his shit, folks. And almost killed Vader.

Like, right here?

⬆️ If Vader hadn’t moved his saber to intercept Luke’s blade, Luke would’ve stabbed Vader in the face.

⬆️ If Vader hadn’t held his sword up in time, SWISH, there goes the top of his helmet AT LEAST, if not the rest of his head.

⬆️ If Vader hadn’t dodged he’d be chopped in two.

⬆️ If Vader’s arm gave out slightly sooner, if his blade faltered just a little lower, if he loosened his grip on his saber a bit, Vader would be cleaved in two.

My point is that if you swing at someone with a lightsaber? They’ll get chopped. And if you aim for the head or the chest? You’re trying to kill them.

Before Luke got a grip, throughout that whole rampage, the only thing that kept Vader alive was his own skill.

Otherwise, Luke would’ve murdered him in a fit of rage.

If Luke was holding back, then the theme of "resisting the Dark Side" completely falls apart.

There's no indication that he was restraining himself, in he script.

And just look at the imagery.

Luke is surrounded by darkness, symbolizing how he's being seduced by the Dark Side, he's being tempted to give in to his anger towards the man who hurt his friends and took his hand.

Then Vader threatens Leia.

And the next time we see Luke, he's silhouetted, his face is all black.

Luke was originally trying to hold back and talk Vader down, but fails to control his instincts and gives in to fear, to anger, to the Dark Side... and goes all out.

He swings at his father furiously and keeps swinging, until he cuts off Vader's hand... and he is about to deliver the final blow…

… when he sees Vader’s mechanical hand and realizes that by giving in to his anger, that path will inevitably lead him to become exactly like this half-machine half-man laying at his feet. That’s where the path to power leads.

And so he makes a decision:

He’s a Jedi. Like his father before him. His compassion for Anakin is stronger than his hate for Vader.

That's the narrative intent.

It has to be.

Because if he had been "holding back" throughout that entire bit, then the stakes are lowered immeasurably, John Williams' saddening score is misplaced, the lightsaber choreography is misleading, etc.

For the above-listed reasons, I think Luke's portrayal in The Last Jedi doesn't really contradict anything in the previously-established lore. It works, it's the typical "old cowboy needs to get back in the saddle" trope. Frankly, I can defend this subject all day long... so where's the problem?

The problem comes in at an out-of-universe level. While it's not inconsistent... it's also not satisfying.

The thing is, if you...

... take one of the most brave and optimistic characters in the franchise, then open the film saying "well, now he's jaded and in hiding", without giving us context on how he became that way...

... take a character whose arc was specifically about controlling his emotions, then show him be ruled by those emotions without providing context for what made him do that...

... then that kills the suspension of disbelief, for a lot of fans.

And, as such, they'll have a much harder time going along with what you're saying.

Because "show, don't tell" is one of the most basic principles in visual storytelling. And we weren't shown:

"Ben being increasingly violent during training",

"Luke sitting Ben down and having a talk with him, only to be ignored" or

"the horrors Luke saw in Ben's head".

I have no doubt that those things happened, in-universe.

But if we're talking about a movie-going experience, many were left emotionally-unsatisfied.

Because all that stuff was in there... but only subtextually. It was up to the fans to imagine on the details. Normally, I'd argue that's what Star Wars is all about: allowing fans to dream and think outside the box. But in this specific case, I think many fans would've rather had a more complete and explicit story. Because it's Luke Skywalker.

And yet... even these structural and writing issues had a logic behind them, and if you ask me... there was no other direction that this story could be taken in.

We'll explore this in more detail in part 2/2.

#Luke Skywalker #The Last Jedi #Rian Johnson #Star Wars episode VIII #star wars #jedi order #meta #long post #Ahch-To #in defense of the jedi #episode 8 #Ben Solo #Kylo Ren #Mark Hamill #star wars sequel trilogy

245 notes · View notes

david-talks-sw · 1 year

Text

Luke Skywalker in 'The Last Jedi' (2/2)

OK, so in Part 1/2 of this post, we explored why Luke's TLJ characterization isn't really inconsistent with what had previously been established in Star Wars lore. It tracks. Dare I say: it works.

And yet... something still feels off, right?

Well, the reason for this is because Luke's character development is impacted by the film's structure, which in turn is impacted by - of all things - Poe's lack of development in Episode VII! Just hear me out!

The intention: Making the audience feel the same emotions as the protagonist, deuteragonists and antagonist.

This is what most movies strive for. Unless the film is trying to go for some dramatic irony, you want your audience to be on the same page with your protagonist, emotionally-speaking.

And y'know what? Rian Johnson does this very well.

Overall, he displays a very good grasp of making us, the audience, feel the same emotions as a film’s protagonist (generally, the main character, whose POV we follow) or deuteragonist (the ‘secondary main character’).

Rey was expecting to meet the Luke from the Original Trilogy, the Luke from Legends... and instead was disappointed to meet an old jaded hermit. Just like many of the fans were.

Finn is fooled by DJ, mistaking him for an archetypal "misfit with a heart of gold". Just like the fans were.

Poe is increasingly frustrated with Holdo, just like we were.

Call it "meta", call it "subversive", the bottom line is that some of the narrative choices that a lot of fans criticize the film for are intentionally placed there to put you in the same mental state as the characters you're following, even during the film's twists.

But as a result, if a character isn’t the protagonist (Rey), or the deuteragonists (Poe or Finn), or even the antagonist (Kylo)... they'll barely get any development.

They might get one or two scenes for themselves tops, but overall secondary characters like Luke, or Holdo, or DJ will mostly be shown through the filter of Rey or Poe’s or Finn's POV.

The Problem: Luke isn't a protagonist or deuteragonist, so he isn't developed to the audience's satisfaction.

Don't get me wrong: Luke has the second-most screen time in the whole film, but that's because Rey is the one with the most screen time, and he's primarily a character in her storyline.

To be fair, he does have his own subplot, he's the spiritual center of the whole film. But concretely, he’s one step above support characters like Holdo, Leia, Rose and DJ. We're barely shown his own POV and mainly view him through Rey's lens.

Like, there's a reason why in this scene...

... we don't see what Luke witnessed in Ben’s mind, simply his reaction to it: Rey didn’t see it either.

All three "Rashomon" flashbacks are what Rey is picturing in her mind when she’s being told three different versions of the story. She doesn't see what Luke witnessed, so we don't see it either.

And you know what? On paper... this is also not really an issue. It's actually quite standard. I mean, Yoda doesn't get much backstory or an arc in Empire Strikes Back. He's just the mentor figure, and we see him through Luke's POV.

There's no arguing that Luke in TLJ receives much more development than Yoda does in ESB.

But y’know what?

Yoda was also never the protagonist of a whole other trilogy.

So if you're gonna tell an audience that "the protagonist of the previous trilogy strayed from the path and is now a completely different person" - even if they eventually make their way back with a character arc - I don’t think it’s out of order for audience members to expect more development than a regular mentor archetype.

Context is expected, and when it isn't delivered, that'll kill the suspension of disbelief, for many fans. They're not just disappointed in Luke like Rey is, they're not immersed in the movie anymore.

So how do you go for what Rian was going while also trying to keep about half the fans from jumping ship?

The Solution (?) Delving deeper into Luke.

So let’s suppose Luke was treated like a deuteragonist. Suppose we see his own POV more, rather than just seeing him through Rey’s eyes. Would that help? And what would that look like?

Firstly, we keep that deleted scene of him mourning Han’s loss.

Or we show it like in the comic adaptation of TLJ, with Luke getting angry at his decision to cut himself off from the Force, unintentionally levitating objects until Chewie consoles him.

WHAT IT DOES: Either version humanizes Luke, shows who he is beneath the jaded mask he's putting on, gives audience a chance to mourn Han with him.

We keep that deleted scene of him explaining to Rey why he thinks the Jedi were flawed, also known as the “3rd lesson scene”.

WHAT IT DOES: Spells out Luke's rationalization that the Jedi Order needs to end. Marks the beginning of Luke's wake up call.

We add one or two additional short flashbacks of Ben gradually becoming darker and unhinged. Maybe he harms one of his fellow students in a fit of rage.

WHAT IT DOES: Clarifies that Ben was going through a dark period and that's why Luke went to confront him in his hut. He didn't just saunter into Ben's hut, sabers blazing.

Maybe halfway through the film, we see Luke pack his bag as he prepares to rescue his friends with Rey, only to find her communicating with Kyloe.

After all, the novelization shows that, upon opening himself to the Force and sensing Leia, he immediately decides to get back in the game. So if that’s not just something Jason Fry added to embellish stuff, let’s see that.

WHAT IT DOES: Drives home the fact that Luke realizes his mistake. (Although, it might also take away from the subsequent scene with Yoda).

Finally, let’s actually see what Luke saw in Ben’s mind: him killing Lor San Tekka, killing Han, killing Leia, murdering Chewie and countless more innocents all with a smile on his face.

WHAT IT DOES: Provides context for Luke's extreme reaction.

Most of these things are already technically canon, the only difference is that it would be shown on screen. And if all these elements are added, then Luke’s reasons for staying away and his reaction in Ben’s hut are already more understandable.

So where’s the flaws in this solution?

Solution Flaw #1: Plot twist would be ruined.

Talking about this one:

Again, we're seeing Luke THROUGH Rey's POV, for the most part. Our reaction is - intentionally - the same reaction as Rey.

The whole point of the twist is that

we, with Rey, believe Kylo can be redeemed, because

we, like Rey, remember Luke redeemed Vader.

So when she realizes “oh shit, Luke was right, he’s too far gone”... we react that way too.

But if we had seen Ben’s turn as well, if we had seen how he was during his training, if we had seen what Luke’s saw in Ben’s mind, we would all collectively agree with Luke and think that Rey is making a mistake in trying to redeem Kylo.

So when Rey walks away from Luke, rather than hoping she succeeds, we’d just be waiting for her to inevitably fail. We'd be thinking:

"Rey, you moron, you're walking into a trap and Kylo isn't gonna turn!"

Emotionally-speaking, we would be detached from the protagonist.

Solution Flaw #2: Increase in the runtime at the cost of other scenes.

The Last Jedi is already the longest film in the franchise. Adding just three of the above-suggestions would increase that runtime, which wouldn’t work. So you’d need to take something out.

But Finn and Poe’s storylines are already stripped down to their bare bones as it is. Hell, so was the Rey/Luke storyline, for that matter.

Actually, wait... why do we have three storylines, in the first place?

After all, if we look at The Empire Strikes Back, they only have two storylines, right?

The protagonist, Luke, goes to Dagobah.

The deuteragonists, Han and Leia, evade the Empire.

Main plot & subplot. Great.

Wouldn't it be better to just have Poe and Finn do the Canto Bight storyline together? That would give us sme remaining time to focus on Luke’s past, right? Where’s the issue?

Well, Rian Johnson put it this way:

Bottom line, in The Force Awakens, Poe is a clear-cut character. Simple as that. He’s charismatic and fun, but there isn’t much room for him to grow.

A lot of people compare his character to Han, but there's an issue with that comparison (besides the obvious fact that Finn is Han and Poe is Leia)...

In ANH, Han has an arc. He's the philosophical antagonist of the film, he's only out for himself which conflicts with Luke's attempts to help others. Han goes from being a selfish irresponsible gun-slinger to taking responsibility and becoming a selfless rebel, a part of something bigger. Arc concluded.

(Hell, this very reason is why Harrison Ford didn’t wanna keep playing him and lobbied to kill him off.)

So in ESB, Leia is the one who has the arc. Han is just being himself. Leia is the one who must slowly come to terms with the fact that she does love him, despite him being a total nerf-herder. So she and Han bicker, there’s conflict there, but there’s also an underlying affection.

As such, when Poe doesn’t have an arc in TFA, and is already on great terms with Finn, then there’s no conflict if you put them together in a subplot.

And conflict is crucial, in storytelling. If it's absent, then the story becomes boring.

As a result, Rian Johnson had to create conflict and growth for Poe.

Which means that, now, a third storyline is thrown in the mix... and the pacing and development of the other two are affected by this. Some really good scenes need to be cut, some stuff needs to get shuffled around.

For example, remember this deleted scene, from further up?

In the commentary, Rian explained that the reason it wasn’t in the film is because it didn’t intercut well with the other two storylines. *Three and a half, if you wanna count Kylo's personal scenes.

As such, there’s no space to add more scenes to develop Luke's perspective.

And if Rian made more space, well, that wouldn't work either. Because while Luke is the spiritual core of the film... this isn't his movie. He's not the protagonist anymore. But he used to be, and if you show him too much (not as Rey's mentor figure, that is, but as a protagonist or deuteragonist), he'll take the spotlight off the new cast with the snap of a finger.

When Michael Arndt was working on the Sequels with George Lucas in 2012, he encountered this same issue:

“Early on I tried to write versions of the story where [Rey] is at home, her home is destroyed, and then she goes on the road and meets Luke. And then she goes and kicks the bad guy’s ass. It just never worked and I struggled with this. This was back in 2012. It just felt like every time Luke came in and entered the movie, he just took it over. Suddenly you didn’t care about your main character anymore because, ‘Oh f*ck, Luke Skywalker's here. I want to see what he’s going to do’.” - Michael Arndt, Entertainment Weekly, 2015

And I'm guessing this is a problem that JJ had to deal with too, hence why Luke was pushed to the end of Episode VII: so as to give the new characters a chance to be developed a bit more, first.

“In a very general sense, the original idea for Episode VII started midway through what we now know as Episode VIII...” - Pablo Hidalgo, Twitter, 2016

There's finally the fact that, while most of those ideas can make Luke's fall more understandable... his story isn't about "how he fell".

It's about how he got back up. The whole point of the film is that even when you've reached your lowest point you can still inspire and be inspired by hope.

So while adding any of the above scenes would only reinforce what was already shown in the movie, be it explicit or subtextual... they wouldn't ADD anything to the theme of learning from failure and getting back in the saddle.

Do I care about Luke’s characterization in TLJ...?

In spite of what the length and intricacy of these two posts might indicate... I don’t, really 😅

Like, sure, I wish more had been done with the character, but Luke was never really my childhood hero, Obi-Wan was.

So Luke in TLJ isn’t a gaping wound in my chest. I didn't whine about it in 2017, nor did I shed tears of joy and said “he’s finally back” when we saw him in The Mandalorian, for example.

Like, it was an awesome scene, but in my mind Luke never left.

Also I’m the type of Star Wars fan who’ll tolerate any addition to the canon by virtue of it being new Star Wars content.

So even if that addition is something I didn’t enjoy during the viewing, I still focus on the positive and roll with it, I come up with a headcanon that'll make it work.

Because you get to do that, with a transmedia franchise!

If you don’t like how it went down in the movie? There's always a comic around the corner that'll retcon it and/or retroactively make it better... that's how it was for the Prequels.

But for the Sequels, it's difficult. There's a scarcity of transmedia content, when it comes to stuff set around the Sequels era.

I mean, can you think of any

Luke-centric work

that serves as a meaningful addendum to what's seen of him in the Sequels?

A novel, a comic issue and a distantly-relevant manga.

That's it.

(The Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett are too soon after ROTJ to have any meaningful impact on Luke's journey in the Sequels. Some people see Luke's behavior in those shows as "the beginning of his failure", but I covered why I don't think this is really the case, here.)

Instead of just three items, how about a comic mini-series focusing on the year Luke spent training Leia, or on his adventures across the galaxy as he tries to rebuild the Jedi Order? Maybe he meets Cal Kestis, or Quinlan Vos? Maybe he needs to face against an Oppo Rancisis who was consumed by the darkness, post-Order 66?

Or better yet, how about a video game centered on Luke, in the style of Fallen Order or Jedi Academy?

Get Mark Hamill to motion cap it, he's done it before.

This would also allow the fans who grew up with the powerhouse that is Legends Grandmaster Luke Skywaker to have some fun!

Many fans wanted to see Luke in action, in TLJ, and instead got a pretend-samurai fight. Which is nice, powerful and symbolic, he goes out like a true Jedi, it makes the Force more than a superpower... but it's not a lightsaber duel. In a game, though? Players can go to town.

I dunno... any additional content would've smoothed the blow for many people who didn't like what was done with Luke in TLJ. Sure, you'd always have people who just hated the whole thing, but if transmedia content helped reduce the hate for the Prequels, it could've done the same with Luke.

I'm not sure why that route wasn't taken.

177 notes · View notes