Broken heroes aren't the problem - It's Just bad Writing 

It’s sad, because Luke Skywalker in the original trilogy encapsulated what was positive masculinity, but was often overlooked not being masculine enough back in the day, and now in the modern day, you have trying to say he was toxic masculinity. What a sad turn of affairs.

@@TheFirstOkiroHow true. That’s why Mark Hammil had a much better career in animation.

As you shouldn’t Player was there to slay, not to pay

I think where the older hero return works is when the writer understands they have to write the characters and story in a way that’s consistent with the history of the character, instead of whatever the writer personally wants to see regardless of context. Luke and many returning legacy characters don’t work because they’re a slave to the interpretations and agendas of the writers and studios. Context isn’t being put forward and any story that ignores context will suffer imo

What makes into the spider verse and Moana work, so well is that they are stories that put context and sincerity as the top priority for those stories. TLJ doesn’t care about context what came before, just its own interpretation of what came before.

In all honesty I find TLJ to be nothing more than boringly offensive. None of the racial things Rian does is really that interesting imo. Just damaging. It reminds me of that story he was told about how he destroyed his Lego Star Wars figure just to see what would happen. It’s completely unnecessary I’ve always had to belief that TFA should’ve been the weakest of of the trilogy, not retroactively the strongest because TLJ yeeted the trilogy into disarray and TROS didn’t have the control or time to fix it.

@TheFirstOkiro It really is a shame, and I think that if JJ Abrams had full control of the Sequels from the start, they would have turned out much better than they did. But it is what it is, and there’s nothing that can realistically be done to fix or reboot the movies. All that we can do is look past them and try to keep hope alive for the new Star Wars content. (At least I prefer to do that because I don't believe in being negative all the time.)

@@arkhamfivehundred I think retroactively some things can be done to fix the sequel characters and Luke, but I don’t think there’s anything that can be done about the trilogy itself. That story is pretty cooked. I think Bob Iger, Kathleen Kennedy, and the Lucas film creative team shuffles out we will get a change of things but I do hope Lucas film eventually learns the lesson I know others wouldn’t agree, but I would like to see JJ Abrams come back

Exactly, the more drastic the change in the character, the more extreme the triggering event needs to be! A good example of this done reasonably well is Samurai Jack's revival, where it starts decades later, and Jack has given up the way of the Samurai, including his iconic sword. And when you eventually learn WHY, it's plausible that the tragic event in the past would make him do this. However, the show has not forgotten who he IS, so he still fights the good fight, just with other weapons and methods, until the story has him reconcile his demons...

Going from TFA, I always expected Luke to be tragic and broken, but that didn’t mean he had to be out of character or so nihilistic pathetic. I am playing on doing a companion piece to this video about Peter B Parker and Logan to show that it’s possible to break characters, but keep them consistent

Two words Nostalgia bait.

They do - and in some instances, I can understand the appeal but by design those stories are meant to divide and reject the spirit and consistency of the character

💛

As I said, in the video, you can make character destruction work. It’s happened with characters like Spider-Man or wolverine. Dialogue destiny suffered because of execution, but it could have worked. Character assassination is irreversible damage. There is no going back, especially for Luke with his character assassination is so much a fundamental contradiction to everything known about the character. It changes everything.

On a battle station that was about to blow up I think your sleeping emo nephew could at least get one conversation before jumping to contemplating ending him in his sleep. Luke could over power Luke in an instant. He did not need to do that while Kylo slept

@@TheFirstOkiroI think You can’t stand Heroes making mistakes and fallen Then rising themselves back up These struggles hit people Differently It’s a constant struggle It does not end 😂 after one moment in time Also Star Wars is meant to be a mythology So like there different versions of king Arthur or Hercules Why not Luke Canon and Legends are meant to be two different versions of Star Wars That have been documented in a far far far away Like in our world Different religions Myths Historical accounts that tell certain events differently

@@ChosenOne-il4bm Firstly, wow... that formatting. :D Secondly, this reads like you ether didn't watch the whole video, didn't understand the video, or are deliberately interpreting it in a disingenuous way. What happened with Luke's character in TLJ wasn't an example of a hero making a mistake and falling then struggling to reclaim themselves. What happened was an example of someone with perhaps a surplus of pessimism seeking to destroy something optimistic within the fictional universe they were given control over. Could Luke have made mistakes? Yes, he just wouldn't have made These mistakes. Could Luke have fallen? Yes, it just wouldn't have played-out this way because... again... he wouldn't have made these particular mistakes. Could the story of a fallen Luke struggling and reclaiming himself been a good story? Hell yes, but... again... that wasn't the story TLJ was telling.

@ChosenOne Wow, the amount of effort you gave... To justify bad writing... So inspirational... So brave.. So stunning...

@@ChosenOne-il4bmok first off Chosen One, Luke failed plenty of times in the Original Trilogy. He failed to save his aunt and uncle, he failed to save Han and defeat Vader, and he also failed to kill the Emperor in both Legends and Canon. But the strongest thing is that he never gave up! He kept on going no matter what came his way and kept on fighting for his friends, he kept on holding out his hand for his father, and he kept trying to find hope in the galaxy’s darkest hour

The funny thing is characters are not people. They can only exist within the context given to them initially, and you must grow them from that context. Everything else is just self projection and delusional defenses.

@@TheFirstOkiro Gonna be hard to convince those who'll stand by those decisions the film made. I know its all subjective but sheesh... some people can be VERY adamant about their opinions. Ironic coming from me admittedly lol. Still, didn't help too another reason that Rian had Luke die in the 2nd film of the trilogy was that, again, paraphrasing, but I swear he said that he doesn't like to end films to have a continuation. Preferring to have films with a definitive end. LOOK HOW WELL THAT TURNED OUT!

@@HeartlessSlayer Thing is I would argue inconsistency actually exists as an objective problem, not subjective. Its like you established the math problem (Context) 2+2 = 4 (Character) you can't suddenly make it 2+2=5

@@kingorange7739 Yeah there are some objective things in writing. Like as you say. If a piece of media goes this is how x works. People are willing to accept that how x works in this world. Even if say, it doesn't match up with our own reality. Now suddenly you see someone come along and break all the rules for the magic system. Given events in a story play out the same way each and every time Like Luke blowing up the death star in a new hope, unless it something like a choose your own adventure book. Yeah that would be a flaw. For now the viewer no longer has any idea how the magic system is meant to work. Leading to the issue of, a character can suddenly just become more powerful or pull a new ability out of their rear for reasons. Or to bring up Rwby, a series that has retcon it own magic system so many times. It hard to know if what the characters doing makes sense within the context of the world or if it all nonsense. Even hard-core fans have trouble understanding it magic system. Which leads to ruining investment and tension in a story. For it no longer the heroes coming up with a clever plan to beat the villain but just due to the author favoring them, in ways that clearly breaks the logic of the setting, taking the viewer out of the experience by reminding them this is all fiction. Set up and build up, is a key part of any good story. Which is why the classic training arc gets used alot. It allows a character to improve themselves, becoming stronger and learning new abilities in a way that makes sense. For the training arc is rather simple to use, making it easy to pull off the execution of it. While random powers out of the blue is the poorly execution version of giving the hero new stuff. For it simply makes no sense, nothing is earn or gain. It just happens. For alot of ideas can be done well, with proper execution behind them. For that what I would say. Not that story telling is all subjective but rather, if something works or not depends on the execution. Given there been bad action films and good action films. Sometimes a minor difference, can be the one thing that makes or breaks an action fight.

@@tacticianAlexandra exactly

Thanks for this comment. I actually bought the EU novels for the post OG trilogy era and now I am glad I did. When I start reading them, I know to expect the good story telling and not Disney trash.

It’s execution that people don’t understand. Heroes do get old, heroes do retire, but there is a critical difference between a character being completely assassinated vs a story just being poorly executed. Picard is a poorly executed show at times, but it never commits to completely assassinating the character. The series also allows the character to live and because of that, the story is able to end on high note despite its rough beginnings. That is far better than TLJ character assassinating Luke, then literally assassinating the character so there can be the redemption of the story or the character. Killing Luke was probably the most selfish thing TLJ could’ve ever done because it made any redemption impossible.

@@TheFirstOkiro Yep. I remember TLJ defenders not understanding why the movie's detractors loved Logan, despite the plot's description being similar on paper. My response: Imagine if Logan said "No" to Laura's mother...then spent the entire run time of the movie just sitting in that apartment, refusing to budge, unto the last ten minutes. THAT'S The Last Jedi...🙄

Thank you!

@@HandofOmega I think the worst part is that it’s just boring. I’ve heard so many people say it’s the most interesting the character has been when I find it to be the most superficial and one dimensional. I don’t think anyone expected Luke to be completely ok if they watched TFA but there’s a giant difference between Luke being a herding hero to being a completely different character. Logan, Peter B, despite their broken down state, they are very much recognizable as the characters. Luke he only recognizable due to being played by Mark Hamill.

@@VesnaVKyeah that island didn’t serve any purpose at all first Jedi temple my ass. I honestly thought Luke took the surviving Jedis of his temple into hidden to complete there training when the time is right due to they have different housing seem going be more people in next movie to show finding the map was worth it.

It’s the worse fault of TLJ in regards to its characters and the trilogy. Peter B Parker has a terrible fall from grace in the film “Into the Spider-Verse” and is almost everything Spider-Man is not, yet by living and remembering who he was, it allows Peter to have the opportunity to become great again. Showing that our failings are not death sentences Luke’s treatment is a cruel message that the only way we can fix ourselves is through death and even then our mistakes and problems will still hurt others.

@@TheFirstOkiro 100% brother.

It didn’t help made the resistance fail there to bring Luke back have this so called celebration that is so hollow at the end.

Love metal gear! One day I’ll cover that franchise

I think that’s an aspect of Die Hard 4 that most enjoyed about the film. He was older and clearly more weary but still the same badass character

Logan, Deckard, Rocky, Peter B, shit even Sarah Conner in T2. There have been so many characters that have been damaged through the years and made more bitter. TLJ wasn’t revolutionary for what it did with Luke. It was unearned and made little sense

I have never honestly heard anyone say, Luke should be a flawless perfect hero as a legit reason to why last jedi was bad. Always came off as a strawman, for only ever saw people defending the last jedi say it. Like have they not seen the original films? Luke needs his rear saved many times, even gets his rear handed to him by Vader on cloud city. A flawless hero, fits Rey better than it does Luke. Luke was far from perfect. He started out as a farm boy that would slowly become a hero. For in the original films, you got a story that made way more sense. For going from a to b to c. Worked, unlike the sequels. Not only due to consistency but also being able to understand how the character when from a farm boy to a Hero. Due to three full movies covering all of these events. While last jedi, just wants you to accept. This is Luke, without giving any reason as to why this is the case. Even the backstory it gives you, needs more backstory to explain things. For it still fails to show why Luke became this way. The backstory we get, already shows him being the way he is. Not how he became like this. Making it seem kind of pointless, outside of wanting to make the character into someone that was willing to murder Kylo, who should of been very easy to deal with after dealing with the likes of Vader. For it also brings in another question. If all people care about was seeing a flawless Luke, why did he become a popular character in the first place? Due to how flawed he was in the original movies? The whole thing just falls apart the more you think about it.

That’s true - like I said, no matter if you love or hate Indy 5, there is the hope that things can get better and it’s a very self contained issues at that Luke however, has no opportunity to ever come back or have an actual happy ending.

@@TheFirstOkiro Yeah Luke would never just go straight for the killing "option" just because he felt something wrong with Ben. Not after what Luke already did years ago. Also, we the audience missed 30+ years of Luke's life so to go straight to total misery was too much I think. Like "WTF HAPPENED??" 30 something years went by in universe as well as in real life so if they bring back an old hero that everyone loved they needed to at least address some of the time that went by.

See, I would actually argue against both statements about JJ and Rian. JJ is indeed intelligence, but I would argue he is creative. many of the better ideas from TFA came from him. JJ’s worst problem isn’t creativity, it’s conviction. Conviction to do what he wants regardless of who he’s working with. He compromised his ideas too much for the sake of working with others. JJ would have been better If he had the mindset to give no other options but what he wanted. Now, I won’t say Rian lacks creativity, but I would argue. He doesn’t have much creativity. Many of the creative choices he did more rather boring. And he’s definitely not intelligent. But where Rian shines is his unshaken convictions in his ideas. Doesn’t matter how dumb they are. It doesn’t matter if they contradict with everything. He’s going to do whatever he wants to do. It’s a level of unshaken, almost religious dedication to his ideas that brought down the trilogy, and honestly the franchise. If you gave Rian some of that humility to compromise with his ideas and gave JJ more of the conviction to just stand by his ideas, you would’ve had a better trilogy Or just give the whole thing to JJ so we have one story

Thank you!

To me peter b parker is like Spiderman after everything,

Not yet, but I’ve heard nothing but good things. Where can I watch it?

Hm, didn't know that was out yet...Is Godzilla a broken monster in it?😉

​@TheFirstOkiro it's only available in theaters for now but I've heard it might be added to crunchy roll in a few months

@@Dektoonics_inc. nice I guess I’ll head to the cinema and check it out

Dave isn’t really that good of a writer

No, I wouldn’t consider Obi-Wan as broken. ROTS set him up as damaged definitely, but not broken. The biggest problem with Kenobi is that his arc is so artificially created. Without questioning, the character was depressed and burdened with guilt, but the entire point of Kenobi was that he never lost sight of the mission. It was his flaw in of itself. He was loyal to the old order even after his death. Instructing Luke to do what he must with Vader. At its best tho, thankfully due to canon, Kenobi cannot get the complete TLJ Luke, but there are many instances of concept being put before context. A story that explored Obi-Wan’s actual flaws, like his favoritism of Luke over Leia, not viewing her as another option, his struggle to stay consistent with his mission and his training to let go of Obi-Wan to become Old Ben would’ve been a more fitting story than what the Obi-Wan show did. Also either Kenobi needed to be 12 episodes or the whole Reva/inquisitor story needed to be its own spin-off. I also think the Vader V Obi-Wan 2.0 fight shouldn’t have happened. Even tho it’s well acted, tragedy of the prequels is that Vader and Old Ben never met again till the Death Star

I found the series on the seven seas. I plan to talk about it hopefully this month now that I’m finally home

It’s been a long time coming, but I’m finally making a video on that. The virtue signaling of Disney has done more damage to representation than ironically the actual people who don’t want it. Hopefully will be out this week.

Love you 💛💛💛💛💛

Rye, how you been been? Always love hearing from you

@@TheFirstOkiro Busy. I think it would be fun sometime to get you on the podcast with Darth'd.

If you want to be technical, he also didn’t even save the resistance By the logic of the movie: the threat to the resistance was the tracking device. The tracking device wasn’t destroyed. The film even said you can’t destroy the tracker because it just hops from ship to ship. Only way to escape is through a reboot that lasts a few seconds, which they didn’t do. So logically the heroes could still be wiped out immediately after the credits roll

​@@TheFirstOkiroHoldo destroyed the tracker, right?

Completely disagreement As the title says explicitly,, the problem isn’t with Luke being broken. JJ gave Rian a complete blank check and even Mark said JJ had a much different story idea in mind. The problem is that Rian shows the worst of all options. There were 1 million things Luke could have been doing, but nobody in this world told Rian he had to have Luke cut off from the force, reject the quality action, try to murder his nephew in his sleep, and spend most of the movie just monologuing about nihilistic Reddit Jedi philosophy, then kill the character off. That was Rian’s choice and he even said it was Luke could have been doing anything on that island, rebuilding the order in secret, trapped on the island with no way of escaping looking for something. The film doesn’t even address the fact that there was a map he left behind. Mark himself said there was a continuity problem where it didn’t even make sense for Luke to be in ceremonial Jedi at the first Jedi Temple, but for some reason he had gone there to die. It’s like going to a supermarket to star of the death. Luke’s treatment and the blame is 50% on Rian and 50% on Lucasfilm for approving such a ludicrous story

@@TheFirstOkiro Ok

I did say several times, ignoring third-party from the clown school TROS itself says it came from Luke and that takes a hire president than some novel written by a YA author who said she took creative liberties making it Print material from the story group means nothing when they themselves have stated they don’t care what canon is

Respectfully, never tell someone to pay attention to a film if you want to engage in a good faith discussion. Secondly, it’s not that Luke is not motivated by his kindness, it’s his kindness is inconsistently applied. Everything about Luke comes second to what the concepts of the film want him to be. If Luke was motivated by kindness, he would’ve tried to speak with his nephew, instead of sneaking in his bedroom in the middle of the night, and then almost murdering him If Luke was motivated by kindness, he would’ve immediately left to go help his sister after hearing she was in danger of being killed immediately It’s not that Luke in TLJ is without kindness, it’s the fact that his kindness has to come second to what the movie needs him to do for the plot the progress It’s not that Luke can’t be broken, it’s not that he can’t be depressed and have his faith in himself, and the Jedi shaken, it’s the execution of those concepts that completely assassinate his character.

@@TheFirstOkiro Did my comment come off as snarky? Sorry, it wasn't meant to. I have to take issue with your statement about Luke almost murdering his nephew. Luke says himself that killing Ben was only a fleeting thought that he quickly dismissed. He never tried to kill Ben, nor did he have any serious intention to. Kindness is actually a pretty consistent motivator for Luke throughout this film. - Considering killing Ben? Motivated by Luke's compassion for the galaxy and his desire to rescue Ben's future victims. - Deciding not to kill Ben? Motivated by his compassion for Ben and hope that he could still be saved. - Taking an interest in Rey? Motivated by his realisation that she needs something and that he might be able to help her. - Trying to dissuade Rey from going after Ben? Motivated by his desire to save Rey from disappointment. You can say that Luke should have tried talking to Ben, and maybe he would have. But he never got a chance. Ben's actions when he saw Luke in his room made it impossible. You can also say that Luke should have helped Leia fight the First Order, but the argument only works if you believe that *Luke* believed that he *could* help. Clearly, Luke *doesn't* think he can help. Clearly, he thinks Leia is better off without him. That's not a failure in *kindness*; that's a failure in *self-esteem*. And I guess you can say that self-esteem wasn't an issue for Luke in the Original Trilogy. But Luke's older now. He's had a lot more life experience. And he has a lot more reason to question and doubt himself. That's the factor that your analysis seems to be ignoring: people's actions aren't just a product of their personalities; they're also a product of their *circumstances*. We never saw Luke despair and hide himself away before, but that's because we never saw Luke experiencing the pain and failure that Luke of TLJ has. It's not that Luke is a different person. It's that he's the same person dealing with a different kind of situation from what he faced in the Original Trilogy. Same character, new circumstances. That makes for interesting storytelling. You may not like seeing Luke in these circumstances, and I can understand that. But that's not character *assassination*; it's character *development*. And that makes Luke a bad choice for this case study.

​@@BlueIce-Tea Problem is you are attempting to downplay actual intent with technicalities. "Luke says himself that killing Ben was only a fleeting thought that he quickly dismissed. He never tried to kill Ben, nor did he have any serious intention to." - I am pretty sure drawing your lightsaber on your nephew showcased a serious desire to. Luke having that little control over his emotions in that kind of situation makes literally no sense for him. "Considering killing Ben? Motivated by Luke's compassion for the galaxy and his desire to rescue Ben's future victims." - Gee, he didn't seem that have that consideration when coming in to confront Vader even though Vader was a much more immediate danger and an already committed dark sider. "Deciding not to kill Ben? Motivated by his compassion for Ben and hope that he could still be saved." - Which he never tries to save him. "You can say that Luke should have tried talking to Ben, and maybe he would have. But he never got a chance. Ben's actions when he saw Luke in his room made it impossible." - No, Luke drawing his lightsaber and seriously considering to murder his nephew is what never gave him the chance. Like really think about? What did Luke seriously think he was going to accomplish through that? "You can also say that Luke should have helped Leia fight the First Order, but the argument only works if you believe that Luke believed that he could help. Clearly, Luke doesn't think he can help. Clearly, he thinks Leia is better off without him. That's not a failure in *kindness*; that's a failure in *self-esteem*." - Except that is literally factually disprovable. Regardless of Luke's faith in himself or the Jedi, the resistance very clearly could of had a Jedi assist or at least someone with the powers of one. We already learn time and time again how much of a difference even one Jedi can make in a combat setting. There is no way to reconcile this without either making Luke an inconsiderate prick or a completely brainless moron. Both are character assassinations. Also it isn't character development. Character development is having the character undergo change as a reaction to circumstances and past experiences, not completely abandoning their core values of what made them them off screen.

​@@kingorange7739 Have you seen Cinema Therapy's "Psychology of a Hero" video about Luke? It touches on a lot of the points you bring up. Your comment seems to be taking a rather simplistic view of human nature. You seem to be assuming that people will always act rationally and objectively, never be impulsive, never get caught up in their emotions, always be the best versions of themselves. That's not how people are in real life. In real life people sometimes struggle with conflicting impulses, feel overwhelmed, do things that they regret. Here's one way to look at it: put yourself into Luke's shoes. Imagine you've just realised that someone is going down a path towards enslaving and murdering millions of people. What is your first impulse? Not your second impulse or your third. Not your well-reasoned conclusion after you've had a chance to sit down and have some tea and think the thing through. Your *first* impulse. And bear in mind that you're a compassionate person who cares about *all* life, not just the lives of your family members. Or, imagine that some project that you'd been working on your whole life has failed miserably. That you've inadvertently helped to bring about great evil. That you've lost the closest thing you'll ever have to your own child and deeply hurt the two people you love most in the world. Do you just pull yourself together and keep on working? Or do you take some time to wrestle with feelings of guilt, shame, and hopelessness? And bear in mind that you're a very emotionally-driven person, who tends to follow your heart rather than your brain.

​@@BlueIce-Tea I actually have seen their video and while they do think some good points, I think they miss the point about this being Luke specifically. I will try my best though to break down these counter arguments in a respectful manner. "Your comment seems to be taking a rather simplistic view of human nature. You seem to be assuming that people will always act rationally and objectively, never be impulsive, never get caught up in their emotions, always be the best versions of themselves. That's not how people are in real life. In real life people sometimes struggle with conflicting impulses, feel overwhelmed, do things that they regret." - For an average human I agree with that, but as we both know. Luke isn't an average human being, he is a Jedi who is specifically trained not to give into his impulses and approach situations calmly and collectively. By indication within other characters in the series, Obi Wan for example (I chose him because he kinda aligns the best as the relatable typical Jedi) thought with rational and motive pretty much through his entire mature years. Yes he made mistakes, but those mistakes were not made impulsively. Luke in this situation is no different. Yes Luke can have moments of vulnerability or make mistakes, but it should never go against the maturity the character faced from the OT and especially accounting for a 30 year time jump where his qualities should have only improved. "Here's one way to look at it: put yourself into Luke's shoes. Imagine you've just realised that someone is going down a path towards enslaving and murdering millions of people. What is your first impulse? Not your second impulse or your third. Not your well-reasoned conclusion after you've had a chance to sit down and have some tea and think the thing through. Your first impulse." - Considering we are talking about someone I would care about, my first impulse would be to wake them and interrogate them, to learn the truth about it. Also I am going to say this here and now given that this is probably the most appropriate time to mention it, there is no reason for Luke to act that impulsive given the situation he is in. His nephew is sleeping, Luke grew suspicious and likely was coming in knowing that there was something bad going on in Ben's head. Otherwise it would just come across as very strange for Luke to randomly do a mind probe. The point is, a human being with a good degree of self control is not likely to act impulsively when they are mentally prepared for a negative possibility. "And bear in mind that you're a compassionate person who cares about all life, not just the lives of your family members." - Problem is, Luke in this case doesn't apply like that. Luke's character in the OT always prioritized life on a micro level before a macro and that came down to how he was even willing to risk his own life or risk falling to the dark side in order to redeem Vader. You cannot reconcile Luke's desire to save Vader, even against Ben and Yoda's better judgement with a Luke that would draw his weapon on Ben as soon as he sees on potential vision, who he already knows is not set and stone (a lesson he learned in Empire Strikes Back.) "Here's one way to look at it: put yourself into Luke's shoes. Imagine you've just realized that someone is going down a path towards enslaving and murdering millions of people. What is your first impulse? Not your second impulse or your third. Not your well-reasoned conclusion after you've had a chance to sit down and have some tea and think the thing through. Your first impulse." - Again confront him, wake him, figure out of the possibility is actually true. Even Padme did that much for Anakin and she does not have the discipline of a Jedi. Again this is why I find this argument so misleading. Because you are basing it off of what an average joe would do, and not someone with Luke's background, training, and lessons specifically. Even if this was the first impulse of Luke (Which I don't believe given Luke's compassion and seeing the good in people down to a fault), but it also ignores that most, myself including do not believe Luke would ever give into his impulses in that situation to begin with.

IMO Indy would’ve done well 6 years ago when the Lucasfilm brand was more appealing rather than currency it’s more now for being LucasTelevision

@@TheFirstOkiroFair point

New Lorena comment 💛😁