I see many people saying that TLJ deconstructs the myth of Star Wars. I think this is a valid interpretation, but not entirely true. In my view this movie tests the myth, yes, it creates terrible (and incredible) obstacles for the heroes, making them question what was once unquestionable. “dead heroes”, as Leia told Poe, reminding us that in fact not everything serves a divine purpose as we usually believe for these films.
But after the dark journey that was the TLJ, we have a much more powerful myth, in my opinion. One that goes beyond the old norm, because it does not abandon what has already been, it just puts to the test and adds the new concepts. Luke in Crait was real, he inspired the Galaxy, saved the resistance and faced his biggest mistake, Ben. He was a great hero, but still only a man capable of making mistakes.
All the characters in this movie have their truths tested and evolve from that. Just as the film itself tests the truths of the saga (as TESB and TPM did before). I agree that this film has a postmodern side, consequent of the time in which we live, but I do not think that it left the myth, only magnified.
You can’t have your cake and eat it. TLJ deconstructs the legend of Luke Skywalker, and turns him into the deeply flawed man Luke Skywalker. Luke then creates a new in-universe legend or myth of himself within the story. This is not the same as creating a myth for the benefit of the viewer. TLJ is a film about myth and legend, not a myth onto itself. If the OT is the story of how on the North Pole, there’s a mythical person called Santa Clause, who makes toys and then delivers them to children all around the world on Christmas Day, then TLJ is a story about a disillusioned fat old drunk, who tells a young girl, who’s come looking for the legend of Santa Clause, that he hates Christmas, and that Santa Clause doesn’t exist. After refusing to put on his red suit for the entire story, the old drunk redeems himself by donning the red suit one more time, and giving his greatest performance in the holiday parade, convincing children in the story one last time that Santa is real, before shuffling off the mortal coil. To summarize, a story about Santa Clause is not the same as a story about a guy playing Santa Clause.
I’d say that the legend of Santa is still intact.
Once you take off the beard and the suit, it becomes very hard to sell the reality of Santa Clause.
Santa just stopped believing in himself and even the concept of Christmas because he couldn’t decide if Ben was naughty or nice.
Eventually he forgives himself, learns from his mistakes, not only saves the day, but reaffirms the legend of Santa and the values of Christmas for a new generation.
No, Santa reaffirms the legend of Santa and the values of Christmas to the children in the story. However, us critics have already seen Santa without his beard and suit, so we won’t be fooled again.
The legend is perfectly intact. Your delusion of perfection is gone. That is the lesson Luke had to learn too.
Becoming a Jedi is a metaphore for reaching a state of enlightenment, an ideal. When Luke says I’m a Jedi, like my father before me, he has grown beyond himself, and beyond his father. That was Luke’s arc. The ST then destroys that arc, by having Luke forsake everything he once believed in, including the sister and friends he once would have protected at an cost. TLJ then has him pass on the baton to the next new hope, who again has to fight another Empire, and another fallen Jedi student with the aid of another group of rebels. In effect the ST has Luke take off his beard and red suit, then has him pass it on to Rey, and then expects us to believe Rey’s the real Santa Clause.
And I think we are down to the real issue with this statement. Luke reaching a state of enlightenment. Really? If that is Luke’s arc to you, that is great, but that really isn’t his arc. He is a Jedi, like his father before him. His father was flawed at still fallen at the moment he said that. He had reached a state of confidence and faced the most powerful force user in the galaxy. He knew he was about to die. His sacrifice is what turned Darth Vader back into Anakin Skywalker. In terms of a Jedi, Luke was facing the trials to become a knight and on the success of this, he became a Knight and master by virtue of being the only Jedi. I don’t think we can say he had reached the pinnacle of enlightenment. Enlightened yes, but not perfect. Not finished. He still had to journey on as Jedi Master and train a new batch, which Abrams gave us as an utter failure. Not just Kylo Ren, but the rest of his trainees killed or turned. He did what his masters before him did, retreated to regroup. But Luke ended up on Ach-to, finding the ancient Jedi texts and becoming disillusioned that he could do anything different a second time. How can he keep someone from falling to the dark side? He didn’t know. Then Rey came along and seems almost impervious to the dark side.
His arc was to become a Jedi and pass on what he had learned, as the Rebel Alliance restored peace and justice to the galaxy. What RJ did is to have Luke make a 180 degree turn, without providing proper motivation for Luke’s change of heart, and no a sixty second flashback is not character development. Luke turned his back on his ideals and his friends, not even the death of his best friend, or the impending doom of his twin sister could change his mind. Remember this is the same character who for three films risked his life to save his friends. That to me requires a bit more explanation than Luke mind raping young Ben Solo, and seeing some darkness for me to jump on the Rey band wagon.
Ok, Dre. you really need to lay off of that closing line hyperbole nonesense.
This is the same character that for three films thought he knew best, and trusted himself over others.
In this film he reached what some of us find to be a believable conclusion, given his character, and a major life crisis in how the Jedi training turned out.
Why? Hyperboles serve a function to punctuate an argument.
Hyperbole: derived from a Greek word meaning “over-casting,” is a figure of speech that involves an exaggeration of ideas for the sake of emphasis; exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
There’s nothing wrong with using hyperboles in a discussion, and it certainly is not something that anyone should take offense to.