Main Kylo Ren/Adam Driver Episode IX Thread

Ben isn't the principal vehicle. at the end of the day, other than choosing right it's really not what Ben does that matters, it's what the heroes do (and consequently us).

and no, we can't have it both ways. Ben himself is a victim of exploitation just like all the children of post-war RotJ. it's been an ongoing theme in the movies and the eu. so when you says no one will have a problem with that secondary message of killing him even if he is redeemed, don't underestimate the many Bendemptionists who will not see that as a fulfillment of righteousness, but as a nihilist statement of powerlessness and hopelessness.

ultimately you think the central message is justice (they all had it coming) and that Ben is going to die.
i think the central message is compassion (anyone can be saved) and that Ben will ultimately choose wisely and live.

again, the story of Star Wars is a story of triumph and hope.
i don't see the saga ending in failure and death.

 

We've been told repetedly that he believes that he what is doing is right.
That doesn't mean that he doesn't understand the consequeces of his actions on other people etc... (only an idiot at 30 would not).
That means, that he knows what he's doing and that at the same time he believes there are/he has "good reasons" to do what he is doing.
Those reasons may not be vengance or revange but a greater good - according to his own twisted opinion, point of view.
For instance, terrorists - of any kind - believe that the society they want to built up is the best possible society we could live in.
If you ask them, they believe they are right.

And the fact that he was born under peace and democracy is the point.
He knows how democracy works.
He knows what freedom is.
However he chose the space fascists.

As many people born under democracy and freedom do...
That because instead of focusing on the harder job, that is to make democracy - with all its flaw - work better, they choose the easer path: that of facism...
because - you know - Peace and to some degree Purpose.
That's what Bolsheviks, Mussolini or Sidius have promised their citizens.

 

I don't know if I'd call this being under the spell of the dark side, he's looking for his place and assurance through external validation. He thinks he's meant for some great destiny and the only person who caters to all three of these weaknesses (in order to manipulate him) is Snoke. He gives him a place, he gives him assurance that he has a great destiny, but we understand this to be manipulation. If that's what you mean by "under a spell" then I get it. But I initially took that to mean in awe of the "powers" of the dark side. He seems indifferent to the particular powers available and more about the end goal of where he stands in the galaxy.

I don't even think he's fully committed to the darkside in TFA, he's lying to himself the whole movie (i.e. wearing the mask) and Snoke knows it. We know it because we hear Kylo's monologue about feeling the pull to the light. He doesn't take his true first step towards darkness until he kills Han (replete with the light of the sun going out to drive home the metaphor)

But we see in TLJ he still can't kill his mother. He knows he's supposed to, but he can't. He's got one foot in the dark, and one foot in the light. When he comes back to Snoke expecting to be validated for killing Han, he is instead mocked and humiliated. When the masks comes off this time, Ben is no more. Kylo is two feet into darkness now and Snoke's fate is sealed. I thought he would kill him in the Episode 9 but one way or another Snoke is getting his "ticket punched". We all knew this was coming even before we saw TLJ.

Now that all said, while he was in the throes of trying to find his place, people all around him were made to pay a grave cost. A return to the light isn't impossible (I think it's likely) but it cost blood to get him into the darkness, it's going to cost blood to get him out.

This is an interesting description of Padme. I didn't really look at her material trappings but more so her actions. In terms of her privileged position there is perhaps a parallel to draw between Padme and others like her (in the real world) who give voice but not action to cause... except Padme does give action. She is privileged but she doesn't rest in it, she gets on the playing field and risks her existence (she wasn't in any less danger in the arena on Geneosis than Anakin or Obi Wan). So I'm not sure if hypocrisy is applicable to her anymore than it would be to Princess Leia. Also privileged, but also very much in the fight on the ground floor.

Did you feel like the Jedi were saints after the PT? I got the sense that part of the trilogy's purpose was to knock some of the righteous shine off of them and to show they had blind spots. Also I don't know that I feel much empathy for Rey and Kylo. I'm more curious about what Rey is going to do next than feeling empathy for her, most of her suffering (as a child slave) we don't really see. And with Kylo, part of the reason it's hard to get behind the poor confused child of privilege just trying to find his way is that

1. People suffer while he is trying to find his way
2. Leia and Amidala demonstrate to us that privilege doesn't have to mean detachment and inability to fight for righteousness

Kylo comes off a little bit like a child suffering "affluenza". It's hard (for me) to relate to that.

 

I don't see it ending in failure and death either, I do see it ending in death. And if the Bendemptionists take issue with this particular instance of it, they'll be at odds with the well established dynamics that occur within the family. Anakin had to turn around from where he was, Luke had to turn around from where he was, if Kylo doesn't turn around from where he is (for whatever reason), if he remains the Snoke/Sidious character what end is available for him but death and defeat? So I suspect there will be some 11th hour realization and sacrifice, and then a Luke and Ben Force Ghost moment at the end of the movie.

 

Yes, you’re right. I said Kylo was committed to the dark, but he isn’t really. He’s been manipulated and wants to belong, but in reality he doesn’t belong to the dark side... at least not yet. By “under the spell” I meant that he’s been somewhat brain washed, although not to the extent that he’s lost all light... and, for me, those moments in which he finds the light is when I truly feel sympathy with him, because I see in them his humanity. I feel those sentiments truly belong to “our world”.

Kylo is indeed privileged like Amidala and Leia, but instead of fighting for democracy like them, he becomes enamoured with the dark side, and as we are drawing parallels with the real world, let’s say that he starts listening to the Ben Shapiros and Nigel Farages of the galaxy far away, who convince him that he is a victim in spite of all his privilege and confirm his prejudices and grudges instead of dispelling them... so he decides to joint the space nazi party or the white supremacists or whatever, and follow your standard crazy tyrant. Is it wrong of me to wish this silly boy came back to his senses? Of course not. I am the mother of a privileged twenty year old boy and teach in a privileged boys school. I know who these boys listen to, what pressures they face, whom they are prey to, what makes them stay safe and in the right track. If we are going to bring real world morality into this we have to do it in its entirety... I for starters would want my boy to be reformed and alive no matter his crimes, even if things were so bad it wasn’t possible anymore... and I would sympathise with any parent in the planet who were in that exact predicament, particularly if I knew their boy had been influenced by the poisonous rhetoric of demagogues... The way I see it, forgiveness and understanding go hand in hand. Killing Kylo Ren unredeemed teaches us nothing.

 

You may be surprised to hear this but I don't disagree entirely with what you're saying. I do think Kylo is 2 feet into darkness now but it doesn't preclude him turning back (like Anakin). I don't even disagree with having a desire to see him turned back, because you relate to / identify with him in some ways. I did acknowledge early it's what most people do (regardless of economic, political, or social standing). The rub for me is that this an emotionally driven compunction (and I'm not using "emotionally" as a pejorative here, it is simply what's driving it versus logistics) that very often considers only the person making bad decisions, and not those who have been affected by them.

The story though is one that is well understood. I don't know if any of you all saw the movie "Higher Learning" (RIP John Singleton) but it touches on a similar phenomena. Here the character's name was Remy and he is looking for his place, something to belong to, and a group of White Supremacists see it and manipulate it. They give him an identity and an ideology, it isn't really him, but because they've also given him a place where he belongs he accepts it. And in solidifying his place, Remy does some terrible things that he can't undo. And just before the end, you can see him acknowledge that this wasn't what he wanted, just before he dies. Remy could be Kylo very easily if the story proceeded by following Remy and his life, his growth, his corruption, and his 11th hour repudiation of an ideology and path that wasn't his. But instead in "Higher Learning" they show the story principally from the view of the people who end up impacted by Remy's decision, you see how they are hurt, scarred, and killed. And no amount of empathy for Remy (which I think as the audience you do develop to some degree) dilutes that pain and suffering. Nor should it (IMO).

I say all this to say, it's not that I don't understand the desire to empathize with Kylo. Even if he wasn't privileged I could still see the desire to empathize with him and to have things work out. For me, that desire will never be bigger or more important than the desire to see those injured by his actions restored and served a measure of justice. Even if all there's time for is a tearful Ben lamenting what he's done and being determined to help undo what he's done even if it kills him.

 

I hear what you’re saying about serving those injured by Kylo’s actions and the interesting thing is that Leia herself is not only the mother of the murderer but also the wife and sister of the victims... In the movies she is “the injured party that needs to be restored and served a measure of justice”... But, as it turns out, the instrument of justice for her is the demise of her son... so Leia is doomed to become doubly injured, which is really a shitty situation to be in and I wonder if LFL will use it to make us pause and think: Is the death of Ben Solo really the solution? Does his death heal anyone? Is his death giving a message of hope to the galaxy? Or rather a neat solution to an uncomfortable problem? Food for thought

 

exactly. they feel morally justified to take whatever actions needed to secure themselves, their "people", country, galaxy, etc.
i never said he doesn't understand that he's hurt people. i said he believes that he's right to do so for a greater good.
the only reason we judge him and recognize the wrongness of it is because we're not a part of the group he follows; we believe in something else.

just as a side note (and not to get too deep in the weeds), as far as know, Ben did not grow up in a stable and peaceful democracy.
he grew up in a corrupt and messy political vacuum absolutely rife with justifications to reject the "New Republic" and hope for something else.

yes, and if he is redeemed and lives, i'm sure the people who thinks he deserves to die will take issue with it and claim there is some well-established dynamic that dictates that it should have happened otherwise.

this is literally my whole point.
there is no should.
there are no "rules".
it could literally go any which way.
i prefer a happy ending, it makes the most sense to me given the character arcs we've been provided thus far, and that is what will satisfy me personally.
i don't watch popcorn sci-fi serials to bother myself with reality. we have reality for that. XD

in the end, some of us are going to be happy with the outcome and some of us aren't.

 

I think it will depend on the manner in which it is rendered. If he dies saving the Rey, Finn, and Poe will the message really dash hope?

Agree to disagree here, if there is one franchise that most definitely has "rules" and "shoulds" it's SW; it is precisely what has been the wedge that divides the fans in this ST. That "rules" and "shoulds" were completely discarded with little on screen explanation with half saying it didn't matter and the other half saying yes it did. Can Kylo's arc be anything? Sure. And whether you say "what it should be" or "what you'd like it to be" you're still drawing from the same well. Wording your preference differently is not necessarily going to temper your reaction if your preference doesn't come to fruition. Rey could end up killing Kylo because he wouldn't turn back, and I don't think the GA will flinch at all. They will see good triumphing over evil and feeling as though LFL fulfilled the theme of hope for the saga.

I think it won't end up being that way because there's is something poetic about the Skywalker line coming to an end, with Ben coming back just like his grandfather before it was too late. But no, it doesn't have to happen that way.

 

yeah, just gonna have to move on here.
no art, no film, no franchise has "shoulds" as far as i'm concerned.

and the difference between my reaction and others, possibly, is that if i am personally disappointed, i'll take responsibility for misinterpreting the message of the film and won't blame LFL/Johnson/Kennedy/whomever because of some set of arbitrary rules that are completely made up.

 

I'm not sure if our impasse here is semantics or what but, to me, it is inescapable that an anthology will have rules and shoulds; especially one that has characters that follow well established models (i.e. Campbellian). If the franchise chooses to "color outside the lines" it's going to have to provide sufficient exposition so to be believable within it's own established rules. If you see it differently than that, so be it, I'm not going to belabor this (especially if you're just done arguing/debating this particular topic) but I just needed to follow up.

 

Just saw this video made by Wit and Folly about Ben's redemption and what redemption is and is not. Very interesting and only eleven minutes long.

 

I have two other film examples in mind thinking about Ben Solo.
In "Fight Club" Eduard Norton gives a great performance of someone being torn apart between two extreme aspects of his personality and an even better example is "The devils advocate" with Keeanu Reeves.
Both protagonists literally kill their psychopathic alter egos at the very end and live on.
It's all about forgiveness.
Does a society have to pay back everything someone has done with the same amount of brutality.
If your answer is YES then you will always repeat the cycles of conflicts, maybe in different ways, but you are in a never ending story OR if you are answer is NO then you could (with best luck) brake through repetitive conflict structures.
You profits from endless conflicts? Palpatine and his heirs. Who profits from peace. Everyone except the first named.

 

I offer this extreme thought experiment to test your position: If Snoke had decided to walk away from the Darkside and his actions, do you still hold him accountable for the destruction of Hosnian Prime and surrounding planets? Yes billions died, but if he has a change of heart then, no need to pursue justice any further?

Again, extreme thought experiment, and again I can appreciate that Ben/Kylo is in conflict. If the radius of that conflict was restricted to his immediate person and didn't reach or impact anyone else physically, then absolutely he could be redeemed and forgiven for his fall with no other considerations. But his conflict has had deadly consequences to people around him. Don't they warrant consideration?

 

Difficult to answer. You can make that experiment for every case where someone or even a nation or a society as a whole decides about other people's life. The proplem as you said is the moment where we carry inner conflicts to the outside.
The problem with Kylo is that he has the power connections and resources to carry is conflicts into the galaxy in huge scale and we are lucky that not everyone with a crises has the possibility to fight a war with the whole galaxy.
In my life so far I had the impression that people that "spill out" their inner conflicts and aggressions are - very often - people with big mental health issues or people that seek for revenge.
The problem in general is that nothing can be undone.
And if someone would do harm my family I can imagine that I would have an immediate and very intense hate attack and would scream for revenge. Would it help anyone especially my family if I would kill the aggressor. No.
What would be the only thing to come to peace with such a situation? Forgiveness.
BUT oth I am human and therefore I know how difficult it is to give the right answer to your extreme thought experiment.
Fact is that Snoke is a predator that is fully aware of his actions and who seem to enjoy to manipulate and kill bodies and souls. I can't say the same from Kylo so far. He seems to have a crude and somewhat naive kind of mission and thinks every action is allowed to reach the "greater good". Like Snoke said it in the throne room he was more "a tool".
Snoke is like Palpatine the huge evil in the background that only cares for gaining as much power as possible.

Conlusion: I have huge issues to forgive Snoke and Palpatine but I think I am able to forgive Ren if it is executed well in EPIX.

 

Very good but equally tough points here. Very interesting food for thought.

So, it seems the common understanding is that Kylo/Ben is worthy of forgiveness while Snoke and Palpatine are not, because as you say, Snoke and Palpatine are fully aware of their evil actions. In other words, they know better and choose to be evil, while we may consider Ben and even Anakin to have been prey of these two and therefore were more like pawns, manipulated and twisted to their own internal will and true self.

So, but, where is the line drawn to who may be redeemable and who may not? Here we enter in philosophical and ethical questions that are hard to square.

I tend to concur with this. I'd add despair to the mix, at both the individual and nation levels, or something that goes against the values or more importantly puts the survival of the individual or a group at risk.

For the sake of continuing the extreme exercise, would Palpatine also be redeemable? And if so, what would be required for that to be the case? That he was being manipulated as well, that the true Palpatine self was being clouded by someone else, or himself. If Palpatine would snap and say : "Boy, what a bad dream I had.", would he be redeemable?

I have to admit that I'm that soft that I would consider forgiving Snoke and Palpatine, if it was to be believed that they were under some kind of mental disturbance or being pawns of something or someone else. As for Kylo/Ben, I'm able to forgive him if I'm convinced he was acting against his will, being misguided or forced to. As Vader said: "It's too late for me, son" (...) "You don't know the power of the darkside. I have to obey my Master". I'd add that this "Master" can be, many times, our own Ego.

 

Initially yes, he does rationalize his acts through a lens of "a greater good". But the greater good has to do with him finding his place first, and then organizing the galaxy around it. And he still knows right from wrong. He simply devalues life as a necessary step to achieving his end. If he was on "ethical" auto pilot he wouldn't have hesitated to kill Han or Leia. The same sentiment that brought Anakin around in the end, is tugging at Kylo in both TFA and TLJ (initially). He knows. But by TLJ's end he has decided it's who he is. It's why he kills Snoke. It's why his order on Crait is to provide no quarter and to take no prisoners (even though Leia is in the mine also). He is fully aware of what he's doing by the end, and there is no Snoke to manipulate him into it.

The irony in all this is that Anakin kills his master and returns to the Light. Kylo kills his master and goes fully into the Dark.

 

To answer the question why Kylo (and Vader) is redeemable and Snoke (and Palpatine) isn't, you have to have a bit of an understanding of storytelling and how to create character arcs.

So, how do you create a redeemable character?

First of all you have to know your villain's backstory and its wound/s. The villain has to overcome them to succeed.

Secondly how did the villain's view of her-/hilmself or the world change because of it?
What new behaviors, beliefs, habits, and responses developed as a means of protecting her-/himself from a recurrence of that event and the negative emotions associated with it?

A redeemable villains denies or avoids the past by pursuing other goals and interests. But at some point the villain learns the truth and his redemption starts. He changes throughout the story while an irredeemable character doesn't.

I could go on and on but I guess you guys now see why Snoke/Palpatine can't be redeemed while Kylo can and will be redeemed.

Snoke and Palpatine have no wounds or backstory which give them conflict or a reason to change and to do the stuff they do.

Kylo and Vader have a Backstory and wounds. They are formed and guided by them. They have to overcome them and learn about the truth.

 

But... Vader is "redeemed" before we see his back story. He throws Palpatine down the power shaft and THEN we get the prequels. How is his back story a prerequisite for "redemption"?

So if the writers do a back story on Snoke and Palpatine, they are then retroactively redeemable? Their transgressions remain the same even if they have a backstory that explains how they arrive at the point where we see them doing great harm... just like Kylo and Vader. I don't see how this distinguishes these two groups of people "in-universe". We may not know Palp or Snoke's backstory but we know it exists. But if they don't have to earn redemption, why would their backstories be a prerequisite before they can receive it anyway?