A New Old Skywalker
Recently, I went to see the new Star Wars. I know, I wanted to see it sooner, but I have babies. Anyway, getting home from the cinema, I was curious to see what people were saying about the movie, and what I discovered surprised me. While most critics and many fans loved it as much as I did, there was also a passionate contingent who decidedly didn’t.
I was intrigued. A lot of my favorite movies polarize audiences. Many, many voices had much to say, and I only got through reading a tiny speck of it, but right away, I noticed a recurring theme in the various objections. In fact, I noticed a number of recurring themes, and I’m tempted to write down my thoughts about several of them. But in the interest of brevity (and the likelihood that I actually manage to finish writing this), I’ll limit myself to this one:
What happened to Luke Skywalker?
Before I dive into what I think, forgive me for prefacing just a bit more. I should say, the writer and director of The Last Jedi, Rian Johnson, is a good friend of mine. I played the protagonist in two of his movies, Brick and Looper, and in fact, for the sake of some kind of brotherly streak, he gave me cameos in his other two movies, The Brothers Bloom, and this one. However, and this is important, I’m NOT speaking for him here. He doesn’t even know I’m writing this. I guess I should probably make sure it’s cool with him if I’m gonna post it publicly. I’ll worry about that later. But for now, I’m gonna repeat myself, because I want to be really clear, this is just my own opinion, and in no way do I carry any special authority on this movie. I’m probably biased in its favor, but then again, we’re all biased somehow, so there’s that.
I also wanna say, I’m not here to tell anybody they’re wrong. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to be wrong when it comes to movies, or art, or literature, or whatever you wanna call it. In our ever more gamified culture, with endless awards shows, publicized box office figures, and the all-knowing Tomatometer, it seems conversations about movies are more and more often put into quantified terms of good and bad, best and worst, right and wrong. And then there’s the twitface-insta-fueled tribalism, people taking sides, pointing fingers and spitting venom at the other guys. There seems to be a lot of that going around right now from both lovers and haters of this movie. Dear oh dear, folks. This isn’t politics or sports. The fruit is in the subjectivity. If you feel differently than I do, I’m 100% cool with that. I think it’s often in these very differences of perspective that movies can be at their most enlightening, helping us learn something about each other and ourselves.
So, with all that said, I’ll ask again… What happened to Luke Skywalker?
The Luke Skywalker we meet in The Last Jedi is very different than the Luke Skywalker we remember from the original Star Wars movies. In the past, Luke was hopeful, an idealist, deeply driven to venture out into the galaxy, find his destiny, and do the right thing, no matter the cost. Now he’s apathetic, cynical even, hunkered down on an island and seemingly passionate about nothing but his own isolation. He’s wasting his talents on an eccentric day-to-day routine of laughable animal husbandry and death-defying spearfishing. When a young potential Jedi with profound aptitude, Rey, comes to find him seeking a mentor, he literally tosses her lightsaber over his shoulder into the dirt. And later, when facing said youngster in combat, he ends up on his knees, defeated.
And even worse than becoming personally weird and physically weak, he’s become morally questionable. The plot hinges on a moment from the recent past where Luke contemplates killing Ben Solo, his own nephew, in his sleep, sensing the young man’s attraction to the dark side of the Force, and fearful of the damage he might cause. I saw the point made several times that decades earlier, in Return of the Jedi, Luke is so righteous, so forgiving, he even refuses to kill the reprehensibly villainous Darth Vader. Clearly this is an enormous departure.
It makes sense that all of this might not feel very good. For so many of us, Luke is the epitome of a hero. He is what we strive to be. He’s also our access point into a world we love. We got to know Star Wars through the eyes of this character. And now, after all this time, we finally get to see him again, and he sorta sucks as a person. He’s disrespecting everything a Jedi is supposed to stand for. Ultimately it feels like he’s disrespecting us. Or, as some fans concluded, this just isn’t the real Luke Skywalker, but rather a bastardization perpetrated by bad storytelling or corporate interests.
And again, if that’s how you feel, more power to you. I think there’s a certain enjoyment to be had from taking a subversive stance against the biggest “Big Hollywood” movie of the year. And I know I couldn’t kill that buzz even if I wanted to. But if you’re feeling disappointed in the man Luke Skywalker has become in The Last Jedi, and maybe it’s getting in the way of you really loving the movie, and you’re kinda wishing you didn’t feel that way, because you want to love the movie… read on.
The way I see it, The Last Jedi takes two big risks in its depiction of Luke.
1) He’s different than he used to be.
2) Not only is he different, he’s changed for the worse.
As for the first risk, he didn’t have to be different. He’s one of the most iconic movie characters ever. A safer bet would have been to bring him back and make him just like he always was. This is what The Force Awakens did exceedingly well. For example, the Han Solo we meet in that movie is pretty much the same charmingly roguish character we loved in the original trilogy. Yes, he’s gotten older, had a kid, but it hardly seems to have changed him much. And that was fine by me. Seeing him again after so many years felt like a sweet reunion with an old friend. So, why not do the same for Luke?
Leaving Luke unchanged would have been a huge missed opportunity. Think about how rare this is. A trilogy of movies is made with a young protagonist played by an actor in his 20s. Then, no fewer than 40 YEARS LATER (A New Hope came out in 1977) this actor gets to play the same character as an older man. I don’t know how many times that has ever happened in the history of movies. Has it ever happened?
This gives the filmmaker and the actor an extraordinary opportunity to tell a story about one of the most universal truths in human experience — getting older. We all get older, and those of us who are lucky enough to survive our youth all face the joys, the terrors, the puzzles, the pitfalls, the surprises, and the inevitabilities that come along with doing so. Re-meeting our beloved protagonist decades after we last saw him, only to learn that the passing years have changed some of his most fundamental qualities, I’ll admit, it’s almost hard to see. But in that glaring contrast between the Luke of old and the new Old Luke, The Last Jedi offers a uniquely fascinating portrayal of a man’s life marching inescapably forward.
Time changes us. Go talk to anybody in their sixties and ask if they feel very different than they did in their twenties. The look on their face will almost surely speak volumes. As do so many such looks from Mark Hamill in what I feel is a beautifully nuanced and heartfelt performance.
The second big risk I mentioned was that Luke has not only changed, he’s changed for the worse. But to me, the obvious response here is that movie characters are usually better when they’re flawed. Speaking as an actor, when I’m considering whether or not I want to play a certain character, I’m always looking for a healthy balance of virtues and shortcomings. Otherwise, it doesn’t feel real. No one is a perfect hero or a perfect villain, we’re more complicated than that, every one of us. Flawless characters feel thin. And forgive me if I blaspheme, but the young Luke Skywalker always did feel just a little light to me, which is why it was so cool this time around to see him fill out into a more imperfect human being.
A flawed main character is one of the main distinctions between a story with substance and a gratuitous spectacle. It’s often through a character overcoming their flaws that a movie can really say something. Yes, when the movie begins, Luke has grown cynical. He’s lost faith in what it means to be a Jedi. He’s let fear of the Dark Side of the Force corner him into isolation and inaction. But he needs to start there, so that he can overcome this grave deficit.
To me, this is a story about not losing faith: faith in the outside world, faith in your allies as well as your enemies, in the future as well as the past, in the next generation that will take your place, and yes, faith in your own damn self. Luke has made mistakes that had terrible consequences, and his regret is so strong that he wants to give up. We need to see that despair, hidden under a crusty front of indifference, so that when he finally decides to put himself out there and make the ultimate sacrifice, it means something. It means more than just stalling the First Order to let the remainder of the Resistance escape. Our protagonist has arrived at the end of his journey. He’s re-found his faith, both in the past and the future of the Jedi Order, and even more importantly, in himself. Again, it’s in that glaring contrast between a journey’s beginnings and its end where we find a story’s meaning.
And so, speaking of faith, I’ll end on a bit of a meta note here. It feels to me like a good chunk of the backlash against The Last Jedi is about exactly that. Star Wars has a certain sanctity for a great many of us, and it’s understandable why current circumstances might rattle a fan’s faith. The ultimate authority in this world, its auteur, George Lucas, has recently passed the torch onto the next generation. The new owner of Lucasfilm is a massive media conglomerate. But I think the new Luke Skywalker of Episode VIII gives us good reason to feel reassured.
That a big Hollywood studio would take such risks on such a big property — again, to present their central hero in a drastically different light than ever before, to unflinchingly deliver the ominous message that even the most pure-hearted idealists can struggle through darkness and doubt — these are not the kinds of decisions that get made when short-term profitability is prioritized above all else. These are risks taken in the interest of building a world that is not only good for selling popcorn and action figures this year, but that thrives in the long-run on a bed of literary substance and artistic dignity. As a fan, I take it as a sign of respect that the movie was not only a good time, but a provocative challenge. A lot of studios and filmmakers don’t think so highly of their audiences. In the end, to me, The Last Jedi demonstrates not only that we can still have faith in Star Wars, but that Star Wars still has faith in us.
Authorship and Date of Luke's Gospel
- Length: 681 words (1.9 double-spaced pages)
- Rating: Excellent
Authorship and Date of Luke's Gospel
There are two main issues to be disscussed when considering authorship
and date of Luke- They are often put under two simple headings,
external evidence and internal evidence. However, the true strory is
much more complicated than this.
It is usually agreed that the writer of Acts is the same person who
wrote Luke. This is because in the preface of both books, they are
adressed to the same person, Theophilus. Also, both books share a
similar style of vocabulary.
Tradition unamimously says Luke as the author. This is sometimes
dismissed as no more than guesswork. Howeve, the point is put across
by many authors, Leon Morris included, that Luke was not an important
enough figure in the early church to have two considerable volumes
attributed to him without good reason- surely if people were guessing
they would be more likely to attribute it to an apostle. This provides
a weighty argument which ois further inforced by Martin Dibelius. He
points out that because of the address to Theophilus there must have
been a desire to circulate the book among the educated and for such
readers the name of the author would have certainly been included. So
it is extremley unlikely for tradition to attribute to Luke a book
which was known from its oublication to be written by someone else.
In Acts there are four passages in which the writer uses the pronoun
"we" (16:10-17; 20:5-10;21:1-18;27:1-28:16). These would appear to
have been taken from the diary of one of Paul's companions. The most
likely explanation of these passages is that a companion of Paul used
extracts from his own diary.
If this idea is accepted, we see the author as somebody who was with
Paul at the times he indicates by the "we" but not named in the
narrative, as the author would include himself in the "we"). When
these extracts are examined a small group is left: Titus, Demos,
Crescans, Jesus Justus, Epapharus, Epaphroditus and Luke. There seems
no reason why anyone else other than Luke could be considered as the
How to Cite this Page
|The Gospel According to Matthew Essay - ... Schnackenburg suggests that the gospel was written after “Jewish war and destruction of Jerusalem, “around 66-73AD. He also indicated Antioch as a possible writing place where Greek was the common language. Stanton suggests that if Mark’s gospel was written following the events of 70AD, Matthew’s revised and considerably edited; edition of Mark must be later. Scholars accept that Matt chapter 22, the parable of the wedding banquet, was referring to the destruction of Jerusalem and Israel’s rejection of Jesus, therefore Matthew gospel needs to be dated after this event.... [tags: new testament, christians, jews, jesus]||2876 words|
| Essay on Controversial Evidence Found in the Gospel of Mark - The article Gospel of Mark, explains controversial evidence found by scholars about the origin and theological understanding of the Gospel book. The scholars go on to explain the different categories within the book of Gospels such as date, authorship, purpose, and theology of Mark of the Gospel is controversial to devout Christians. These facts however can be controversial to orthodox, how the Christians believe in the accurate understanding of the book because it was eyewitness account, divine dictation; it also tells the biography of Jesus, and recorded history, along with Mark being the sole author of it.... [tags: bible, Jesus, Christians]|
:: 1 Works Cited
|Gospel of John Essay - Gospel of John This essay will show contrasts in views on the Gospel of John regarding authorship,dates, and the relationship between John's Gospel and the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Some comparison of thought, concerning composition and life setting, will also be presented. The majority of the information that we have today, describing the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ, is contained in the four Gospels.... [tags: Religion Religious]||1702 words|
|The Ethic of the Community in Luke’s Gospel Essay - For the sake of this study, Luke’s Gospel plays an important role in establishing the identity of the members of the community. Indeed, “without Luke’s Gospel our visual images of the Christian story would be impoverished” because “Luke’s Gospel [can be considered] the aesthetic teacher of Christian senses in hearing and speech through story and song and in sight through the many artistic renderings of his stories.” Luke accomplishes this feat by using cultural conventions surrounding hospitality and banqueting to “illustrate such important facets of Jesus’ teaching as generosity to the poor, forgiveness of sinners, humility rather than social power, and the priority given to the word of G... [tags: Religion, Luke's Gospel]||2036 words|
| Essay on The Gospel of Luke - The Gospel of Luke I chose to read The Gospel of Luke for my project. It is said that The Gospel of Luke was written somewhere between 80 CE - 90 CE. The Gospel of Luke was written for Theophilus, who was called “Friend of God”. But The Gospel was also written for a wider audience, including converts and potential converts. One thing that surprised me while reading the Gospel of Luke was how much of Jesus’ life they skipped. In one paragraph he was a baby, and in the next paragraph he was twelve years old.... [tags: Scripture Analysis ]|
:: 4 Works Cited
| Exegetical Summary for Luke 11:5-13 Essay - EXEGETICAL SUMMARY FOR LUKE 11:5-13 – THE FRIEND AT MIDNIGHT The Gospel of Luke is the longest book of the four Gospel in the New Testament. Prayer is the focus of Luke 11 as it is started with the Lord's prayer and followed by His assurance in Luke 11:9, “Ask and it will be given to you.” Verse-by-Verse analysis and Commentary of Luke 11:5-13 Verse 5 Then Jesus said to them, “Suppose you have a friend, and you go to him at midnight and say, “Friend, lend me three loaves of bread; Two characters are mentioned inside the story; the first character is “The Host” which is a man who needs the bread and the latter one is “The Friend” who is in bed.... [tags: Bible, Gospels, Luke]|
:: 2 Works Cited
| Meditating The Gospel of Luke Essay - Meditating The Gospel of Luke Basic theme Luke didn't mean to write history or biography. As a faithful companion of a missionary wrote the great Paul, for her faith is a question of life or death. In accordance with it his Gospel is not intended as a bouquet is a historical Handbook, and absolutely not the result of speculation-philosophical speculation or research results is dry. Luke believes Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and God. With piety, seriousness and precision he ensure the validity of all the essential facts about the history of the Gospel; from the vast amounts of information that could be trusted and has already been gathered.... [tags: paul, bible, god, christianity]|
:: 10 Works Cited
|The Gospel of Luke Essays - The Gospel of Luke The Gospel of Luke, Gentile Physician and companion of Paul wrote this Gospel in the mid 60's A.D. Luke wrote both the Gospel of Luke and Acts making him the largest contributor to the New Testament. These writings both begin with dedications to Theophilus, perhaps a potential or recent convert or patron who sponsored the circulation of Luke and Acts. The third Gospel presents Jesus as the Son of Man. The first three chapters and the beginning of the fourth give us the entrance of the Lord into the race, beginning with his genealogy; how he was born and made one of us.... [tags: Papers]||1940 words|
|Compare the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke Essay - Compare and contrast the birth narratives in the Gospel of Matthew and that of the Gospel of Luke. The birth narrative of Matthew begins with a long genealogy of Jesus, which basically shows how Jesus is son of Abraham who is the father of the nation of Israel, and David the King of the Jews. This may not seem important but this genealogy shows how Jesus is connected to the Davidic line. Then we have Mary, who just found out she was pregnant and Joseph decides it is best to divorce her because he wanted to break his union with someone who is pregnant, by someone else.... [tags: Faith Religion bible]||570 words|
| Essay on Blessed Luke - Blessed Luke Background of Saint Luke . Saint Luke was born in 896 A.D. most likely in Delphi or in nearby Kastri in Central Greece.. He is known today as Blessed Luke, Luke the Younger, St. Luke of Stiris, and Luke the Wonderworker (Thaumaturgus in Greek).. ?His parents were farmers in Thessaly.?. Originally from Egina, St. Luke?s parents fled the island when the Saracens attacked it. Saracens was the name that Medieval Europeans used to describe the Arabs and all Muslims in general.. As a youth, St.... [tags: Saint Luke Stiris Essays]|
:: 7 Works Cited
Another reason why many people consider Luke, who was a physician, to
be the author is that troughout we see medical knowledge and technical
language used. One example of this is when he describes the man of
being in the advanced stage of leporacy, "He was full of leporacy".
However, we have so far only discussed instances which may persuade
the reader that Luke can be the only person considered as the author.
We must realise that there are those who argue otherwise. One of their
most serious objections to the Lukan authorship is that it differs to
the other gospels and so some argue that because of this the writer of
Luke could not have been a close companion of Paul. One example is the
way pentecost and the speaking in tounges in Luke seems different to
what Paul meant in 1 Corinthians 14.
However, in my opinion differences of this type may well show that
Luke was written in independence of anything else, however there are
no real contradictions and the evidence for the Lukan authorship
heavily outweighs the evidence against it. The fact that there is very
little evidence for anybody else being the author must also be
considered and so it must be concluded that Luke was the author.
The question of date is little more questionable and three dates have
been suggested with some seriousness. These are, around AD 63, AD 75-
85 and the early second century. the date of Luke is very much linked
to the date in which Acts was written, as Luke clearly must have been
earlier than its sequel. It is now generally argued that the earliest
date is most likely, Fot the following reasons:
· Acts ends with Paul in prision. If Luke knew of Paul's release or
martyrsom he would most likely have mentioned it.
· The Pastoral Letters seem to show that Paul visited Ephesus again.
If Luke wrote after that visit he would surely not have left Paul's
prophecy that the Ephesians would not see him again stand without
· Luke notes the fullfillment of Agabus. If he were writing after AD
70 it is logical to expect him to mention the fulfilment of Jesus'
prophecy that the city would be destroyed- often recently scholars
have likened this to writing a diary entry dated 12 September 2001 and
not mentioning the attacks a day previous and so surely Luke must have
been before the fall of Jerusalem.
· In Acts no event after AD62 is mentioned, for example the death of
James (AD62) or Paul and so it is fair to assume it was written before
There are also certain issues which must be adressesed with the other
two dates. Starting with the second centuary date. There are
dissimilarities with any other material which was written at the time
e.g. 1 Clement and there is no reference to the writing of Paul. With
the 75- 85 date the main problem is the failure to mention the fall of
Jerusalem. Such an important event would have surely been mantioned..
In conclusion, the earliest date seems the most likely. Although the
evidence falls short of complete proof there is certainly more to be
said for this date than any of the others.