Sign In

Does Kylo really deserve to be redeemed? Did he deserve to be Reys love interest?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So one of the things that upsets me the most about the sequel trilogy is Kylo’s redemption. Personally I don’t feel he deserves or was setup to be redeemed.

In TFA he clearly moves away from his family to became a dark sider for no good reason. He had the love of Leia and Luke, he turned away from it all just to pursue… something? the movies never really explain his motivation to go to the dark side, was it lust for power? Maybe in the comics it will be clearer but its kinda late now.

Anyway, he kills his father just so he breaks away from the light in a deliberate decision. Right there, the most personal act of evil in the series (not even Vader could kill his son) setting him apart from Vader. And at that point it was clear to me they were setting Kylo up to be this ultimate villain.

In TLJ, he throws another tantrum just because Snoke tells him he was no Vader and ends up killing him… that commitment to the dark side wasn’t there apparently (enough to kill his father, not enough to finish training). So again, Kylo is erratic, unstable and doesn’t know what he wants. Well, we all know what he wants - Rey, but he doesn’t deserve her. He is a monster that pursues her, tries to manipulate her… a murderer trying hard to have his victim run away with him. If this reminds you of any serial Killer story you’ve heard you wouldn’t be too far off, sick, demented and delusional. Personally I think its really disturbing that TROS really went for this Stockholm Syndrome BS.

By the end of TLJ Kylo was set on killing Luke and the Resistance, Rey included. He was rejected by her on the ship, and by the end of the movie she rejects him again by closing the Falcon door on him… a physical and symbolic act that sadly didn’t carry over TROS… By the end of TLJ Kylo was a savage animal, no control over his humanity.

People compare him to Vader… Anakin had to move to the dark side to save someone he loved, not because he wanted to. And by the time he had converted he was a slave to the dark side and couldn’t break free as showed in Return of the Jedi - “I must obey my master, I must take you to him” - Kylo was the opposite, he chose the dark side, he has no redeemable qualities.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

One of Rey’s special powers is that everyone falls in love with her for some reason, and yes that’s including the villain!

Peace is a lie
There is only passion…

Author
Time

Whether you think he deserves it or not, Kylo was pretty obviously being set up for redemption every step of the way. They’ve basically confirmed this saying it was the plan all along.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Whether you think he deserves it or not, Kylo was pretty obviously being set up for redemption every step of the way. They’ve basically confirmed this saying it was the plan all along.

How though? Not in the first one, not in TLJ. What scenes pointed in that direction?
Outisde of TRoS nothing did, and there lies the big development flaw of this character.

Author
Time

Did Vader ‘deserve’ to be redeemed? Does anyone?

Initiating self-destruct countdown…

Author
Time

Wanderer_ said:

DominicCobb said:

Whether you think he deserves it or not, Kylo was pretty obviously being set up for redemption every step of the way. They’ve basically confirmed this saying it was the plan all along.

How though? Not in the first one, not in TLJ. What scenes pointed in that direction?

Do you want the short answer or the long one?

I’ll keep it simple. Look at his reaction to killing Han (and his scene with Snoke in TLJ that confirms it) and his final scene in TLJ. These two me, are the most indicative, but nearly every moment with him is in someway building up to this conclusion. I’m honestly baffled how anyone could miss it.

Author
Time

Here’s my problem with Kylo’s redemption - it re-centers the entirety of the trilogy on him and shifts focus from Rey/Finn. Now that it’s all done, Finn is obviously the biggest missed opportunity of the entire trilogy, and I think a lot of his story got subsumed by the level of importance Kylo’s potential redemption took up. Basically - starting the story one way, and then shifting to make it all about Kylo (which it ultimately ended up being) sucked a ton of air out of the story.

I think that maybe there was a way to achieve a redemption (or at least a measure of it) for the character without doing that, but I also think that the entire prospect of a shitty Skywalker son figuring out that he doesn’t need to be a genocidal maniac was only barely pulled off in the OT, and for a sequel trilogy so concerned with the weight and meaning of legacy, having a huge part of the story hinge on more or less the exact same dilemma felt counterproductive at its core. If this story was largely about how the next generation found their own way to move forward from both the victories AND the mistakes of the previous generation’s, then Kylo’s “arc” as it were shouldn’t have simply traced Anakin’s. He should have been the personification of the worst aspects of that previous generation’s failures. His should have traveled in a different villainous direction, much like Rey’s trajectory on the hero path didn’t go where Luke’s went. And like Finn’s probably would have gone, if not for the shift in storytelling focus away from him in the third movie and towards making Kylo a good guy and doing all the heavy lifting needed to not just refocus his arc, but center him as the most important character in the sequel trilogy - which he ultimately became. The Last Jedi did a great job in explaining how someone could believably and understandably corrupt themselves to that degree, The Rise of Skywalker then made the decision to forgive him for it, and I honestly think that was a mistake, and even worse, a mistake made for not much more reason than “That’s how Star Wars works.” It’s a mistake rooted in bad conventional wisdom and unexamined storytelling dogma.

I think TFA set up some amazing arcs, and TLJ complicated and enriched them. But the third movie needed to pay them off, and Trevorrow only got partway there (at least he managed to give Finn something great that realized the potential he was given in TFA) and Abrams fumbled almost everything that wasn’t named See Threepio or Babu Frik. Ultimately deciding Star Wars’ quality as a story would live or die on the successful redemption of this galaxy’s equivalent to Stephen Miller or Ben Shapiro was the wrong decision at PRECISELY the wrong time, and if people at Lucasfilm were adamant that decision NEEDED to be applied to this story or else it “wouldn’t be Star Wars” then they hobbled their own storytelling potential for no good reason.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I’m struggling to understand how redeeming Kylo makes the whole trilogy about him anymore so than it already was. That’s a jump being made and I don’t see the reasoning behind it, or the evidence of it in the final product.

I also reject the notion that Kylo shouldn’t have turned good just because Vader did too. A story should dictate its own direction, not just follow the path of another - whether that’s copying or purposefully doing the opposite. Not doing something just because its been done before is just as bad as doing something just because it’s been done before. What matters is what’s right for the story.

The idea that Kylo Ren represents the alt-right is not in anyway a given. That’s not the message that they’ve ever been trying to make, and it’s not the message that comes through in the film (Hux? maybe. Kylo? No). From the very start this is a character they humanized and gave depth to. He is someone who has struggled with the darkness within him, who has been manipulated and abused by evil men, who has been betrayed by a loved one, who has made choices that he has regretted, and who we know has the same capacity for light as he does for darkness. Star Wars is and has always been a mythic story, a metaphorical story about right and wrong and the freedom of choice to do good. Kylo is not supposed to be that evil other, you’re supposed to see yourself in him. He’s not the big bad to Rey’s goody hero, they’re a yin and yang. To cast this aside and just make him evil is to ignore everything that makes the character interesting.

I think Rian Johnson said it best:

And also this tweet that he liked:

At its heart, SW films are for kids. TFA did a new thing for a SW film, where it made the villain a POV character in a way that none of the other films did. TLJ took this further, inviting identification with the character, engendering sympathy and empathy with him. There was only one conclusion that made sense for him in Episode IX.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

There was only one conclusion

I don’t agree with this. Never have. There isn’t only one way to tell a Star Wars story.

Making Kylo Ren understandable doesn’t mean you NEED to make him forgiveable, or further, make him a good guy. You don’t HAVE to do that. And especially not at the expense of Finn and Rey’s character arcs. You can engender sympathy with the devil, you can highlight the parts of a villains personality and characterization that are relatable, but you don’t HAVE to reward that character with a victory either. That character can pack just as much punch by being a negative example, an object lesson of what will happen if you refuse the opportunities provided you time and time again. I never argued for him to stay bad “just because it’s new” or for him to be flatly characterized as one-dimensional evil, either. But there are ways to have his arc track in a different, more villainous route that doesn’t include redemption, and tackling the story as if it’s a fait accompli that he’ll be redeemed is short-circuiting so many good dramatic possibilities. That’s not to say there isn’t a way to have redeemed him that could be satisfying. Just that nobody seemed to have figured it out when the saga ended. Although that one story group idea that he take Luke’s place and exile himself to Ahch-To was a good option that… nobody pursued.

further, there’s something very, very useful to addressing the notion, especially in children’s entertainment, ESPECIALLY NOW, that sometimes you can’t make friends with the bully, that sometimes the bad guy won’t become the good guy, NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO OR HOW HARD YOU TRY. That you wanting someone to change really, really hard doesn’t mean they’re going to, especially if they don’t want to do their part to make that happen. That doesn’t mean that bad guy doesn’t have humanity, or has their dimensionality removed. But it also lets kids know that you don’t have to stop everything you’re doing and give up on the things that are important to you in order to cater to THAT ONE GUY, either.

The argument that it had to happen this way because “It’s Star Wars” and “It’s for kids” just rings false. It’s pop-culture dogma and it doesn’t carry weight with me. There were other options, and they were rejected out of hand, it sounds like, for the sake of “doing the Star Wars thing” and I disagree with that decison, and with the reasoning behind it, because it’s limited and circular. “The Star Wars thing” is pretty nebulous, especially since “Star Wars” is basically a mixtape of pop myths with great production and sound design and that’s about it. It can be a lot of things. It can be more than it is now, and a lot of what it IS now, it only is because someone years ago decided it needed to be different from what it was.

I also think whether he was intended to represent modern-day fascism or not doesn’t really matter. He does. He is. He’s Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk and all the young self-righteous super-angry and combative people who learned the absolute wrong lessons from the destructive forces who came before them. And I think there’s something not only shortsighted in making sure the entire story of Star Wars in the 21st century is about REDEEMING that guy, but slightly dangerous as well, because if we’re going to talk about kids movies, we need to talk about teaching children that the most important things are making sure that Kylos are heard, Kylos are listened to, Kylos are catered to, and Kylos are CENTERED in EVERYONE ELSE’S stories.

Everyone worries about the kids who project onto the bad guy and whether or not they’re going to give up - nobody seems to worry about whether or not the kids projecting onto Rey and Finn are being told that their desires, their hopes, and their dreams need to be sidelined or ultimately sublimated to ensure Kylo’s redemption occurs. And I don’t find that particularly fair, either. This was an opportunity for Star Wars to be about new people, and instead it’s about Kylo, and making sure he died with the light in his eyes.

The idea that a villain in Star Wars can’t stay the villain because it’s letting down “bad kids” seems like a particularly empty strawman, to me. Bad guys can (and should) just as often be object examples of what happens when you keep making awful choices no matter how “right” or “justified” you think you are to be making them.

Author
Time

You still haven’t explained how Kylo being redeemed comes at the expense of Rey and Finn’s stories. You’re taking that as a given, when I’m here not understanding what that even means or how that’s the case at all.

You also sort of misunderstand my point about identification, and it being for kids. People identify with Kylo. He’s not just “the bully” for people. They see themselves in him. For a kid to be see themselves in him, and then for the conclusion to be that they’re really just an irredeemable monster is fucked. Obviously SW is not just for kids, and the myth should stand on its own. But even in that sense it’s a terribly boring conclusion for a character to die evil.

As for fascism, the character is explicitly separated from the FO ideology. On the one side we have the fanatic Hux who seems more in charge of the machinery of the FO. On the other, Kylo, who’s really just shown to be with the FO because they’re the bad guys/dark side. His story is separate from that. TLJ sets up an interesting conflict where Kylo is now Supreme Leader, but doesn’t work well with people like Hux who have their own goals. If you see him as alt-right, that’s a you problem, and is not one very well supported by the film.

Star Wars is a lot of things. Political to some degree, sure, but that’s never been the whole point. SW characterization shouldn’t suffer at the altar of a political message. A SW story should be something more timeless than just trying to take a dig at a shit head like Ben Shapiro. It’s bigger than that, it’s more universal than that. You can say that SW can and should evolve beyond what it’s been, but at some point you’re asking for it to be something that it fundamentally is just not. When you’re talking about a conclusion to a trilogy, and a nine episode saga, you’re not talking about the right time to just wholeheartedly abandon some of the most prominent themes of the series. Forgiveness and redemption. Seeing the good in people. Learning from failure. Saving, not fighting. Freedom of choice. Hope, always.

To put it simply, what you’re asking for is something that is at its very core antithetical to all that Star Wars has built up. It’s not Star Wars, and thank god it doesn’t exist, trashy as TROS is, at least they understood what Kylo meant. Even if it was the only story they got vaguely right, it’s at least something. To make him an irredeemable villain would have been character assassination on par with Rey Palpatine. So I guess in that sense it’s surprising they didn’t do it, considering all the other awful decisions made.

Author
Time

“You still haven’t explained how Kylo being redeemed comes at the expense of Rey and Finn’s stories.”

Because time is finite and spending time, energy, and effort on focusing both Rey and Kylo’s arcs on “Saving Kylo” as the primary goal takes time away from better, more interesting, more worthwhile storytelling endeavors for both of those characters. I don’t think my argument above is in any way “antithetical” to “what Star Wars has built up” because I’m not arguing that Star Wars can’t ever be what you’re arguing for. I’m simply saying it would have been worthwhile to pursue something else BESIDE that, too, and suggesting that Star Wars can’t do that is limiting and somewhat shortsighted. It also isn’t borne out by the history of multiple artistically successful Star Wars stories, the majority of which don’t take as read the idea that the bad guy is going to be redeemed somehow in the end.

I’m also not misunderstanding your point. I’m not saying Kylo isn’t redeemable. He CAN be redeemed. He DOESN’T WANT TO BE, though. And that’s where the compelling aspect of his character really kicks in, and where the tragedy of him is most resonant. And that’s the story of the first two movies. That’s different. That’s the point at which a lesson can be learned, and lessons in fiction can (and have been and will be) learned by taking relatable aspects and showing what happens when you behave in a certain way. You say it’s boring to follow that to a different conclusion, I say rejecting all other storytelling possibilities for the sake of ensuring some kids projecting themselves into him to the point where they’re not paying attention to THE REST OF THE STORY or its context AT ALL is shortsighted and limited. There are other ways to speak to those kids, and I think there’s worth in considering those options. You don’t have to “abandon” themes in order to play with them differently. All of that just reinforces the idea that there’s some weird dogmatic adherence to “the rules of Star Wars” that I don’t necessarily agree with very much, if at all.

I understand that you and I have fundamental disagreements on this specific issue, and despite the fact that we’re probably not going to bridge that divide ever because of the way we look at the story, the story’s possibilities, and other key factors, I do want to say that while I disagree, I DO understand where you’re coming from, and I appreciate the level of thought and time you put into the conversation, and that you’ve never gotten angry, impatient, or mean-spirited about that disagreement. It’s very much appreciated.

Author
Time

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Broom Kid said:

“You still haven’t explained how Kylo being redeemed comes at the expense of Rey and Finn’s stories.”

Because time is finite and spending time, energy, and effort on focusing both Rey and Kylo’s arcs on “Saving Kylo” as the primary goal takes time away from better, more interesting, more worthwhile storytelling endeavors for both of those characters.
I’m also not misunderstanding your point. I’m not saying Kylo isn’t redeemable. He CAN be redeemed. He DOESN’T WANT TO BE, though. And that’s where the compelling aspect of his character really kicks in, and where the tragedy of him is most resonant. And that’s the story of the first two movies. That’s different.

I’m not sure I buy this argument. Kylo is a main character as much as Rey or Finn. Time should be devoted to his conclusion, as it should be to those two. Even if he wasn’t redeemed, his character would still be deserving of ample screen time to conclude his story. If this is the Skywalker saga, and he is a Skywalker, we should expect some care given to his role.

I also believe they were very much trying to set up a scenario where it wasn’t Rey’s job to save Kylo. Where he needed to come to that decision himself, to choose the right thing to do. That’s where his redemption is supposed to be different from Vader, who is only saved because Luke believed in him (technically TROS did do this, though not very elegantly). Kylo has burned all his bridges at the end of TLJ. He tells himself he doesn’t want his soul saved, but it’s left him empty to the core. For me, just from a general storytelling perspective (regardless of the larger saga implications) it’s uninteresting if he doesn’t progress in a meaningful way from that point on. That’s what I mean when I say it’s “boring.”

I would have liked to see an attempt at atonement for the character. What happens when you turn back to the light and you don’t die? Because sacrificing is sort of cheap, easy way out. Having Kylo face up to those he’s hurt - Rey, Finn, Poe - could have lead to interesting, powerful places. Not everyone would be so easily forgiving, which is another interesting thing to play with. Doing the right thing, not for the sake of being forgiven, but simply because it’s the right thing, which is another interesting and different idea that could have been done (that would have been in keeping with the saga, in my mind). And yes, screen time would have to have been spent on this, but I don’t believe it’d necessarily have to be at the expense of any other character. Really I think they shackled themselves by trying to maintain the traditional 2hr runtime. TLJ knew that it was working with a bigger story than usual, with more main characters than other movies, and it had a runtime befitting of that. TROS as is is a film feels like a 3hr story awkwardly crammed into a 2hr movie.

I understand that you and I have fundamental disagreements on this specific issue, and despite the fact that we’re probably not going to bridge that divide ever because of the way we look at the story, the story’s possibilities, and other key factors, I do want to say that while I disagree, I DO understand where you’re coming from, and I appreciate the level of thought and time you put into the conversation, and that you’ve never gotten angry, impatient, or mean-spirited about that disagreement. It’s very much appreciated.

Likewise, of course.

Author
Time

I think some may have missed some of the setup for Kylo. He was already troubled when Luke started training him. He was already heading down that path. Something in him was seeking and he settled on Vader, his grandfather. For 23 years he held the power of the galaxy in his hands. He was the right hand of the Emperor. He was mythic. Kylo worships him as a hero. To us he is the villain. His path goes along a dark path that culminates in him killing his father. But even doing that doesn’t bring any peace. Instead he kills his teacher, Snoke. That doesn’t bring any peace. Kylo is still conflicted. And Rey is a key player. She can see the conflict. She helps bring out the conflict. Between Rey and Leia, they finally reach him. There is always hope. That has really been a theme of the saga. That there is always hope. Hope in a rebellion, a resistance, hope for a father, hope for a son. It is a timeless message about not giving up on people. Luke doesn’t give up on Vader so why should anyone in the ST give up on Kylo?

And as for Kylo’s acts being less evil than Vader… seriously… the younglings… Vader starts off with an act so horrible that not a single thing in the rest of the saga compares to it. Such things were only implied until the PT came out, but his force choking was pretty damned evil to start with.

Why did Lucas and Abrams include redemption for Vader and Kylo? Because we all need hope. Hope that we can change our worst aspects. And Luke in the ST falls into that line of thinking as well. What if we learned our lesson and changed and then fell back to our old habits. Yes, even that can be changed. It gives people struggling with demons hope of finding a way out. And who knows, the stories of their misfortunes might steer some clear of falling into the trouble in the first place. These are issues as old as our species. Vader and Kylo are fallen heroes. Those who made them fall do not fare so well, but they have the chance to be redeemed.

Author
Time

Well, I don’t think ROTJ makes a great argument for Vader’s redemption, either (and that’s partially why the Prequels are so hamstrung, because they’re primarily interested in retroactively centering Anakin so as to make that by-that-point foregone ROTJ victory HIS, and not Luke’s.) but Vader’s “redemption” isn’t really about Vader at all - it’s Luke’s reward, not Anakin’s. Vader’s redemption is representative of Luke’s faith in himself, and in the Force. Knowledge and defense. Love and compassion. Those are the things he believed in, and his reward for that belief was finally getting to REALLY meet his father for the first (and last) time. The redemption’s purpose isn’t to reward Anakin’s character. It’s to reward LUKE’S. It’s an affirmation of the Jedi way. Basically, Vader’s redemption is a byproduct of Luke’s arc completing successfully, and that moment’s resonance hits so hard because it’s a reflection of how well Luke’s story concluded.

Reframing that moment so that it’s a referendum on Anakin, and then going back to tell Anakin’s story as a means to justify that reframing is basically the exact place that Lucas lost control of Star Wars from a storytelling perspective, and it’s arguable that he never really got it back, either.

(that his attempt to re-frame it was as confused and awkward as it ended up being didn’t help, either).

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

I’ve never seen someone who hates Vader’s redemption before, so this take seems really bizarre to me. If you don’t think Vader had any conflict in the OT, did you even watch those movies? Throughout the trilogy, Vader just seems tired of being the Emperor’s lapdog. When he finds out his son is alive, that becomes his only focus. He was already in a position to be redeemed by Luke, he just needed the push of seeing the Emperor torturing his son. So I don’t think it’s some kind of “support your abusive dad” message, and I feel like the idea that Luke should be religiously focused on fighting the Sith goes against the principles of the saga. The old Jedi were wrong because they were focused on fighting the Sith, and they couldn’t see the manipulation occurring right under their noses. Luke managed to see through the darkness and redeem his father, ending the Sith once and for all.

My preferred saga experience:
ANH (4K77), ESB (Harmy), ROTJ (4K83).
Everything else is optional.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

The essential idea of ROTJ is simple. Lucas wanted to send the message that even bad people can make a change for the better, so he did it in the most extreme way possible, taking a character who showed no sign of light or remorse in the previous two films, and giving him a path to redemption by way of love for his son.

Whether the turn works for you or you like the idea behind it is a different matter. But I think it’s purposefully extreme to make a point.

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

I’ve never seen someone who hates Vader’s redemption before, so this take seems really bizarre to me.

S/he’s not the only one.

Divergent Universes
Dreams of a Randy Git-Fiend

Make Off Topic great again.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

I’ve never seen someone who hates Vader’s redemption before, so this take seems really bizarre to me.

S/he’s not the only one.

I was going to mention you, but I wasn’t entirely sure.

My preferred saga experience:
ANH (4K77), ESB (Harmy), ROTJ (4K83).
Everything else is optional.

Author
Time

I think Kylo ultimately just turning good and dying was unfortunate and sent the whole ST down the drain of redundancy (I look at the movies on their own and I like TROS, but within the larger context it’s a disaster). You can’t just repeat things again and again or people will ask what was the point. We already know someone evil like Vader can be redeemed.

I think there are a lot of ways this could have gone down better. TLJ leaves the door open to go dark (DOTF) or light (TROS). The issue is neither DOTF or TROS fully commit to the path.

Maul- A Star Wars Story

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

I’ve never seen someone who hates Vader’s redemption before, so this take seems really bizarre to me. If you don’t think Vader had any conflict in the OT, did you even watch those movies? Throughout the trilogy, Vader just seems tired of being the Emperor’s lapdog. When he finds out his son is alive, that becomes his only focus. He was already in a position to be redeemed by Luke, he just needed the push of seeing the Emperor torturing his son. So I don’t think it’s some kind of “support your abusive dad” message, and I feel like the idea that Luke should be religiously focused on fighting the Sith goes against the principles of the saga. The old Jedi were wrong because they were focused on fighting the Sith, and they couldn’t see the manipulation occurring right under their noses. Luke managed to see through the darkness and redeem his father, ending the Sith once and for all.

There was nothing pre-ROTJ to indicate Vader was a conflicted soul. This is primarily because he wasn’t - Lucas hadn’t written him to be the fallen Anakin Skywalker until very late in the process. So ignoring his actions from within the Empire let’s consider Vader from Luke’s perspective - Vader’s dogged pursuit of the DS plans led to the grisly death of Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru, he tortured Leia on the DS, he killed Obi Wan right before Luke’s eyes, he shot down Luke’s comrades during the DS battle - one of whom was Luke’s boyhood friend, he tortured Luke’s friends on Bespin just to get a rise out of Luke, he beat the crap out of Luke and offered joint custody of a new fascist Empire, and finally Luke was so horrified that he attempted suicide rather than accept Vader as his dad.

I fail to see how from this we get to Luke’s “there’s still good in him” stance of ROTJ. And don’t get me started on the ethics of remaining calm while countless innocents are being annihilated by a super-laser…

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

Well why the hell did Vader deserve redemption? At least Kylo had layers, some obvious conflict. The great thing about the TROS version is that Kylo’s redemption was a by-product of what was going on. Rey was on mission (both in the DS wreckage and on Exegol) and Kylo’s turn around came about as a consequence of their interactions (and Leia’s death) - not just a matter of Rey throwing everything aside to win his heart. Luke’s entire focus on DS II was saving Vader when he should have been fighting the Sith with every last breath. The idea that Luke became some kind of legend for this is absurd to me. So I absolutely prefer Kylo’s redemption over the cockamamie “Vader was really just a nice dad and you should always support your dad” thing of ROTJ.

I’ve never seen someone who hates Vader’s redemption before, so this take seems really bizarre to me. If you don’t think Vader had any conflict in the OT, did you even watch those movies? Throughout the trilogy, Vader just seems tired of being the Emperor’s lapdog. When he finds out his son is alive, that becomes his only focus. He was already in a position to be redeemed by Luke, he just needed the push of seeing the Emperor torturing his son. So I don’t think it’s some kind of “support your abusive dad” message, and I feel like the idea that Luke should be religiously focused on fighting the Sith goes against the principles of the saga. The old Jedi were wrong because they were focused on fighting the Sith, and they couldn’t see the manipulation occurring right under their noses. Luke managed to see through the darkness and redeem his father, ending the Sith once and for all.

There was nothing pre-ROTJ to indicate Vader was a conflicted soul. This is primarily because he wasn’t - Lucas hadn’t written him to be the fallen Anakin Skywalker until very late in the process. So ignoring his actions from within the Empire let’s consider Vader from Luke’s perspective - Vader’s dogged pursuit of the DS plans led to the grisly death of Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru, he tortured Leia on the DS, he killed Obi Wan right before Luke’s eyes, he shot down Luke’s comrades during the DS battle - one of whom was Luke’s boyhood friend, he tortured Luke’s friends on Bespin just to get a rise out of Luke, he beat the crap out of Luke and offered joint custody of a new fascist Empire, and finally Luke was so horrified that he attempted suicide rather than accept Vader as his dad.

I fail to see how from this we get to Luke’s “there’s still good in him” stance of ROTJ. And don’t get me started on the ethics of remaining calm while countless innocents are being annihilated by a super-laser…

I feel like you’re missing the point. Yes, Vader did bad things, but he never did them with glee. He projected an imposing figure onto himself, but there was still a light side to him. Luke was able to see his inner light when he saw that Vader couldn’t bring himself to kill him on Bespin. When Vader destroyed the Emperor and ended the Sith, it confirmed Luke’s hope. Vader wasn’t always intended to be the fallen Anakin, but he was always intended to be a fallen Jedi.

My preferred saga experience:
ANH (4K77), ESB (Harmy), ROTJ (4K83).
Everything else is optional.