The Force Awakens Luke Skywalker - Mark Hamill - Part 1

[sherrymarton]

Love that shot. Expression on his face is so intense.

It's as if to say 'the ****teth, hath hitteth the fanneth'

exactly the appreciable work

 

[titansupes]

Official BTS pic from TFA.

 

[marcvader]

Oooooh

 

[The Caped Knight]

Badass!!!

 

[titansupes]

 

[sueb1863]

Cool!! Is that a trading card?

 

[Young Superman]

Luke better get to whip out his green lightsaber in episode 8 or 9.

 

[titansupes]

Cool!! Is that a trading card?

Sure is, from Topps I believe.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Master Jedi!

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

https://***********/StarWarsDirect/status/705540263565881344

From: Facebook.com/starwarsmovies/

 

[The Caped Knight]

it's from the blu-ray promo ad banner

 

[Matt]

Does anyone else find Hamill's comments that Luke's sexuality is open to interpretation to be a bit odd? Luke's sexuality is hardly ambiguous. He shows a very active interest in Leia in the original trilogy.

 

[titansupes]

^ Yeah, it's just him being nice and trying to be inclusive, but it makes no sense in the context of the movies themselves.

 

[Matt]

^ Yeah, it's just him being nice and trying to be inclusive, but it makes no sense in the context of the movies themselves.

I suppose. I blame Abrams more than anything for lighting the fire with his comments about gay characters coming. Why does there need to be a "gay character"? Why can't there just be a character and if the character is gay, so be it? Going out of your way to force a character whose defining trait is their sexuality is almost as bad as outright bigotry. There is something inherently patronizing about it. I find it even more patronizing when a studio or writer feels the need to take an existing and well defined character and swap their sexuality for the hell of it. Marvel did something similar with Bobby Drake. Forget the fact that these characters have engaged in countless heterosexual relationships, that was clearly just a mask. The notion that sexuality can be changed at the drop of a dime is equally insulting to homosexuals (and heterosexuals for that matter).

 

[craigdbfan]

Agreed.

 

[Sawyer]

I suppose. I blame Abrams more than anything for lighting the fire with his comments about gay characters coming. Why does there need to be a "gay character"? Why can't there just be a character and if the character is gay, so be it? Going out of your way to force a character whose defining trait is their sexuality is almost as bad as outright bigotry. There is something inherently patronizing about it. I find it even more patronizing when a studio or writer feels the need to take an existing and well defined character and swap their sexuality for the hell of it. Marvel did something similar with Bobby Drake. Forget the fact that these characters have engaged in countless heterosexual relationships, that was clearly just a mask. The notion that sexuality can be changed at the drop of a dime is equally insulting to homosexuals (and heterosexuals for that matter).

When has that ever been something that Abrams has said he wanted to do?

 

[Matt]

When has that ever been something that Abrams has said he wanted to do?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/26/j-j-abrams-gay-characters-coming-to-star-wars.html

And this is the part where you say, "HE NEVER SAID HIS DEFINING TRAIT WAS HOMOSEXUALITY!" but he kinda did. By saying that there needs to be a gay character, you are basically setting up a mandate to write a character who is a blank slate, but for one component: they have to be gay. When there is but one predetermined trait that a character must have, before they are even envisioned, that makes it their defining trait.

 

[Marvolo]

Does anyone else find Hamill's comments that Luke's sexuality is open to interpretation to be a bit odd? Luke's sexuality is hardly ambiguous. He shows a very active interest in Leia in the original trilogy.

That just means he finds a pretty girl attractive. It says nothing about whether he is attracted to guys. He could be bi.

That being said, I think it's pretty damn stupid to mire an established beloved 53 year old character in a mire of inevitable BS and backlash just for PR. Leave Luke and Leia be. Make Rey or Finn or Poe or any other new character gay or bi. They are new, not established, and it won't require people to reevaluate years of thoughts on characters and it won't reek of arbitrary retcon.

Personally I think they need to treat Luke A sexually at this point in his life. When he is discovered in TFA he is basically an ascetic monk at that point in his life. So sex probably isn't all that important to him. And Considering Luke's responsibilities and life post-ROTJ I just don't think he was wasting time or energy on the opposite or same sex. He had bigger things to worry about than getting his jollies.

 

[Roose Bolton]

No, I refuse to believe he gave up his twincestuous ways

 

[The Caped Knight]

Luke Skywalker wins in This Is Madness: The Star Wars Character Tournament,
http://www.starwars.com/news/return...dness-the-star-wars-character-tournament-2016

 

[The Caped Knight]

 

[Ponyboy]

Luke better get to whip out his green lightsaber in episode 8 or 9.

I want this more than anything

 

[The Caped Knight]

Oh I agree we gotta see some lightsaber action

 

[The Caped Knight]

 

[Hunter Rider]

That is awesome!!!