A character needs to be balanced, imo
@Exeter. In my stance, at least, it IS understandable to have a character who's good at everything.....at least, everything their intended role would require. Soldiers that have gone through their training from hell are ideally good at all kinds of combat related skills....but then you see that they're suddenly very poor at things like diplomacy, empathy, even normal life when they return home (IF they do).
So a character with a high proficiency in many skills related to profession will likely be fairly incompetent or incapable of other things; the better they are at what they're meant to do, the worse they are at everything else. The stereotype for the logical conclusion being the "Ultimate Soldier", "Ultimate Weapon", and "Ultimate Agent" types; they're insanely good at doing the things they do, be it taking live or saving it, but ultimately they're without any emotion, to their victim or the person who initially looks at them as their hero.
Regardless of the reasoning behind why a character can do all the things it can do, one that can do anything and everything needed of them with no drawbacks is a Mary Sue. Regardless of gender, too, as I never really paid attention to Luke Skywalker before (I found Han Solo more interesting), but looking at the old trilogy he's pretty Mary Sue...
And to answer your question about why nobody ever called him out for being one? They do now. But back when Star Wars was just A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, and Return Of The Jedi, Mary Sue characters were preferred for the lead role. Remember that the Original Trilogy comes from the same era of media as "golden" heros who never do anything wrong, and damsels in distress who always need their hero, and how the bad guy always gets his due.
I personally prefer stories that are darker, specifically the ones that are more realistic about good and bad not being black and white, but rather perspective, and where sometimes being good just doesn't work. But that's just me.
Click to expand...