Is Last Jedi Luke's actions consistent with Luke's character from the original movies?

[AuRon]

The thing I note is that while Lucas says he does not want to kill Yoda, Yoda does end up dying in ROTJ (it is unclear to me whether killing meant a violent death or any death), I would suggest that illustrates nicely that simply because characters die (or even are killed) does not make it some gratuitous exercise in grim-dark. I don't think say Luke's death in TLJ is particularly grim or the like (very much like Yoda's death) and more broadly I don't think the story of TLJ somehow renders meaningless or otherwise negates the victories of the original trilogy.

Anyway in terms of your broader point, I think mere defying expectations when it is shallow and gimicky is kind of hack, lazy and/or cynical writing. However I think those of us who think TLJ worked think it does much more than defy expectations, rather it sets up one thing and than another thing happens that second thing actually makes way more sense than the initial expectation. So Luke says he's not going to go it alone against the first order with a laser sword and in the end he does exactly that but not exactly, and to me it works great because the subversion (it is an illusion) makes more sense then the initial expectation. Of course finding that more satisfying depends on lots of judgments along the way that one might disagree with.

Anyway to the question of the thread put me down as among those who had a conception of Luke based on the way I watched the original trilogy and this movie, where the two lined up pretty well. However just what Luke was like in the original trilogy and just what he is supposed to have done in TLJ seems like debated points.

First of all, yes Yoda "dies". So does Ben/Obi-Wan, as Lucas himself pointed out. But the fact that Obi-wan came back as a force ghost was Lucas' way of "taking the edge off it". Same with Yoda. Yoda came back as a ghost just a short time later after dying. Kasdan probably didn't want anyone to come back as a ghost, and just stay dead. Like Han Solo in the new movies.

As for rendering the victories of the original trilogy meaningless; yes the new movies do exactly that. Not TLJ by itself, but the new series as a whole. The Empire is back (albeit with a different name), the new republic is gone, the rebel alliance is back (again, under a different name), Han was back to doing what he was doing before meeting Luke, and there was even a new Death Star (Starkiller). TLJ takes this a few steps further by reducing the "resistance" to a tiny number of people after most of them are killed, and by having Luke abandon his friends and his duties to go live as a hermit, thus throwing out all of his character development and achievements from the original movies. Hell, they even had his attempt at a new Jedi order wiped out by killing all the kids he was training, and have Luke be sort of responsible for the villain of this series. To me, this all seems very cynical, and blatantly undoes everything that was accomplished in the old movies, making them feel like a big waste of time if you accept the Disney stuff as canon.

Of course, the reason Disney signed off on all of this is because they actually just wanted to do remakes of the Star Wars movies disguised as sequels. Which is exactly what these movies are. The Force Awakens is A New Hope, but with some things changed around. The Last Jedi is The Empire Strikes Back (with some of Return of The Jedi), but with subversions.

As for Luke "going it alone" against the order, I don't think anyone was realistically expecting that to happen. Luke coming to help, sure. But if anything I think people would have expected him to fight alongside Rey and Finn and the others, helping them. Not just going it alone, which would be ridiculous.

As for the "conception" of Luke, how he was portrayed in this movie was not at all how I ever saw him. While watching this movie I just thought "that's not Luke Skywalker". Hamill did a good job with what he was given to work with, but it wasn't the character from the old movies. Not even an older version of that character. And Hamill himself agrees. Here is what he had to say about it:

“I said to Rian, ‘Jedis don’t give up.’ I mean, even if [Luke] had a problem, he would maybe take a year to try and regroup, but if he made a mistake, he would try and right that wrong, so right there, we had a fundamental difference. But it’s not my story anymore, it’s somebody else’s story and Rian needed me to be a certain way to make the ending effective. That’s the crux of my problem. Luke would never say that. I’m sorry.”

“Well, in this version…see, I’m talking about the George Lucas Star Wars, this is the next generation of Star Wars. I almost had to think of Luke as another character. Maybe he’s ‘Jake Skywalker,’ he’s not my Luke Skywalker. But I had to do what Rian wanted me to do because it serves the story well. Listen, I still haven’t accepted it completely, but, it’s only a movie. I hope people like it. I hope they don’t get upset. I came to really believe that Rian was the exact man they needed for this job.” http://collider.com/the-last-jedi-mark- ... son-disney

[Yukaphile]

AuRon, you're the BEST... like no one ever was...

[AllanO]

To me, this all seems very cynical, and blatantly undoes everything that was accomplished in the old movies, making them feel like a big waste of time if you accept the Disney stuff as canon.

"Everything"? Careful there, only a Sith deals in absolutes.

In any case I would say things have changed a fair bit. For example in the original trilogy Luke was brash and jumped in before he is ready. In the Last Jedim despair seems to be his vice, so its not like he is repeating the same mistakes over and over rather he is finding new ways to screw up, which I think is progresss.

Likewise the characters (and setting) are (in general) not just repeating the same thing, rather things are different in various ways. That being said some of the bits were lazy (oh yeah there is a New Republic which exists off screen and is destroyed) and there are similarities and call backs, but to me that is different from them being the same.

Not just going it alone, which would be ridiculous.

Kind of my point. The expectations being defied were often off in some way, that would have just been the one where it was most blatant.

I came to really believe that Rian was the exact man they needed for this job.” http://collider.com/the-last-jedi-mark- ... son-disney

To me the last part of that quote (that I've singled out above) from Hamill is perhaps the point we should take away. At the start of the process Hamill was incredulous and by the end he's convinced, maybe we can be convinced too?

But this serves to asks of Rian or whoever wrote its competency in writing Luke Skywalker. If there is any case that Luke's actions are consistent then that determines the competency.

What I am suggesting is that there is a limit to what can be debated or proven about a a fiction, because ultimately what is implied by something, what is good writing and so on depend on our interpretation, on our individual way of seeing things, on our point of view (like Obi-wan says "you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."). Yukaphile can't believe Luke can activate his lightsaber without premeditation, I think he can.

However, I'm probably not going to convince Yukaphile even though I think there are arguments (Jedi are on such a hair trigger that they can deflect and dodge blaster bolts from out of nowhere, they react without thought in an instant to things), because ultimately it depends on how you feel about and react to the story on a fundamental level that goes beyond argument. However this means that likewise Yukaphile's probably not going to convince me that somehow activating a lightsaber requires premeditation, and can't just be a gut reaction although I am sure arguments exist for that position also. People are allowed to have different opinions (for now) and so we should.

Also the point is that there are real people having these reactions, I am not just imagining them for the sake of argument. The movie succeeds in making sense to a lot of people and more than that being pretty compelling to a fair number of people even if it fails to be either for plenty of others. I don't think any movie is going to be compelling or even diverting for everyone, or consistent and coherent. So I think when we ask is a portrayal consistent, the question is not, could every audience or every person find it so, but rather whether there was a real substantial audience that would find it consistent, compelling and so on, and too me it seems pretty clear the answer to that limited question is yes in general even if for many in particular the answer is no.

[AuRon]

Kind of my point. The expectations being defied were often off in some way, that would have just been the one where it was most blatant.

I never expected that of him though. I figured that his laser sword comment was just him being facetious, and wasn't intended as foreshadowing or anything.

To me the last part of that quote (that I've singled out above) from Hamill is perhaps the point we should take away. At the start of the process Hamill was incredulous and by the end he's convinced, maybe we can be convinced too?

That's not how I interpreted what he said. It sounds like he liked a lot of things about the movie, but disagreed specifically with Rian Johnson's interpretation of Luke Skywalker. I felt he made that pretty clear.

I'll just say this. I'm not trying to convince anyone to dislike this movie, I'm just trying to explain why I don't like it. Its not like I wanted to dislike this movie either. Before it was released it sounded pretty interesting. I was actually okay with the idea of telling a darker story, and maybe even seeing heroic characters fall(either literally or figuratively). That could have made for an interesting movie, and in the right hands, could have taken Star Wars in some exciting new directions. The movie got a great reaction from critics, and people who saw it early were saying it was the best Star Wars movie since Empire Strikes Back. I wanted to see it. Looking forward to it in fact. I wanted to like this movie, and was expecting to.

I go to see it, and the movie starts. It starts with Poe telling dumb jokes, and the bad guys being made to look stupid. Off to a bad start, but it was a long movie so it could still be mostly good. We then get more unfunny and intrusive comedy with Finn and the suit after he woke up (this also made him being in a coma seem pointless, since it was resolved almost immediately). There was the boring and meandering subplot with Poe and Holdo. Finn decides to try running again, only to learn that he needs to face things and be a hero... which was the same character arc he had in TFA. I didn't hate Rose, but she felt extraneous. The Casino planet subplot had even more bad comedy, and the war profiteering stuff, and DJ betraying them made it feel pointless. Guess they needed to waste Captain Phasma a second time (to be fair, she at least got to fight for a minute in this one).

I was actually initially okay with how Luke was portrayed, but became gradually less okay with it as the movie went on. I could have forgiven him being very different (and arguably out of character), if he had at least been interesting. Or did something interesting. Or did something cool. Or something. But he didn't. Rey learned nothing from hm. The porgs were pointless. Luke didn't talk to his old friends, or mourn his dead friends. Instead they decided to waste time showing him drinking milk from a gross alien creature. The cave scene was a waste of time. Then Rey leaves, and Yoda shows up. Luke wants to burn the books, Yoda seemingly burns them, and Luke is upset that Yoda did what Luke was going to do. Okay.

The pathetic rebels are trapped on the Hoth substitute planet, waiting for a miracle to save them. Luke shows up and has a pretend fight with Kylo. There were actually some neat visuals here. And I could even appreciate the idea of this scene, although it was hampered by how lousy the build up to it was. Luke dies anticlimactically.

I will say that the Kylo and Rey interactions were actually well done. One of the few good things about the movie in fact. Although even that had its flaws. The guard fight scene was bad, Snoke's death was dumb and ridiculous. It made him look like an oblivious idiot, and you wonder how he ever became leader. It was a nice moment for Ren I guess. Then another Empire ripoff scene subverted. Then by the end of the movie all of the villains, including Kylo, are made to look like jokes.

By the time I got 20 minutes into this movie, I was starting to wonder if I had made a mistake, and this wasn't actually as good as people said. By the time I was halfway through, I was pretty sure I didn't like it. By the beginning of the final act, I was sure I didn't like it. I felt disappointed, and lied to. This was not a good movie. In fact, I thought it was one of the worst Star Wars movies.

I could have been fine with taking liberties with the characters, and even repeating certain things, if it had actually been well written and interesting and entertaining. But, in my personal opinion, The Last Jedi was none of those things. It was boring, unfunny, had no one I really wanted to root for, everyone came off as an idiot or an incompetent, everyone was made to look like a joke. It really felt like this movie was going out of its way to piss all over Star Wars, which was made all the more disappointing because I was actually looking forward to it. Like I said, I wanted to like this movie, but I really didn't.

Obviously this movie worked for you, and a lot of other people. I wish it had worked for me too, but it didn't. Luke giving up and becoming a hermetic asshole, throwing away his hero's journey and achievements (and yes, I do feel that's what happened), is just the tip of the iceberg. If the movie was otherwise great, I could have been okay with that, even if I didn't agree with it. But there was just so much wrong here. This was a movie that felt like it was trying to use a story from Battlestar Galactica (2004), but with a tone more similar to Spaceballs. I could go on, but I think that's enough.

Anyway, you like this movie, I don't. What more is there to say? I don't feel like writing anymore essays, so I'm done commenting on this subject.

[AuRon]

For the record, the above post was a lot longer than I meant it to be. I was just trying to give a full context of why I not only disliked Luke's portrayal, but the movie in general. But maybe I could have been more concise.

[Admiral X]

I rather enjoyed reading it.

[Yukaphile]

ME TOO! I'm also proud at how my thread has just exploded.

[AllanO]

Anyway, you like this movie, I don't. What more is there to say? I don't feel like writing anymore essays, so I'm done commenting on this subject.

Thanks for sharing, I will think about what you said.

[Makeshift Python]

The whole "it renders the OT meaningless" argument doesn't hold a lot of water for me because ultimately STAR WARS is a soap opera where you're supposed to enjoy on an episode by episode basis. Lucas may have hyped up how much of Star Wars is some grand saga he planned out, but hype was all it ever was. The original film had set up the idea that the Empire would crumble due to the loss of the Death Star, which is why the victory feels so grand for the Rebels and why they're handing out medals instead of evacuating the base.

[Yukaphile]

To play devil's advocate, even Legends didn't have the whole happy ending, with the Yuuzhan Vong War and the war with Corellia, and so on and so forth. It didn't turn Luke into a bitter emo hermit, but it also didn't keep the status quo. There was also lots of political backstabbing, though.