The early rumors were, not sure if they were true, that Luke was becoming so powerful he was having trouble dealing with it and that was why he was in exile. He was learning to control it (whether it was his strength or a specific power, not sure). That would have made a lot more sense IMO.
I mean, I think that both outcomes "make sense," it's just that one is more palatable to fans than the other.
People don't want to accept it, but I tend to think that if you thought you personally caused your nephew to lose his mind and (1) kill all the other Jedi (apparently), and (2) go join the NuFascist regime where he would (3) bring terror and death to the galaxy as a whole while placing it under the boot of said regime...yeah, I can see where that would massively **** you up and make you just go into self-imposed exile.
But it's a downer, and people don't like it. I think it makes sense why they don't like it. But I don't think that Luke bailing doesn't make sense. That's just my view, though.
That aside, while I think it'd make sense that Luke grew "too powerful" and so isolated himself so he wouldn't be a burden also kinda, sorta makes sense, but...it leaves you with MASSIVE narrative problems. There's almost nowhere to go with a story like that, and you end up with inevitable "Why don't the eagles just carry Frodo to Mount Doom?" situations. Like, if Luke is basically a demigod, why doesn't he just destroy the First Order himself? Why do we need anyone else? And why would he then say "No, no, even with all this awfulness, I can't get involved"? That, to me, makes a whole lot less sense than "I feel massive, crushing guilt and believe myself to be a total failure and a danger to the galaxy because my efforts resulted in destroying everything I love and sought to protect."
It does, of course, open up the door for Luke doing a ton of kickass kewl Jedi stuff, but as I said, narratively, that's pretty boring.
Problem is this is up to the studios and not the audience. We can voice our opinions on what we think should and should not be made but its ultimately the studios that decide what get made.
Sure, but they're not immune to public opinion, as witnessed based on how they course shifted after TLJ's "divided" response.
I dont think anyone was expecting a movie of 60 year olds in a piece of junk flying around and kicking ass (although that would be a good one-off film not going to lie). I think people were realistically expecting a new group of characters as the leads with the old cast popping up as cameos or possibly a mentor role. Saying something like "Im too old to go fighting so I leave the future to you." There is still a big difference between mentors who are hopeful of the future and miserable ones who just want to die until a young um comes to get them in gear. See Top Gun: Maverick to see an old main character not hating himself and wanting to die as an example.
Yeah, I found Top Gun: Maverick to be really boring, honestly. Plus, it was all about Maverick, not the new characters. If you want a movie about the new characters, then Maverick is more in the Iceman role. Or...wait, sorry, LUKE is more in the Iceman role. Anyway, you get the point.
Boba Fett is a bounty hunter, someone with skill but not overwhelming strength like the force. A series on him starting or restarting his career as a bounty hunter while delving into the underground of Star Wars would be an interesting take with an anti-hero or villain protagonist which we dont have in official Star Wars film media (yes in books and video games to an extent). Kicking ass is also not bad if the asskicking is not certain and the hero struggles to eventually kick the ass which Boba Fett would given he is highly trained but only human in a world of aliens and beasts. Given the demand for the cancelled Star Wars bounty hunter game, such a series would have legs.
Yeah, possibly. But that's kinda what The Mandolorian was doing anyway. Which calls into question why you need Boba Fett at all. I think it was intended as fan service, and then, fans being fans, they weren't happy with it. Don't get me wrong: while I enjoyed it overall, I do think it's one of the weakest of the new Star Wars things produced. But I tend to think that mostly because of how it resolves fairly abruptly, not because I disliked where they took the character.
Obi Wan should just not have been made period and has been noted by several people here on the site. We knew there was no story to tell at best and would screw up the canon at worst (which the series did with the legitimate question why Obi Wan didnt kill Vader in the series encounter. Vader should have never been there which was apparently the original draft and Obi Wan should have not be drawing attention to himself given he is in hiding to protect Luke).
Yeah, again, I enjoyed it, but I do see the timeline issues with it. I didn't care as much as some other folks, but I get the complaints about it.
I think I mostly just look at the new Star Wars stuff and take it as it comes. I gave up getting peeved over things ruining "my" Star Wars after going through the various "phases of grief" with the PT coming out and everything shifting to focus on that. Admittedly, I'm just...less picky these days. But that's not to say I don't take issue with things. I still think the PT itself, as a standalone project, is an uninteresting narrative that is weakly conveyed, but I respect it for at least having some kind of "vision" and for it being a clear artistic choice (albeit one I often disagree with). I think the ST is...deeply flawed as an overall project, even if it includes stuff I really enjoy. The rest? Eh, it's just extra stuff that I can choose to have fun with, or that I can ignore. Doesn't faze me one way or the other, really. As a result, I find I'm much more accepting of what it is than frustrated by what it failed to be.
While I dont want to go too deep into politics and hate the term "woke," I do think there is something with gender to be honest although its not as major as people make it out to be or the only reason.
There are way too many instances where a character is competent/right or not due to what is between their legs.
Rey is the obvious example but could be excused as badly handling a main character. Leia becomes her mentor though even though she has minimal jedi training and isnt even a jedi. Holdo has all the bearings of a secret traitor or bad guy in disguise but was actually the good guy. Rose is the "moral center" of the cast in TLJ and lectures Finn on the evils of capitalism. Although not revealed, Phasma played by a woman seems to be the only actually competent bad guy from the First Order (although she is still pretty incompetent).
Meanwhile, Luke is a failed jedi who is letting his life waste away. Han ran from his duties and lost his ship. Poe is arrogant and gets his crew killed. Finn remains an "idiot" unaware of the costs of the "real world" and sort of a tagalong. Ben takes consistent Ls and is indecisive until the end (honestly the makings of a good main character). Hux went from authoritative second in command to a joke incompetent commander who was actually the traitor for the resistance.
While bad writing is a big issue, there is some legitimate evidence to make an argument about gender.
Yeah, sorry, I just disagree with that. Again, without getting too much into deeper political/cultural issues, I think we've all kind of grown up in a world where stories were told with mostly men in these roles and with women being relegated to secondary characters. (Not always, of course -- Ripley comes to mind, as does Sarah Connor.) When we start seeing women put into the roles, it "stands out" because in our experience women have been the love interest, the damsel, the secondary character, etc. You gender-flip things, and make those women men, I think you see a lot less pushback about "God, why are they so hyper competent while everyone else is a doofus?" And it's often not even because of some conscious sense of "Women aren't as capable" as much as we're just...used to stories being told with dudes as the competent heroes.
I mean, nobody's complaining that Luke beats Vader in his second ever lightsabre duel. They're happy to fill in the blanks and say "Surely, in the ensuing years, he must've trained himself, even though we don't know how long it's been between films based solely on the films."
Now, what I do think is likely is that the choice to include more female characters and more people of color as main characters was done to expand the appeal to audiences beyond white dudes. To the extent we want to ascribe cynical, gender/racial/cultural bases to those decisions, I'd say it's waaaay more likely that it comes down to "And that way more people will see the movie, and we'll make even more money and be able to sell way more stuff to people."
Past that, it really is down to sloppy storytelling and being more interested in building rollercoasters than anything else.
