Avatar

Luke Skywalker in 'The Last Jedi' (1/2)

Luke in The Last Jedi... love it or hate it, it's a difficult subject.

I personally stand somewhere in the middle. I don't think Luke was "ruined"... I'd argue that, from a purely in-universe perspective, his subplot actually tracks with what was previously established in the original films.

There are issues, but I think they are mainly found on an out-of-universe/structural level (which I'll get into in post 2/2). For now, let's take a deep dive and unpack why this portrayal isn't all that problematic.

The most commonly-heard argument is that:

"They ruined Luke's character! He would never go into exile or abandon his sister and friends!"

Simply put, Luke used to be:

  • an optimist
  • so brave he'd risk his life to save his friends,
  • aspired to become a Jedi.

Whereas, in The Last Jedi, he's:

  • jaded and depressed,
  • hides/abandons his sister and friends, like a coward,
  • says the Jedi need to die?!

Now the fact is... Luke is 24 years older when he goes into exile, 30 years older in The Last Jedi. People change, with age.

In Luke's case, he matured from an impatient kid who'd rashly run to save his friends, like in Empire Strikes Back, to a grown-up who makes hard choices and restrains himself from doing that, even though he desperately wants to.

Luke tells himself this is a self-sacrifice, this is for the greater good.

"Because he’s the last Jedi and a symbol of that it then becomes this self-sacrifice, he has take himself out of it, when he knows his friends are dying, when the thing he’d most like to do is get back in the fight." - Rian Johnson, The Empire Film Podcast, 2018

And Rian Johnson didn't want Luke to come across as a coward, so he also gave Luke an argument that initially seems to make sense:

  • The Jedi way is flawed and inevitably leads to arrogance. Proof: the Sith originally came from Jedi. His own new order is no exception to that rule, even if he thought it was (in his arrogance, he believed his own legend).
  • So if he leaves and stays in exile? No more Jedi, no more Jedi-turned-darksiders that can mess up the galaxy.
  • The Force will keep trying to balance itself and a new, worthier source will appear (in the form of Rey).

But while his reasoning that "the Jedi are inevitably arrogant" seems sound and reasonable... it's wrong.

Where is it wrong, in Luke's case?

Well, he's rationalizing his actions by blaming the Jedi religion, instead of admitting his own failure.

"The notion of, 'Nope, toss this all away and find something new,' is not really a valid choice, I think. Ultimately, Luke's exile and his justifications for it are all covering over his guilt over Kylo." - Rian Johnson, The Art of The Last Jedi, 2017
"In his own way, [Luke is] trying to disconnect, he’s trying to throw away the past, he’s saying 'Let’s kill [the Jedi] religion. It’s the thing that’s messing us up, thins thing right here, let’s kill it.’ And the truth is, it’s a personal failure. It’s not religion, it’s his own human nature that’s betrayed him." - Rian Johnson, The Empire Film Podcast, 2018

He fucked up, plain and simple.

But it's not because “he’s a Jedi and that made him arrogant and the Jedi mentality is flawed”, as he claims early on in the movie.

He failed because he's flawed. Luke is human and had a moment of weakness where he was scared shitless and acted on instinct.

Yoda's spirit helps him realize this, and he fixes his mistake by allowing Leia and the resistance to save themselves. And as he does it, he acknowledges the importance of the Jedi and their teachings.

And it's also why, in The Rise of Skywalker, he has the maturity to admit that he wasn't staying on the island out of some self-sacrificial gesture, as he kept telling himself. Truth is, he was afraid. Afraid he'd screw up again.

Do the movies go about this in an emotionally-satisfying way? That's debatable. But, on paper, I don't think Luke's behavior in The Last Jedi is too much of a shark-jump considering how

THE ORIGINAL IDEA CAME FROM GEORGE LUCAS!

In the couple of months after the Disney sale, Lucas developed the Sequels with Michael Arndt in late 2012/early 2013, and concept art was made by artists like Christian Alzmann.

Note: the image on the left got a “Fabouloso” stamp of approval from Lucas!

Lucas’ sequels would feature a Luke Skywalker who was a figure like the jaded, reclusive Colonel Kurtz in the movie Apocalypse Now (which, fun fact, Lucas helped write and was originally set to direct).

The reason why Luke was in self-imposed exile wasn’t specified, all we know is that he was:

  • hiding from the world in a cave,
  • haunted by the betrayal of one of his students,
  • and spiritually in a dark place.

Other concept artists, like James Clyne, tried to illustrate the First Jedi Temple and some of the designs were approved by Lucas, such as the one below.

Eventually, Kira the female Jedi-wannabe protagonist (who eventually became Rey) would seek him out so he can train her.

This Luke would be a much more prominent part of Episode VII (instead of only appearing at the end) but still died at the end of Episode VIII.

For sources and more information about George Lucas’ plans for the Sequel Trilogy, read this post.

The only part that wasn't detailed by Lucas were the specifics of why he went into exile. But all in all, this sounds pretty similar to what we got in The Last Jedi.

"Luke would never try to kill Ben!”

I agree. And he didn’t try to kill Ben. He stopped himself.

And this version of the event?

This didn’t happen.

What Kylo tells Rey is his version of the story. And he thinks he’s telling the truth... but his recollection of the event is warped as this was obviously a very traumatic event for him.

"I don't think he's lying actually. In my mind, that was his experience. [...] I think that it's probably twisted a little bit by Kylo's own anger and his own prejudices against Luke, but I feel like he's actually telling her the truth of his experience." - Rian Johnson, Star Wars: The Last Jedi commentary, 2017

The narrative frames the third version of the story as the one that’s objectively how events went down. Because Rey believes him, and Rey is both the protagonist and a stand-in for the audience.

Now, if you think Luke’s word is unreliable and you have an easier time trusting Kylo’s version of the story, go to town.

But I think that if you actually believe would Luke would never try to kill Ben, you’d take Luke's second retelling of the story at face value.

I know I do.

“Okay, but he would never consider killing a child, like Ben. He saw the good in Darth Vader!”

First off, Luke refers to Ben as "a scared boy" because, he's a middle-aged man. But objectively, Ben was 23 years old.

But also, I mean... with Vader, Luke actually had the luxury ignorance.

Avatar
Hux: I can't believe you assassinated our Supreme Leader! Kylo: Well, "assassinated" implies I had political motives. I actually just killed him because he was kind of a dick and that's just how the Dark Side works. So technically, I just murdered him. Hux: That's not better.
Avatar
Hux: "They'll never find your body" is such a boring threat. I think a better threat would be, "they'll never stop finding your body." Phasma: "They'll be finding pieces of your body for at least four months, and you'll still be alive for three of them." Hux: Now that's threatening.
Avatar

Luke Skywalker in 'The Last Jedi' (2/2)

OK, so in Part 1/2 of this post, we explored why Luke's TLJ characterization isn't really inconsistent with what had previously been established in Star Wars lore. It tracks. Dare I say: it works.

And yet... something still feels off, right?

Well, the reason for this is because Luke's character development is impacted by the film's structure, which in turn is impacted by - of all things - Poe's lack of development in Episode VII! Just hear me out!

The intention: Making the audience feel the same emotions as the protagonist, deuteragonists and antagonist.

This is what most movies strive for. Unless the film is trying to go for some dramatic irony, you want your audience to be on the same page with your protagonist, emotionally-speaking.

And y'know what? Rian Johnson does this very well.

Overall, he displays a very good grasp of making us, the audience, feel the same emotions as a film’s protagonist (generally, the main character, whose POV we follow) or deuteragonist (the ‘secondary main character’).

Rey was expecting to meet the Luke from the Original Trilogy, the Luke from Legends... and instead was disappointed to meet an old jaded hermit. Just like many of the fans were.

Finn is fooled by DJ, mistaking him for an archetypal "misfit with a heart of gold". Just like the fans were.

Poe is increasingly frustrated with Holdo, just like we were.

Call it "meta", call it "subversive", the bottom line is that some of the narrative choices that a lot of fans criticize the film for are intentionally placed there to put you in the same mental state as the characters you're following, even during the film's twists.

But as a result, if a character isn’t the protagonist (Rey), or the deuteragonists (Poe or Finn), or even the antagonist (Kylo)... they'll barely get any development.

They might get one or two scenes for themselves tops, but overall secondary characters like Luke, or Holdo, or DJ will mostly be shown through the filter of Rey or Poe’s or Finn's POV.

The Problem: Luke isn't a protagonist or deuteragonist, so he isn't developed to the audience's satisfaction.

Don't get me wrong: Luke has the second-most screen time in the whole film, but that's because Rey is the one with the most screen time, and he's primarily a character in her storyline.

To be fair, he does have his own subplot, he's the spiritual center of the whole film. But concretely, he’s one step above support characters like Holdo, Leia, Rose and DJ. We're barely shown his own POV and mainly view him through Rey's lens.

Like, there's a reason why in this scene...

... we don't see what Luke witnessed in Ben’s mind, simply his reaction to it: Rey didn’t see it either.

All three "Rashomon" flashbacks are what Rey is picturing in her mind when she’s being told three different versions of the story. She doesn't see what Luke witnessed, so we don't see it either.

And you know what? On paper... this is also not really an issue. It's actually quite standard. I mean, Yoda doesn't get much backstory or an arc in Empire Strikes Back. He's just the mentor figure, and we see him through Luke's POV.

There's no arguing that Luke in TLJ receives much more development than Yoda does in ESB.

But y’know what?

Yoda was also never the protagonist of a whole other trilogy.

So if you're gonna tell an audience that "the protagonist of the previous trilogy strayed from the path and is now a completely different person" - even if they eventually make their way back with a character arc - I don’t think it’s out of order for audience members to expect more development than a regular mentor archetype.

Context is expected, and when it isn't delivered, that'll kill the suspension of disbelief, for many fans. They're not just disappointed in Luke like Rey is, they're not immersed in the movie anymore.

So how do you go for what Rian was going while also trying to keep about half the fans from jumping ship?

The Solution (?) Delving deeper into Luke.

So let’s suppose Luke was treated like a deuteragonist. Suppose we see his own POV more, rather than just seeing him through Rey’s eyes. Would that help? And what would that look like?

Firstly, we keep that deleted scene of him mourning Han’s loss.

Or we show it like in the comic adaptation of TLJ, with Luke getting angry at his decision to cut himself off from the Force, unintentionally levitating objects until Chewie consoles him.

WHAT IT DOES: Either version humanizes Luke, shows who he is beneath the jaded mask he's putting on, gives audience a chance to mourn Han with him.

We keep that deleted scene of him explaining to Rey why he thinks the Jedi were flawed, also known as the “3rd lesson scene”.

WHAT IT DOES: Spells out Luke's rationalization that the Jedi Order needs to end. Marks the beginning of Luke's wake up call.

We add one or two additional short flashbacks of Ben gradually becoming darker and unhinged. Maybe he harms one of his fellow students in a fit of rage.

WHAT IT DOES: Clarifies that Ben was going through a dark period and that's why Luke went to confront him in his hut. He didn't just saunter into Ben's hut, sabers blazing.

Maybe halfway through the film, we see Luke pack his bag as he prepares to rescue his friends with Rey, only to find her communicating with Kyloe.

After all, the novelization shows that, upon opening himself to the Force and sensing Leia, he immediately decides to get back in the game. So if that’s not just something Jason Fry added to embellish stuff, let’s see that.

WHAT IT DOES: Drives home the fact that Luke realizes his mistake. (Although, it might also take away from the subsequent scene with Yoda).

Finally, let’s actually see what Luke saw in Ben’s mind: him killing Lor San Tekka, killing Han, killing Leia, murdering Chewie and countless more innocents all with a smile on his face.

WHAT IT DOES: Provides context for Luke's extreme reaction.

Most of these things are already technically canon, the only difference is that it would be shown on screen. And if all these elements are added, then Luke’s reasons for staying away and his reaction in Ben’s hut are already more understandable.

So where’s the flaws in this solution?

Solution Flaw #1: Plot twist would be ruined.

Talking about this one:

Again, we're seeing Luke THROUGH Rey's POV, for the most part. Our reaction is - intentionally - the same reaction as Rey.

The whole point of the twist is that

  • we, with Rey, believe Kylo can be redeemed, because
  • we, like Rey, remember Luke redeemed Vader.

So when she realizes “oh shit, Luke was right, he’s too far gone”... we react that way too.

But if we had seen Ben’s turn as well, if we had seen how he was during his training, if we had seen what Luke’s saw in Ben’s mind, we would all collectively agree with Luke and think that Rey is making a mistake in trying to redeem Kylo.

So when Rey walks away from Luke, rather than hoping she succeeds, we’d just be waiting for her to inevitably fail. We'd be thinking:

"Rey, you moron, you're walking into a trap and Kylo isn't gonna turn!"

Emotionally-speaking, we would be detached from the protagonist.

Solution Flaw #2: Increase in the runtime at the cost of other scenes.

The Last Jedi is already the longest film in the franchise. Adding just three of the above-suggestions would increase that runtime, which wouldn’t work. So you’d need to take something out.

But Finn and Poe’s storylines are already stripped down to their bare bones as it is. Hell, so was the Rey/Luke storyline, for that matter.

Actually, wait... why do we have three storylines, in the first place?

After all, if we look at The Empire Strikes Back, they only have two storylines, right?

  • The protagonist, Luke, goes to Dagobah.
  • The deuteragonists, Han and Leia, evade the Empire.

Main plot & subplot. Great.

Wouldn't it be better to just have Poe and Finn do the Canto Bight storyline together? That would give us sme remaining time to focus on Luke’s past, right? Where’s the issue?

Well, Rian Johnson put it this way:

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.