Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

[RogueIce]

You're missing the point. Was Thrawn a different Imperial? Yes. But he was still an Imperial. Hell he was even cruising around in the same old ISDs from the movies, yet the trailers show new designs buy you whine "too close" while Thrawn was in the same damn ship.

What is an Imperial anyway, aside from an English guy who may or may not be Force-chokeable?

Thrawn was. He was an officer of the Galactic Empire, continuing the fight of said Galactic Empire, to restore that Galactic Empire.

These new guys? Well they have a certain visual commonality I guess, but that doesn't mean they're the "Empire" we knew from the OT. They could be something entirely different. It's like saying the Republic was the Empire because of the clone troopers and Venators. Sure they became the Empire, but they weren't there yet. By the same token these guys could be what the "Empire" evolved into, or an offshoot of it...but that doesn't mean it's the same First Galactic Empire created by Palpatine in ROTS. That one, arguably, died with him over Endor.

[Iroscato]

I'd actually like the fights to be rougher and a little less skilled than the impressive but over-choreographed dances of the prequels. It does make sense as it's a re-emerging art, so we have two relative novices dueling, mixing in a few sucker punches and generally making a mess of their surroundings from the occasional wild swing

[Adam Reynolds]

As a random question, I wonder if Rey's staff is actually her way of concealing a lightsaber?

[Mr Bean]

I'd actually like the fights to be rougher and a little less skilled than the impressive but over-choreographed dances of the prequels. It does make sense as it's a re-emerging art, so we have two relative novices dueling, mixing in a few sucker punches and generally making a mess of their surroundings from the occasional wild swing

I know I'd get chuckle more if it turns into "Lightsaber barroom brawl" with two people swinging lightsabers like baseball bats, tossing things around with the force and really exploiting that cutting ability to make improvised barricades and weapons.

[jwl]

If you aren't going to change everything about the series, what would you like to retain, if not jedi and sith?

Cinematography? The score? Having scifi battles on a massive scale? I think that Star Wars at its very core is about narrating a "history" of the Galaxy as an epic. It's like the Iliad, Odyssey and other forms of epic poetry/story.

Imagine you made a star wars movie with wars-like cinematography, star wars music and big sci-fi battles, then changed all of the names which refer to the star wars continuity.

If you were to show that movie to someone, they would not recognize it as star wars. They might notice the star wars theme tune, but they would go: "oh, there's a movie with the star wars theme tune"; not "oh, there's a star wars movie".

[Adam Reynolds]

Instead of splitting these up I will make two general points that are largely an answer to ray245's questions.
1. The fundamental strength of Jedi, that which they lost in the prequels, is their ability to see into and thus manipulate the future. It is only though the conflicts of Jedi or Sith that this ability is weakened.

In the right context, during the Clone Wars, bounty hunters, droids and clone troopers are all capable of killing Jedi. But those attacks would never have been possible if not for the fact that the Dark Side was clouding their vision. The key weakness that most forget is that without either the Dark Side or Light Side clouding the judgement of Jedi and Sith respectively, they can sense a potential ambush. This weakness was a major plot point in AOTC. Notice that Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were never in any serious mortal danger in TPM until Darth Maul appeared, despite facing entire armies of battle droids. That is what would happen if a Jedi had no Sith to face. It wouldn't be a very interesting story.

The only reliable counter to a Jedi is a Sith(and vice versa). It is notable that in all of the films apart from AOTC the Jedi and Sith spend nearly all of their time in major battles purely dealing with each other. While other factors such as insufficient numbers of Jedi can be a mitigating factor, their ability to see the future is such an overpowering advantage that it needs to be countered. That counter is their opposite, the only thing that can weaken their ability to sense the future.

2. The second key reason why Sith are inevitable in a Star Wars sequel is that it comes down to the fundamental Taoist duality of The Force. Just as you cannot have Yin without Yang, you cannot have Light without Dark. It might not be full Sith, but there will almost always be Dark Side Force users in some capacity. The Jedi might think they are extinct at different points, but there is no evidence they ever will be fully. '

Of course ideal really would be Force users who strike a balance between the two. Yoda, the avatar of the Light, lost to Palpatine. Mace Windu, who had a much darker presence in the Force, as show by his purple lightsaber(being a mix of red and blue), won. Similarly, Luke is no match for his father when purely using the Light, it is only when he taps into the Dark Side by unleashing his anger that his is able to defeat him. But by turning back before landing the killing blow, he was able to stay on the right path.

The problem with the above is how hard it is to truly strike a balance. Anakin tried in AOTC and ROTS and failed utterly. Though in the end Vader suceeded by turning back toward the Light Side in order to kill Palpatine. The problem is that as long as you have people trying to strike a balance, you will have those who fall. And as long as those who fall have the ability to organize, you will have Sith. It was only at times of the height of the Jedi Order's influence that they were apparently able to wipe out the Sith(and they obviously still failed).

As for the chosen one, Anakin Skywalker destroyed the Bane line that resulted in Darth Plagieus who experimented in the Force to the degree that it created Anakin. Destroying that line was his purpose, not that he would be capable of completely obliterating the Dark Side.

I do. I grew up with the Naboo fighters together with the X-Wings. I think that by being a little too young to let nostalgia influence by judgement on the prequels, I don't necessarily have to hold everything in the OT as being "better".

I like the prequels myself, but the designs aren't nearly as good as those in the original films. Naboo fighters are objectively a worse design than X-wings. R2 wouldn't even fit inside it properly. In the TPM ICS his head has to physically detach from his body in order to fit.

The point is that if you can't think of someone different for the heroes to face off with, do not ( from a writing point of view at the least) try and make a movie out of it. The news that Abrams threw out Lucas's script makes me wonder if Abrams really did have something different to tell, or did he threw out Lucas's story because it is too different? I think story writing isn't something Abrams is good at.

So it's good he has Lawrence Kasden working with him. My guess is that the script(actually it was probably more like story notes) was written before Return of the Jedi and likely wouldn't have fit into the current continuity with both ROTJ and the prequels.

Moreover, I liked the idea of Vader ending the Sith for good. It shows the galaxy entering a different era for his children to built.

see above.

In addition, we know so little about these Sith(they are clearly not the same order Anakin destroyed), they might be weak enough that his children largely did rebuild the galaxy. The new Battlefront game references the New Republic beating the Empire, as did Star Wars in 100 Scenes that I mentioned earlier. I suspect that the New Republic is active in some fashion. Someone else mentioned the idea that the Resistance is only called that for political reasons in a similar fashion to the Flying Tigers, perhaps that is the case.

I know I have been using that word, but who says that Kylo Ren is actually a full fledged Sith? Maybe he is closer to Ventress in level of ability, unable to really do much in terms of truly tapping into the Dark Side.

I do not think we need to over rely on in-universe explanation why the design stayed the same. Films are visual medium. They uses art as a way of expressing ideas to the audience. The aim of the art design team shouldn't be about whether they can reuse old designs, but whether they can communicate easily to the audience that TFA is set in a different era. That the passage of time has passed.

And we clearly see a different era given that we see a star destroyer half buried in sand. To me that shows a different era far more than a new starfighter design would. Did you like the clones even though they looked just like stormtroopers?

The point is a SW story has been told in an episode without relying on the idea that there must be a lightsaber duel.

But the series itself did have lightsaber duels, especially the standalone movie, which had two. My point was that a single episode is hardly representative. There were entire episodes that were purely about politics. Would you want the new movie to be that?

Being able to quantify the force potential of someone does not equate to understanding the Force. The Jedi has no idea how someone can use the force to retain an identity after death for example. Or how Anakin was conceived.

The Jedi might not know how Anakin was conceived, but Plagieus likely did. The point is that Force users in general actually do understand the Force.

But they are fundamentally still the same thing. It's would be like calling an Islamic terrorist the same as a Nazi simply because they were considered as evil to us. It's just very unimaginative to me.

But they have been refereed to as Islamofascists, at least by Americans(not that the term really has any meaning).

In his most basic form, he is someone holding a red lightsaber and being the evil guy.

So why did you like the prequels if they mostly reused Sith as antagonists?

So what is wrong for asking for a greater degree of change than what we have seen so far?

Because this change would alter the fundamental core of the story. The prequels are a different part of the same conflict. What you are suggesting is a completely different one.

Sure, there might be some differences from the old Empire, but visually they are the exact same bunch of people. They use stormtroopers (with different helmet) and they fly TIE-fighters. That to me is boring.

But they're not in control of the galaxy.

Can you explain why are duels necessary? What makes them so important that we must always see someone fighting a bad guy with a red lightsaber? I certainly think I can enjoy a Star Wars movie without the Sith around.

I'm sure Rouge One will be at least somewhat good, not featuring either Jedi or Sith and thus not having the problem of needing one to counter the other.

Yes, it is simply repetitive. And that to me is why I didn't enjoy ROTJ and prefer the prequels over it.

You actually didn't enjoy ROTJ? I can understand not liking specific aspects, but actually not liking it at all is rather extreme. Are you really saying that you had no enjoyment when you first watched it?

[ray245]

Instead of splitting these up I will make two general points that are largely an answer to ray245's questions.
1. The fundamental strength of Jedi, that which they lost in the prequels, is their ability to see into and thus manipulate the future. It is only though the conflicts of Jedi or Sith that this ability is weakened.

In the right context, during the Clone Wars, bounty hunters, droids and clone troopers are all capable of killing Jedi. But those attacks would never have been possible if not for the fact that the Dark Side was clouding their vision. The key weakness that most forget is that without either the Dark Side or Light Side clouding the judgement of Jedi and Sith respectively, they can sense a potential ambush. This weakness was a major plot point in AOTC. Notice that Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were never in any serious mortal danger in TPM until Darth Maul appeared, despite facing entire armies of battle droids. That is what would happen if a Jedi had no Sith to face. It wouldn't be a very interesting story.

The only reliable counter to a Jedi is a Sith(and vice versa). It is notable that in all of the films apart from AOTC the Jedi and Sith spend nearly all of their time in major battles purely dealing with each other. While other factors such as insufficient numbers of Jedi can be a mitigating factor, their ability to see the future is such an overpowering advantage that it needs to be countered. That counter is their opposite, the only thing that can weaken their ability to sense the future.

Again, the point is not to rely on in-universe explanations at all.

2. The second key reason why Sith are inevitable in a Star Wars sequel is that it comes down to the fundamental Taoist duality of The Force. Just as you cannot have Yin without Yang, you cannot have Light without Dark. It might not be full Sith, but there will almost always be Dark Side Force users in some capacity. The Jedi might think they are extinct at different points, but there is no evidence they ever will be fully. '

Of course ideal really would be Force users who strike a balance between the two. Yoda, the avatar of the Light, lost to Palpatine. Mace Windu, who had a much darker presence in the Force, as show by his purple lightsaber(being a mix of red and blue), won. Similarly, Luke is no match for his father when purely using the Light, it is only when he taps into the Dark Side by unleashing his anger that his is able to defeat him. But by turning back before landing the killing blow, he was able to stay on the right path.

The problem with the above is how hard it is to truly strike a balance. Anakin tried in AOTC and ROTS and failed utterly. Though in the end Vader suceeded by turning back toward the Light Side in order to kill Palpatine. The problem is that as long as you have people trying to strike a balance, you will have those who fall. And as long as those who fall have the ability to organize, you will have Sith. It was only at times of the height of the Jedi Order's influence that they were apparently able to wipe out the Sith(and they obviously still failed).

As for the chosen one, Anakin Skywalker destroyed the Bane line that resulted in Darth Plagieus who experimented in the Force to the degree that it created Anakin. Destroying that line was his purpose, not that he would be capable of completely obliterating the Dark Side.

You are still trying to give an in-universe response to an out-of-universe question.

I like the prequels myself, but the designs aren't nearly as good as those in the original films. Naboo fighters are objectively a worse design than X-wings. R2 wouldn't even fit inside it properly. In the TPM ICS his head has to physically detach from his body in order to fit.

How are they objectively worse? The notion that art preference is somehow objective as opposed to it being subjective is you imposing your own personal preference onto others. This is a very negative attribute common in fandom.

So it's good he has Lawrence Kasden working with him. My guess is that the script(actually it was probably more like story notes) was written before Return of the Jedi and likely wouldn't have fit into the current continuity with both ROTJ and the prequels.

Again, we do not know for sure. My main worry is Abrams is making creative decision based on nostalgia.

In addition, we know so little about these Sith(they are clearly not the same order Anakin destroyed), they might be weak enough that his children largely did rebuild the galaxy. The new Battlefront game references the New Republic beating the Empire, as did Star Wars in 100 Scenes that I mentioned earlier. I suspect that the New Republic is active in some fashion. Someone else mentioned the idea that the Resistance is only called that for political reasons in a similar fashion to the Flying Tigers, perhaps that is the case.

I know I have been using that word, but who says that Kylo Ren is actually a full fledged Sith? Maybe he is closer to Ventress in level of ability, unable to really do much in terms of truly tapping into the Dark Side.

It doesn't matter if he is a full sith or not. The point is we should try and move away from the old standard paradigm.

And we clearly see a different era given that we see a star destroyer half buried in sand. To me that shows a different era far more than a new starfighter design would. Did you like the clones even though they looked just like stormtroopers?

Yet in many aspect, so many visual design elements were very different from what we get in the OT. The Starship for example looks a lot more different.

But the series itself did have lightsaber duels, especially the standalone movie, which had two. My point was that a single episode is hardly representative. There were entire episodes that were purely about politics. Would you want the new movie to be that?

Why can't you have action without a lightsaber duel? We see Jedi deflecting ( and some getting killed by ) blasters all the time. You do not need someone holding a red lightsaber to create dramatic conflict.

The Jedi might not know how Anakin was conceived, but Plagieus likely did. The point is that Force users in general actually do understand the Force.

The point is what we see in Cannon and in the films have constantly show that the force is not something that could be easily understood via technology alone.

But they have been refereed to as Islamofascists, at least by Americans(not that the term really has any meaning).

The point is they are still different kind of threat to the US.

So why did you like the prequels if they mostly reused Sith as antagonists?

Because that is the entire point of the prequels? To show the fall of Darth Vader to the dark side? I think that narratively the stories in 1-6 requires some Sith elements, wheras ROTJ shows that the Sith threat has finally been ended for good.

Because this change would alter the fundamental core of the story. The prequels are a different part of the same conflict. What you are suggesting is a completely different one.

Again, how does this change the core of the story?

But they're not in control of the galaxy.

You are arguing about schematics, and missing the bigger point of my reply.

I'm sure Rouge One will be at least somewhat good, not featuring either Jedi or Sith and thus not having the problem of needing one to counter the other.

So why must TFA require Jedi vs. Sith to work as a Star Wars movie?

You actually didn't enjoy ROTJ? I can understand not liking specific aspects, but actually not liking it at all is rather extreme. Are you really saying that you had no enjoyment when you first watched it?

I've never said I hated all of it. I just think that the overall experiences felt a little disappointing compared to the other episodes.

Again, my interest is not in debating the in-universe reasons and the schematics as to why the Sith are a good threat against the Jedi. My point is from the point of storytelling itself, why is it necessary for all Star Wars movies to have a Sith villain?

This is the question you have yet to give an answer to.

Imagine you made a star wars movie with wars-like cinematography, star wars music and big sci-fi battles, then changed all of the names which refer to the star wars continuity.

If you were to show that movie to someone, they would not recognize it as star wars. They might notice the star wars theme tune, but they would go: "oh, there's a movie with the star wars theme tune"; not "oh, there's a star wars movie"

And why do people identify with visual designs in the prequels that looks very different from the OT and still accept it as being part of Star Wars? I just do not agree with JJ that you need to see X-Wings and TIE/stormtroopers to make a Star Wars sequel.

To me, Star Wars is simply a franchise that tries to tell an epic set in space using the cinematic techniques used in all the other epic films during the early 20th century, while invoking elements of mysticism and fantasy. I think that those are the core elements of Star Wars that could survive without having any X-Wings or lightsaber duels.

I think that those are the superficial aspect of Star Wars that many fans mistook to be the core elements of Star Wars. I think that JJ and many fans is making a mistake in approaching TFA by trying to recreate the superficial elements, and hinder the overall creativity of the project.

[Knife]

Oh for crying out loud, Star Wars is about blasters, laser swords, and space battles with strong themes of Light v Dark and youth exceeding what old had done. Without these things, it's not a SW movie and if you want something different why make a SW movie, make another movie.

And while there are some gems in the old EU, a vast majority of it was shit, so I won't cry a single tear if zero references were made to it in the new movies. I almost hope Luke Skywalker married some girl named sue and Han and Leia divorced with no children just to piss of the EU fans.

[Anacronian]

Oh for crying out loud, Star Wars is about blasters, laser swords, and space battles with strong themes of Light v Dark and youth exceeding what old had done. Without these things, it's not a SW movie and if you want something different why make a SW movie, make another movie.

And while there are some gems in the old EU, a vast majority of it was shit, so I won't cry a single tear if zero references were made to it in the new movies. I almost hope Luke Skywalker married some girl named sue and Han and Leia divorced with no children just to piss of the EU fans.

And Thrawn is the name of an alcoholic Jawa.

[Soontir C'boath]

I guess all those "good" EU material that doesn't necessarily involve lightsabers are not SW then including the acclaim Rogue Squadron series, Corran Horn aside. One of the main things I really liked about XWA were the missions that involved the Azzameen family dealing with smugglers and pirates and what not. It was cool being a mundane human being living in a universe that frankly has a small population of force users compared to everyone else anyway. So I guess you can say, I can readily identify myself easier with an Azzameen or a Han Solo for that matter than a Luke or Anakin Skywalker.

Also after all, while Star Trek was centrally focus on the Federation and the theme of exploration, it wasn't as if we have material regarding Romulans, Klingons, etc and their own "culture". And on top of that, one could say DS9 took a much different approach while still holding elements of what ST is.

Frankly, it's like saying ST should always be about the Enterprise, Kirk, McCoy, Spock, etc and that Sisko, Dax, Kira, Odo, etc should be put into the dustbin forever banished from canon.

[ray245]

Oh for crying out loud, Star Wars is about blasters, laser swords, and space battles with strong themes of Light v Dark and youth exceeding what old had done. Without these things, it's not a SW movie and if you want something different why make a SW movie, make another movie.

Because if we think about this in the long run, it makes the entire Star Wars an endless tragedy which the dark side of the force will always rise up and cause massive chaos despite the actions of the protagonist. If Disney is going to make Ep 10-12 with the same cast, it will fall into the exact same trap the EU did, which is never giving the heroes a respite from an endless life of chaos and suffering.

That was one of my biggest problem with the EU post-NJO. The fact that there is a constant wars despite what the heroes have done, it makes the entire Star Wars movies overly tragic. The bare minimum the writers of Star Wars could do is to try and give the heroes radically new foes and challenges to face, instead of Imperial warlord #565 and Sith-wannabe #234.

Frankly, it's like saying ST should always be about the Enterprise, Kirk, McCoy, Spock, etc and that Sisko, Dax, Kira, Odo, etc should be put into the dustbin forever banished from canon.

Exactly.

Also after all, while Star Trek was centrally focus on the Federation and the theme of exploration, it wasn't as if we have material regarding Romulans, Klingons, etc and their own "culture". And on top of that, one could say DS9 took a much different approach while still holding elements of what ST is.

That is what I am hoping for in EP 7. It is very different visually and thematically, while retaining the elements that makes it a Star Trek movie.

[Iroscato]

Or maybe it gives the optimistic message of how no matter when or where evil rears its ugly head, good people will rise to the occasion and defeat it in the name justice and peace. The little guy will always win in the end, because they have good on their side. The Jedi and Sith are the representations of that struggle, and that will always be what Star Wars is about.

[Soontir C'boath]

Perhaps, but it can be had as done with the Azzameens and the insidious Viraxo, though calling the Jedi Order the little guy is a bit much.

What the six movies were about was the downfall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker. The story has finished and it is time to move on.

[Omeganian]

Is that supposed to be Luke's hand? Because if he allowed it to get like that, matters look bad.


http://i.imgur.com/qe0FEG7.jpg

[Elheru Aran]

He may have simply decided to not bother maintaining its synthetic flesh surface-- a glove over it would have sufficed and that's what he usually did anyway. There could be plenty of reasons that its mechanics are exposed, not all of them bad.

[Adam Reynolds]

Ray, if you're going to consider any bit of reason as to why Sith make sense an in universe explanation, there is no way this debate can possibly continue. The Taoist nature of the Force is not an in universe explanation.

I understand the dislike of the concept of new Sith after Anakin was redeemed and brought balance to the Force, I had the same hesitations initially. But I came to realize that it makes more sense that Vader gave his life to defeat the Emperor and end that line of Sith Lords, not that he would be capable of wiping out the Dark Side in its entirety.

And Thrawn is the name of an alcoholic Jawa.

And one who only succeeded by literally using kyrptonite. If those lizards make an appearance in the new films, I would walk out of the theater. Not that there is any indication that they will.

I guess all those "good" EU material that doesn't necessarily involve lightsabers are not SW then including the acclaim Rogue Squadron series, Corran Horn aside. One of the main things I really liked about XWA were the missions that involved the Azzameen family dealing with smugglers and pirates and what not. It was cool being a mundane human being living in a universe that frankly has a small population of force users compared to everyone else anyway. So I guess you can say, I can readily identify myself easier with an Azzameen or a Han Solo for that matter than a Luke or Anakin Skywalker.

Rouge Squadron novels weren't very good. If you had said Wraith Squadron you might have a point, those were extremely entertaining. But more generally, there are two levels of Star Wars, the first is that of Wedge Antillies and the lower level mostly redshirt backup characteres. This is the level on which the spin off movies seem to be and what much of the old EU was. The second level is that of the big heroes, of the proper SW episodes. While that usually includes Force users, that will still include Han Solo in the new movie. Even without him, there is no evidence that X-wing pilot Poe is a Force user. And even if Finn or Rey eventually become Jedi, they likely won't until later. Spoiler

Amusingly Han Solo seems to be taking on the Obi-Wan role, apparently having a much larger role than Luke.

Spoiler

This might even include dying to save the new generation of heroes, most notably Rey(who I assume to be his daughter).

Also after all, while Star Trek was centrally focus on the Federation and the theme of exploration, it wasn't as if we have material regarding Romulans, Klingons, etc and their own "culture". And on top of that, one could say DS9 took a much different approach while still holding elements of what ST is.

And DS9, while well executed, was the beginning of the end of ST before the reboot. It killed the mystery, something that there was no turning back from. I would hate to see the same thing happen in SW. Remoivng the Jedi vs Sith conflict would be similar.

Frankly, it's like saying ST should always be about the Enterprise, Kirk, McCoy, Spock, etc and that Sisko, Dax, Kira, Odo, etc should be put into the dustbin forever banished from canon.

And yet the best ST stories were about the idea of exploration and featured the Enterprise, spesifically the first one. It's no coincidence that the reboot featured Kirk rather than Sisko.

Or maybe it gives the optimistic message of how no matter when or where evil rears its ugly head, good people will rise to the occasion and defeat it in the name justice and peace. The little guy will always win in the end, because they have good on their side. The Jedi and Sith are the representations of that struggle, and that will always be what Star Wars is about.

That was more or less the way I saw it. The idea that evil would ever cease to exist in the setting seems rather unrealistic to me.

Perhaps, but it can be had as done with the Azzameens and the insidious Viraxo, though calling the Jedi Order the little guy is a bit much.

The fact that the Jedi wasn't the little guy is partially why they lost.

What the six movies were about was the downfall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker. The story has finished and it is time to move on.

And it is moving on. But that doesn't mean there shouldn't be Dark Side Force users.

Is that supposed to be Luke's hand? Because if he allowed it to get like that, matters look bad.

Spoiler

The rumor is that he is in exile for some reason, possibly relating to why Kylo Ren is running around. Luke might only have one or two major scenes in the film, with a possibility of a larger role in the sequel.

He may have simply decided to not bother maintaining its synthetic flesh surface-- a glove over it would have sufficed and that's what he usually did anyway. There could be plenty of reasons that its mechanics are exposed, not all of them bad.

Anakin afterall used an exposed hand in the PT. It makes maintenance much easier.

[Adam Reynolds]

Another interesting thing I noticed in that scene with Luke was that his robes were white an interesting contrast with the black of ROTJ.

[Anacronian]

Is that supposed to be Luke's hand? Because if he allowed it to get like that, matters look bad.


http://i.imgur.com/qe0FEG7.jpg

I can't help but thinking these leaked concept art pictures could be Luke : Spoiler

I guess a Jedi can lose a lot of body parts in 30 years of warfare.

[Anacronian]

Another interesting thing I noticed in that scene with Luke was that his robes were white an interesting contrast with the black of ROTJ.

Another interesting thing is that where he is - from the sound of it Luke has gone missing or is theorised to be missing.



Could this be Dagobah - maybe Luke felt he had unfinished business with the cave?

I mean we already know that Dagobah is a pretty damn good hiding place.

Wild speculation of cause.

[Gandalf]

I could see Luke being in seclusion, living as a reclusive monk, emerging to set things right in the galaxy.

Also, I thought the planet may have been Mustafar, though I know that's unlikely.

[Anacronian]

I could see Luke being in seclusion, living as a reclusive monk, emerging to set things right in the galaxy.

Also, I thought the planet may have been Mustafar, though I know that's unlikely.

Mustafar is a good idea - after all that's where his father got maimed and if he himself is in the same condition he might be coming there to look for answers, And Luke is also the best candidate to be the one who preserved Vader's helmet after the funeral pyre.

I mean after the fire dies down and some of Vader's armor remains do you just let lie there for the Ewoks to play with or do you take it with you as the only physical memento of your father?

[Nephtys]

My interpretation on seeing the obvious robot hand was, 'Maybe he decided to leave it unfleshed, so that he can be reminded of his dad's path'. A reminder to keep himself force-sober, so to speak.

Odd that the rebels are the 'resistance', which suggests that they're not a major force that stands alone, like if they were a new and capable nation. It could also very well be that instead of an imperial remnant and a new republic, the galaxy's balkanized to the point where 'this' empire and 'this' rebellion are extremely localized to the point where such makes sense.

[Gandalf]

Mustafar is a good idea - after all that's where his father got maimed and if he himself is in the same condition he might be coming there to look for answers, And Luke is also the best candidate to be the one who preserved Vader's helmet after the funeral pyre.

I mean after the fire dies down and some of Vader's armor remains do you just let lie there for the Ewoks to play with or do you take it with you as the only physical memento of your father?

I'm not sure. What's left after a funeral pyre runs its course on a normal body?

Perhaps Luke took the remains to be interred somewhere right after ROTJ, and then returns there in TFA for some sort of spiritual guidance. Weee for baseless speculation!

[Anacronian]

Mustafar is a good idea - after all that's where his father got maimed and if he himself is in the same condition he might be coming there to look for answers, And Luke is also the best candidate to be the one who preserved Vader's helmet after the funeral pyre.

I mean after the fire dies down and some of Vader's armor remains do you just let lie there for the Ewoks to play with or do you take it with you as the only physical memento of your father?

I'm not sure. What's left after a funeral pyre runs its course on a normal body?

Perhaps Luke took the remains to be interred somewhere right after ROTJ, and then returns there in TFA for some sort of spiritual guidance. Weee for baseless speculation!

There is also the bit where some Alien gives Leia* the lightsaber Luke used in Cloud City.


That was Vader's Lightsaber before Luke got it - there's lot of Darth Vader memento changing hands.


*presumably.

[Prannon]

I can't help but thinking these leaked concept art pictures could be Luke : Spoiler

I guess a Jedi can lose a lot of body parts in 30 years of warfare.

The top image? Definitely. That _is_ Mark Hamill's upper lip. I knew that from the instant I saw it.