TheVileOne Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I'd rather Mark Hamill be honest. At the same time, Rian Johnson gave him an opportunity to pluck him out of voice-over and celebrity obscurity and gave him an opportunity to be in the spotlight again. Who cares if you didn't have any dialogue in Force Awakens, you got a much bigger role in the next movie. They spent a whole movie setting up your return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eivion Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 It seems to me he was honest. Hamill's regret seems to be more about fans using his words to twist his actual thoughts. He dislikes the direction Luke took, but also could understand why they thought it was necessary and felt Johnson did a good job even if it wasn't where Hamill would have liked to have gone with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 If he dislikes how his words were twisted, he should've thought things out more carefully and not said them. Months ago he was joking about how based on some of his statements that headlines were being written, "Oh, Mark Hamill hates Rian Johnson's vision." Disney probably gave him a rap on the knuckles and told him to apologize as well. Case in point, the viral video got taken down everywhere. Disney was clearly unhappy and did something about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Hamill is arguably more famous now for his "obscure voice over work" than being in three movies in the 70s/80s. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 37 minutes ago, TheVileOne said: I'd rather Mark Hamill be honest. At the same time, Rian Johnson gave him an opportunity to pluck him out of voice-over and celebrity obscurity and gave him an opportunity to be in the spotlight again. Who cares if you didn't have any dialogue in Force Awakens, you got a much bigger role in the next movie. They spent a whole movie setting up your return. The logic in here is pretty dubious all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 What's dubious about it? Quote Hamill is arguably more famous now for his "obscure voice over work" than being in three movies in the 70s/80s. OK, and now he's in the biggest movie of the year in a major role. Maybe he shouldn't be expressing any kind of complaints or opinions at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Johnson isn’t the one to thank. Abrams set it up that way, but are you really not going to do Star Wars 7-9 without featuring Hamill heavily? Really? Dubious all around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beech27 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 43 minutes ago, Mickie Zeidler said: Hamill is arguably more famous now for his "obscure voice over work" than being in three movies in the 70s/80s. Maybe among certain niche communities, but I don't think that would pass a hypothetical "man on the street" test. That is, anyone invested enough in nerd culture to remember that B:TAS existed, and know that he voiced The Joker in it, surely knows who played Luke Skywalker. On the other hand, I'd wager there are literally millions of people who only know him as Luke--the main character in some of the post popular movies and pop culture landmarks ever--and couldn't name a single voice actor, no matter how accomplished. It's just not the sort of thing that gets you mainstream famous. To be clear, he has had a great career, even if Star Wars never happened. And it's to his credit that his Joker voice is independently famous, and not just "Hey, that's Mark Hamill!" But he doesn't get the same publicity for it without the cognitive dissonance of Luke Skywalker doing that deranged voice. Anyway, I'm not suggesting he owes Rian Johnson some grave debt. TLJ needed Luke, and he was great in the role. I think he was honest about how the creative process works, and that got blown up into "Luke Skywalker hates the movie too you guys! Our cause is just!" He did stoke that a little, because he's kind of a troll. But now, having seen the movie and the vitriol, he probably feels a tad guilty. And I'm inclined to believe that he thinks its a great movie if he says he does, and that he's not been coerced. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I think he's more known as Cock Knocker, myself. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Rian Johnson gave Luke Skywalker the opportunity to be in Star Wars. OK. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Regardless of what Hamill meant, I always find it douchey when an actor thinks their opinion on a character's direction should hold weight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVA Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 David Milch once gave a great quote (naturally) on the subject of actors’ opinions on “their” characters. It was something like: ”As soon as you say ‘My character...’ you don’t have to finish that sentence: you’re wrong.” 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Generally I’d agree but it’s hard not to be sympathetic in this specific case given almost 40 years of expectation and Hamill sort of owning the character in a reasonable sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 As an actor, you are trained to take ownership of a character, to understand who they are, and how they would react to things. Which in a play or stand alone movie is great, the script is your Bible, and you make those decisions based on it. But sequels and TV shows mean you keep getting new scripts. So I imagine it can be a real mindfuck when they write a script that violates how you've developed the character in your own head. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 It's weird to me that the two people most synonymous with Star Wars, George Lucas and Mark Hamill, understand it the least. Lucas displayed how out of touch he was over the course of 3 movies and then took his ball and went home again with it until Disney bought it. Hamill has such an odd take on Luke because it ignores that Luke was rarely sure if himself and it would make sense if Luke would come across a power so great that he would wind up dancing with the dark side again. Why wouldn't Luke question the need for Jedi when their history of hypocrisy and folly gave birth to so much death and destruction. Luke is right to question the need for the Jedi when ultimately being aligned with the light side of the Force is so much more important. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 5 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said: As an actor, you are trained to take ownership of a character, to understand who they are, and how they would react to things. Which in a play or stand alone movie is great, the script is your Bible, and you make those decisions based on it. But sequels and TV shows mean you keep getting new scripts. So I imagine it can be a real mindfuck when they write a script that violates how you've developed the character in your own head. And that's totally valid as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said: As an actor, you are trained to take ownership of a character, to understand who they are, and how they would react to things. Which in a play or stand alone movie is great, the script is your Bible, and you make those decisions based on it. But sequels and TV shows mean you keep getting new scripts. So I imagine it can be a real mindfuck when they write a script that violates how you've developed the character in your own head. 9 minutes ago, Craig H said: It's weird to me that the two people most synonymous with Star Wars, George Lucas and Mark Hamill, understand it the least. Lucas displayed how out of touch he was over the course of 3 movies and then took his ball and went home again with it until Disney bought it. Hamill has such an odd take on Luke because it ignores that Luke was rarely sure if himself and it would make sense if Luke would come across a power so great that he would wind up dancing with the dark side again. Why wouldn't Luke question the need for Jedi when their history of hypocrisy and folly gave birth to so much death and destruction. Luke is right to question the need for the Jedi when ultimately being aligned with the light side of the Force is so much more important. It seems like Hamill's, and seemingly many fans, understanding of the character was frozen in time in 1983. Feeling linked to a character is one thing, but assuming a character would not evolve in 35 years is something else. Did Hamill and the upset fans really expect the same heroic Luke Skywalker from over three decades ago to show up and wreck shit on the Empire again? Like he'd just take the lightsaber from Rey and say, "fuck yeah let's roll!" This new film's portrayal is far more realistic, and adult, and I think a lot of people can't deal with that. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Eh, complaining about the arrested development of fans of Star Wars is probably going to be a waste of your time. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 17 minutes ago, Craig H said: It's weird to me that the two people most synonymous with Star Wars, George Lucas and Mark Hamill, understand it the least. Lucas displayed how out of touch he was over the course of 3 movies and then took his ball and went home again with it until Disney bought it. Hamill has such an odd take on Luke because it ignores that Luke was rarely sure if himself and it would make sense if Luke would come across a power so great that he would wind up dancing with the dark side again. Why wouldn't Luke question the need for Jedi when their history of hypocrisy and folly gave birth to so much death and destruction. Luke is right to question the need for the Jedi when ultimately being aligned with the light side of the Force is so much more important. It's funny because Hamill's take feels very "Luke"-y. I still think Hamill was way cooler than Luke could ever be in TLJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 He Force projected himself across the galaxy and fooled even the strongest Force user present. THAT IS bad-ass. I read spoilers before watching it, and I was expecting more "weirdness" from Luke than we got. Hyperbole is clouding a lot of people's judgements on the issue. Rey/Ben are Reform Jedi, and Luke is their Martin Lukether. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuetsar Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 43 minutes ago, Craig H said: It's weird to me that the two people most synonymous with Star Wars, George Lucas and Mark Hamill, understand it the least. Lucas displayed how out of touch he was over the course of 3 movies and then took his ball and went home again with it until Disney bought it. Hamill has such an odd take on Luke because it ignores that Luke was rarely sure if himself and it would make sense if Luke would come across a power so great that he would wind up dancing with the dark side again. Why wouldn't Luke question the need for Jedi when their history of hypocrisy and folly gave birth to so much death and destruction. Luke is right to question the need for the Jedi when ultimately being aligned with the light side of the Force is so much more important. I think that's completely off base. Lucas understanding is the basis of the entire series for right or wrong. The prequels sucked not for the story(which actually isn't bad), but for the execution. I don't its wrong for people to want more of that. I thought the movie was pretty good, but it wasn't really a star wars movie. Rian Johnson is the one that doesn't get star wars, and frankly I'd rather JJ had made it( I know I've ripped him a lot on this forum so that should tell you something). It would have ripped Empire off more than Rian did(which is saying something, as TLJ borrows at least as much if not more so that TFA borrowed from ANH), but would have been a more traditional movie. Actually they should have had Lucas write the basic story for the three, then hired screen writers to polish it , and one complete vision, because we as viewers are going to ge whiplash when JJ wipes out all of the shit Johnson did. I liked the movie, but it should have been much better. And to reply to someone else, godamn right Luke should have gone to war and killed the Knights of Ren, then put Kylo Ren in a Vader suit. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I kind of feel bad for you for that. I understand the take and I'm not even sure you're wrong necessarily (except for that the problems with the prequels are more than just execution). I just feel bad for you for having it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVileOne Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 3 hours ago, Matt D said: Johnson isn’t the one to thank. Abrams set it up that way, but are you really not going to do Star Wars 7-9 without featuring Hamill heavily? Really? Dubious all around. Johnson wrote and directed the film. He gave him a deep, thoughtful role for Luke that maybe wasn't what people expected, but he was trying to do something new and different with the character. He gave him an emotional arc and a big scene in the final act. Also, Abrams was the one who re-wrote The Force Awakens with Kasdan so Luke was marginalized in the film, which Hamill also wasn't happy about. So he's not necessarily the one to thank either. As Hamill has said multiple times, "I like everyone's part but my own." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 This is not the best argument I ever had, but I'm foot in now. Thanks to Abrams, he didn't have to share the screen with Harrison Ford (which, as much as I like Mark Hamill, he can't do. He would have come off as buffoonish with his shoulder dusting and winking if Ford was in the movie). He basically had his own movie instead of having to share one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beech27 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I totally understand the desire to see Luke wreck some walkers and bad guys, because I was a kid gawking at that page of Dark Empire once, and wanted it too. But it would have been the wrong choice. I’d think this board of all places would understand the danger in focusing too much on old part-timers in the main event, at the expense of younger talent. And they even let Luke go out without losing, so you can imagine he’d have thrashed Kylo, if that’s your preference. Although, the protagonists behind the door don’t seem to assume he would have, which keeps Kylo from looking like a total dork. Anyway, this metaphor isn’t that great. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts