Disney Continues To Mess Up Luke Skywalker & Ahsoka Proves It

Close your eyes and put yourself back in 1983. "Return of the Jedi" has just hit theaters, delivering a climactic conclusion to arguably the biggest movie trilogy of all time. After redeeming his father and defeating Emperor Palpatine, Luke Skywalker stands as the last living Jedi in the galaxy, but the future is bright. Now truly a master, his path forward could be virtually anything.

In the decades after "Return of the Jedi," Luke starred in numerous "Star Wars" stories, but never with Mark Hamill portraying him onscreen. Novels and comics showed how he rebuilt the Jedi Order, fell in love, had a son, and fought again and again to protect the galaxy from invaders and would-be tyrants. By the time Disney shut the lid on the old "Star Wars" Expanded Universe, Luke had lived a full life as the most important man in the galaxy — a paragon of virtue and a peerless warrior who was at the center of almost every major galactic event.

And then Disney came along, the canon was rebooted, and the "Star Wars" universe changed forever. Ever since, it's felt like Disney has had no idea what to do with Luke Skywalker. This dilemma has never been more apparent than in the live-action Disney+ "Ahsoka" series, which features both a massive threat to galactic security and the return of a redeemed Anakin Skywalker (sort of) — all with no mention of or appearance from the main character of "Star Wars." Every new release continues to complicate the legacy of Luke Skywalker, and at this point, fixing the problem is getting harder and harder.

To understand the absolute malpractice that is Disney's handling of Luke Skywalker, we have to go back in time — not to 1983, but to 2017. The company's time as steward of the "Star Wars" franchise was off to a stellar start, with "The Force Awakens" and "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" both earning great reviews, praise from fans, and huge box office returns. And things were only about to get better with the release of "The Last Jedi." Finally, after so many years, Luke Skywalker was going to star in another "Star Wars" movie.

Of course, you probably know what happened next. "The Last Jedi" was not universally beloved. Instead, it rapidly became the single most divisive and controversial piece of "Star Wars" media ever made — a veritable Tower of Babel that shattered the briefly unified fandom into a hundred pieces that still haven't come back together. Love it or hate it, the film is impressive simply for its ability to completely change the trajectory of a franchise. And that includes Luke himself.

From a certain point of view, Luke's story in "The Last Jedi" is actually spectacular. He gets a whole new character arc that opens up fresh dimensions of his persona, and he goes out in one of the most jaw-dropping displays of Force mastery ever seen in "Star Wars." But somehow, enough people made enough noise about hating the whole thing that Disney shrunk back from any further risks involving the character. And thus, deepfake Muppet Luke Skywalker was born.

Disney's use of CGI and de-aging technology in "Star Wars" is well-documented, but it hasn't affected any character quite like Luke Skywalker. His cameo at the end of "The Mandalorian" Season 2 worked because it was so minimal. Fans got to see him fighting at the height of his powers, and the uncanny valley of his weirdo face was only onscreen for a few shots.

But then Jon Favreau flew too close to the sun in "The Book of Boba Fett," establishing this half-dead, half-fake mannequin of a character as the de facto version of Luke. His clothes, his pattern of speech, and even his couldn't-be-more-distracting 1970s haircut are forever frozen in time — window dressing on a CGI action figure who's too stiff to be a protagonist but too famous to risk changing.

And so Luke Skywalker arrived at his present dilemma, a woolly mammoth stuck in the tar pit of Disney's oppressive brand strategy. Since the New Republic era has mostly focused on stories about the Mandalorians and the Outer Rim, Luke's absence as a major player hasn't been all that noticeable. But now that Dave Filoni is telling full-scale galactic stories with "Ahsoka" (and, if it still happens, his planned New Republic movie), it's getting weirder and weirder that the Jedi Grandmaster and savior of the galaxy isn't around. Heck, Anakin Skywalker even returns through the Force to talk to Ahsoka in her show, but his own son is nowhere to be seen.

Because the glorified Madame Tussauds-style wax figure that is today's Luke Skywalker can't carry a story on his own, he's been sidelined in an era when the character should be extremely important. The reconstruction of the Jedi Order and the battle against the Imperial Remnant are both major events in the "Star Wars" timeline, yet the former is treated as a side story and the latter somehow has nothing to do with him.

It makes no sense that Luke isn't around more in shows like "Ahsoka," and the problem is only going to get more serious with time. How will Dave Filoni make a New Republic "Star Wars" movie without placing Luke in a prominent role? Expanded Universe fans will expect the Jedi Master to be front and center, and the established canon still places Luke at the core of the plot. But rather than being the narrative-driver he is in the Legends timeline, he's more like Yoda in the original trilogy — sequestered away on some far-off planet where no important storyline will ever touch him.

When you realize that Disney's CGI approximation of Luke is incapable of real emotion, that role makes a lot more sense. But it falls apart when you remember that in "The Mandalorian," Luke is only in his late 20s. He speaks with the stoic poise of an ancient guru because that's all the mannequin can do. So, we're stuck in limbo with a character who is fully developed at age 28 and isn't allowed to re-enter the main story.

To be fair, there is no clear solution to Disney's Luke Skywalker problem. The original "Star Wars" trilogy wasn't made with the intention of picking up the story 40 years later. Actors get old, but characters don't, leaving the quandary of what to do when returning to a decades-old story. But most people can agree that the "Blade Runner" dropout that is Luke's current incarnation is not the way to go.

The answer isn't easy, but it is clear: You have to recast Luke Skywalker, and you have to do it now. The longer we go with no true actor filling the role, the more difficult it will be to accept him as Luke and the more damage will be done to the overarching "Star Wars" story. No, it won't be the same. Our human brains are pretty good at recognizing faces, and it will take some time for anyone to be widely accepted as the new Luke Skywalker. But the alternative — relegating him to comics and cameos for the majority of the character's canonical life — is far, far worse.

Here's the silver lining: Luke Skywalker might not actually be that hard to recast. He's a great character, and Hamill's performance is iconic, but he's also pretty simple. His primary traits belong to most main characters throughout the hero's journey expanded universe. Right now, his treatment is the wound that won't heal at the center of the "Star Wars" galaxy. To fix it, Disney needs to bite the bullet and recast him.