13 hours ago, LifeGain said:

He did not have to stop the whole First Order though. He just had to stop the monster he had created. If Luke were able to stop Kylo, the First Order would not have gone away (just like the Empire did not go away when Darth Vader died), but it would have lost an extremely valuable asset and it would have been easier for the Republic and the Resistance to defeat the First Order. Just think how crucial Kylo is to the First Order and how he is now in control of it. Kylo is conflicted throughout most of the movies and it was possible that Luke would have turned him. If Luke had been able to stop that....well then we would not have the Episode 8 that we do now lol.

And how, physically, would you stop Kylo? To kill him you've got to get to him. To turn him you've got to get through to him and I doubt the man that, in Kylo's view, tried to kill him in his sleep is really going to have much influence there.

We have seen that a force connection can be established between two force-sensitive people by a third and very powerful force-sensititive individual. I am sure that Luke could establish a force connection with his sister's son and lead him to a place where he is considerably more vulnerable to kill him if trying to convince him that he (Luke) was terribly wrong failed. He could toy with Kylo's emotions if need be (lead him along, portray that he is a weak and decrepit old hermit, etc....) and we have seen that Kylo is very impulsive and prone to reacting in anger.

On ‎30‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 5:27 PM, FTS Gecko said:

The same goes for Luke's death; it was inevitable, sure, but it was also unnecessary at this point in time. We'd had a number of "fake-out" deaths and "noble sacrifice" sequences in the film; Leia, Finn, Holdo, Paige Tico... when Luke's appearance on Crait was revealed as an illusion, a projection to buy the Resistance time, I thought "great - a Jedi mind trick to distract the First Order, and Luke can become a more active participant in the final film".

Eh... no. He dies anyway. The twin suns setting was great, sure, and a fitting way for him to bow out, but it came way, way too soon.

Exactly. I genuinely thought it was a brilliant, brilliant bit of the film....which felt like it was totally undercut immediately afterwards.

On ‎30‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 5:27 PM, FTS Gecko said:

I mean, come on. It's been said by so many people so many times over the last few weeks, but this is the guy who believed that Darth Vader could be redeemed. And he contemplates killing his nephew - the son of his sister and best friend - in cold blood?

I could maybe have bought this idea. Maybe . With a crap ton more exposition over the course of three films, with all of them leading up to that being the final twist in the tale. But it came pretty much out of nowhere. We simply aren't told enough about Luke's time as a teacher, Ben Solo as a student and Snoke's influence over him for this "twist" to many any kind of sense.

"Oh, Snoke had already got to Ben." When? Where? How? "Luke saw he would be the next Darth Vader, that he was too far gone" What? How? Why

I agree - I think it's a problem with telling/showing "too much but not enough" - prior to The Last Jedi, we just smiled and accepted 'stuff happened', but what we've seen now doesn't seem to make sense without extra bits around it. Whilst luke doesn't actually strike, the 'I don't have a choice, I need to [do something horrible] because [future vision]' is essentially exactly the same emotional trauma his father goes through through...well....most of episode III. And whilst there are plenty of things not to like in that film, you do see the emotional trauma building up and up to that scene in the chancellor's chambers and you see Palpatine continuously poking him again and again (including Ian McDairmud calmly stealing the entire movie during the opera scene).

I get that Luke isn't the main character in this film. But he is such a major character in the series that he essentially is the plot maguffin everyone's fighting over for the first film and a half of the trilogy, so an event that is so pivotal to his character either needs to be explained well or not at all.

On 12/31/2017 at 7:37 AM, BlodVargarna said:

“It might be fake news but I chose to believe it because it fits my world view”

Really? What in the video was fake?

On 12/30/2017 at 1:10 PM, Firespray-32 said:

The comparison I'd go with is if you were in the 1910s, you had a weapon on you, Hitler was asleep in front of you and you saw the entirely of the Second World War in moments would the thought cross your mind?

Don't you know the first rule in time-cop academy is "don't kill Hitler?"

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 0:27 PM, FTS Gecko said:

And he contemplates killing his nephew - the son of his sister and best friend - in cold blood?

Leia had an affair with Biggs? Scandal!

Seriously, though, did Luke explicitly say he contemplated killing Ben? I thought he said he just reacted to what he saw by turning on his lightsaber, and as soon as he could actually think about what he was doing, he rejected the idea but it was too late.

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 4:29 PM, LifeGain said:

He can let the Jedi die. He can have his spirit broken. But to let a problem you created destroy millions of lives, at least in part, goes against who Luke had become in the original trilogy imo.

One might almost think that seeing that your nephew will become one of the most powerful, evil beings in the galaxy and then waking up to find everything you've worked for destroyed (and people who trusted you dead) changes a person a little!

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 0:02 PM, LifeGain said:

We have seen that a force connection can be established between two force-sensitive people by a third and very powerful force-sensititive individual. I am sure that Luke could establish a force connection with his sister's son and lead him to a place where he is considerably more vulnerable to kill him if trying to convince him that he (Luke) was terribly wrong failed. He could toy with Kylo's emotions if need be (lead him along, portray that he is a weak and decrepit old hermit, etc....) and we have seen that Kylo is very impulsive and prone to reacting in anger.

Luke could probably accept that Kylo needs killing, but could he bring himself to do it? Especially, could he bring himself to construct an elaborate plan for the sole purpose of killing Kylo?

Luke just didn't feel like Luke. How was that the first time Yoda had visited him in years? I really wanted to see a Luke Rey Kylo Snoke duke it out in the last movie. I wanted Luke to go out in the last movie. I am not sure how it's going to work without Luke Han or Leia in the last one unless they find someone else to play Leia. I liked a lot of TLJ but a lot felt disjointed. My favorite seen was the boy at the end using the force to grab a broom. Hope he has a role in the last one.

On ‎03‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 2:24 PM, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Don't you know the first rule in time-cop academy is "don't kill Hitler?"

Oh no...

On ‎03‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 2:24 PM, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

...the first rule in time-cop academy...

Oh God...

On ‎03‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 2:24 PM, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

...time-cop

On 31/12/2017 at 4:27 AM, FTS Gecko said:

I could maybe have bought this idea. Maybe . With a crap ton more exposition over the course of three films, with all of them leading up to that being the final twist in the tale. But it came pretty much out of nowhere. We simply aren't told enough about Luke's time as a teacher, Ben Solo as a student and Snoke's influence over him for this "twist" to many any kind of sense.

"Oh, Snoke had already got to Ben." When? Where? How? "Luke saw he would be the next Darth Vader, that he was too far gone" What? How? Why?

But this is great! Why? Because we, the audience fill in the gaps. One of the the original trilogy's strengths is giving us a glimpse of a greater universe and allowing us to build on it. We are active participants in the SW story and with that comes a level of emotional investment into the saga. Han/Lando's history, Han/Chewies history, Jabba's Bounty, Bounty Hunter at Ord Mandell, bullseyeing Womp Rats in T-16s, etc. We fill these blanks with a story that is exciting and relevant to us. We have now created a part of the universe and were given license to do so.

Explaining every detail takes this away and makes the film just another movie. The upcoming Han Solo movie is going to de-authenticate a lot of our emotional investment in the saga I find this concerning. At this point, the OT characters are more interesting off-screen.

5 hours ago, Conandoodle said:

But this is great! Why? Because we, the audience fill in the gaps. One of the the original trilogy's strengths is giving us a glimpse of a greater universe and allowing us to build on it. We are active participants in the SW story and with that comes a level of emotional investment into the saga. Han/Lando's history, Han/Chewies history, Jabba's Bounty, Bounty Hunter at Ord Mandell, bullseyeing Womp Rats in T-16s, etc. We fill these blanks with a story that is exciting and relevant to us. We have now created a part of the universe and were given license to do so.

Explaining every detail takes this away and makes the film just another movie. The upcoming Han Solo movie is going to de-authenticate a lot of our emotional investment in the saga I find this concerning. At this point, the OT characters are more interesting off-screen.

I agree. It's not important that the movie give us all the answers, provided it doesn't shut out the possibility that there are answers, and we can come up with them.

On 12/30/2017 at 9:16 PM, LifeGain said:

I think the movie had good intentions, but it was just communicated poorly and was full of discrepancies (having 2 different directors with different visions did not help that one bit).

And lacked an outline, unlike the other two trilogies. Lucas set up the goal in the first trilogy to beat the evil empire with a plucky rebellion from the first film, and pretty much just had to work out how to get from point A to point B. The Prequel trilogy he mapped out TPM, he allowed himself some wiggle room like reducing Jar Jar's character to the background, but he still had all the bullet points he needed to tell the story to get to the OT. Now, the Sequel Trilogy? It didn't have an outline, nor was given one. JJ made a film, and then they gave Rian Johnson complete control to make whatever he wanted, so this trilogy feels like a mess tonally and directionaly. What Star Wars needs is an outline, if not a Kevin Feige, to map things out for where the stories are going.

8 hours ago, Conandoodle said:

But this is great! Why? Because we, the audience fill in the gaps. One of the the original trilogy's strengths is giving us a glimpse of a greater universe and allowing us to build on it. We are active participants in the SW story and with that comes a level of emotional investment into the saga. Han/Lando's history, Han/Chewies history, Jabba's Bounty, Bounty Hunter at Ord Mandell, bullseyeing Womp Rats in T-16s, etc. We fill these blanks with a story that is exciting and relevant to us. We have now created a part of the universe and were given license to do so.

Explaining every detail takes this away and makes the film just another movie. The upcoming Han Solo movie is going to de-authenticate a lot of our emotional investment in the saga I find this concerning. At this point, the OT characters are more interesting off-screen.

True, but I feel TFA and TLJ sets up some really bad world building. We are told that the New Republic doesn't take the FO seriously, yet by the second film it somehow has a large enough force to come and just take over near the entire galaxy in days? Uh, what? The only way you can justify that is that the New Republic was so much more inept than the Old Republic by magnitudes. And the OT's cast is sacrificed to get them into positions that make it so they don't outshine the new cast, that much has already been said with how they didn't want Luke to show up but they had to show him since everyone would be upset otherwise in TFA. Really, would it have changed things too much to have Han as part of the Resistance, or Luke on the Jedi planet more to try and research a way to defeat snoke rather than going into an exile? At least Obi-wan and Yoda had a plan for their exile, to watch over Luke and eventually train him to be a jedi rather than just to go someplace and die.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh Mark...

https://www.cnet.com/news/mark-hamill-luke-skywalker-admiral-holdo-star-wars-the-last-jedi/

On 12/30/2017 at 11:27 AM, FTS Gecko said:

'Honestly, one of the parts of The Last Jedi I enjoyed the most was Mark Hamill's performance as Luke Skywalker. Like Mark, I "fundamentally disagreed" with a lot of the choices for his character, particularly the notion that Luke would even consider for the briefest of moments killing a child while he slept in cold blood. I mean, come on. It's been said by so many people so many times over the last few weeks, but this is the guy who believed that Darth Vader could be redeemed. And he contemplates killing his nephew - the son of his sister and best friend - in cold blood?

I could maybe have bought this idea. Maybe . With a crap ton more exposition over the course of three films, with all of them leading up to that being the final twist in the tale. But it came pretty much out of nowhere. We simply aren't told enough about Luke's time as a teacher, Ben Solo as a student and Snoke's influence over him for this "twist" to many any kind of sense.

"Oh, Snoke had already got to Ben." When? Where? How? "Luke saw he would be the next Darth Vader, that he was too far gone" What? How? Why?

The same goes for Luke's death; it was inevitable, sure, but it was also unnecessary at this point in time. We'd had a number of "fake-out" deaths and "noble sacrifice" sequences in the film; Leia, Finn, Holdo, Paige Tico... when Luke's appearance on Crait was revealed as an illusion, a projection to buy the Resistance time, I thought "great - a Jedi mind trick to distract the First Order, and Luke can become a more active participant in the final film".

Eh... no. He dies anyway. The twin suns setting was great, sure, and a fitting way for him to bow out, but it came way, way too soon. If Mark Hamill's performance in the Last Jedi showed us anything, it's that he still has so much to offer the franchise moving forward. He loves the character and the films just as much as any fan, he loves being involved and that passion shines through in his work.

I can understand Han being written out of the series (in fact, Harrison Ford probably made it a condition of his involvement), but you can't tell me there's no room for Luke as an experienced veteran and wise mentor for the new, young cast in future films. Luke as a reluctant father figure and guide could have been a great foil for Rey for a long time; he could have had some incredible interactions with Poe as the former hot shot pilot meets the new kid on the block. You could have had him alongside Laura Dern in future films as leaders of the Resistance (and even a possible romance). But no, they pointlessly killed Holdo - who looked like she was being set up as a replacement for Leia - off as well. Gah, what a waste of potential. For such a cheap payoff.

At the end of the day, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill all brought heart and soul to the Star Wars franchise. To lose one is understandable, to lose two is sad and regrettable, but to lose all three - this soon, and in this manner - is pretty much unforgivable.

Bravo! Well spoken!

Luke became my childhood idol in 1977. I've been waiting since 1983 to see him back on the big screen. Mark is a wonderful actor and did an amazing job with what he was given but he wasn't given enough. A few seconds in TFA and then killed off in TLJ. What a waste by JJ and Rian.

Carrie is gone so that opportunity is gone as well. Harrison wanted out so that opportunity is gone. But Mark, he loves the role and wanted to do more. There is SO much more story he could offer. He's still young enough and willing to do it so I hope someone will take advantage of that. A Luke stand alone would be a good opportunity or a live action TV with Luke.

We fell in love with Star Wars in 1977, 1980 and 1983 and have wanted more of what we saw then ever since. Instead, directors have wanted to do "something new" instead. Why can we not go back to what made the franchise great in the first place?

Well, A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back are arguably two of the best movies ever made. That's a hard freaking standard to live up to. And part of what makes those movies great in the first place is that they did new things and broke new ground, so in that sense the new movies are trying to do what made the franchise great in the first place, they're just not as successful at it.

In my opinion, the new movies are... OK. They're entertaining enough, but they also have some pretty big and glaring flaws. They definitely aren't very good when you compare them to the OT, but by the some token they're pretty darn good when you compare them to the prequels, so that makes it easier for me to separate them out and try to judge them on their own merit. Which leaves me with: they're OK movies, fun enough to watch a few times, not amazing enough to nerd out over like I do with the OT. I'd be thrilled if they could be something more than that, but expecting them to be able to do what the OT did is, I think, neither realistic nor a fair standard to hold the new movies to.

34 minutes ago, drail14me said:

Carrie is gone so that opportunity is gone as well. Harrison wanted out so that opportunity is gone. But Mark, he loves the role and wanted to do more. There is SO much more story he could offer. He's still young enough and willing to do it so I hope someone will take advantage of that. A Luke stand alone would be a good opportunity or a live action TV with Luke.

This, so much this. Mark obviously loves Star Wars. he loves playing the character of Luke, it shines through in his work. It makes zero sense that Disney would toss him and the character away like that, when he'd happily be involved in the series for the rest of his life.

Mark has always been the heard and soul of Star Wars; Disney have ripped that heart and soul out and tossed it over their shoulder like an old, long forgotten lightsaber.

Maybe Mark being so outspoken with his reservations about the story and the film didn't help. Maybe Disney decided it was too much trouble. Either way, I love the way Mark absolutely ethered Rian Johnson in the above video. "A Jedi never takes resposibility..." well, Rian Johnson's Jedi don't.

On 1/7/2018 at 8:09 AM, Trghpu1994 said:

Luke just didn't feel like Luke. How was that the first time Yoda had visited him in years?

To this particular point, when Rey reaches out into the force, or whatever, she comes back out and says that she didn't see Luke at all, that Luke had completely cut himself off from the force.