The Mandalorian (Star Wars Live Action Series)

[ajp4mgs]

Despite ZE_501's attempt at gaslighting any opinion he doesn't agree with () my point was that neither Ahsoka nor Luke were acting out of character, but you wouldn't know that from certain fan reactions to them.

Ahsoka gave the Magistrate an ultimatum and a 24 hour countdown before she faced her one final time so I'm fine with her wrongly assuming that the Magistrate would send a big gun to take her out before then once and for all.

The fact still remains though that Ahsoka, one of the purest characters in all of SW (her reluctance to go for insta-kills even during open war proves that time and time again), tried to murder a non-enemy based on a faulty assumption and everyone gives both her character and the writer an instant pass. Whereas Luke *rightly sees* the *actual* death and destruction that will be caused by the *evil* man before him and simply *thinks a bad thought* and many people carry on like it was some sort of character assassination. It's just funny to see the double standards at work, that's all.

You know I'm with you on the Luke stuff. But you had no issue with Ahsoka's approach to Din?

It was *one* Mando after she's been shown to disarm multiple at the same time. He had his back turned to her. With her powers, she could've Force-pulled his helmet off and conked him on the head.

More importantly, she had the high ground, Khev. The high ground!! (She did drop from above, right? I hope I'm remembering that correctly).

But yeah, Luke saw atrocities being committed and had a fleeting reaction that he immediately regretted with shame and self-loathing. His moral compass was self-correcting, even when he arguably could've prevented many deaths by following through on an angry impulse that was predicated by an already evident and thorough corruption, combined with the future carnage playing itself out for him to witness.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Although I'm being slightly tongue-in-cheek at this point, I see her character as a war vet with many, many kills under her belt and don't think it was unusual that she was ready to add the armoured stranger tracking her to the very long list.

Well, I guess that's the key difference with our points of view on this issue. I don't think she has a battlefield approach similar to that of a clone trooper (for example).

She's a well-trained and powerful person with a myriad of non-lethal abilities at her disposal. Plus, the interpretation I've gotten from her characterization is that she's pure of heart. In a one-on-one confrontation with an opponent who has his back turned, I wouldn't expect the Ahsoka I saw in the animated shows to go for the kill when she knows she could try other approaches and likely be successful.

Then again, if my memory serves, they never showed her merely apprehending the magistrate and handing her over to the villagers. Or did they? If not, then maybe the intended implication is that she's ruthless now. I don't know.

 

[Sassafras]

This is what I'm thinking for the remaining episodes:

1. Mando takes Grogu to Typhon but Moff Gideon shows up and kidnaps the little brat;
2. Moff Gideon works for Thrawn and takes Grogu to him;
3. Ahsoka wants to find Thrawn (more specifically, Ezra Bridges);
4. Bo-Katan wants to find Moff Gideon (more specifically, the Dark Saber);
5. Mando wants to rescue Grogu;
6. Mando, Ahsoka, Bo-Katan, Koska, Axe, Cara & Greef (maybe Cobb Vanth too) converge on Thrawn's location and launch a "rescue mission" with conflicting priorities, but despite this they succeed until
7. Mythrol (Horatio Sanz's character) sells them out and they are captured. Cliffhanger - see you next October!

Holy &^%$.

I'll settle for Baby getting snatched and Mando getting a posse of his buddies together. Maybe even getting approached by Boba who cuts a deal to help out to get his armor back, or something.

Thrawn and all the other Rebels stuff are punted to Ahsoka's series as they hafta have her doing something besides wafting around.

 

[ZE_501]

Despite ZE_501's attempt at gaslighting any opinion he doesn't agree with ()

LOLOLOLOLOL.... ... oh Khev, that is laughable. I laugh.

Your comparison is indeed a false equivalency and I honestly don't think you can prove otherwise.

[...] my point was that neither Ahsoka nor Luke were acting out of character, but you wouldn't know that from certain fan reactions to them.

I agree that Ahsoka was doing what she does best as a Clone Wars vet, which is to say cut a b****.

[...]Whereas Luke *rightly sees* the *actual* death and destruction that will be caused by the *evil* man before him and simply *thinks a bad thought* and many people carry on like it was some sort of character assassination. It's just funny to see the double standards at work, that's all.

Just to make sure, I went back and cued up those scenes in TLJ. Now let's look at the situation:

Luke was established in the OT to be full of compassion and the unswerving belief that beings as heinous as Darth Vader himself could be turned back to the light, and was willing to give his own life in the attempt.

Vader had actively participated in war crimes ranging from torture all the way through to genocide at this stage in his career, all in the service of a fascist Empire bent on subjugating the galaxy. The loophole? Enslaved by the Emperor so Luke thought he deserved a shot at redemption in spite of things he actually did.

There. We have established precedent.

Luke had also been taught by Yoda that things he saw through the Force did not necessarily come to pass. Always in motion the future is. This is an important point, because it introduces uncertainty of outcome:

Decades later Luke sees his nephew, the son of his best friend and beloved sister, "already turned" by Snoke. But he's asleep. He's in Luke's care, and he hasn't actually done anything yet beyond giving Luke spooky visions that may or may not come to pass, because always in motion the future is.

So now this compassionate Jedi Master ignites his lightsaber in a moment of fear and considers killing him.

He doesn't act on it, but he went there. All the way to drawing on his nephew where he slept.

Now looking at this scene in isolation, it's not *that* bad. Luke was trained late and it was sketchy. He had an impetuous streak in his youth, a little too much fire. Maybe he had a moment of fear and doubt that produced the error.

But wait! There is already a precedent for Luke Skywalker giving someone much worse who's actually done very bad things a pass.

But no pass for Ben. Just didn't like the cut of his jib, I guess.

Even if we ignore the precedent our hero set decades prior as to who he will give the benefit of the doubt to, the secondary problem is that this scenario does not play out in isolation.

There is a whole slew of problems with the way the character and the entire ST scenario is presented that I won't revisit here. Those who know already understand the meta-problem of Disney's bastard child, and people like yourself will never back down, because you're as forgiving as Luke Skywalker in ROTJ, even if Kennedy and her Empire destroy a planet -- I mean franchise.

You'll never let them go.

Your original remark quoted again below:

Ahsoka Tano actively tries to kill a good guy.

Fans: "Ha ha, she made a murderous oopsie but learned her lesson, all is forgiven. I love Filoni!"

Luke Skywalker simply *thinks* about killing an actual bad guy.

Fans: "Character ruined! Not my Luke! I hate everything!"

Never mind that Luke's actions in those two seconds were in perfect sync with Ahsoka's speech about her witnessing even the greatest Jedi being capable of turning to evil due to their attachments. But boo to RJ for telling a story that matches up with established themes.

My original charge was false equivalency. The Luke and Ahsoka scenarios are different in-universe and from a meta-narrative point of view.

That's not gaslighting. And by your own standards:

"Luke Skywalker simply *thinks* about killing an actual bad guy"

...Ben at that stage is not an actual bad guy. All he's done is fill up with bad thoughts. He hadn't actually done anything yet.

 

[Khev]

You know I'm with you on the Luke stuff. But you had no issue with Ahsoka's approach to Din?

No though I concede that perhaps I should. You're right that she did try and kill an unknown bounty hunter from behind without any provocation other than her own assumptions. I mean the guy wasn't even wielding a weapon! Much different than the known followers of the Magistrate who were out hunting her with rifles at the ready.

I guess I choose to be forgiving because I understand the spirit of the scene (not saying you don't of course). Just a fun little "Marvel-esque" duel where heroes temporarily get in a scrap due to misunderstood intentions. Think about the very first scene where Thor and Iron Man fight in the forest in the first Avengers film. Thor is this supposedly super good guy but when some random dude in bright blue tights appears and tells him to stop fighting and put the hammer down Thor responds by trying to straight up *murder* him???

I mean he had no idea this goofy looking peacemaker had a vibranium shield, he was literally just going to violently kill him then and there. But eh, the scene had a fun spirit and was mostly played for laughs and no one ended up hurt so no harm no foul. Should I give the same pass to a similar scene in Star Wars? Maybe, maybe not. But for whatever reason I do.

 

[ajp4mgs]

LOLOLOLOLOL.... ... oh Khev, that is laughable. I laugh.

Your comparison is indeed a false equivalency and I honestly don't think you can prove otherwise.



I agree that Ahsoka was doing what she does best as a Clone Wars vet, which is to say cut a b****.



Just to make sure, I went back and cued up those scenes in TLJ. Now let's look at the situation:

Luke was established in the OT to be full of compassion and the unswerving belief that beings as heinous as Darth Vader himself could be turned back to the light, and was willing to give his own life in the attempt.

Vader had actively participated in war crimes ranging from torture all the way through to genocide at this stage in his career, all in the service of a fascist Empire bent on subjugating the galaxy. The loophole? Enslaved by the Emperor so Luke thought he deserved a shot at redemption in spite of things he actually did.

There. We have established precedent.

Luke had also been taught by Yoda that things he saw through the Force did not necessarily come to pass. Always in motion the future is. This is an important point, because it introduces uncertainty of outcome:

Decades later Luke sees his nephew, the son of his best friend and beloved sister, "already turned" by Snoke. But he's asleep. He's in Luke's care, and he hasn't actually done anything yet beyond giving Luke spooky visions that may or may not come to pass, because always in motion the future is.

So now this compassionate Jedi Master ignites his lightsaber in a moment of fear and considers killing him.

He doesn't act on it, but he went there. All the way to drawing on his nephew where he slept.

Now looking at this scene in isolation, it's not *that* bad. Luke was trained late and it was sketchy. He had an impetuous streak in his youth, a little too much fire. Maybe he had a moment of fear and doubt that produced the error.

But wait! There is already a precedent for Luke Skywalker giving someone much worse who's actually done very bad things a pass.

But no pass for Ben. Just didn't like the cut of his jib, I guess.

Even if we ignore the precedent our hero set decades prior as to who he will give the benefit of the doubt to, the secondary problem is that this scenario does not play out in isolation.

There is a whole slew of problems with the way the character and the entire ST scenario is presented that I won't revisit here. Those who know already understand the meta-problem of Disney's bastard child, and people like yourself will never back down, because you're as forgiving as Luke Skywalker in ROTJ, even if Kennedy and her Empire destroy a planet -- I mean franchise.

You'll never let them go.

Your original remark quoted again below:



My original charge was false equivalency. The Luke and Ahsoka scenarios are different in-universe and from a meta-narrative point of view.

That's not gaslighting. And by your own standards:

"Luke Skywalker simply *thinks* about killing an actual bad guy"

...Ben at that stage is not an actual bad guy. All he's done is fill up with bad thoughts. He hadn't actually done anything yet.

I know you were addressing Khev, so I apologize, but I need to butt in because this criticism of Luke's portrayal as being inconsistent with his OT characterization annoys me to no end. (And sorry to Khev too for my butting in.)

You're drawing a great comparison to how Luke had faith in his father's redemption. What happened to that faith when Vader threatened to turn Leia? I can tell you what happened: Luke came within an inch of taking Vader's life. He wasn't acting in that moment to kill an evil man who had committed atrocities. He was acting against a man who only seconds before was being perceived as a father who "still has good in him."

Luke was protecting his sister from a *possible* scenario where Vader *might* corrupt her. In the hut with Ben, Luke's impulse was more fleeting, and was in reaction to what his mastery of the Force was showing him would happen because of his nephew's corruption. And then guess what happened mere moments later? Luke's Jedi students dead on the ground, lit by the fire of a burning temple.

All of the same elements are there: lost faith; uncertain future; impulsive violent (deadly) reaction; sorrow and regret.

Is this a false equivalency that I'm making? Or do you believe Luke wasn't actually trying to kill his father (the one he presumed could still be saved/redeemed) when he was unleashing those saber strikes?

 

[Wor-Gar]

Were those super Sith soldiers that Moff Gideon was overseeing? They look like Death Trooper variants but I guess have Force-sensitive bodies encased in that armor.

 

[Khev]

Your comparison is indeed a false equivalency and I honestly don't think you can prove otherwise.

Well you're right the two scenes aren't equivalent, which is my point. Ahsoka, the "purer" character, was actually much more murderous than Luke. The irony was that she got a pass whereas he didn't.

Just to make sure, I went back and cued up those scenes in TLJ.

Right on!

Now let's look at the situation:

Luke was established in the OT to be full of compassion and the unswerving belief that beings as heinous as Darth Vader himself could be turned back to the light, and was willing to give his own life in the attempt.

Vader had actively participated in war crimes ranging from torture all the way through to genocide at this stage in his career, all in the service of a fascist Empire bent on subjugating the galaxy. The loophole? Enslaved by the Emperor so Luke thought he deserved a shot at redemption in spite of things he actually did.

There. We have established precedent.

Well you did leave out one tiny detail, lol:

Luke had also been taught by Yoda that things he saw through the Force did not necessarily come to pass. Always in motion the future is. This is an important point, because it introduces uncertainty of outcome:

Correct, and is no doubt one of the primary reasons Luke didn't actually follow through with anything (unlike Ahsoka.)

Decades later Luke sees his nephew, the son of his best friend and beloved sister, "already turned" by Snoke.

Also correct. Which shows that you recognize that Ben was evil at that point.

But he's asleep. He's in Luke's care, and he hasn't actually done anything yet beyond giving Luke spooky visions that may or may not come to pass, because always in motion the future is.

So now this compassionate Jedi Master ignites his lightsaber in a moment of fear and considers killing him.

He doesn't act on it, but he went there. All the way to drawing on his nephew where he slept.

Now looking at this scene in isolation, it's not *that* bad. Luke was trained late and it was sketchy. He had an impetuous streak in his youth, a little too much fire. Maybe he had a moment of fear and doubt that produced the error.

There you go.

But wait! There is already a precedent for Luke Skywalker giving someone much worse who's actually done very bad things a pass.

Ahem...

But no pass for Ben.

Excuse me? No pass for Ben? Did he wail on him repeatedly like Vader above and *only* stopped because of Palpatine's ill timed laughter? Hell no. He self corrected *before* going on the attack at all.

"Luke Skywalker simply *thinks* about killing an actual bad guy"

...Ben at that stage is not an actual bad guy. All he's done is fill up with bad thoughts. He hadn't actually done anything yet.

Okay then by YOUR definition Luke "simply thinking" didn't make HIM a bad guy now did it? You know because "he hadn't actually done anything yet." But what did Ben do in response? Attacked him and immediately murdered however many innocents that very night.

So yes, Ben was indeed an "actual bad guy" at that point.

Fun discussion by the way.

 

[Khev]

I know you were addressing Khev, so I apologize, but I need to butt in because this criticism of Luke's portrayal as being inconsistent with his OT characterization annoys me to no end. (And sorry to Khev too for my butting in.)

You're drawing a great comparison to how Luke had faith in his father's redemption. What happened to that faith when Vader threatened to turn Leia? I can tell you what happened: Luke came within an inch of taking Vader's life. He wasn't acting in that moment to kill an evil man who had committed atrocities. He was acting against a man who only seconds before was being perceived as a father who "still has good in him."

Luke was protecting his sister from a *possible* scenario where Vader *might* corrupt her.

Bingo!

Same scenario, same guy, but the wizened TLJ Luke was able to control his impulses much better than his younger self.

 

[chrisstbh]

Were those super Sith soldiers that Moff Gideon was overseeing? They look like Death Trooper variants but I guess have Force-sensitive bodies encased in that armor.

They look like Dark Troopers, basically just murder bot droids.

 

[ZE_501]

[...] You're drawing a great comparison to how Luke had faith in his father's redemption. What happened to that faith when Vader threatened to turn Leia? I can tell you what happened: Luke came within an inch of taking Vader's life. He wasn't acting in that moment to kill an evil man who had committed atrocities. He was acting against a man who only seconds before was being perceived as a father who "still has good in him."

Luke was protecting his sister from a *possible* scenario where Vader *might* corrupt her.

Good point. I had allowed that Luke was passionate and fiery, as you may expect a partially trained, late-in-life Jedi to be, which is why I concede that taken in isolation, it's not such a terrible scene.

[...] In the hut with Ben, Luke's impulse was more fleeting, and was in reaction to what his mastery of the Force was showing him would happen because of his nephew's corruption.[...]

Might happen, as established by Yoda's teachings in ESB.

And then guess what happened mre moments later? Luke's Jedi students dead on the ground, lit by the fire of a burning temple.

Arguably due to Luke reacting with fear.

All of the same elements are there: lost faith; uncertain future; impulsive violent (deadly) reaction; sorrow and regret.

Is this a false equivalency that I'm making? Or do you believe Luke wasn't actually trying to kill his father (the one he presumed could still be saved/redeemed) when he was unleashing those saber strikes?

Your take is more nuanced, but I don't think it's an either/or proposition if we take that into account.

• I believe Luke was trying to kill Vader dead due to fear and attachment.
• I believe Vader's redemption, Luke's turning away from the Dark Side, and ultimately the Emperor's defeat, was due to Luke letting go of that fear.

So you would think, by the internal logic of the narrative playing out, that Luke would have *learned* from that experience and internalized it enough not to go drawing a blade on sleeping nephews decades later.

 

[xipotec]

Actually they are better Jedi than most jedi in the prequels, they follow their religion with criticism and not blindly like the jedi from the fall of the republic.
Ahsoka, Erza and Kanan were better Jedi than Luke(until TLJ, when Luke learned his final lesson about not being so stiff in their teachings) because of that.
When i say better jedi is not in terms of power level.

I agree with this, but that?s our opinion of what a Jedi should be, not what we have seen the Jedi actually we?re.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZE_501]

Well you're right the two scenes aren't equivalent, which is my point. Ahsoka, the "purer" character, was actually much more murderous than Luke. The irony was that she got a pass whereas he didn't.

From my point of view, Ahsoka's character is murder-y, Luke's should not be by this point in time.

Well you did leave out one tiny detail, lol:

Yep, as was pointed out by ajp4mgs, which I addressed in full.

Also correct. Which shows that you recognize that Ben was evil at that point.

Well you can't be tried or punished for crimes in your heart. You have to do bad stuff. Which Ben hadn't quite done ... yet.

Excuse me? No pass for Ben? Did he wail on him repeatedly like Vader above and *only* stopped because of Palpatine's ill timed laughter? Hell no. He self corrected *before* going on the attack at all.

Refer to my post in response to ajp4mgs. I contend that by this point Luke should have known better. Even so, I've said a couple of times the scene on its own is not the worst thing, for me it's just one of several nails in the space coffin.

Okay then by YOUR definition Luke "simply thinking" didn't make HIM a bad guy now did it? You know because "he hadn't actually done anything yet." But what did Ben do in response? Attacked him and immediately murdered however many innocents that very night.

So yes, Ben was indeed an "actual bad guy" at that point.

Only *after* acting on his bad guy impulses. Before then he was just full of bad thoughts.

Fun discussion by the way.

Yes, I just feel bad for dragging this into the Mando thread, although it does apply to Murdering Ahsoka.

 

[ajp4mgs]

So you would think, by the internal logic of the narrative playing out, that Luke would have *learned* from that experience and internalized it enough not to go drawing a blade on sleeping nephews decades later.

Okay, I can at least see where you're coming from here. Instead of derailing the thread further with continuing to justify the scene and how it maintains Luke's evolution and maturity, I'll just bow out by pointing to the fact that I think we're also ignoring another type of context.

The context I'm talking about is that the previous movie had said that Luke's nephew turned on him, killed his students, fled, and Luke was left with shame and guilt that caused him to flee into exile for years.

With all of those things having to be accounted for (how Luke wouldn't be able to stop Ben from the murdering rampage, how Ben's turn could've created such dramatic guilt to cause Luke to spurn everyone he cared about, and other logistical factors), I don't get why the scene/explanation is such a surprise, or viewed so harshly, given all that needed to be accounted for.

Oh well. Differing views, and nothing more. I appreciate your patience.

 

[The Buffinator]

Despite ZE_501's attempt at gaslighting any opinion he doesn't agree with () my point was that neither Ahsoka nor Luke were acting out of character, but you wouldn't know that from certain fan reactions to them.

Ahsoka gave the Magistrate an ultimatum and a 24 hour countdown before she faced her one final time so I'm fine with her wrongly assuming that the Magistrate would send a big gun to take her out before then once and for all.

The fact still remains though that Ahsoka, one of the purest characters in all of SW (her reluctance to go for insta-kills even during open war proves that time and time again), tried to murder a non-enemy based on a faulty assumption and everyone gives both her character and the writer an instant pass. Whereas Luke *rightly sees* the *actual* death and destruction that will be caused by the *evil* man before him and simply *thinks a bad thought* and many people carry on like it was some sort of character assassination. It's just funny to see the double standards at work, that's all.

Actually Khev, she didn't "wrongly assume that the Magistrate would send a big gun to take her out before then once and for all" because that in fact is EXACTLY what the Magistrate did. Mando was the only character who knew that wasn't his true intent. So from her point of view Ahsoka didn't try to murder a non-enemy based on a faulty assumption, which negates your point entirely. Sorry!

 

[Wor-Gar]

They look like Dark Troopers, basically just murder bot droids.

Ah, OK. I assumed the bodies from the lab were going to be put into those armored skeletons, once they get them to work.

 

[Khev]

Actually Khev, she didn't "wrongly assume that the Magistrate would send a big gun to take her out before then once and for all" because that in fact is EXACTLY what the Magistrate did. Mando was the only character who knew that wasn't his true intent. So from her point of view Ahsoka didn't try to murder a non-enemy based on a faulty assumption, which negates your point entirely. Sorry!

Hey now, you know what I meant, lol!

Fine "Ahsoka wrongly assumed that Mando was there to kill her." So yes she still acted on a false assumption.

Happy now?

 

[chrisstbh]

Ah, OK. I assumed the bodies from the lab were going to be put into those armored skeletons, once they get them to work.

If you look closely you can see they have some tubing coming from their chest area like the Phase 1 Dark Troopers from Legends

The way they all stand uniform like that makes them look like droids to me. Could be wrong though.

Current theory is that the bodies in the test tubes are early Snoke or Palpatine vessel prototypes. They have the huge scar going down the scalp like Snoke does, but the face looks similar to Palpatine to me.

 

[ZE_501]

Actually Khev, she didn't "wrongly assume that the Magistrate would send a big gun to take her out before then once and for all" because that in fact is EXACTLY what the Magistrate did. Mando was the only character who knew that wasn't his true intent. So from her point of view Ahsoka didn't try to murder a non-enemy based on a faulty assumption, which negates your point entirely. Sorry!

Stop gaslighting Khev, Buffinator.

 

[The Buffinator]

Hey now, you know what I meant, lol!

Fine "Ahsoka wrongly assumed that Mando was there to kill her." So yes she still acted on a false assumption.

Happy now?

A false assumption, but not a faulty assumption that would in any way require fans to "give her a pass". So the comparison still doesn't hold up.....IMO.