I don’t think it’s unthinkable at all. And honestly, it’s a good thing for a movie to deal with, in these times specifically.

Also, honestly, “Star Wars’ bones” could do with some breaking and re-setting. The idea that the only path to hope and optimism in a Star Wars story lies in redeeming its villain seems really reductive and narrow, to me. That closes down so many storytelling possibilities that can still be hopeful and optimistic. The trick is not automatically deciding to center so much of your story’s weight and emotional drive on the bad guy at the expense of literally everyone else in the story.

It’s certainly not in Star Wars’ bones to do that. It didn’t happen in the first two films of the series, for example. The two that most people still tend to consider its best entries.

Telling a story about what you do when someone in your family doesn’t want to be saved and won’t let you help is just as powerful, meaningful, and useful to kids as teaching them to have the hope and optimism to try in the first place.

Not every attempt is going to be rewarded. And the lack of reward doesn’t mean everything that came before was in vain.

I still think that was a valid storytelling avenue. They could have gone down that path. If the only reason to close that path is basic dogma, I disagree with it. Star Wars is what it needs to be at the time it’s being made and coming out. It’s a reinterpretation of classic myths. It isn’t one in and of itself. It needs the freedom to riff and vary on different mythological aspects.

Kylo’s redemption shouldn’t have been a fait accompli in the writer’s room, and that it was is probably a big part of why the film is so unsatisfying.