What do you want the force, and the Jedi to mean?

[The Romulan Republic]

Finn in Episode VII, and they reunited at the end of TLJ, and its very clear that they both retain affection for the other. Also, Rey spends most of TLJ in Chewie's company. But more importantly, in the semi-hypothetical progression that I outlined above, Rey's story in TLJ is mainly about Rey coming to terms with the fact that she has no family, no special identity- learning to accept that and stand on her own. I don't think that makes her an ideal Prequel-era Jedi, who does not love or feel attachment- that realization is clearly depicted as a painful emotional blow. But it does not destroy her. Its not because she doesn't love, or thinks love is wrong. But in order to have healthy attachments, you have to break free of unhealthy/abusive ones (ie Anakin for Padme). So TLJ is about her accepting her past, refusing to let it define her present, so that she can then build her own future.

There is no reason the outline I describe could not be completed on the foundation of TFA and TLJ. It may not be, but if so, that will be because ROS did not follow that route.

I think Finn and Rey are more friends than potential lovers. It's too late for a relationship to develop in Ep 9 as it will feel rushed. Rey does feel a sense of attachment, but her journey in Ep 8 is about letting go of that attachment ( namely to her parents).

Nonsense. You do not need an entire film to develop a romance between two characters who are already established and have a strong attachment to each other. Most films that aren't part of big series' have to build their entire plot and character development in a single film.

Doesn't anyone know how to write efficiently any more?

Rey isn't unemotional. I'm saying she is not someone who really develop a deep sense of love to people around her in the two movies. Ep 7 and 8 barely gave her sufficient time to bond with characters that are still alive by the end of the movie. She bonded with Han in Ep 7, he ends up dead. She sorta had some bond or at the least spent most of her time in Ep 8 with Luke. Luke ends up dead.

Her strongest bond is probably Finn, at this point, although she's probably spent the most time with Chewie.

The problem is Rey is she is a character that does whatever the writers wanted from her because I don't think they have a clear personality for Rey. None of the writers in the sequel era has any real sense of foresight on what kind of conclusion do they want from the sequel trilogy and what kind Jedi philosophy they want to build upon.

Lucas had a decent idea, with his movies from Ep 1-6. The same cannot be said about the Sequel era.

Rey is just a cool action hero that does cool stuff, dictated by the "rule of cool".

There are a few fairly consistent points with Rey's character beyond just being an action hero:

1. She has deep insecurities about her lack of a family and identity. This may or may not be something she has permanently moved beyond as of the end of TLJ.

2. Perhaps as a result, she tends to latch onto any potential surrogate family she finds. This is a bit at odds with her "loner" persona early in TFA, but is quickly dropped. Since then, she tends to make friends easily, the only big exception being Luke, who had personal baggage that got in the way.

3. She's very good at thinking on her feet and handling a crisis, but lacks much persuasive/social skill, "book smarts", or long-term planning ability. Which fits someone with her background pretty believably.

[FaxModem1]

The question I have is, what direction is Rey's journey with the force going? We know she took the books before Yoda burned down the temple, we know she is no longer pursuing her parents. And that she is capable of a lot of force abilities. But, what demons still haunt Rey? Kylo is an external threat, and is her bond with him still there even though Snoke has been killed? We also know that she does care about her friend Finn, BB-8, Leia, and doing the right thing.

Her big quest was to find her parents, and sort of then to have a surrogate in the form of a role model. Two of which have been killed. Maybe IX is about her coming into her own and not needing a role model. Or since the passing of Fisher, she will have to endure watching Leia die and realizing that like she has since childhood, she has to stand on her own. Or hopefully not, and they'll have it with Rey realizing that she will lose people, but she can still be intact and be a Jedi. Maybe we'll have scenes of Rey studying those ancient texts and meditating, deepening her connection to the force and bringing peace to herself, wiping away the demons she has from growing up on Jakku, abandoned by her parents.

EDIT: And I'm still holding out on Finn and Poe hooking up. They seem to have better chemistry.

[FaxModem1]

Do you concede that Luke also walked away from that, and had decades to master his feelings over such things?

Of course. Doesn't mean that he succeeded.

Maybe not, but if Luke was studying those ancient books, and held reverence for him, you'd think he might have learned a few things from them, including their philosophy on what to do about such things.

Mostly because we don't see Jedi killing padawans that are drifting to the Dark Side in the PT, or in the Disney EU. They certainly didn't seem to with Anakin, for instance. Maybe Leia and Han should have checked Luke's wizard school basement if he thought that was the acceptable response for people not measuring up before sending their son Ben there.

Comparing Luke to PT era Jedi is disingenuous. They have thousands of years of institutional knowledge behind them. But you are right, more people should have asked if Luke was in any way ready to pass on his space wizard skills in a school setting. Maybe that sort of hubristic imitation of legend should have been a theme of the piece?

Maybe, but we do know that he was, in some form, trying to ape them. Studying their ancient works would probably include picking up a lot of their practices, I assume. Unfortunately, we don't seem to see how it worked out, at all, aside from Luke decided to preemptively kill his nephew, and said nephew burning the place to the ground.

That, and in the new EU, Luke hunting down Jedi artifacts from one of Palpatine's vaults, and helping Del Meeko with his own internal problems through conversation.

He had was a vision, and he didn't talk to Ben about it, and he got out his sword after being disturbed by his vision. Again, we have no context of Luke talking to Ben about this, just deciding, "Whelp, this kid's gotta go."

Murder was the choice, and while Luke acknowledges it as the wrong choice, this seems very out of step with someone who knows that it's better to steer people back to the right path. And again, this wasn't a split second, this was him hovering over his nephew with a readied weapon. Now who's being dishonest?

What makes you say that it wasn't a split second? Luke's flashback says that it was "the briefest moment of pure instinct," which implies that once he had a moment to come to his senses, he decided against killing Ben. Maybe the Force was guiding him to kill Ben?

In the scene he has his lightsaber on for a few seconds before having a "My god, what have I done" face. It's odd that he took it off his belt. It's even odder that he even turned it on. Remember, after reading Ben's visions/dreams/force aura/whatever, he takes his lightsaber off his belt and turns it on. It'd be understandable if he reached for it, leaving it attached, the way cops do when they feel threatened, or how cowboys reach for their pistols in westerns, or even how swordsmen reach for their hilts in medieval movies before a fight, but that's not all he did. He took it off his belt and turned it on. That goes a bit beyond instinct unless he really went into fight or flight mode, and pulled out his weapon expecting to fight Ben right then and there. That speaks to either his conditioning due to his past over the intervening decades, which from the little Battlefront II seems to show us, was one where he was used to talking things out, and when given a choice, chose the better option. This film doesn't show that, and instead shows Luke was predisposed to anger, violence, and rage at the time of Ben's training, and quickly snapped out of it when he saw what he was about to do.

I could buy Luke giving Ben the wrong lessons, and not understanding the path Ben was on, because he's a fundamentally different person. But to jump so quickly to murder? It seems like too much of a stretch for me.

[The Romulan Republic]

The question I have is, what direction is Rey's journey with the force going? We know she took the books before Yoda burned down the temple, we know she is no longer pursuing her parents. And that she is capable of a lot of force abilities. But, what demons still haunt Rey? Kylo is an external threat, and is her bond with him still there even though Snoke has been killed? We also know that she does care about her friend Finn, BB-8, Leia, and doing the right thing.

I think that while Rey may have (I hope she has) largely moved past her doubts about her past, she still has to define herself. In particular, she now has to step into the role of a leader, something she has no real training or experience in.

Her big quest was to find her parents, and sort of then to have a surrogate in the form of a role model. Two of which have been killed. Maybe IX is about her coming into her own and not needing a role model. Or since the passing of Fisher, she will have to endure watching Leia die and realizing that like she has since childhood, she has to stand on her own. Or hopefully not, and they'll have it with Rey realizing that she will lose people, but she can still be intact and be a Jedi. Maybe we'll have scenes of Rey studying those ancient texts and meditating, deepening her connection to the force and bringing peace to herself, wiping away the demons she has from growing up on Jakku, abandoned by her parents.

I think if possible (I don't know what unused footage of Fisher they have to work with), I'd have Leia mentor Rey in leadership at the start of the film, dying about half-way through, with Rey then having to finally stand on her own as the leader of the new Jedi, and forge her own identity. They should have done more to set that up sooner, but a good, and efficient, writer could still make it work.

EDIT: And I'm still holding out on Finn and Poe hooking up. They seem to have better chemistry.

I mean, if it was up to me, I would have Finn/Rey/Rose/Poe in a bisexual polyamorous relationship. But its Disney. Realistically, it won't happen.

[Crazedwraith]

To me the plot point of 'Luke has a force vision and tries to kill his nephew' seems immensely stupid, on paper, if anything it would make sense to me for Luke to try and redeem Ben for far too long when he’d gone over the edge. (Though tbf that would have unfortunately implications that Luke should have been the hard man making hard decisions etc) However Mark Hamill’s peformance pretty much sold me on the ‘one moment of weakness he instantly regrets’ line.

Likewise, the plot point of ‘Luke failed, his new order went no-where and he became a hermit’ is unpalatable to me but I can see why they did it to move Luke into a supporting role for Rey and the whole ‘reach out’ bit in his first lesson remains my favourite bit of TLJ.


As for the force and the Jedi, well I remember Stover’s take on it well. There is no ‘will of the force’. ie) the force isn’t a sapient thing consciously pulling strings and puppeteering all force users. That’s just a metaphor the Jedi use. The force has a tendency to balance, the dark side itself is unbalance so it works to stop them, but since all force users have free will, they keep falling to the dark side (itself not an entity so much as a

If the force doesn’t want the dark side and was a sapient god like thing, it would just unpower dark siders. It would only let them do their thing if it’s goal actually was conflict or something. So I prefer not.

(I think Clone Wars has buggered this a bit by showing actual avatars of the light and dark which I think is kinda balls)


For the sequel trilogy, I wish Luke had an order, much smaller and less formal the in the PT era and there would be a Knight Errant style theme. They wander the galaxy freeily right wrongs etc trusting in the force to take them where they need to be.

There would be the same checking all kids for force sensitivity and shanghai-ing them into the order so they’d be a lot of room for independent light siders, non-sith dark siders and inbetweeners. Like the Knights of Ren only we’d know more than just the name

The main character could be a young knight have adventures maybe a crisis of faith at seeing the grey reality of the universe but then coming out on top and faithful, maybe a small scale adventure for the first film then then uncovers a galaxy spanning plot. Luke, Leia and Han could be the big goods in the background that only appear when the situation gets serious enough to warrant it.

[NeoGoomba]

To me the plot point of 'Luke has a force vision and tries to kill his nephew' seems immensely stupid, on paper, if anything it would make sense to me for Luke to try and redeem Ben for far too long when he’d gone over the edge. (Though tbf that would have unfortunately implications that Luke should have been the hard man making hard decisions etc) However Mark Hamill’s peformance pretty much sold me on the ‘one moment of weakness he instantly regrets’ line.

I like the idea of Luke really going the extra mile to redeem Ben after the whole "tries to kill him" bit. It almost should have been Luke that Kylo kills in the first film instead of Han, with Luke dropping his lightsaber down the shaft and not just trying to help guide Ben back, but also begging his nephew for forgiveness.

And then you can still have Luke train Rey as a Force Ghost or something for the second film, and have Kylo be extremely off-balance as Luke's sacrifice really pries open a hole in his darkness.

[The Romulan Republic]

To me the plot point of 'Luke has a force vision and tries to kill his nephew' seems immensely stupid, on paper, if anything it would make sense to me for Luke to try and redeem Ben for far too long when he’d gone over the edge. (Though tbf that would have unfortunately implications that Luke should have been the hard man making hard decisions etc) However Mark Hamill’s peformance pretty much sold me on the ‘one moment of weakness he instantly regrets’ line.

Yeah, I actually prefer "Luke's greatest mistake was trying to be a HARD MAN" over the alternative "Luke's greatest mistake was not being ENOUGH of a HARD MAN".

Because let's be honest, if they were going to have the new films feature another galactic conflict (which, realistically, they were), then that would require Luke having, in some sense, failed. Failed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy. The question is what form that failure would take, and what lessons would be taken from it. And this is far from the worst option.

And yeah, Hamill is a good actor.

Likewise, the plot point of ‘Luke failed, his new order went no-where and he became a hermit’ is unpalatable to me but I can see why they did it to move Luke into a supporting role for Rey and the whole ‘reach out’ bit in his first lesson remains my favourite bit of TLJ.

Likewise I see this as more an inevitability. They were always going to want to bring forward new protagonists, and Luke was always going to get moved more into the mentor role as a consequence.

As for the force and the Jedi, well I remember Stover’s take on it well. There is no ‘will of the force’. ie) the force isn’t a sapient thing consciously pulling strings and puppeteering all force users. That’s just a metaphor the Jedi use. The force has a tendency to balance, the dark side itself is unbalance so it works to stop them, but since all force users have free will, they keep falling to the dark side (itself not an entity so much as a

If the force doesn’t want the dark side and was a sapient god like thing, it would just unpower dark siders. It would only let them do their thing if it’s goal actually was conflict or something. So I prefer not.

(I think Clone Wars has buggered this a bit by showing actual avatars of the light and dark which I think is kinda balls)

There might be some room for debate, though, as to whether the avatars actually were the Light/Dark Side, etc, or just extremely powerful beings connected to it. Like, the Light Side didn't cease to exist when the Daughter's physical body got killed.

For the sequel trilogy, I wish Luke had an order, much smaller and less formal the in the PT era and there would be a Knight Errant style theme. They wander the galaxy freeily right wrongs etc trusting in the force to take them where they need to be.

While that might appeal to some stylistically, the problem is that a) You can't really have Force users wandering around without oversight, and no stable government would tolerate that, given their power; and b) Its pretty clear that the Old Republic only lasted as long as it did because it had a strong Jedi Order keeping the peace. This is reinforced by the New Republic essentially trying to be the Old Republic but with less Jedi, and failing in a few decades.

There would be the same checking all kids for force sensitivity and shanghai-ing them into the order so they’d be a lot of room for independent light siders, non-sith dark siders and inbetweeners. Like the Knights of Ren only we’d know more than just the name

There actually were a surprising number of non-Sith/non-Jedi in the Clone Wars era, as well (Ventress, Ashoka ultimately, Maul and Savage, the Nightsisters of Dathomir...)

The main character could be a young knight have adventures maybe a crisis of faith at seeing the grey reality of the universe but then coming out on top and faithful, maybe a small scale adventure for the first film then then uncovers a galaxy spanning plot. Luke, Leia and Han could be the big goods in the background that only appear when the situation gets serious enough to warrant it.

That could have worked. I think that's more in line with what fans expected, but that doesn't necessarily make it better or worse.

[ray245]

What I do hope for is for Disney to realised they've squandered a lot of potentially more interesting storylines with the way they wrote the films, and actually use the Legends label to give us alternative narratives of how Luke would have built the order differently.

Because as of now, I'm just too annoyed with the squandered potential of ST to get too invested in the post ROTJ era. Even Rey's storyline has a lot of squandered potential.

I would have found it more interesting if Rey isn't the last surviving Jedi yet again and have her interact and grow with other fellow students. We had a mostly self-taught Jedi with Luke. Making Rey into yet another self-taught Jedi is boring.

[FaxModem1]

To me the plot point of 'Luke has a force vision and tries to kill his nephew' seems immensely stupid, on paper, if anything it would make sense to me for Luke to try and redeem Ben for far too long when he’d gone over the edge. (Though tbf that would have unfortunately implications that Luke should have been the hard man making hard decisions etc) However Mark Hamill’s peformance pretty much sold me on the ‘one moment of weakness he instantly regrets’ line.

Yeah, I actually prefer "Luke's greatest mistake was trying to be a HARD MAN" over the alternative "Luke's greatest mistake was not being ENOUGH of a HARD MAN".

Because let's be honest, if they were going to have the new films feature another galactic conflict (which, realistically, they were), then that would require Luke having, in some sense, failed. Failed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy. The question is what form that failure would take, and what lessons would be taken from it. And this is far from the worst option.

And yeah, Hamill is a good actor.

The only reason it worked was that Hamill is that good an actor. Luke overestimating his relationship with his nephew, to the point of his pride blinding him to utter destruction is a lot easier to stomach than he's willing to kill family for even a chance of the greater good being threatened.

Than we can still have a fallen Luke due to pride, without bringing in all this Luke the attempted nephew killer nonsense.

Another possibility is to have Luke have been forced out of the New Republic because of politics, wherein the pro-Imperial or corrupt elements in the Senate didnt like having the Jedi as babysitters, and the Jedi slowly became inadequate due to being overridden and overturned by the politicians at every level, even because of investigating people like industrialist Snoke. Ben Solo taking leadership of the order because he wants the power, and prefers being a sort of Secret Pokice for some senator's political enemies rather than being just and fair.

See, there are ways to do this, to even bring in allegory, without making Luke someone who fell so far as to think murdering his nephew was a good idea.

[The Romulan Republic]

To me the plot point of 'Luke has a force vision and tries to kill his nephew' seems immensely stupid, on paper, if anything it would make sense to me for Luke to try and redeem Ben for far too long when he’d gone over the edge. (Though tbf that would have unfortunately implications that Luke should have been the hard man making hard decisions etc) However Mark Hamill’s peformance pretty much sold me on the ‘one moment of weakness he instantly regrets’ line.

Yeah, I actually prefer "Luke's greatest mistake was trying to be a HARD MAN" over the alternative "Luke's greatest mistake was not being ENOUGH of a HARD MAN".

Because let's be honest, if they were going to have the new films feature another galactic conflict (which, realistically, they were), then that would require Luke having, in some sense, failed. Failed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy. The question is what form that failure would take, and what lessons would be taken from it. And this is far from the worst option.

And yeah, Hamill is a good actor.

The only reason it worked was that Hamill is that good an actor. Luke overestimating his relationship with his nephew, to the point of his pride blinding him to utter destruction is a lot easier to stomach than he's willing to kill family for even a chance of the greater good being threatened.

Than we can still have a fallen Luke due to pride, without bringing in all this Luke the attempted nephew killer nonsense.

Another possibility is to have Luke have been forced out of the New Republic because of politics, wherein the pro-Imperial or corrupt elements in the Senate didnt like having the Jedi as babysitters, and the Jedi slowly became inadequate due to being overridden and overturned by the politicians at every level, even because of investigating people like industrialist Snoke. Ben Solo taking leadership of the order because he wants the power, and prefers being a sort of Secret Pokice for some senator's political enemies rather than being just and fair.

See, there are ways to do this, to even bring in allegory, without making Luke someone who fell so far as to think murdering his nephew was a good idea.

There are alternatives, certainly. Some might have been better. I'm just saying, this was far from the worst route they could have gone. And having Luke's failure be overagression, rather than underagression, actually reaffirms OT Luke's choice, albeit at the expense of ST Luke.

[ray245]

Nonsense. You do not need an entire film to develop a romance between two characters who are already established and have a strong attachment to each other. Most films that aren't part of big series' have to build their entire plot and character development in a single film.

Doesn't anyone know how to write efficiently any more?

I see Rey's attraction to Finn as being platonic rather than romantic, and it will feel to sudden if they switch over to more of a romantic relationship within one movie.

Her strongest bond is probably Finn, at this point, although she's probably spent the most time with Chewie.

She didn't really spend that much time with Finn throughout the first two movies. Even in TFA, she was knocked out and cut off from the group for a decent portion of the time. I think Finn spent more time with Rose than with Rey.

There are a few fairly consistent points with Rey's character beyond just being an action hero:

1. She has deep insecurities about her lack of a family and identity. This may or may not be something she has permanently moved beyond as of the end of TLJ.

It feels like this is something she have moved on from, or at the least I hope she does by Ep 9.

2. Perhaps as a result, she tends to latch onto any potential surrogate family she finds. This is a bit at odds with her "loner" persona early in TFA, but is quickly dropped. Since then, she tends to make friends easily, the only big exception being Luke, who had personal baggage that got in the way.

Problem is she didn't really spent much time with the surrogate family in the past two films.

3. She's very good at thinking on her feet and handling a crisis, but lacks much persuasive/social skill, "book smarts", or long-term planning ability. Which fits someone with her background pretty believably.

And this creates problem in the sense that she needs to be well-developed as a character by the end of Ep 9, that you can envision her as being a good mentor to new Jedi students. If the writers needs to let Rey grow into a figure that can rebuild the Jedi Order when Luke failed to do so, she needs a lot of good character development beyond the course of one film.

It is important to show how Rey has grown spiritually, and not just with manifestation of her physical abilities. I do not think Ep 7 and 8 really set up a good development arc for Rey to realised her spiritual development by Ep 9.

There are alternatives, certainly. Some might have been better. I'm just saying, this was far from the worst route they could have gone. And having Luke's failure be overagression, rather than underagression, actually reaffirms OT Luke's choice, albeit at the expense of ST Luke.

I think the choice they went with is pretty bad, and a really bad case of short-sightedness when it comes to character development. It basically squandered the chances to show what Luke could have learnt from the failure of the old Jedi Order.

Luke successfully rebuilding the Jedi order as the son of the man who destroyed it would have a good and strong thematic message about the importance of love and attachment in the new Jedi Order. But the failure of Luke's order meant that Rey would have even less experience in understanding just how important those values are in making sure the Jedis don't fall to the dark side easily.

I think Rey would not have been the most ideal mentor figure with the burden of rebuilding the Jedi Order. Her prodigious talent and lack of struggle in mastering the force might mean that she can't translate her experience well to her students. The best student does not automatically make one the best teacher. Rey is still a bit of a loner ( even if she does value and seek friendship), and she's more of a hands-on/street-smart learner than a book-smart learner. I feel like she would not have been the most helpful figure to Jedi padawans that aren't as naturally talented as her, and had more issues dealing with their emotions.

There's a really bad case of mis-writing Rey's character development/arc and what they writers are hoping to make her into by the end of Ep 9. Rey the grandmaster of a re-established Jedi Order feels jarring if you look at how her character arc is written.

[FaxModem1]

There are alternatives, certainly. Some might have been better. I'm just saying, this was far from the worst route they could have gone. And having Luke's failure be overaggression, rather than underaggression, actually reaffirms OT Luke's choice, albeit at the expense of ST Luke.

There are worse alternatives, we could have had Luke murdering anyone he thought had an inkling of dark side temptation, with Ben finding a pile of failed padawan bodies in Luke's basement. Doesn't mean that was the correct choice narratively to show how there needs to be a new generation to carry the torch, and the old guard are no longer able to save the day. They could also have had Leia become Supreme Chancellor, dealing with her political enemies the same way Palpatine did, to reaffirm Leia's choices, at the cost of ST Leia. That doesn't make it a good idea, since it shows that the characters were just as evil as the people they fought, and are only acting different because they're now in power. Showing that the wheel keeps on turning, etc.

A better idea could have done so by having heroes who weren't constrained by their stations, with Han, Leia, and Luke having to deal with politics, bigger matters, or their own troubles, while Rey, Finn, and Poe acting, maybe even under Holdo to get things accomplished. Better to have our heroes move the ball forward, with the new heroes carrying it more forward, then have the new heroes fixing the old heroes divet, making it to where nothing really got accomplished.

[Gandalf]

Do you concede that Luke also walked away from that, and had decades to master his feelings over such things?

Of course. Doesn't mean that he succeeded.

Maybe not, but if Luke was studying those ancient books, and held reverence for him, you'd think he might have learned a few things from them, including their philosophy on what to do about such things.

"Oh. Read them, have you?"
"Well, I..."
"Page-turners, they were not."

He seemed to be half arsing it a bit. Lots of talk, and some bold actions, but evidently not the work.

Maybe, but we do know that he was, in some form, trying to ape them. Studying their ancient works would probably include picking up a lot of their practices, I assume. Unfortunately, we don't seem to see how it worked out, at all, aside from Luke decided to preemptively kill his nephew, and said nephew burning the place to the ground.

That, and in the new EU, Luke hunting down Jedi artifacts from one of Palpatine's vaults, and helping Del Meeko with his own internal problems through conversation.

I address this bit above.

In the scene he has his lightsaber on for a few seconds before having a "My god, what have I done" face. It's odd that he took it off his belt. It's even odder that he even turned it on. Remember, after reading Ben's visions/dreams/force aura/whatever, he takes his lightsaber off his belt and turns it on. It'd be understandable if he reached for it, leaving it attached, the way cops do when they feel threatened, or how cowboys reach for their pistols in westerns, or even how swordsmen reach for their hilts in medieval movies before a fight, but that's not all he did. He took it off his belt and turned it on. That goes a bit beyond instinct unless he really went into fight or flight mode, and pulled out his weapon expecting to fight Ben right then and there. That speaks to either his conditioning due to his past over the intervening decades, which from the little Battlefront II seems to show us, was one where he was used to talking things out, and when given a choice, chose the better option. This film doesn't show that, and instead shows Luke was predisposed to anger, violence, and rage at the time of Ben's training, and quickly snapped out of it when he saw what he was about to do.

I could buy Luke giving Ben the wrong lessons, and not understanding the path Ben was on, because he's a fundamentally different person. But to jump so quickly to murder? It seems like too much of a stretch for me.

What makes it a stretch? His (limited) Jedi training taught him to follow his instincts, and said instincts drive him off a cliff. Yet another failure for the Jedi it seems.

[FaxModem1]

So, in addition to giving us Luke Skywalker, attempted nephew killer, The Last Jedi also gives us, Luke Skywalker, college dropout. I'm starting to wonder if Rian Johnson was just really pissed about the idea of a pacfistic monk like character, and wanted to drag him down through the mud as much as possible.

[FaxModem1]

In the scene he has his lightsaber on for a few seconds before having a "My god, what have I done" face. It's odd that he took it off his belt. It's even odder that he even turned it on. Remember, after reading Ben's visions/dreams/force aura/whatever, he takes his lightsaber off his belt and turns it on. It'd be understandable if he reached for it, leaving it attached, the way cops do when they feel threatened, or how cowboys reach for their pistols in westerns, or even how swordsmen reach for their hilts in medieval movies before a fight, but that's not all he did. He took it off his belt and turned it on. That goes a bit beyond instinct unless he really went into fight or flight mode, and pulled out his weapon expecting to fight Ben right then and there. That speaks to either his conditioning due to his past over the intervening decades, which from the little Battlefront II seems to show us, was one where he was used to talking things out, and when given a choice, chose the better option. This film doesn't show that, and instead shows Luke was predisposed to anger, violence, and rage at the time of Ben's training, and quickly snapped out of it when he saw what he was about to do.

I could buy Luke giving Ben the wrong lessons, and not understanding the path Ben was on, because he's a fundamentally different person. But to jump so quickly to murder? It seems like too much of a stretch for me.

What makes it a stretch? His (limited) Jedi training taught him to follow his instincts, and said instincts drive him off a cliff. Yet another failure for the Jedi it seems.

If violence is supposed to be Luke's natural instincts, which I very much doubt, why didn't we have Luke murdering his way through Jabba's palace? Or force choking Jabba? Why did he spare Del Meeko in Battlefront 2, as opposed to counseling him about his inner conflicts? Why did Luke surrender to the Empire in the first place to try and turn Vader instead of murdering his way across the Endor base?

Maybe if Rian Johnson had written ROTJ, Luke would have been the one grabbing for the meat trap instead of Chewie.

[Gandalf]

If violence is supposed to be Luke's natural instincts, which I very much doubt, why didn't we have Luke murdering his way through Jabba's palace? Or force choking Jabba? Why did he spare Del Meeko in Battlefront 2, as opposed to counseling him about his inner conflicts? Why did Luke surrender to the Empire in the first place to try and turn Vader instead of murdering his way across the Endor base?

Maybe if Rian Johnson had written ROTJ, Luke would have been the one grabbing for the meat trap instead of Chewie.

Because different things generate different instinctive responses. Duh.

[FaxModem1]

If violence is supposed to be Luke's natural instincts, which I very much doubt, why didn't we have Luke murdering his way through Jabba's palace? Or force choking Jabba? Why did he spare Del Meeko in Battlefront 2, as opposed to counseling him about his inner conflicts? Why did Luke surrender to the Empire in the first place to try and turn Vader instead of murdering his way across the Endor base?

Maybe if Rian Johnson had written ROTJ, Luke would have been the one grabbing for the meat trap instead of Chewie.

Because different things generate different instinctive responses. Duh.

So, a crime boss holding his friends hostage generates more mercy from Luke than his sleeping nephew? Think about that.

[Gandalf]

So, a crime boss holding his friends hostage generates more mercy from Luke than his sleeping nephew? Think about that.

Jabba's Palace was the result of a whole big (if fucking strange) plan. Everyone went in ahead, and things were sorted out to get a friend from a weird captive situation. That moment with Ben... wasn't anything like that. Think about that.

[FaxModem1]

So, a crime boss holding his friends hostage generates more mercy from Luke than his sleeping nephew? Think about that.

Jabba's Palace was the result of a whole big (if fucking strange) plan. Everyone went in ahead, and things were sorted out to get a friend from a weird captive situation. That moment with Ben... wasn't anything like that. Think about that.

And they still gave Jabba plenty of opportunities to live. Are we saying that Luke only asked for Han to be returned and leaving Jabba in peace because R2, Leia, or Lando asked, or he would have killed him? Or is it more likely that Luke was being sincere in that he didn't plan on killing everyone in Jabba's palace until they gave him no choice?

Do you seriously think that if Jabba went, "You know, I like the cut of your jib, go ahead and take your friends", as unlikely as that is, that Luke would have started slicing through the everyone at the palace? I think Luke was much more compassionate and reasonable than that, and The Last Jedi is the odd duck out for making Luke willing to kill others at the drop of a hat, rather than when he has no choice.

[The Romulan Republic]

So, in addition to giving us Luke Skywalker, attempted nephew killer, The Last Jedi also gives us, Luke Skywalker, college dropout. I'm starting to wonder if Rian Johnson was just really pissed about the idea of a pacfistic monk like character, and wanted to drag him down through the mud as much as possible.

Oh, here we go. You can't just personally not like the film or have wanted something different, no, it has to be a deliberate, malicious plot to destroy the character and the franchise.

If that had be Johnson's intent, he would not have given Luke such a dignified and carefully crafted final scene.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough (because you keep ignoring it), but Luke never actually killed his nephew, and there is zero evidence that he would actually have gone through with it if Ben hadn't woken up.

[FaxModem1]

So, in addition to giving us Luke Skywalker, attempted nephew killer, The Last Jedi also gives us, Luke Skywalker, college dropout. I'm starting to wonder if Rian Johnson was just really pissed about the idea of a pacfistic monk like character, and wanted to drag him down through the mud as much as possible.

Oh, here we go. You can't just personally not like the film or have wanted something different, no, it has to be a deliberate, malicious plot to destroy the character and the franchise.

If that had be Johnson's intent, he would not have given Luke such a dignified and carefully crafted final scene.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough (because you keep ignoring it), but Luke never actually killed his nephew, and there is zero evidence that he would actually have gone through with it if Ben hadn't woken up.

Except for the fact that he drew out his weapon and ignited it, something you have been ignoring. As I noted before, he reached for it, he pulled it out, and he turned it on. Unless you're arguing that Luke just needed better lighting to look at his nephew.

[The Romulan Republic]

So, in addition to giving us Luke Skywalker, attempted nephew killer, The Last Jedi also gives us, Luke Skywalker, college dropout. I'm starting to wonder if Rian Johnson was just really pissed about the idea of a pacfistic monk like character, and wanted to drag him down through the mud as much as possible.

Oh, here we go. You can't just personally not like the film or have wanted something different, no, it has to be a deliberate, malicious plot to destroy the character and the franchise.

If that had be Johnson's intent, he would not have given Luke such a dignified and carefully crafted final scene.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough (because you keep ignoring it), but Luke never actually killed his nephew, and there is zero evidence that he would actually have gone through with it if Ben hadn't woken up.

Except for the fact that he drew out his weapon and ignited it, something you have been ignoring.

On the contrary, I've acknowledged and addressed it.

As I noted before, he reached for it, he pulled it out, and he turned it on. Unless you're arguing that Luke just needed better lighting to look at his nephew.

No shit. And it was a really, really big mistake, as Luke himself acknowledged. Probably the worst thing he ever did, and something he felt so ashamed of that he went into hiding for most of the rest of his life. But I think there are reasons for it, given what we know happened and Luke's prior experiences (note: understanding why someone did something is not the same as saying they were justified in doing it).

[FaxModem1]

As I noted before, he reached for it, he pulled it out, and he turned it on. Unless you're arguing that Luke just needed better lighting to look at his nephew.

No shit. And it was a really, really big mistake, as Luke himself acknowledged. Probably the worst thing he ever did, and something he felt so ashamed of that he went into hiding for most of the rest of his life. But I think there are reasons for it, given what we know happened and Luke's prior experiences (note: understanding why someone did something is not the same as saying they were justified in doing it).

We're talking in circles here. You think it's an acceptable character growth, I think it's not. You think it's only due to lack of portrayal between this point and ROTJ. I agree, but think it's because the points between A and C are way too far for this to be acceptable on-screen.

Luke did not, was not, seeming like a man on the edge in prior portrayals. I can get behind the Luke is in self imposed exile, drinking milk and fishing for the rest of his days, but there are layers of self control people have when it comes to doing things. Luke did not murder Ben, he stopped at that last point. But, as noted, there are several points between having murderous intentions, and actually drawing out the weapon to do so.

One of those reasons, if familiar with weapons, is to realize that they're not toys or props, and have to be afforded respect by the user. That should have been a muscle memory in itself for Luke. To breach that layer, Luke must have been incensed with rage, and so lacking in control so as to do so, that he seriously was committing attempted murder. That seems out of character for Luke, especially since he's not presented with a serious tangible threat to himself or others, unlike when Palpatine or Vader threatened or tortured others.

Another is headspace. The war with the Empire has been over for over a decade by the time of Ben's teen years(if not longer, depending on how old he was in the flashback). Luke seemed to be mastering himself and his impulses even in the OT, with his personality becoming much more zen and one with the force. Even before Ben was born, Luke was learning the key steps of Jedi training, and mastering emotional control. Luke had his problems, as anyone would, as shown when he fought Vader, but he seemed to be on the route to becoming more centered with himself. Assuming his development didn't arrest, he would have grown beyond that by the time Ben was old enough to shave.

Third, Luke had plenty of other options, which are never brought up. Did Luke offer Ben some counseling, and only turned to attempted murder when he thought he wasn't able to, or was his natural impulse? Which seems troubling, due to the fact that he should have both better weapon control and emotional control.

Gandalf is arguing that Luke wasn't following Jedi teachings, and that the film is arguing that Luke didn't even bother to read the Jedi texts. Essentially, Luke couldn't be bothered to try and further his spiritual training and education. If he didn't want to do so, that's one thing, but if that's the case, why did he even open up a school in the first place? Those two plot points seem at cross purposes. Unless Luke obtained the books after opening up the school, which is a possibility.

In order for The Last Jedi to work, Luke has to be someone who has rage issues, is borderline homicidal, inattentive to others, a hypocrite, and is only partially aware of this until he gets a pep talk from Yoda. That's a lot to ask of the audience regarding a character. This is why earlier in the thread, I made the connection to the AHF parody Gandhi II. It's just as sensible a plot turn.

I will also point to my earlier post, which was ignored:

link

Mostly because I wondered what Luke was doing in Ben's hut in the first place, which is why I've made jokes in the past about Luke liking to watch his nephew sleep. I'm convinced that a 'therapy session' of watching his student/padawan in their natural state to get a gauge at where they are is plausible for Luke's character. So I'm willing to buy that, if Luke wasn't seriously planning on murdering Ben, him being there to try and help his student works for me. That's the Luke Skywalker I'd buy.



There's a key difference between "Luke isn't perfect", which I'm okay with seeing the ST explore, see my post showing a deluded Luke being like Rocky from Rocky V, in which his apprentice is completely using him and he doesn't realize it until it's too late, and "Luke is such a horrible person that he's willing to kill family members who are defenseless and sleeping", as opposed to simply waking Ben up and asking him, "Why are you tempted? I'm not here to judge, let's talk while I serve us some blue milk."



I'm not trying to say that Jedi are walking saints who can't do anything wrong, but that they DO, from what we see of them, try and go for the peaceful method first. Luke's training was either so flawed from Yoda, Obi Wan, and his own studies that he doesn't consider that option as a way to deal with a problem, especially with a family member, or his new 'evolved' Jedi Order was keen on seeing violence as a way to deal with problems first rather than negotiation and diplomacy. If that's the case, then it's a rather sad warping of what the Jedi were meant to be, and what Luke's Jedi Order was to be.

Problem is, we KNOW that's not the case. Luke's showing of him becoming a Jedi is not giving in to violence,it's throwing down his lightsaber, refusing the Emperor, and showing compassion for his father. Palpatine even goes so far as acknowledging it, "So be it, Jedi."

It's also, from the little new EU that we have, out of character for him. It also negated the themes of the PT Jedi Order being flawed and Luke bringing about a Jedi Order without those flaws. Though, I will acknowledge that Rey is supposed to be serving that purpose now.



This is why I bring up Yoda. We see Yoda being tempted in the Clone Wars cartoon, and how a Jedi can successfully deny the Dark Side within.



Yoda, like a monk, accepts that this is part of him, and learns the lesson to accept his dark side is part of him, and tell it no. Fighting it only increases it's strength, but accepting it removes it, letting him be free of it's influence.

As I said, they deal with the demons within, and that prevents such things from getting power.

Luke, in the OT, did lash out, yes. But cold blooded murder? Or even losing himself so that he isn't only tempted, but actually plans to go through with murdering his nephew? As noted, Luke has lashed out in anger, but that's VERY different from murder in someone's sleep. We don't see Luke approach Palpatine's chambers with a pillow to smother the Emperor or Vader while they're in nap time. Instead, we see them confront them, unarmed, to try and reason with Vader. He's goaded later, but he does try the peaceful approach first, and then succeeds later when he reaches his zen moment.



Sure, Luke might be tempted all the time. Same way that we're all tempted in everyday life. Thing is, as far as know, Luke never went full Sith, and didn't surrender his entire life to giving in and indulging every whim. He lashed out in anger once, and became aware of what that anger's future was for him, which solidified his position as a Jedi. This was conveyed in cinematic language with Luke seeing the damage on Vader's cybernetic arm, and the damage on his own cybernetic arm, receiving a moment of clarity in which he sees where that path leads, turning away from it.

You're arguing that Luke essentially had a relapse. I'm pointing out that unless Luke didn't develop as a Jedi, which, from the little we've seen, he did, that shouldn't have happened the way it did. Luke should know that that is a part of him, and accepted it, which would deny it power.



I disagree, mostly because it has Luke writing off a family member. If the film had established that Luke tried to save him, as opposed to murder him, with Luke having that Rocky & Tommy relationship I hypothesized, then him telling Kylo Ren that he isn't going to try and save him, because he knows now he isn't able to save him, that'd be one thing. Because the film has Luke trying to murder Ben, the film is instead saying that he was right the first time, and giving up on Kylo Ren was the right move the whole time.



All right, first rule of weapons are, you only point them at things you're intent on killing. And only bring them out if you are going to do so. This is probably why, in Luke's false version of events, he doesn't have his lightsaber out while Kylo Ren destroys the place with his force powers. In Luke's second version, the supposed 'true version', he does have his lightsaber out, which Luke is ashamed of. He was lying about the fact to Rey that he WAS going to murder to Ben initially. Unless of course, the second version he told was also a lie.



Edgar Allen Poe short story. I'm really surprised you're unfamiliar with it. Crazy guy hates the old man he lives with. While he acknowledges that the man is kind, he hates the man's 'vulture eye', and plans on murdering him for it. He can't bring himself to do it because when the guy's asleep, he just sees a kind old man, and not the 'vulture eye'. It's only when he accidentally wakes the old man up that he kills the guy.

While we're agreeing that Luke probably didn't plot out to go into the hut and murder Luke, he did decide to murder him with his lightsaber, and was only stopped when instead of seeing an evil Sith, he saw a young boy. Like the narrator of the Telltale Heart, he was only stopped from his own psychopathy because he didn't see the evil that he supposedly saw. Unlike the Telltale Heart, that's because they have force powers and Ben fought back.

Point being, it should be really out of character that Luke is resonating with an Edgar Allen Poe character in regards to murder rather than Yoda and approaching with trying to help him.



Yoda, as shown in the video above, showed us that the Dark Side is with them, but can be mastered through accepting that it's there, denying it's power. Luke, when confronted with the Dark Side, quickly turned away. And while he was in war, he did have decades of supposed peace to learn the force after the Battle of Jakku. He still had over a decade to master himself and learning the force. Even before that, during the fight with the Empire, years after Endor, he was still peaceful and tranquil, only fighting when he didn't have a choice, as he did with attacking stormtroopers, but engaged in peaceful conduct and diplomacy when he could, as he did with Del Meeko. This is why I make comparison to Vietnam veterans, and John Rambo. Luke is clearly not on a hair trigger, and is instead seemingly at peace, and okay with who he is, and where he is.

Seems like he was doing all right. Not constantly being tempted by the Dark Side like a former addict struggling with addiction, or a veteran struggling with their service in a war. The Last Jedi is the odd man out here, not the rest of the saga.



I guess that's your opinion, but as we see with other points in the new canon, including the OT, Luke is someone who only acts when actually already in battle. As opposed to murdering someone in their sleep.



Problem is, Kylo Ren/Ben Solo isn't the reincarnation of Palpatine/Hitler. He's as you said, an incel, who needs to either be whacked about the head a good dozen times, spanked by Leia for being a very naughty boy, and/or confronted by Luke and given some lessons about how the force actually works, and who his grandfather really was, and why he should open up about what is bothering him.



And as we see with Luke, as we see with Yoda, it's your own personal demons that are giving it that power. If you've long ago learned to live with them, you can master them, and deny them. Being unwilling to even confront the dark side at all is what lead to their blindness regarding it, and that's why so many fell. That, and those who saw the Republic was dying and turned because they went crazy. This is again why I bring up Luke Skywalker becoming Rambo. it makes more sense in tone in The Last Jedi than someone from the OT who learned to be someone following a philosophy of peace, love, and understanding.

[Gandalf]

And they still gave Jabba plenty of opportunities to live. Are we saying that Luke only asked for Han to be returned and leaving Jabba in peace because R2, Leia, or Lando asked, or he would have killed him? Or is it more likely that Luke was being sincere in that he didn't plan on killing everyone in Jabba's palace until they gave him no choice?

Do you seriously think that if Jabba went, "You know, I like the cut of your jib, go ahead and take your friends", as unlikely as that is, that Luke would have started slicing through the everyone at the palace? I think Luke was much more compassionate and reasonable than that, and The Last Jedi is the odd duck out for making Luke willing to kill others at the drop of a hat, rather than when he has no choice.

Maybe the circumstances are slightly different?

Gandalf is arguing that Luke wasn't following Jedi teachings, and that the film is arguing that Luke didn't even bother to read the Jedi texts. Essentially, Luke couldn't be bothered to try and further his spiritual training and education. If he didn't want to do so, that's one thing, but if that's the case, why did he even open up a school in the first place? Those two plot points seem at cross purposes. Unless Luke obtained the books after opening up the school, which is a possibility.

"All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was... what he was doing."

Luke fell for his own myth, and didn't put in the work necessary to face new challenges. Then it all went way wrong. He wanted to be the Jedi as he saw them, not as they were suppposed to be, and wound up failing as they did. The same way the First Order is playing Empire, the Resistance is playing Rebellion, Kylo is playing Vader, and so on. The one thing breaking the cycle is Luke telling Rey not to be a Jedi.

Luke's like the cop Reginald VelJohnson plays in Die Hard. Decent otherwise, but ruined by an horrific mistake.

[The Romulan Republic]

Okay, this will be a long post, which I apologize for. Please don't feel any obligation to respond line by line- I just broke it up like this to help me organize my own response/thoughts. A summary of the key points on your part would quite suffice.

No shit. And it was a really, really big mistake, as Luke himself acknowledged. Probably the worst thing he ever did, and something he felt so ashamed of that he went into hiding for most of the rest of his life. But I think there are reasons for it, given what we know happened and Luke's prior experiences (note: understanding why someone did something is not the same as saying they were justified in doing it).

We're talking in circles here. You think it's an acceptable character growth, I think it's not. You think it's only due to lack of portrayal between this point and ROTJ. I agree, but think it's because the points between A and C are way too far for this to be acceptable on-screen.

It is not too difficult for me to believe that a man could change a great deal in thirty years. Hard to watch for a fan of Luke who wants him to be an idealized hero, maybe, but "not what the fans wanted" and "objectively out of character" are not the same thing.

The problem, to me, comes from the fact that we don't see those thirty years except in a few brief lines/flashbacks, so it comes off very sudden and jarring (even with TFA foreshadowing that something clearly went very wrong with Luke for him to go into hiding when the galaxy needed him). So I'll give you that the execution was imperfect (I think if anything, it should have been set up more in TFA, but its pretty clear that the Sequels suffer somewhat from a lack of overall editorial direction), but I believe that the underlying concept is fairly sound.

Luke did not, was not, seeming like a man on the edge in prior portrayals. I can get behind the Luke is in self imposed exile, drinking milk and fishing for the rest of his days, but there are layers of self control people have when it comes to doing things. Luke did not murder Ben, he stopped at that last point. But, as noted, there are several points between having murderous intentions, and actually drawing out the weapon to do so.

One of those reasons, if familiar with weapons, is to realize that they're not toys or props, and have to be afforded respect by the user. That should have been a muscle memory in itself for Luke. To breach that layer, Luke must have been incensed with rage, and so lacking in control so as to do so, that he seriously was committing attempted murder. That seems out of character for Luke, especially since he's not presented with a serious tangible threat to himself or others, unlike when Palpatine or Vader threatened or tortured others.

But, see, that's the thing: its highly implied that her perceived what Kylo would do as a Force vision. So to him it was a tangible threat. Again, this is the guy standing over baby Hitler, knowing what he'll grow up to do, and debating on whether to kill him in his crib- one life of a potential monster who hasn't done anything yet, in exchange for millions.

Its the wrong choice, yes, I have no doubt about that- but its a choice a lot of people would seriously consider, even defend, if it was another person doing it. I don't think its proof of how bad Luke is that he was tempted. Rather, its a testament to how highly-regarded Luke is that people found it so shocking from him.

Another is headspace. The war with the Empire has been over for over a decade by the time of Ben's teen years(if not longer, depending on how old he was in the flashback). Luke seemed to be mastering himself and his impulses even in the OT, with his personality becoming much more zen and one with the force. Even before Ben was born, Luke was learning the key steps of Jedi training, and mastering emotional control. Luke had his problems, as anyone would, as shown when he fought Vader, but he seemed to be on the route to becoming more centered with himself. Assuming his development didn't arrest, he would have grown beyond that by the time Ben was old enough to shave.

I don't know about that. Because he has been tempted before, and while he pulled himself back from the brink then, what did Yoda say?

"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny..."

The Dark Side is portrayed as something that becomes harder, not easier to resist the more one has touched it.

And yes, I do think this was a case of Luke being tempted by the Dark Side. Everything that we know about the Dark Side and how it seduces people-by playing on your fears and then offering you an illusory solution if you lash out in rage-says as much. If Luke had made that final choice, and struck Ben dead, I believe that he would have fallen, and that ST would be about the rebellion against Emperor Luke Skywalker. And Luke probably knows it too, which (though not explicitly stated) is likely a reason why he hid- not merely out of shame or fear for himself, but fear of what he might become if he faced Ben again. Of course, fear (or at least allowing fear to dictate your actions) is the road to the Dark Side, and that includes fear of falling (or fear of failure)- which is the final fear that Luke had to overcome to be a hero and a Jedi again. And of course, the opposite of fear could be said to be hope- which is what Luke's death in the film is ultimately meant to inspire (tying into the larger theme of the film, in which there is a recurring motif of characters making bad decisions out of fear/despair, with the capacity for hope and perserverence in the face of great odds being held up as the key to victory, and the mark of a true Jedi).

Third, Luke had plenty of other options, which are never brought up. Did Luke offer Ben some counseling, and only turned to attempted murder when he thought he wasn't able to, or was his natural impulse? Which seems troubling, due to the fact that he should have both better weapon control and emotional control.

Of course he had other options that he should have pursued. If he hadn't, it wouldn't have been a mistake to pull his saber- his only mistake would have been not following through with it when he had the chance. And the one thing we (and Luke, and Rian Johnson, and seemingly nearly the entire fandom) are all in perfect agreement on is that Luke made the wrong choice. That is the one thing here that is not under serious contention (which I honestly find quite refreshing, given how often fandoms and even official material in modern SF franchises tend to wank the "hard man making hard choices" (ie glorifying "the ends justify the means" and amorality as the highest wisdom and key to success).

But whether it was a bad choice is to me a separate question from whether the bad choice was implausibly out-of-character.

Gandalf is arguing that Luke wasn't following Jedi teachings, and that the film is arguing that Luke didn't even bother to read the Jedi texts. Essentially, Luke couldn't be bothered to try and further his spiritual training and education. If he didn't want to do so, that's one thing, but if that's the case, why did he even open up a school in the first place? Those two plot points seem at cross purposes. Unless Luke obtained the books after opening up the school, which is a possibility.

Well, Gandalf's arguments aren't mine, but I suspect that Luke only found the books on Ach-Toh after he fled there. That seems, at least, heavily-implied to me. What other teachings he studied, and what his views were on teaching, between the trilogies is hard to gauge, because again, we see very little of him. But I suppose its possible that he only founded his school reluctantly, because Leia wanted him to train Ben.

In order for The Last Jedi to work, Luke has to be someone who has rage issues, is borderline homicidal, inattentive to others, a hypocrite, and is only partially aware of this until he gets a pep talk from Yoda. That's a lot to ask of the audience regarding a character. This is why earlier in the thread, I made the connection to the AHF parody Gandhi II. It's just as sensible a plot turn.

I will also point to my earlier post, which was ignored:

link

Mostly because I wondered what Luke was doing in Ben's hut in the first place, which is why I've made jokes in the past about Luke liking to watch his nephew sleep. I'm convinced that a 'therapy session' of watching his student/padawan in their natural state to get a gauge at where they are is plausible for Luke's character. So I'm willing to buy that, if Luke wasn't seriously planning on murdering Ben, him being there to try and help his student works for me. That's the Luke Skywalker I'd buy.

When did I ignore this? As I've pointed out repeatedly, Luke was (unless you regard his account as a lie, but there's no real evidence for that) explicitly NOT there with prior intent to kill Ben. He was there to, essentially, gather information. It was only when he was shocked by finding out that Ben was much further in the thrall of the Dark Side and Snoke than he had realized that he considered killing him.

There's a key difference between "Luke isn't perfect", which I'm okay with seeing the ST explore, see my post showing a deluded Luke being like Rocky from Rocky V, in which his apprentice is completely using him and he doesn't realize it until it's too late, and "Luke is such a horrible person that he's willing to kill family members who are defenseless and sleeping", as opposed to simply waking Ben up and asking him, "Why are you tempted? I'm not here to judge, let's talk while I serve us some blue milk."

I mean, yeah, that's probably what he should have done.

I'm not trying to say that Jedi are walking saints who can't do anything wrong, but that they DO, from what we see of them, try and go for the peaceful method first. Luke's training was either so flawed from Yoda, Obi Wan, and his own studies that he doesn't consider that option as a way to deal with a problem, especially with a family member, or his new 'evolved' Jedi Order was keen on seeing violence as a way to deal with problems first rather than negotiation and diplomacy. If that's the case, then it's a rather sad warping of what the Jedi were meant to be, and what Luke's Jedi Order was to be.

Problem is, we KNOW that's not the case. Luke's showing of him becoming a Jedi is not giving in to violence,it's throwing down his lightsaber, refusing the Emperor, and showing compassion for his father. Palpatine even goes so far as acknowledging it, "So be it, Jedi."

It's also, from the little new EU that we have, out of character for him. It also negated the themes of the PT Jedi Order being flawed and Luke bringing about a Jedi Order without those flaws. Though, I will acknowledge that Rey is supposed to be serving that purpose now.

It IS out of step with his actions in RotJ, and with Jedi philosophy generally. Again, NO ONE IS DEFENDING LUKE'S CHOICE.

This is why I bring up Yoda. We see Yoda being tempted in the Clone Wars cartoon, and how a Jedi can successfully deny the Dark Side within.



Yoda, like a monk, accepts that this is part of him, and learns the lesson to accept his dark side is part of him, and tell it no. Fighting it only increases it's strength, but accepting it removes it, letting him be free of it's influence.

As I said, they deal with the demons within, and that prevents such things from getting power.

I wonder if that's the problem here. Luke came to believe his own legend ("Because I was Luke Skywalker. A legend."), and wasn't willing to acknowledge the darkness growing in himself, which left him unable to address it until it nearly consumed him. That to me is a very plausible road to corruption for Luke, and also a highly ironic one, because it means that Luke's failing was the same as that of the fans who are insisting that Luke could never do that. He was the man who brought balance to the Force (or guided Anakin to), who redeemed Vader and saved the galaxy by throwing away his sword. Surely he could never be tempted to lash out in anger.

Pride goeth before the fall, and one thing Luke was never lacking in was (over)confidence. Just listen to... about half his dialogue with Yoda in Empire Strikes Back. Or wanting to rush off to become a fighter pilot in A New Hope. Or plotting to break a top security prisoner out of the Death Star with a couple of guys he just met, essentially on an impulse, despite never having done anything like this before and his Jedi master having told him to stay put. Or thinking that he can redeem one of the greatest monsters in the galaxy despite all evidence to the contrary. He usually pulls it off because he's Luke Skywalker, but this is a seriously overconfident guy who could easily begin to buy his own legend, especially after years of relative peace, where he's the most powerful Jedi left, regarded as a living legend, and has faced no real challenges on the level of what he faced in the Galactic Civil War.

Luke, in the OT, did lash out, yes. But cold blooded murder? Or even losing himself so that he isn't only tempted, but actually plans to go through with murdering his nephew? As noted, Luke has lashed out in anger, but that's VERY different from murder in someone's sleep. We don't see Luke approach Palpatine's chambers with a pillow to smother the Emperor or Vader while they're in nap time. Instead, we see them confront them, unarmed, to try and reason with Vader. He's goaded later, but he does try the peaceful approach first, and then succeeds later when he reaches his zen moment.

I actually dispute the "cold blooded" bit. It was very much portrayed as an impulsive action, not (as I've pointed out again and again) something he planned in advance of reading Ben's mind.

If it had been cold blooded, if he had thought it through before-hand and decided, calmly and deliberately, that Ben needed to die, I don't think he would have hesitated in the moment. Luke never really struck me as an indecisive or spineless man. And in fact, that would have been closer to the Old Republic Jedi ideal- cooly, deliberately acting for the greater good, without emotion or attachment.

It would also have been utterly alien to Luke's character, because he is above all else a man driven by his heart, just as much as his father was.

Sure, Luke might be tempted all the time. Same way that we're all tempted in everyday life. Thing is, as far as know, Luke never went full Sith, and didn't surrender his entire life to giving in and indulging every whim. He lashed out in anger once, and became aware of what that anger's future was for him, which solidified his position as a Jedi. This was conveyed in cinematic language with Luke seeing the damage on Vader's cybernetic arm, and the damage on his own cybernetic arm, receiving a moment of clarity in which he sees where that path leads, turning away from it.

You're arguing that Luke essentially had a relapse. I'm pointing out that unless Luke didn't develop as a Jedi, which, from the little we've seen, he did, that shouldn't have happened the way it did. Luke should know that that is a part of him, and accepted it, which would deny it power.

My position is quite a bit more nuanced than that, as I hope I've made clear. I've made the best case I can for relating Luke's actions in TLJ to his prior established character, because unless something is really irredeemably awful (like turning your female lead/feminist icon into a shallow misogynist stereotype so she can be killed off at the last moment, yes I'm talking about you Game of Thrones), I generally prefer to try to make sense of the canon rather than just rejecting it. That's more rewarding to me as a fan, and more interesting as a writer.

I disagree, mostly because it has Luke writing off a family member. If the film had established that Luke tried to save him, as opposed to murder him, with Luke having that Rocky & Tommy relationship I hypothesized, then him telling Kylo Ren that he isn't going to try and save him, because he knows now he isn't able to save him, that'd be one thing. Because the film has Luke trying to murder Ben, the film is instead saying that he was right the first time, and giving up on Kylo Ren was the right move the whole time.

It is emphatically NOT saying that LUke was right to try to kill Ben. If you have to warp the film that much to justify your hatred of it, one frankly wonders what your problem with it actually was in the first place.

I feel like we somehow saw two different movies, and I honestly wish you could see the one I saw, because I think you'd like it a lot more.

All right, first rule of weapons are, you only point them at things you're intent on killing. And only bring them out if you are going to do so. This is probably why, in Luke's false version of events, he doesn't have his lightsaber out while Kylo Ren destroys the place with his force powers. In Luke's second version, the supposed 'true version', he does have his lightsaber out, which Luke is ashamed of. He was lying about the fact to Rey that he WAS going to murder to Ben initially. Unless of course, the second version he told was also a lie.

There is no real evidence that the second version was a lie, however. Maybe fudging the truth a little (Luke describes his impulse to kill Ben as momentary, when in the footage he seems to think it over for several seconds, and I'd be inclined in such discrepancies to take the footage over the dialogue), but the basic facts of the account are not contradicted, and his version is far less self-serving than Kylo's.

Yeah, it could be a lie- and the whole film could really be an illusion taking place inside the Matrix. But if you want to claim its false, then the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that, and that is not possible given available evidence.

Edgar Allen Poe short story. I'm really surprised you're unfamiliar with it. Crazy guy hates the old man he lives with. While he acknowledges that the man is kind, he hates the man's 'vulture eye', and plans on murdering him for it. He can't bring himself to do it because when the guy's asleep, he just sees a kind old man, and not the 'vulture eye'. It's only when he accidentally wakes the old man up that he kills the guy.

In fact I have heard of the story, but thanks for assuming my ignorance.

While we're agreeing that Luke probably didn't plot out to go into the hut and murder Luke, he did decide to murder him with his lightsaber, and was only stopped when instead of seeing an evil Sith, he saw a young boy. Like the narrator of the Telltale Heart, he was only stopped from his own psychopathy because he didn't see the evil that he supposedly saw. Unlike the Telltale Heart, that's because they have force powers and Ben fought back.

Point being, it should be really out of character that Luke is resonating with an Edgar Allen Poe character in regards to murder rather than Yoda and approaching with trying to help him.

Actually, its interesting that Luke's story in some ways is a reverse of the events of Poe's story. In Poe's tale, the murderer hesitates upon seeing the sleeping man, and kills him only when he wakes. Whereas Luke considers killing the sleeping Ben, but does not try to kill him when he's awake. I don't know what if any significance that has. Its just interesting.

And before anyone comes in with the worst possible interpretation, I don't think its because Luke was a coward who would happily murder a sleeping man but is afraid to face him in a fair fight. The way its shot, he doesn't seem to realize Ben is awake until after he's decided not to strike, and in any case, while Luke's fears driving him is crucial to his story in TLJ, its NOT physical danger that he fears. I don't believe fear of what Ben could physically do to him in a fight would have swayed his decisions much, one way or the other.

Yoda, as shown in the video above, showed us that the Dark Side is with them, but can be mastered through accepting that it's there, denying it's power. Luke, when confronted with the Dark Side, quickly turned away. And while he was in war, he did have decades of supposed peace to learn the force after the Battle of Jakku. He still had over a decade to master himself and learning the force. Even before that, during the fight with the Empire, years after Endor, he was still peaceful and tranquil, only fighting when he didn't have a choice, as he did with attacking stormtroopers, but engaged in peaceful conduct and diplomacy when he could, as he did with Del Meeko. This is why I make comparison to Vietnam veterans, and John Rambo. Luke is clearly not on a hair trigger, and is instead seemingly at peace, and okay with who he is, and where he is.

Seems like he was doing all right. Not constantly being tempted by the Dark Side like a former addict struggling with addiction, or a veteran struggling with their service in a war. The Last Jedi is the odd man out here, not the rest of the saga.

I guess that's your opinion, but as we see with other points in the new canon, including the OT, Luke is someone who only acts when actually already in battle. As opposed to murdering someone in their sleep.

The EU has always fitted somewhat inconsistently with the films, though. I can fully buy that the EU's portrayal of Luke is at odds with TLJ's- but I'd say that in that case greater weight should be given to the film's characterization. In which case, we see very little of Luke, or what his state of mind was, between Vader's death and TLJ.

Problem is, Kylo Ren/Ben Solo isn't the reincarnation of Palpatine/Hitler. He's as you said, an incel, who needs to either be whacked about the head a good dozen times, spanked by Leia for being a very naughty boy, and/or confronted by Luke and given some lessons about how the force actually works, and who his grandfather really was, and why he should open up about what is bothering him.

And as we see with Luke, as we see with Yoda, it's your own personal demons that are giving it that power. If you've long ago learned to live with them, you can master them, and deny them. Being unwilling to even confront the dark side at all is what lead to their blindness regarding it, and that's why so many fell. That, and those who saw the Republic was dying and turned because they went crazy. This is again why I bring up Luke Skywalker becoming Rambo. it makes more sense in tone in The Last Jedi than someone from the OT who learned to be someone following a philosophy of peace, love, and understanding.

I don't think its either. I think what we have is a fundamentally good but human (and therefore fallible and often driven by his emotions) man, who has great confidence in his abilities and begins to buy into his own legend, not fully recognizing that darkness is beginning to grow both in and around him. The shock of the darkness in Ben brings out the darkness in himself- it allows the Dark Side to play on his fear of failure, and of losing those he loves, to make him lash out in anger. And that shocks him into realizing how far he himself has fallen- but too late to prevent disaster. He then spends the next few years living with that regret in self-imposed exile, before finally coming to terms with it and overcoming the final, ultimate fear, the ultimate test of a Jedi- the fear of falling, or failing. Which allows him to die as himself, as a Jedi, and in doing so bring hope to the galaxy.

Edit: Made a minor edit to the format of your quotes (not to the content) to make the quotes work.