The Last Jedi Luke Skywalker's role in "The Last Jedi": Did you like it?

[Spider-Fan]

Yes, we did. That was under the influence of the Emperor's temptation to the dark side (and Vader's too of course), and still he actually deliberately struck against the hand when Vader was finally exposed, and then never even raised his saber to strike against the incapacitated foe. He did raise his blade against his sleeping nephew though, in a situation where no dark side influence from a Sith Master was upon him.

Sorry man, but I think you missed the point in ROTJ. You're reading the entire scene wrong. Luke was turning to the dark side in that moment, not having some cool head and ending a fight. ROTJ, it was a clear attempt to kill Vader in the moment, but he stopped himself. It was the entire point of the scene. This is not even an up for interpretation type thing, it is literally what is happening in the movie.

 

[blake c]

What do you mean?

It's easy to kill a teenage Hitler and damn near impossible to kill an adult Hitler.

So how about answer the original question?

Obi Wan and Yoda wanted Luke to sacrifice his friends to stay and train so that he would become more powerful than Vader. There intent was for Luke to kill him. Luke decides to save his friends.

In Return of the Jedi, Luke tells both Obi Wan and Yoda that he cannot kill his father. He even has a chance to near the end of the movie, but decides against it.

I also think the Hitler comparison is a horrible example. Is this baby my nephew? Is he being manipulated by someone more powerful? Does he have unique gifts? Is he struggling to be evil? Also, how do we know for certain that he will be Hitler?

One of my favorite traits about Luke is his ability to see change in even the worst person. People aren't simply good vs. evil. Its why I fail to see how, or why Luke would turn his back on Kylo. "Only a Sith deals in absolute"

 

[random_havoc]

SPOILERS!!!


Hated it passionately. I waited decades to see Luke again. I knew he would not be the main star but they made him a cowardly loser not to mention he didn't even leave the tiny island this entire trilogy. Garbage

 

[danoyse]

Yes, we did. That was under the influence of the Emperor's temptation to the dark side (and Vader's too of course), and still he actually deliberately struck against the hand when Vader was finally exposed, and then never even raised his saber to strike against the incapacitated foe. He did raise his blade against his sleeping nephew though, in a situation where no dark side influence from a Sith Master was upon him.

Luke attacked Darth Vader because he threatened Leia. He was holding onto his anger by a thread as it was, then Vader reached into his thoughts, found out about Leia, and basically told him his sacrifice would be for nothing because he'd go for his sister next.

That broke his resolve and he went for the Darth Vader. He let his anger get the best of him, and he realized just before it was too late that he was doing just what the Emperor wanted.

Luke was never holding back in that scene. He hit the arm to get the lightsaber away from Vader and virtually snarled at him as he did it. All of that rage coming from him then was all of the hate he had for Darth Vader his whole life.

 

[blake c]

Did you see RoTJ when he was hacking away at Vader? Full of rage and hatred?

Wasn't it because Vader threatened Leia? Guess she doesn't matter to him now... Besides that, Luke stopped himself.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Something that really bothers me is the fact that Luke mirrors the fall of the Jedi in the prequels. He becomes a Jedi knight that falls to only become an old hermit. This is similar to both Obi Wan and Yoda.

I was always under the impression that Luke learned from their failures. He sees that the force is not as black and white as the Jedi made it out to be. He shows this by refusing to kill his father. He also does not adhere to the Jedi by having attachments to his friends and family.

I don't see how this movie took risks, or how this movie showed character development for Luke.

1) Yoda and Obi Wan didn't disconnect from the force or retire like Luke. And they were hermits for basic survival.

2) People who don't take sides in the SW universe are cynics who feel the battle between good and evil is useless. Luke gets to this place after he fails to rebuild Yoda and Obi Wan's vision of a prosperous jedi order and creates another Vader.

3) Of course the movie took risks. The backlash isn't because they went the safe, predictable route.

 

[InCali]

You highlight well why both you and the poster you quote either misunderstand what people are saying, or deliberately try to misrepresent it.

You show that Luke had plenty of character development in the first three movies without ever losing the core base of his character. The trait you could see in everything from the whiny farmhand to the Jedi Knight. The point people are making that this time they didn't manage to preserve that while writing his character development.

You also misrepresent who Luke was in ESB. What's the classic heroic thing? To be obedient to your teacher and stay away when your friends are suffering, possibly dying, or to take a big risk to try to save them? Being heroic is very often foolish and risky.

I don't "think" I misunderstand and I'm "certainly" not deliberately misrepresenting anything.

First off, I don't think Luke "ever" lost the core base of his character. Sometimes when you think you are doing the right thing and things go SO wrong, it makes you re-evaluate what you are doing. Due to, what appear to me to be, a multitude of reasons, Luke decided that his course of action and, probably, his ability to train Jedi was compromised and what he was doing created more harm than good. That is, sometimes you feel that if you act, you simply make things worse. I would say his core was preserved, but people "misunderstood" that. I think it hurt him to not try to help, but he held back because he felt his actions created more harm than good. People don't have to agree with me on this. We can just agree to disagree.

As far as me misrepresenting Luke in ESB, I did no such thing. I said he was (at times) a dumb ass that didn't listen to his teacher. I never mentioned leaving his training specifically (which I'm about half and half on). Students, by definition, aren't generally super advanced. Luke wanted to be a Jedi, but acted like a dumb ass when he first met Yoda. Remember "I don't believe it" and "That is why you fail" WRT lifting Luke's ship? Typical student dumb ass. Remember "Your light saber. You will not need it" when going down into the Dagobah cave? Dumb ass.

Not entirely unexpected from a student, but some dumb ass stuff. Who is misrepresenting anything? Certainly not me.

Fast forward to present day Star Wars. What was Luke supposed to do? Not listen to his teacher again? No. That would have been hard to do because he didn't have one. Another, more difficult challenge awaited him and he passed the test in the end.

The funny thing is that people already KNEW Luke had vanished; it was the FIRST thing you read in TFA and we had a pretty good idea of why. Why weren't people complaining about it then? IMO, what happened is that people were ready to accept that Luke had become a recluse (though maybe it just never occurred to them because it wasn't a major theme in the storyline of TFA), but they weren't willing to see what that meant.

I could go on, but I think people get the gist of what I'm saying.

 

[Mad Ones]

The way Luke was handled is my favourite part of this film. I thought he was poignant, thought provoking, and both transcended and deconstructed my nostalgic perceptions of him.

"Wow. Everything you just said was wrong"

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Luke redeemed his father but he didn't try to redeem Kylo.

Why? Cause he was tired of playing this game of restore order with chosen one, chosen one turns evil hurts billions, redeem evil chosen one, restore order with the chosen one...

He's tired of the hopeless cycle.

 

[danoyse]

Luke redeemed his father but he didn't try to redeem Kylo.

Why? Cause he was tired of playing this game of restore order with chosen one, chosen one turns evil hurts billions, redeem evil chosen one, restore order with the chosen one...

He's tired of the hopeless cycle.

My thoughts were that Luke saw something to redeem in his father (a "spark" as this movie is so fond of using). He saw nothing to redeem in Kylo.

 

[writer0327]

Something that really bothers me is the fact that Luke mirrors the fall of the Jedi in the prequels. He becomes a Jedi knight that falls to only become an old hermit. This is similar to both Obi Wan and Yoda.

I was always under the impression that Luke learned from their failures. He sees that the force is not as black and white as the Jedi made it out to be. He shows this by refusing to kill his father. He also does not adhere to the Jedi by having attachments to his friends and family.

I don't see how this movie took risks, or how this movie showed character development for Luke.

I think we see the character of Luke failing much in the same way as his predecessors, which is 180 degrees in the opposite of his own character at the end of RoTJ.

 

[Webhead38]

This post from the Star Wars subreddit puts things into perspective:

That generally sums it up for me. Can his motivation evolve? Yes I can accept it a bit more than that reader did. But you can't get there without taking the journey to explain it and this story felt no obligation to do that. And when we're talking about a character followed for some 40 years, that was not creative writing, so much as reckless abandonment of a character that was better written than what this story offered as his exit. Very poorly executed.

 

[Mjölnir]

Sorry man, but I think you missed the point in ROTJ. You're reading the entire scene wrong. Luke was turning to the dark side in that moment, not having some cool head and ending a fight. ROTJ, it was a clear attempt to kill Vader in the moment, but he stopped himself. It was the entire point of the scene. This is not even an up for interpretation type thing, it is literally what is happening in the movie.

I wrote that Luke was under influence from the dark side but I missed the point about him being under the dark side's influence? Right.

I was literally describing the events that occur. I didn't say what he was thinking or feeling, I described the actions that we see on screen. Luke does very clearly aim for the hand, that's beyond dispute. He also never raises his hand to kill the incapacitated Vader, he stops himself before that. Those are things we see on screen.

If you want to make up that Luke just being such a clumsy fighter that when he finally got his opening he just missed by half a meter then that's up to you.

I then juxtaposed the two situations where he had a defenseless person in front of him. In one he's under the influence of the dark side and very angry, and he doesn't raise his blade for the coup de grace. In the other he's neither angry or has any influence of the dark side that we're aware of, and he instinctively (although just temporarily) readies his blade for the kill.

 

[Mjölnir]

My thoughts were that Luke saw something to redeem in his father (a "spark" as this movie is so fond of using). He saw nothing to redeem in Kylo.

Which is pretty hilarious writing as the film also tells us that he hadn't even fully turned to the dark side yet. His full transition seems to have been his reactions to Luke and then going out to kill people.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I wrote that Luke was under influence from the dark side but I missed the point about him being under the dark side's influence? Right.

I was literally describing the events that occur. I didn't say what he was thinking or feeling, I described the actions that we see on screen. Luke does very clearly aim for the hand, that's beyond dispute. He also never raises his hand to kill the incapacitated Vader, he stops himself before that. Those are things we see on screen.

If you want to make up that Luke just being such a clumsy fighter that when he finally got his opening he just missed by half a meter then that's up to you.

I then juxtaposed the two situations where he had a defenseless person in front of him. In one he's under the influence of the dark side and very angry, and he doesn't raise his blade for the coup de grace. In the other he's neither angry or has any influence of the dark side that we're aware of, and he instinctively (although just temporarily) readies his blade for the kill.

The fact he does not raise his blade to kill him after cutting off his hand does not change the intent of the scene. Yes, he is hitting the saber repeatedly and not cutting around it, but Luke is in a savage state and not thinking. He is just striking at him more or less like a savage animal. Once he cuts off his hand, he realizes what he is doing. But his savage intent is the same, and you're missing that.

 

[Limonade]

Which is pretty hilarious writing as the film also tells us that he hadn't even fully turned to the dark side yet. His full transition seems to have been his reactions to Luke and then going out to kill people.

Yup! That's where my criticism lies... and you said better than I could have with less characters to boot!

 

[Webhead38]

I wrote that Luke was under influence from the dark side but I missed the point about him being under the dark side's influence? Right.

I was literally describing the events that occur. I didn't say what he was thinking or feeling, I described the actions that we see on screen. Luke does very clearly aim for the hand, that's beyond dispute. He also never raises his hand to kill the incapacitated Vader, he stops himself before that. Those are things we see on screen.

If you want to make up that Luke just being such a clumsy fighter that when he finally got his opening he just missed by half a meter then that's up to you.

I then juxtaposed the two situations where he had a defenseless person in front of him. In one he's under the influence of the dark side and very angry, and he doesn't raise his blade for the coup de grace. In the other he's neither angry or has any influence of the dark side that we're aware of, and he instinctively (although just temporarily) readies his blade for the kill.

I think that scene clearly illustrates we all have a choice. The dark side is a great analogy about the pitfalls of making emotional choices. We all live in that realm. So this idea that Luke should be above that is not realistic. He's human, like all of us. I agree with you that he is simply feeling the emotional divide and chose the better of the two. That's strength in character, not a sign of weakness. His father chose to follow his emotions which led to his fate. Anakin only saw the pitfalls of that when he was spared by his son for seeing the better side of him that he had not earned.

 

[Mjölnir]

The fact he does not raise his blade to kill him after cutting off his hand does not change the intent of the scene. Yes, he is hitting the saber repeatedly and not cutting around it, but Luke is in a savage state and not thinking. He is just striking at him more or less like a savage animal. Once he cuts off his hand, he realizes what he is doing. But his savage intent is the same, and you're missing that.

No, I'm not. Was I unclear when I spelled out that I was just describing what's physically happening in the scene?

We're directly shown two scenes where he has a defenseless person in front of him, that's either evil or potentially evil. To actually go into what he's thinking I'll point out that he certainly seems to have a thought of killing the person in front of him in both scenes. The result is that the scene where he isn't influenced by the dark side or in a rage that he actually takes that impulse the furthest in action. From that one can draw one's conclusion of what that says.

 

[Spider-Fan]

No, I'm not. Was I unclear when I spelled out that I was just describing what's physically happening in the scene?

We're directly shown two scenes where he has a defenseless person in front of him, that's either evil or potentially evil. To actually go into what he's thinking I'll point out that he certainly seems to have a thought of killing the person in front of him in both scenes. The result is that the scene where he isn't influenced by the dark side or in a rage that he actually takes that impulse the furthest in action. From that one can draw one's conclusion of what that says.

Yes, in both cases he doesn't follow through. To me, that is the very definition of consistency.

 

[Mjölnir]

I think that scene clearly illustrates we all have a choice. The dark side is a great analogy about the pitfalls of making emotional choices. We all live in that realm. So this idea that Luke should be above that is not realistic. He's human, like all of us. I agree with you that he is simply feeling the emotional divide and chose the better of the two. That's strength in character, not a sign of weakness. His father chose to follow his emotions which led to his fate. Anakin only saw the pitfalls of that when he was spared by his son for seeing the better side of him that he had not earned.

Luke has never been above making emotional choices and I've never stated anywhere that he shouldn't make that.

He does them all the time in the OT. I'm talking about that I think it's poor handling of the character to make him make the instinctive choice he did with Kylo after how he had been presented in a far, far more dire situation with the same general context. My point is that I think it's an uncharacteristic emotional choice they have him make, and I think that it makes the scene feel like it's desperately written to get the story where they want it.

 

[Mjölnir]

Yes, in both cases he doesn't follow through. To me, that is the very definition of consistency.

And to me it's the definition of inconsistency that the far, far more difficult scene for him has less of a reaction than the calm, innocent scene.

Go wide enough and everything becomes the same. That's not the kind of consistency I applaud.

 

[Spider-Fan]

And to me it's the definition of inconsistency that the far, far more difficult scene for him has less of a reaction than the calm, innocent scene.

I don't think Kylo left that tent without a hand. Vader cannot say the same.

 

[Webhead38]

Luke has never been above making emotional choices and I've never stated anywhere that he shouldn't make that.

He does them all the time in the OT. I'm talking about that I think it's poor handling of the character to make him make the instinctive choice he did with Kylo after how he had been presented in a far, far more dire situation with the same general context. My point is that I think it's an uncharacteristic emotional choice they have him make, and I think that it makes the scene feel like it's desperately written to get the story where they want it.

I'm agreeing with you.

 

[C. Lee]

From what I have seen in the SW films....and what Obi-Wan even says in ESB.....people tell "versions" of the truth at different times. Saying that something is the absolute truth because it was said in one of the movies....can be changed in the next movie when a new absolute truth is told.

 

[Mjölnir]

I don't think Kylo left that tent without a hand. Vader cannot say the same.

I think I managed to state it fairly clearly that I started my comparison when he has a helpless person in front of him, to boil it down to the urge to strike the person down is handled. I am however not a native English speaker so if there's anything I type that's hard to understand feel free to point that out.

Vader lost his hand before that and the way that plays in is how I've described the big difference in emotional state between the scenes.