It actually holds together pretty well when you think about it.

Leia is on her to Tatooine to pick up Obi-Wan and Luke. Luke is sort of a secret weapon that Bail Organa and Obi-Wan plan to use against Vader and the Emperor (the "new hope.") Obi-Wan took Luke to Tatooine to watch over him and probably train him in the ways of the Force. (Though he didn't get much of a chance to train him, as, from what we saw, Owen Lars didn't seem to want Luke to be trained in the ways of the Jedi; shades of Harry Potter?) Notice that there appears to be some kind of history between Luke, Owen, and Obi-Wan. Luke seems to remember "Ben," but hasn't seen him in some time. Owen seems to want to keep Luke away from Obi-Wan.

At any rate, while Leia is on her way to pick up Luke and Obi-Wan, her ship is attacked by Vader and his Imperial forces. She is forced to hand the plans over to the droids, and R2 sends the escape pod to land near Obi-Wan's location.

The droids are picked up by the Jawas before they can make it to Obi-Wan's home. (Kind of a clever set up in the prequels, where 3PO had his memory wiped and doesn't know what R2 is doing, while R2 would remember everything.) The Jawas taking the droids to the Lars home, and having them need droids is a bit of a coincidence, or at least plot convenience, though.

But it still makes sense for all of these pieces to be where they are at the beginning of the movie. It's never outright stated that Luke is some kind of secret weapon, but it can be read into the events.

What's really cool is that the revelation that Darth Vader is Luke's father adds a whole new level of subtext to the first movie. Now that we know that Luke is Vader's son, it makes more sense for Obi-Wan to be hiding out and preparing to use him against Vader. It also gives a new meaning to "He has a lot of his father in him./That's what I'm afriad of." And the complete lack of interaction between Luke and Vader in that movie also sets up the relationship. So, while I have little doubt that the father-son thing was unplanned at the time the original Star Wars made, it fits together beautifully in hindsight. It takes a couple of things from that movie, like Kenobi's interest in Luke and the lack of a face-to-face meeting between Luke and Vader, and puts them in a new context.

I can't be the only one who wants an entire "Star Wars Story" film about the adventure of Luke's hand floating through space...

Which IMO is why so many (including me) believe it was being hinted at that the happings on Jakku were meant to be the same thing with Rey not being a "nobody".

The Red Letter Media review makes a really good point about where the film should have ended. Basically just chop off the Battle of Crait and leave us on a cliffhanger after Kylo asks Rey to join her. It would have left some good hooks for Episode IX rather than teasing the will they won’t they team up subplot only to have that aspect just immediately reversed after they team up to take out Snoke. It also would have left Luke in limbo until the next film and we could have possibly had a more satisfying end to his arc rather than what they did. Instead it’s like what the film did is kill what a lot of people wanted and left us with a rather unsatisfying ending that has us scratching our heads as to what the next film will even be.

Although it makes it odd Vader is face-to-face with his daughter several times and completely misses it.

Again, it's completely understandable why people may have read into certain things in TFA and came to certain conclusions/guesses. But that doesn't mean TLJ is a bad movie because it decided to do something different, and the move to make Rey a nobody doesn't actually contradict anything in TFA.

As you point out, it's like how Vader is Luke's father wasn't originally planned. That actually does directly contradict what Obi-Wan said about Luke's father in the first film, which lead to Yoda confirming the reveal in ROTJ, to quell the doubters, and Obi-Wan's infamous "true from a certain point of view" line to retcon the contradiction.

What's really interesting is the way Alec Guiness played the scene in 1977 where he tells Luke about his father. Now in 1977 he was talking in the context that Luke's father was killed by Vader, but he still pauses for a second and hesitates (and sort of has a haunting look on his face) before he gives him the full story. So you can actually watch the Original in both contexts as his father and not his father, and they both work.

That sounds terrible. For one, I didn't really think for longer than a moment that Rey would join Kylo. It's a great, dramatic moment, but it's not something to hang a cliffhanger on. It's like suggesting that ESB should've ended with Vader's reveal to Luke and his offer to join together.

Also, without the Battle of Crait, you're leaving the story in the lurch, not at an end point. Also, with all the relentless losing the Resistance and our heroes face, you need to end with a win. It's a bit like the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR:TTT. All they really did was stop from being completely eradicated. The war at large still looms. But it's enough to end the film on an upbeat note. It signals a turning of the tide.

Leaving Luke without a win in this movie would've been completely unsatisfying. It would've, what, left him just after both Rey and Yoda schooled him? It's like, there's these things called "arcs," and movies need them, even the middle film in a trilogy.

It also wouldn't complicated the dynamic of light side vs dark
side of the Force in the final film. What is Luke doing, just hanging around? If there's two light side users, wouldn't they both go after Kylo? And if it's Luke & Rey together, wouldn't Luke logically be taking the lead, like Obi-Wan does up through the Death Star in the first film? It would put Rey in a much more passive role, when she needs to be the focus. Even in the original trilogy they knew they had to kill off the Jedi Master so the Luke could take the lead. It's why Yoda dies right off the bat in ROTJ, when there previously wasn't any indication he was near death.

But really that’s a big plot of the film and even started in the marketing to a degree. Also if you really think about it after Vader asks Luke to join him the film doesn’t linger on a lot longer. There’s probably like five minutes or so after that wraps up the movie but things are looking bleak and Luke is conflicted. I don’t think you had to literally end The Last Jedi there, you could have added a scene of the Resistance in peril or something but it could have left us with something to think about if we didn’t get an instant resolve to Kylo/Rey.

It’s the middle chapter in a trilogy. Generally that’s where conflict in the story is at its highest point and we’re left in limbo.

Again the middle chapter is generally about conflict. Luke didn’t want to be the heroic Jedi because he doesn’t view himself that way. Episode IX would ha

It also wouldn't complicated the dynamic of light side vs dark
side of the Force in the final film. What is Luke doing, just hanging around? If there's two light side users, wouldn't they both go after Kylo? And if it's Luke & Rey together, wouldn't Luke logically be taking the lead, like Obi-Wan does up through the Death Star in the first film? It would put Rey in a much more passive role, when she needs to be the focus. Even in the original trilogy they knew they had to kill off the Jedi Master so the Luke could take the lead. It's why Yoda dies right off the bat in ROTJ, when there previously wasn't any indication he was near death.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely. Watching that, you can see that there's something he's not telling Luke.

But really that’s a big plot of the film and even started in the marketing to a degree. Also if you really think about it after Vader asks Luke to join him the film doesn’t linger on a lot longer. There’s probably like five minutes or so after that where the movie wraps up but things are looking bleak and Luke is conflicted. Not that he wants to join his father but he also doesn’t want to kill him. I don’t think you had to literally end The Last Jedi there, you could have added a scene of the Resistance in peril or something but it could have left us with something to think about if we didn’t get an instant resolve to Kylo/Rey.

It’s the middle chapter in a trilogy. Generally that’s where conflict in the story is at its highest point and we’re left in limbo.

Again the middle chapter is generally about conflict. Luke didn’t want to be the heroic Jedi because he doesn’t view himself that way. Episode IX could have had him return in a more grand manner after being visited by Yoda and realizing that his purpose is greater than just sitting like a lump on a log on a deserted island.

You could have put Luke with Rey and had it be balanced. I always assumed he’d have more the Obi-Wan role and Rey would be the focus but I think you could have done his character greater justice than going out the way he did.

Correct. I covered that in the part of my post you chose not to quote. That the "you're a nobody" reveal was poory executed. If it could hold up to the "I am your father" scene I would have no problem accepting it going forward despite my belief it was not the intial intent.

Agreed... IMO, it didn't hold up because I didn't believe it.

Yep because I don’t think that was the original intention. It felt like a swerve for no other reason than to be a swerve.

How was it poorly executed? Given that the goal is to basically give Rey the most emotionally devastating answer at a critical point in the story, how could the reveal that she's a nobody be better executed in TLJ?

Edit: BTW, I quoted your post fully. Your point about the execution was in a completely different post of yours.

I remember James Earl Jones saying even he was sure Darth Vader was lying to Luke. I was too young to know what speculation was like between ESB and ROTJ but I'm sure the notion of whether the reveal was a lie or not was part of it. I think that's a fun thing to speculate about with friends.

Source:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...father-1066729

I was 8 years old when ESB came out and there were alot of debates from 1980-83 among my friends and with my older brother on whether Vader was lying. I really believed he was lying (Being that age I was very naive and still didn't fully grasp the themes of ESB), where my brother who was 13 years old at the time, and he firmly believed that he was Luke's father.

I feel like an oldtimer talking about this stuff as I even remember when the movie was called 'Revenge of the Jedi' before it was changed as it was first announced around the summer/fall of 1982 in time for the first teaser.

But it was there, so why not ackolwedge my point? But to expand on it, not being familar with who made all the decisions, I'n not sure who to blame. Isntead of feeling the same eomotial devestaton as ESB, it came off more like 'whatever, let's get back to what else is going on now that she's a nobody'.

DId James listen the rest of dialog he recorded? I can say with full hoestly I never doubed it was truth given everything that came after that famous line. What I rememebr discussing ruight away with freinds was how Ben must have been implying that the good in his father was dead and Vader emerged as we now know him.

Because it wasn't in the post I was replying to. Am I supposed to keep track of and respond to everything a poster has written when I reply to a post?

I didn't ask who you'd blame, I asked what specifically was wrong with the execution, and how you think the execution could've been changed to make the reveal that Rey was a nobody better.

From what you describe, it sounds more like you were too busy dwelling on your own disappointment about the reveal to notice the emotional impact it had on Rey (who was crying about the reveal), and the tension it added when Rey asked her to join the dark side.

Are you suggesting he did it what, phonetically? He was reading pages of script, he knew what he said.

That may be true for you, but it's not true for James Earl Jones. It wasn't true for mcnabb, in his post above yours. The ESB reveal wasn't something universally assumed to be true.

Isn't it a good idea to read all the recent posts by each person before responding given they may have covered what you are about to respond with?

And to answer fully that I would need to know who made the decisions that I feel led to the bad exeiction. It's the same way with many of the other scenes that I feel came off porly, Such that in the end, I was just glad they were over. The overly long casino and casino escape scenes, Leia not dead in space, anyting involvng Phasma (again), Luke decising to burn it all down. Were any of those forced on the direcor in any way? Was anything cut before filing began that would have made them better. Phasma in particular seemed ot be such a waste that I would easily buy that Rian was focred to include something with her just because somebody wanted her in the movie again. Was Rian focred to kill/and then revive Leia despite it making no sense at all given the circumstances?

So not at all just not living that Rey ended up a nobody.

Honestly, your claim of "poor execution" doesn't really cover anything, since you're not able to explain what that means.

I think you may have a different definition of execution than is standard. You shouldn't need to know anybody involved in the making of the film. The execution is self evident in the final product. If you're saying it's a poor execution, say what in the final product was done poorly. What didn't the scene do? What should it have done? If your problem isn't with the concept (Rey is a nobody) but with the execution, you should be able to say what's wrong with it.

What does this sentence mean?

If that is your take given all of what I’ve posted in this thread I don’t see any point in typing more.

And for the record ‘living’ was a typo of ‘liking’ since I’m terrible at typing these days. As such I don’t do multi paragraph posts.

I'd say focus on quality, not quantity. Short and succinct can be better than long and rambling.

I disagree with the criticism of the poor execution. That scene was executed beautifully. From the scene in the elevator when Kylo says "I saw who your parents were," providing a shock and building up suspense while we wait for the reveal. Then Kylo takes out Snoke, Kylo and Rey team up to take out his guards, and we're thinking "Rey was right, there's good in Kylo!" And then there's two quick blows to Rey. First Kylo reveals he hasn't gone light, but wants Rey to join him on the dark side. She's hurt and confused. But then Kylo goes for the kill and reveals the truth. But he doesn't tell her, no. He makes her say it, admit it to herself: Her parents were nobodies. She's crying when the says it. Her world is shattered, but so is the audience's. We're so used to the big reveal, the twist that makes the hero more important, not less. So when Kylo says "you're nothing, but not to me," suddenly he's offering her a place to belong, a place that she's been looking for forever, first waiting for her parents on Jakku, then from Luke, then from the cave. Rey joining Kylo seems, at least for a moment, terrifyingly plausible.

I don't know how it could've been better executed.

Well for one, I don’t see the breaking up the reveal like that as a positive. And I notice you left out the breakaways to the worthless Benicio and Purple Hair lead scenes. Scenes intended to be that emotional should be just one longer scene as it was in ESB.

But that taking down of Snoke was a highlight for me. Too bad it was followed by such a ‘meh’ exchange.

For those upset that using the Force to project his image killed Luke, I have a question. Would it change your perception of Luke’s death if he chose to become one with the Force instead of dying from physical exhaustion?

Rewatching that scene, Luke is clearly exhausted when he finishes projecting. He falls off the rock he’s hovering over. He looks physically beat. But then he picks himself up, sits back on the rock again, and looks out on a twin sunset. This isn’t a short moment, and he no longer looks exhausted. He looks at peace and fulfilled. Only then do we see him fade away.

On the Falcon, Rey says to Leia that Luke is gone, that she felt it, but it wasn’t pain or sadness, it was peace and purpose.

To me, that feels like Luke, who had made his decision not to fight, not to perpetuate the cycle of Jedi/Sith that the universe was caught up in, found a way to save the people he cared about, save the rebellion, and then, having fulfilled his purpose and reaching the apex of his connection to the Force, chose to merge with the Force in peace, having let go of his guilt and pain.

To me that is an incredibly meaningful act, an affirmation of everything Luke stood for. But I wonder if anyone else sees his death the way I do.