"Somehow, Palpatine..."

I...think I'd accept their love for their daughter more if they hadn't left her with a slave master!

There is also...spoiler for Shadow of the Sith here...
a strong implication that Rey's grandmother was some kind of goddess....

 

No argument here. I still don’t grasp the logic of BOTH of them surrendering to Ochi to keep her safe. But I don’t understand much of anything about the Ochi subplot.

I reckon if they had the time, they’d have recast Plutt as an outwardly gruff taskmaster, who was actually secretly kind to Rey and cared about her deeply in his own cantankerous way

Please don’t make me have to read through the wookiepedia synopsis to get the backstory on Rey’s mom’s mom. I only have so much interest I can invest in this

 

Tell me about it - I lost interest three years ago post TROS.

 

Not here we weren’t...

No more effort than the saga usually does about good triumphing over evil. Your question isn’t relevant to what I was saying anyway. I was saying that just because you sense someone has justified doing something that is morally supremely questionable doesn’t mean that they killed their enemy in order to get joy from it. Or that they are happy about killing at all.

Do you feel the film should have made an effort to dissuade the audience from felling as good, better or worse about a Sith Lord hell bent on filling the galaxy with darkness being destroyed compared with an enemy ship being destroyed?

I’m guessing that this part is sarcastic.

She died. She literally made the ultimate act of heroic sacrifice to try and save the galaxy. I it’s rather academic and petty to suspect her of not reacting to what we can only guess she sees (since it’s not actually shown from her POV) in a way that broadcasts that she’s taking the correct amount of satisfaction mixed with sufficient remorse and regret in order for the defeat of the Sith Lord to remain ethically immaculate.

She’s nit the first Jedi to appear unfazed at the sight of people being killed by them. To say that the sight of Palpatine’s evil energy force feeding back and blowing him up requires an appropriate horrified reaction in order for it to appear heroic is rather spurious in that context.

Again. She gave her life. Gritted her teeth and stood her ground. Come what may she defied the undisputed, unrepentant bad guy of the universe, till they both fell.

 

Please explain. My reaction to the sequence in question is that the staging doesn’t give the impression that Rey would rather have not taken a life, but had to. I’m confused. Are you saying that it actually does and I missed it? Or are you saying such a thing simply doesn’t matter?

No, it was meant to be relevant to what I was saying. “I don’t at all believe that’s what TROS was intending to say. But it’s a message that could be easily received.” The young, impressionable members of the audience, who this film is intended for, could easily receive the message of ‘relief from someone’s death’ as ‘joy from someone’s death’. It’s a slippery slope when you aren’t given the proper perspective.

When you don’t provide the counterargument to that position, then you aren’t directly endorsing it OR rejecting it.

If our heroes stood there watching the enemy soldiers on that ship have their flesh melted away from their bodies only to then deal them a final finishing blow, I’d hope the audience wouldn’t be made to feel that was exactly a triumphant note.

Is this in dispute?

She’s like six feet away. If she can’t see someone’s face melting off his head from six feet away, when she’s staring right at him, then I think she needs a pair of very powerful space glasses.

Whether our hero is affected by the extraordinary amount of physical mutilation she’s actively causing someone is “academic” to you? Compassion is “academic” to you in this story? Holy crap, guy. I mean . . . just . . . wow.

“That’s good and evil. Almost every religion is promoting the ‘good’ side. And the good side is, in a simple word, God is love. And they all say it, in a different way, but they all say exactly the same thing. And that being selfish is based on fear - the battle is between fear and no fear. You’re afraid of everything and everybody, so you mask it with all this other stuff. But if you can be brave enough to be compassionate to other people, regardless of the consequence, then you will have a happy life.

The other one where you’re afraid, you’re greedy, you’re living in this endless cycle of fear. That makes you very unhappy, very angry...yada, yada, yada. That’s what it really all comes down to in the end. You either live a compassionate life, or you lead a selfish life. And if you’re going to be selfish, you’re going to be unhappy. If you’re going to be compassionate, then you’re going to be happy.” George Lucas, James Cameron's Story of Science Fiction, 2018

Caring about others isn’t just a part of Star Wars. It’s the whole point. “Academic”?

Rey isn’t just another Jedi. She’s “all the Jedi” - she’s the representative of an entire ethos built around the nature of what it means to be good. How she specifically chooses to that in this final conflict isn't a routine thing.

In the context of being the avatar of an entire religion centered on compassion, Rey’s indifference to the blatant suffering of another is spurious? Fascinating.

 

Nobody is stood there watching anything. They are grimacing and bracing themselves from a bombardment of blinding energy.

It’s melting because of a blinding stream of enefy force, like lightning. Which she’s deflecting with two lightsabers.

War is hell. We don’t go round checking war dead off the hero list because they didn’t express enough compassion mid battle for the plight of the men they were killing or were trying to kill at the time they too were killed.

A religion which has stated its purpose as destroying the Sith. I don’t recall their policy for reacting to a Sith’s horrific death as it occurs simultaneously to your own death.

In the context of credible and predictable human behaviour in certain circumstances.

Were you compassionate and caring for the Emperor when you saw him get a taste of his own lightning? Even if you were, I doubt you too would have much time or capacity to make sure your pity at the sight of his exploding head registered while yountoo were busy dying at that moment.

 

Is it just me? or somehow this thread is toing and froing... rotating into a circular abyss? ... goodnight all, enjoy the holidays!

 

I feel like it's life imitating art. The galaxy thought the emperor was gone. But then his clone turns up.

 

You know....DLF have now backpedalled and said she didn't, she was just 'waiting for Ben to donate his life force', after a number of fans argued that when Jedi died their bodies disappeared.

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 28, 2022, Original Post Date: Nov 28, 2022 ---

I have started writing fan fiction with my preferred endings, not just with SW but other films that didn't end like I thought....never would I let anyone read it but it's amazingly therapeutic!

 

Only Luke's, Ben's x2, Leia and Yoda's bodies disappeared.

 

Ask yourself this question: What would be the point of that? What possible storytelling purpose could it service for our protagonist to be unaware of the full impact of her actions during the most important moment in her journey? Every step she’d made along the way since we met her had led to that final encounter. But we see more of the outcome than the person whose story this is? Not very likely.

She sees what’s happening. She doesn’t care. That’s what’s presented on screen. You’re apparently OK with that. I find it to be an oddly atonal choice for the reasons I’ve well-articulated. I’m consistently baffled by you seeming to be so invested in how I personally feel about a story element and needing to invalidate my sincere emotional reaction. Very strange.

This isn’t actual war. It’s a fictional story. A narrative feature isn’t a cinema verite style collection of documentary footage where they set up some cameras and shot whatever was happening at the time. The events we see play out on screen were meticulously crafted in order to convey the filmmaker’s underlining intent.

It’s a story about heroes fighting villains. Good fighting evil. HOW good fights evil is a quintessential component to the story. Our heroes care about others. Our villains don’t. That’s not something I just made up to be a contrarian.

The Jedi are established to be “guardians of peace and justice”. Their purpose isn’t to "destroy" anything or anyone. That's the antithesis of what they stand for.

In the sense that I found it a weird choice for our hero to be apathetic toward it. The hero stabbed the villain with his own knife. OK. Then looked him dead in the eye and pushed it in deeper. Not exactly the attitude I would have expected from our hero.

This is a work of fiction that was carefully staged, choreographed, filmed, and edited together through conscious effort. There was enough time to show whatever the filmmakers decided was important to show. They didn’t, for whatever reason, feel it was important to show the hero demonstrate a sense of compassion in that moment. That was a choice that was made and I personally find it at odds with the core message of the story. You don’t. Fair enough.

You don’t seem to feel it’s enough to merely accept and acknowledge that I have a different perspective on this story than you and leave it at that. You apparently have the desire to disprove my subjective emotional interpretation. Why? What exactly do you get out of that? It’s a fascinating characteristic I find very bewildering, but would love to understand.

 

The narrator's purpose.

I know that's what you want to believe to be true. It's a judgement that you have made already and everything you argued and repeat is intended to confirm that judgement.

A story about a war. If the war in the story isn't consistent with what we know to be true about war then we are just being abstract. Might as well be a war where everyone just shakes hands if you are going to ignore basic truths to accommodate actions that wouldn't credibly happen.

Jedi have stated one objective throughout this saga, with the end being the preservation of peace and justice. Destroy the sith. They even have prophecies were this must happen in order for the Jedi goal of balance in the force to be achieved.

That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking how the short couple of seconds of Palpatine's face disintegrating made you feel about Palpatine. If you don't spontaneously feel the way you expect it to be written clearly all over Rey's face, then you are not seeking credible behaviour from her.

It was important for them to show the audience that Rey would not back down in defence of her friends who would all have been destroyed imminently if she hadn't. And to give the audience the satisfaction, not feelings of horror or pity and compassion, of seeing the clone of Palpatine literally destroyed before our eyes. Which they knew the fans would appreciate.

..from the filmmakers and from how audiences generally appreciate a film. You seem to have bespoke, and fluid criteria which are applied as you see fit to impose a certain judgement you have already carried out on Rey's character. It's not just that you have a different perspective.

When you post your arguments on an open forum you're going to get responses, which is what the forum is designed for. So I don't know why you claim it perplexes you that I'm using the forum as intended. I dare say you mean you are frustrated that someone is challenging the strength and substance of what you are arguing.

You say that you don't impose your criteria, or dictate how things should be. But you are indignant when it's pointed out that the filmmakers evidently didn't believe that they should focus on how much pity and compassion Rey should feel about the sight of Emperor's clone's death. Your reaction only makes sense if you believe that they had to focus on what you want them to focus on. That's an imposition, by definition.

Quite simply the fimmakers had no use for pity being felt towards Palpatine. As they quite sensibly understood that it was not something that the audience, star wars fans, would have ever contemplated or desired. Except a few people in a most contrarian way possible. And that it would have been a very late change out of left field to suddenly demand that Rey's character show the devil mercy, while she is preoccupied with saving all her friends from him, purely because you've decided that she must meet these unique standards or else be condemned.

You're condemning Rey's character because the filmmakers didn't write the climactic scene to include her appearing to feel bad about the appearance of the Emperor's head as he suffers from his own attempts to destroy the rebel fleet being deflected by her.......

It's amusing that all this is running concurrently with an argument that Rey is so good and perfect. And yet here we are discussing why they didn't show her having compassion or sympathy for the rotting face of a character which has been depicted as being absolutely unsympathetic. A most evil being we've been told must be destroyed from the first episode. On for which the saga has suggested or requested no compassion or sympathy for at any time. Wouldn't Rey being the only person to show compassion for Palpatine (for his exploding face at least) confirm that she is the goodest most perfect creature in the galaxy?

 

What is the value here? He's a dictator. What do you hope to accomplish? Save him? Blast him.

 

It's a moral victory, not a physical one. Star Wars has always worked in its moral victories into the physical ones.
In the ROTJ, the moment the Republic started winning wasn't when Luke in his righteous anger (and valid fear) was beating down Vader, but the moment he tossed away his weapon, proving that he wasn't going to play Vader and Palpatine's game. (IIRC)
In the PT, the moment the Jedi started to lose was when they played Palpatine's game by being pawns of the Republic and generals in the army. They started being generals of war, not keepers of peace. This is seen as a moral defeat, and even the music in AOTC harkens back to the Imperial March in this instance.

Rey killing Palpatine doesn't echo those themes, nor does it echo the themes of kindness (and moral superiority) being the ways to victory that we saw earlier in the film with the giant snake and with Kylo himself.

The point wouldn't be for Rey to actually save Palpatine, but to give Palpatine a chance to be saved, a chance for redemption. As these things go, he's supposed to refuse it, and that refusal will ultimately lead to his downfall, usually by his own demise or self-defense. For Rey to be the aggressor works towards Palpatine's ultimate goal, of him being killed being the way for the Sith to live or whatnot.

Rey's choice may be the right one in the real world to many, but in a fairy tale - which Star Wars undoubtedly is - that solution falls short because it backslides on one of the major themes of the Jedi.

Or at least that's how I'm interpreting @eeprom's point of view.

 

Tell that to the millions of Palpatine killed directly and indirectly.

I can't believe I'm actually having this conversation.

She wasn't the aggressor. Do you not remember the movie? He's literally in the process of trying to kill more people (including her):

 

OK. And, in your opinion, that purpose is what? That’s what I’m asking.

It’s what’s right there on the screen. She sees him in agony and she isn’t sympathetic toward that agony. It’s hard to misread. You’re perspective makes perfect sense to me. You don’t think she should be sympathetic toward his agony because of who he is. Clearly the filmmakers agree with you. Because of how I read the inherent message of Star Wars: Compassion above all, I see that mindset as jarring. I accept the scenario as it is. I get the rationale. But I have reservations.

The war is only important to the story as a reflection of the narrative’s value system. How our heroes fight the war, with respect to our villains, is the point. When Finn and Jannah, for example, rig the cannon to fire on the command bridge, they’re noticeably elated. Not because they just killed a bunch of people, but because doing so would be saving countless lives. It’s presented triumphantly.

If that sequence had instead been structured so that Finn and Jannah were watching the crew die from their attack and then pointedly fired again to make sure they were dead, for me at least, the scene would have felt a lot less triumphant. A mixed message. Even in battle, our heroes are morally superior to our villains.

I know that was a stated goal of Yoda before he utterly failed in that attempt. Is that what you're referring to?

No. They have a prophecy that states this WILL happen. The Sith will be destroyed and balance will be restored. How much import the order itself places on this in the movies is practically zero. The prophecy exists. It isn’t anyone’s guiding motivation beyond Qui-Gon though.

No one is saying they need to make the prophecy happen and that’s what’s driving their actions. The Jedi do not exist to destroy. They are keepers of the peace. If they must kill in order to do that, then they will, but that is not their purpose. They don't seek it out. And when they do, it inevitably ends in tragedy.

At first, I felt it was fitting that he would be undone by his own aggression. He’s attacking. She’s defending. That’s awesome! When he starts to melt away and she goes in for the kill, I felt a little strange about that. Something seemed ‘off’ to me. I should be happy about this. I want to be. But I’m not.

I wasn’t sure exactly why until I introspectively evaluated what was being shown in the scene. Our hero is killing our villain in a very brutal way, but doesn’t seem cognizant of that brutality, or simply doesn’t care. It’s an odd note to end the struggle between empathy and cruelty on: Our hero of empathy resolving the conflict with violence rather than empathy. As I’ve stated numerous times, I don’t believe at all that’s what was intended by the filmmakers, but that is my genuine human reaction.

I don’t know what this means. The audience is only allowed to feel the precise way the artist intended and any deviation from that isn’t credible? I hope I’m misunderstanding you. Anyone is allowed to feel however they want to about a piece of art. That’s one of the great things about art.

We all approach it from our own unique perspective built from our own unique experiences and values. Learning from others – understanding how they interpret art, how they interpret the world around them – it’s one of the purist and fulfilling endeavors in this world. It’s why I’m on this forum.

I’m sorry, I don’t see what one has to do with the other. How does demonstrating compassion preclude her from defending her friends?

Yeah, sorry, still not understanding why these two concepts are mutually exclusive. It would be “unsatisfying” if the villain’s demise was in conversation with the message of the story?

What if Rey, recognizing what was happening to Palps, offered mercy? Told him it didn’t have to happen this way. She didn’t want to have to kill him. But he refused. He was too consumed by his own hate. He responded to her gesture of mercy with greater violence. He left her no choice and she had to kill him.

The audience would be unsatisfied with that? The fans wouldn’t appreciate that? They’d feel bad about that? Doubtful. She gave him every opportunity and that creep decided his own fate. He got what he deserved and everyone’s conscience is clear.

I’m not saying that’s what ‘should’ have happened. I’m addressing your falsehood that showing compassion = anticlimactic. It doesn’t. You can do both just fine. It’s possible.

“Impose”? This is what I’m talking about. Where is this coming from? A part of the story didn’t totally work for me personally and I explained why. How is that an imposition? I overall like TROS a decent bit. I’d probably like it more if it had handled certain aspects a little different. But I entirely accept it for it is.

I’m not “arguing” anything. I’m expressing my opinion on a work of art. I fully expect and invite feedback on expressed opinions. I love the insightful and provocative discussions that come from it. What I do find peculiar though is the tendency I’ve observed from you to not embrace opposing perspectives from a place of good faith. It seems you’ve made it your mission to dismantle any viewpoint that doesn’t reflect your own. I’m not sure where this attitude comes from. I don’t take it personally. But I also don’t see it as very constructive.

I believe this forum should be a platform of comradery where people with a common interest can freely exchange ideas and outlooks on that shared enthusiasm. Enthusiasm over a children’s fantasy series. Maybe folks ought not to get overly heated about that.

Now this is just patently false. At every opportunity I’ve made it explicit that what I’m speaking to is a reflection of my own interpretation and nothing else. I acknowledge and accept how the story unfolded. I don’t hold anyone up to some lofty standard that only I appreciate and I’ve never ever demanded anyone feel the way I do. That’s something I’ve been VERY careful about here.

They did ‘X’. I’d prefer if they had done ‘Y’. They didn’t do ‘Y’ though and I’m OK with that. That’s the definition of imposition? You need a new dictionary.

Again, this is a willful misstatement of the facts. I have absolutely never expressed my perspective in these terms. I’m OK with how the movie ended. I’d have preferred the character been more empathetic. Empathy isn’t a “unique standard” in Star Wars. Having a preference isn’t a condemnation. Preferring toppings on my pizza isn’t a condemnation of pizza. It’s a reflection of what I personally appreciate. It’s not a refutation of what anyone else thinks or feels.

Yeah, still not sure how you got there. The only sentiment I’ve expressed about the choice is that I find it odd. Not ‘bad’. Not ‘awful’. Not ‘offensive’. Odd. I think it’s odd.

Ding ding ding. You got it!

But the way you phrase it makes me think that’s something you think I wouldn’t endorse. Which makes me think you’re maybe confusing my perspective with someone else here . . . more . . . feline related possibly?

 

I think you're missing the point in more than one way. Regardless of whether or not Palpatine is worthy of redemption, it's more important that Rey offers a space for that to take place, or at least a space for Palpatine to accept his loss. THAT'S the point. It's the belief that there can still be good in even the most heartless and vile of people. That death as a villain doesn't have to be the way out for villains.

And the moment she gained the upper hand, she had a choice whether or not to kill him. We see twice in ROTS and both times when the oppressed kills the oppressor it's presented as morally wrong, despite the evil that the oppressor has done - despite the evil that the oppressor will or would continue to do if given the chance. It's not the Jedi's place to be judge, jury, and executioner, and nearly every time they are it's presented as evil or wrong or a moral failing. THAT'S the problem with Rey killing Palpatine even as he tried to kill her.
Compare Rey's final "I am Iron Ma - I mean I am All of the Jedi" moment to Obi-Wan's "I have the high ground" moment. Obi-Wan calls an end to the fight, begs Anakin one last time not to attack, and then only finishes the fight as Vader attempts to attack once again. A threat is stopped but Kenobi still maintains the moral High Ground (pun intended) because he wasn't the aggressor, despite being the one attacked. That's the point being made.

I don't think anyone is saying that Palpatine should live, as that's a deeply personal discussion that doesn't fully belong here IMO, simply that Rey being the one to kill him when she holds his life in her hands is thematically weak and goes against everything Star Wars has set up in the previous two trilogies...and TROS itself.

 

This thread is is definitely prompting me to watch TROS again..

 

Clearly something different firm the purposes you're projecting on them, and which you are arguing makes the ending not work, thematically.

No. Her observing his moment of dying and making sure the audience understood that Rey felt compassion for him because of the appearance of his face for the last two seconds of his life were not relevant to anything that the filmmakers had been trying to say about Palpatine or the Jedi's duty to defeat him. At no point has sympathy for the devil ever been explored or hinted at as a possibility. Practically or ideologically.

It's the context of this entire saga.

Move beyond Yoda's failure, and fulfill the Jedi's duty, its purpose and its destiny, Rey did.

That's the same as believing it must happen. It's not like if you have a prophecy that you believe in, you can take it or leave it, if it never actually happens.

Naturally.

But you need Rey to behave totally unnaturally in order for what you say is important to the themes and ideology of the saga/trilogy/movie, regarding Palpatine and Rey, to be conveyed.

And since Rey is seconds away from her own death. The likelihood of her being able to behave unnaturally for the sake of the themes that you have imposed on this scene is even lower.

You've got the priorities backwards.

Opinions are one thing. But the vast majority of what you are posting are arguments that you believe support and uphold your opinion.

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 30, 2022, Original Post Date: Nov 30, 2022 ---

The possibility that offering Palapatine compassion was a viable or desirable tactic has never once been hinted at either directly or thematically. Rather than Rey offering a space for this to happen, the filmmakers needed to offer a space were any nominally perceptive viewer might anticipate it about several movies ago. It's not a concept that you can introduce in the few seconds before the Emperor dies and in which the hero is also dying from the effort needed to destroy him.

That's not true, literally a couple of seconds pass (immediately following Palpatine taunting her that his moment will be the end of her and everyone she cares about) between her pulling out the second lightsaber and the resultant rebounding energy vaporising Palpatine

She held two lightsabers up in defence of herself and her friends and the result was that Palpatine was killed by his own energy blast.

It's a nice thematic nod to the times how Palpatine's true cruelty and implacability was depicted when he killed Windu and tortured Luke almost to death. Now with all the Jedi, embodied in Rey, face him down together, his evil backfires and blows up in his face.



Star Wars has long had Christological themes presented with Lucas's pseudo Buddhist tastes. Part of Christian ideology (as philosophers point out) does include the need to be able and willing to kill your brother in the name of universal love. Universal love is cold and ruthless. For the greater good, without mercy.


Rey looking like she cares about the last few seconds of the Palpatine clone's life because his face was momentarily an even more horrific site than it already had been throughout this movie has no currency with any obvious theme or ideology depicted in the movie or the saga. It just isn't.

 

But...the point here isn't how evil Palpatine is, but those old Jedi values going waaaay back to the OT.

Remember how Palpatine taunted Luke in ROTJ? 'Strike me down, and take your father's place at my side'. For any other to kill Palpatine, fine. But for a Jedi to do it, strike down an unarmed person, leads to the Dark Side. And yes, we all know old Palps had Force lightning, but he did in ROTJ - yet killing him could still drive Luke to the Dark Side. In ROTS, Anakin took that step when he killed Count Dooku. Not only that but DLF were determined to present Rey as the shining example of Jedi 'goodness'; she had already had her 'dark side moment' when she stabbed an unarmed Kylo Ren; when she faced Palpatine she did so as the shining hero in white not as the Jedi who still had one last flaw to overcome, as Luke did in ROTJ.

I'm pretty sure what I say now will immediately result in people accusing me of promoting Ben Solo as he's my fave character...which is fine. But, the fact is it would have been far better if Ben had killed Palps, and not Rey. He would have atoned for his past actions with his willingness to sacrifice himself, and saved Rey from having to kill her own flesh and blood. Then, Rey could have revived him with her already established healing powers. And no one needed to die.