[Cecil Terwilliger]

But should it be the same Luke from the original trilogy? At least 10-20 years had passed from end of the trilogy to the training of Kylo. Should we have expected the same Luke? Doesn’t it make sense that he’d changed? And wouldn’t it make sense that losing his star pupil and his nephew changed him?

And maybe he did try to save Kylo after he was turned and before he went into hiding. We don’t know for certain that the minute his temple burned down he hopped in his xwing flew away and was never seen again. Maybe he only went into hiding after Han and Leia started hating him for screwing up with their kid and after several failed attempts to win kylo back.

As for pulling his lightsaber on Kylo, that’s a good point and it is out of character for original trilogy Luke but it is worth noting Luke even said it was a moment of weakness and he thought better of it. As we saw in the third, and presumably most accurate flashback, he never actually was going to kill him. Also, in the now copyright deleted clip of Mark Hamill he’s mostly complaining about Luke going into hiding not about considering murdering his nephew.

And I hate to be cynical but is it any wonder why he’s mostly complaining about the exile part? Could it be that going into exile prevented him from being the main protagonist while killing his nephew was just a flashback? I don’t want to trash mark Hamill here, it is pure speculation, but I can’t help but feel there’s a direct correlation to his complaint and his role in the films, not just Luke’s characterization.