Well, technically it was Mark Hamill… but… you know.
Basically, it’s what was in the back of his mind.
Hamill has revealed some of the history he created himself to get into the mindset of an older, broken, and weary Luke Skywalker in The Last Jedi.
Since it’s not canon, there’s no need for a spoiler warning. Instead, here’s a heartbreak warning: the actor devised an absolutely wrenching experience for one particular chapter in the character’s life after the events of Return of the Jedi.
“Actors like backstories. They want to know motivation and all those things, and it’s such a blank slate,” says Hamill, who has become so entwined with the character over four decades that he sometimes references himself and Luke interchangeably. “You know, if you look at it intellectually, I realized that it’s not my story anymore and so what [Luke] did or did not do in the intervening years aren’t really important to the audience at this point, but I have to work it out for myself.”
Hamill is probably wrong about that. Luke’s history is extremely important to Star Wars fans. But most of the books and comics about Luke that were written as part of the Expanded Universe are now decanonized and classified by Lucasfilm as “Legends.”
That’s why the actor felt he had leeway to imagine his own version of what happened to Luke during that in-between time.
“I wrote lots and lots of scenarios,” Hamill says. “I made notes that he fell in love with a woman who was a widow and had this young child.”
The monk-like Jedi aren’t supposed to have personal relationships, so Hamill says Luke would have temporarily left the order during this time. We know from The Force Awakens that he would later return and found a training academy for new Jedi (which had its own tragic end when his nephew, Ben Solo, fell to the dark side and returned to destroy the school as the monstrous Kylo Ren).
But this long-before imaginary relationship with the widow also had an unhappily ever after for Luke.
“He left the Jedi to raise this young child and marry this woman,” Hamill says. “And the child got hold of a lightsaber and accidentally killed himself.”
That’s darker and more painful than anything fans might guess about the hero, but to Hamill, it would have created the grief and guilt he could imagine leading Luke back on a redemption-seeking path. And it also might explain why the character is hesitant about holding a lightsaber again.
“It’s nothing to do with the story, but when I think about gun violence and you read these tragic stories of kids getting hold of their parents’ guns and killing a sibling or themselves, I mean, I had to go to really dark places to get where Luke needed to be for this story,” the actor says.
Again, this was just an acting tool, so you won’t hear this tale revealed in The Last Jedi or anywhere else. But Hamill said he would consult with writer-director Rian Johnson just to make sure the heavy emotions and turmoil he was generating inside Luke’s head hit the right tone.
So apparently virtue signaling liberals had problems with light saber violence that required light saber control laws in the same way dumbasses want more gun control even though they know nothing about gun laws or gun crime.
Looks like some liberal idiocy survived from a long long time ago in a galaxy far away. Which is a frightening thought.
At first I thought DACA might be the end. But a “discussion” on gun control would certainly put Trump’s presidency at risk.
President Trump reacted to the Las Vegas attack by saying, “We’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes by.”
According to the Washington Times, Trump praised the police response to the attack, saying on Tuesday the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police did an “incredible job.” He added, “How quickly the police department was able to get in was really very much of a miracle. They’ve done an amazing job.”
But after praising the police, Trump made clear a discussion on gun laws is coming.
During an October 2 press briefing, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders expressed the same sentiment. While dismissing calls to discuss gun control during the briefing, Sanders suggested there will be a time to look at gun policies. The Washington Postquoted her describing Monday as a “day of mourning.” She said, “There will certainly be a time for that policy discussion to take place, but that’s not the place that we’re in at this moment.”
Axios reports that Breitbart News’ executive chairman Steve Bannon observed that Trump’s voting base would react worse to gun control than to an amnesty bill. Bannon said that Trump’s support for gun control would “be the end of everything.
Even though it may make me sound like a typical GOP kinda gal, I love my guns and I’m not ashamed of it. And if Trump goes anywhere near the second amendment, he will lose a ton of voters. As if giving DACA over to Congress rather than killing it like he promised wasn’t bad enough.
Anyone who bothers to actually fire a gun or look into FBI crime stats knows that the vast majority of gun crime is committed by blacks. And the majority of those are black males. Meaning approximately 6% of the population is committing over 50% of the homicides in the country. Most of those are gang related violence with illegally obtained weapons. But every time a white commits a mass shooting, we suddenly need to “have a discussion” about guns again. Guns are not the root of the problem. But claiming that gun control really has more to do with race control will get you in hot water so fast you won’t even know you’re wet until you’re drenched.
Paul Ryan is cucking as usual, saying he has joined HRC in shelving a bill that would allow suppressors for firearms. Suppressors are used in Hollywood movies to make it look like they help to commit the perfect crime. When in reality they are often used for hearing protecting. Anyone who has been to a gun range knows that certain guns hurt the ears more so than others and you often need a suppressor to protect your ears. Not to commit the perfect murder. Even with my hearing protection, I sometimes hear a buzzing for a full day or two after having gone to the range. Suppressors help with this. But don’t tell that to cucks like Ryan who should just call himself a liberal already.
Twitter has been on fire with calls for whites to hand over their guns. Right. Because telling whites they’re at fault for everything then telling them to hand over their guns is a brilliant plan. And won’t raise suspicion about intentions at all.
Just type in “white man guns” and see what you find on Twitter.
The shooter was a radical white man who the NRA wanted to have assault rifles. Americans with guns kill 33,000 Americans ever year.
Most of those are black gang related crimes or suicides, but you know… pesky facts. By the way, why is it okay to say “radical white man” and not okay to say “radical Islam?”
Because this is freaking brilliant.
I’ve thought for a very long time that the best work we could give our veterans coming home who can’t get jobs because some immigrant took it for a lower wage is to let them guard our kiddies while they’re at school. I can’t think of a veteran who wouldn’t take that job. A guard at every entry/exist.
I’ve been in close proximity to school shootings twice now. I didn’t attend the schools, but I was nearby when they happened. An armed guard at each entry/exit would have solved the problem.
I wouldn’t stop there either. Arm the teachers should they wish to be armed. Let them put the gun in a small digital safe under their desk or something. No more hiding in that bathrooms with all your students huddling in masses. Let the students get in there and let the teacher send the f*cker to meet his maker.
Guns stop crime. They don’t cause it. Libs saying guns cause violence is like saying seat belts cause car crashes. You don’t wear a seatbelt because you want to crash. You wear it so if you get in an accident, your odds of surviving are greatly increased.
Walmart should have run with this and had some balls. If nothing else, it made my day. But they apologized. Assholes.
The family of late pop singer Christina Grimmie has filed a lawsuit against the “gun-free” concert venue in which she was shot and killed on June 10, 2016.
A former contestant on reality singing competition The Voice, Grimmie was killed by Kevin James Loibl in the Plaza Live Theater as she signed autographs after performing. Loibl took his own life thereafter and two Glock 9mm handguns were found on his person.
According to ABC News, the Grimmie family’s suit alleges the theater had “negligent security.”
“The owners of the facility in which she performed and the outside security company hired to provide security for the concert … failed to take adequate security measures to ensure the safety of the performers and the attendees at the concert venue,” the suit alleges.
On June 11, the Crime Prevention Research Center reported that the theater was a designated “gun-free” zone. Breitbart News previously reported that Loibl passed a background check for his firearms. Police investigating the attack said Loibl not only passed a background check for his guns but did not pick them up until after completing a waiting period required by Florida law.
“We are hopeful that our lawsuit will bring widespread attention to the issue of concert security and safety and more effective safeguards will be implemented to protect performers and attendees at concerts around the U.S. in the future,” the family wrote in the suit.
I’m just glad to hear that they’re not blaming the gun company or gun laws. Any venue that’s proudly anti-gun or a gun free zone should be sued if those inside the venue can’t protect themselves or be protected.
Gun free zones are nothing more than death traps. A bunch of sheep grazing where wolves are expected to stay clear but are openly invited… as long as they promise to play nice.
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released hidden camera video on Thursday, which shows Wisconsin’s Russ Feingold, a Democratic challenger for U.S. Senate, telling a Palo Alto, California, fundraiser that Hillary Clinton might use an executive order to enforce gun control.
In a video shot during the fundraiser, O’Keefe asks Feingold, “If there’s still Republican control in Congress, and if Hillary is elected, is there anything she can do could do to, uh…”. Feingold jumps in and says, “Well, there might be executive order.”
O’Keefe responds by acting like he was learning this for the first time. In a surprised voice, he saus, “Oh, so she can…I know that President Obama…” Feingold then takes over the conversation, saying, “He did some executive orders with the aspects of waiting periods. But what we all need is to win the Senate, have her there, and then put pressure on the House. And we might win the House.”
O’Keefe also spoke with Amy Rao, Clinton’s friend and host of the fundraiser. On hidden camera video, Rao says, “Hillary wants to shut it down. She wants to shut it down,” referring to guns.
Rao continued: “If we can get guns away from everyone in this country, she’ll close the loopholes, get rid of assault weapons. She’ll get rid of being able to buy, you know, unlimited bullets. She’s going to make all that stop.”
The line that stands out the most to me in this article is, “if we can get guns away from everyone in this country, she’ll close the loopholes, get rid of assault weapons.” This is the kind of willful ignorance of the left that drives me out of my mind. And the arrogance of those in power that allow this kind of willful ignorance to spread. An assault weapon is often misconstrued as as a military automatic weapon. Which one needs a special permit to acquire and isn’t available to the average citizen in the U.S. But this kind of language makes it sound to the average person who knows nothing about guns that there’s a big scary weapon out there that anyone can buy.
Second, simple hand guns can be assault weapons. More deaths happen through hand guns than big scary black rifles. And if we really want to be realistic, recent crimes statistics have shown that more people have died in recent years from physical fights than firearms in general.
This “gun show loophole” people talk about are personal sales. Also known as privates sales. Meaning, if you’re at a gun show, a private individual can sell you his gun. Most states require a background check but this kind of instance doesn’t always involve one.
Here’s the thing… even if the law was enforced in a way that made the gun show loophole completely illegal, it wouldn’t stop. People who want to sell firearms are going to sell them. Remember when making marijuana illegal totally stopped the sales of marijuana? And how it didn’t cause lots of youths to be thrown in jail for minor drug offenses with maximum penalties in already overrun prisons? Yeah, that worked out great.
I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. Making something illegal won’t stop crime from happening. And thinking that there’s such a thing as “common sense gun control” is one of the biggest lies the media has taken part in perpetuating to the public.
But let’s face it. HRC doesn’t want to just get rid of assault weapons or loopholes. She wants all your guns. I guarantee you it’s one of her goals. And if she gets her Supreme Court picks who will undoubtedly be anti-second amendment nuts, she’ll have her way, with or without the House or Congress’s consent. I dare anyone who says otherwise to look at how Obama sold the internet to the U.N. recently. Nothing is beyond the realm of possibility when it comes to the power these monsters have.
Because that’s totally gonna fix things…
The batch of emails released by Wikileaks on October 7 includes one in which Hillary Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon explained that Clinton “would support…closing the gun show loophole by executive order.”
Fallon also highlighted Clinton’s support of universal background checks–which have already failed in California, Colorado, Washington state, and Paris–and her support for a scenario wherein victims of crime would be able to sue gun manufacturers.
In the email, dated October 4, 2015, Fallon mentions that Today had made clear they were going to ask Clinton about guns. At that time she was still locked in a tougher stance than expected primary opponent Bernie Sanders. Fallon wrote:
“Circling back around on guns as a follow up to the Friday morning discussion: the Today show has indicated they definitely plan to ask bout guns, and so to have the discussion be more of a news event than her previous times discussing guns, we are going to background reporters tonight on a few of the specific proposals she would support as President – universal background checks of course, but also closing the gun show loophole by executive order and imposing manufacturer liability.”
So let me get this straight, Killary… the gun show loophole wouldn’t have stopped a single mass shooting from happening, but that’s your plan on ‘common sense gun control.’ There isn’t a damn thing you can do to stop individual sales. They will always occur regardless of what the law says.
If we’re going to start suing gun manufacturers for what people do with their weapons, it’s only logical that we start suing car manufacturers when someone drinks and drives then kills someone on the highway.
Drunk drivers don’t kill people. Cars do!