Sick of Kylo!

Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,743
Reaction score
166
he killed Han Solo. there's no way to redeem him in the audience's eyes, short of death.

he will turn to the light side and die for the resistance. it's the only way forward.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
18,040
Reaction score
214
Location
Germany
he killed Han Solo. there's no way to redeem him in the audience's eyes, short of death.

he will turn to the light side and die for the resistance. it's the only way forward.
I really don't want to see him sacrafice himself for the good guys or even turn to the light. I want to see him go down like a weak wanna-be Sith.

When they decided the go the route of "another Skywalker falls to the dark side" the character was pretty much lost on me. Been there, done that, wash, rinse, and repeat...................................
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
3,186
Reaction score
369
Location
Viborg, Denmark
Unfortunately, you hit the nail on the head.
Unfortunately yes ... it's amazing - as if there are no more stories to tell, so rehash what has already been told. It can be done with succes, but it's not how they do it as of now.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
18,040
Reaction score
214
Location
Germany
They should have made up a new group of dark side users for Luke's Jedi Order to fight against. Maybe the dark siders could have been a group that had fought against the Sith for supremacy amongst dark side users and lost or maybe Palpy deafeated them years before ANH and they went into hiding, but returned after his death in ROTJ. The KoR could have been that group..............................
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
31,221
Reaction score
334
Location
Oregon
Totally, I just saw last night that there's a trailer for a Fantasy Island Movie! Like do we even need that?! :unsure:
Just look at how well CHIPs did, or any TV to Film remake.

Not to mention the new Charlie's Angels that looks worse that the originals. FYI, if you;re gonna do this movie at least cast believable action stars...
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
315
Unfortunately yes ... it's amazing - as if there are no more stories to tell, so rehash what has already been told. It can be done with succes, but it's not how they do it as of now.
There's plenty of stories that can be told, but the issue here is that these big franchise exercises are driven by an army of producers and not "creatives", like writers and directors. This is why the likes of Kathleen Kennedy and Kevin Feige are popular names, when before, few people would have known who the producer was on any movie. Kennedy and Feige are not creative people. They're bean counters that have been given immense control over how the creative decisions are made and they step into every process and put their stamp on it continuously, often with bad results -> hello Leia Poppins. They are also people who now greenlight a project, based on "market research" (often flawed) and current trends, which is why Hollywood movies often seem completely redundant these days. If you're following a trend, all you'll get is a variation of a current formula. This can be seen in the fact that nearly every big studio is trying to secure their own "franchise" to milk endlessly and it's incredibly boring. It's lamentable that studios are caught in and interminable loop of remake, reboot, reimagining and franchise sucking.

Before, a producer was someone who primarily provided money to the people who were making a film. They got the director the biggest budget they could, or went to financiers and secured more money because more money was needed. Their role, while relatively important, was behind the scenes and they usually let the director run the story and make the best film they could. There were, of course, exceptions here and there. The likes of Roger Corman completely ran his pictures and you knew you were watching a Roger Corman film, or somebody like Robert Evans who was instrumental in how a picture would be made and even on Star Wars, Gary Kurtz's restraining hand was their to hold the reins of George Lucas's imagination with an extremely positive effect. But, by and large, the director was the guy/gal who orchestrated the look and feel of a film, which is how it should be.

These days, directors are merely yes men for hire and are beholden to a given studio's every whim themselves and are at the behest of a team of producers and executive producers. They are unable to put their own mark on anything, but will do well if they just do what they're told. So, we end up with the likes of JJ Abrams - one of the worst things to happen to cinema in years. But, he'll nod his head and do what's asked of him every time, which amounts to little more than aping Steven Spielberg. Even Rian Johnson, who for all the maligning he gets from Star Wars fans, had to toe the line in many respects, despite the fact that he prefers to go his own way when directing his films.

The day of the great directors is over unfortunately and for the foreseeable future, the typical Hollywood film is going to be a rinse and repeat experience, with the odd gem getting through. There are now just a handful of directors working in Hollywood that are of the old school, whereby, they are the ones making "their" film. Sure, any film is a collaborative process, but you know you're watching a Tarantino movie, or a Christopher Nolan film, or a Wes Anderson one. These people are, like painters, have a certain style that's very much present in their work. While pretty much anyone can direct a Marvel movie or a Jurassic World movie, because they, pretty much, just have to do what they're told.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
3,186
Reaction score
369
Location
Viborg, Denmark
There's plenty of stories that can be told, but the issue here is that these big franchise exercises are driven by an army of producers and not "creatives", like writers and directors. This is why the likes of Kathleen Kennedy and Kevin Feige are popular names, when before, few people would have known who the producer was on any movie. Kennedy and Feige are not creative people. They're bean counters that have been given immense control over how the creative decisions are made and they step into every process and put their stamp on it continuously, often with bad results -> hello Leia Poppins. They are also people who now greenlight a project, based on "market research" (often flawed) and current trends, which is why Hollywood movies often seem completely redundant these days. If you're following a trend, all you'll get is a variation of a current formula. This can be seen in the fact that nearly every big studio is trying to secure their own "franchise" to milk endlessly and it's incredibly boring. It's lamentable that studios are caught in and interminable loop of remake, reboot, reimagining and franchise sucking.

Before, a producer was someone who primarily provided money to the people who were making a film. They got the director the biggest budget they could, or went to financiers and secured more money because more money was needed. Their role, while relatively important, was behind the scenes and they usually let the director run the story and make the best film they could. There were, of course, exceptions here and there. The likes of Roger Corman completely ran his pictures and you knew you were watching a Roger Corman film, or somebody like Robert Evans who was instrumental in how a picture would be made and even on Star Wars, Gary Kurtz's restraining hand was their to hold the reins of George Lucas's imagination with an extremely positive effect. But, by and large, the director was the guy/gal who orchestrated the look and feel of a film, which is how it should be.

These days, directors are merely yes men for hire and are beholden to a given studio's every whim themselves and are at the behest of a team of producers and executive producers. They are unable to put their own mark on anything, but will do well if they just do what they're told. So, we end up with the likes of JJ Abrams - one of the worst things to happen to cinema in years. But, he'll nod his head and do what's asked of him every time, which amounts to little more than aping Steven Spielberg. Even Rian Johnson, who for all the maligning he gets from Star Wars fans, had to toe the line in many respects, despite the fact that he prefers to go his own way when directing his films.

The day of the great directors is over unfortunately and for the foreseeable future, the typical Hollywood film is going to be a rinse and repeat experience, with the odd gem getting through. There are now just a handful of directors working in Hollywood that are of the old school, whereby, they are the ones making "their" film. Sure, any film is a collaborative process, but you know you're watching a Tarantino movie, or a Christopher Nolan film, or a Wes Anderson one. These people are, like painters, have a certain style that's very much present in their work. While pretty much anyone can direct a Marvel movie or a Jurassic World movie, because they, pretty much, just have to do what they're told.
I was being ironic with previous statement :)
I don't disagree, and I think with this wall of text you explain much better what I was saying, in a way.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
2,278
Reaction score
304
Now I'm picturing Han Solo shouting "MACLUNKEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEY" as he falls to his death.
LOL! Someone needs to create gifs having anyone who Han shoots saying "Maclunkey" before he shoots them. First one should be Han shooting Beckett in the Solo movie. :ROFLMAO: Then maybe the Sarlacc Pitt saying it before Han shoots it's tentacle to free Lando.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
13
Location
Jakku, the Inner Rim.
Yeah, pretty much got that, what they were probably trying to go for. But I could do with less tantrum trowing ala 4 year old. It's literally impossible for me to take him seriously as a Villain when he's actually trying to be one, after seeing those.
I think a lot of people missed this.

He’s had more character than Darth Vader did in the 2nd movie. TLJ had too much going on and it still remains to be seen. If we were in the 80s and watched ESB there’s only a handful of things we could say about DV other than what a deep voice, he’s mean and he’s Lukes daddy. And what a cool cape.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
9,130
Reaction score
157
I enjoyed the bit where we learned he was in control of his rage and able to calmly walk away after defeat at Hoth.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned he was totally submissive to Palpatine.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned that despite this he had power and initiative to pursue his own agenda within the Imperial organisation still.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned he was willing to engage with the underworld in order to achieve his goals.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned that he was totally ruthless, ruled by fear and considered the troops under his command expendable regardless of their seniority.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned he was cunning and intelligent by being to arrive at Bespin and prepare his ambush.
I enjoyed the bit where we learned he was manipulative as he continued to alter his agreed arrangements in regard to the above.


I could tell all this when I was under 10 years old and watching it in 1980.
Just a shame he had no character and the film told us nothing about him at all. (NB Please engage irony meters for this comment).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,743
Reaction score
166
re: not taking Kylo seriously as a Villain.


at no point in ESB did we ever get the sense that we couldn't take Vader seriously.
slamming ESB to defend the ST is not going to work.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
13
Location
Jakku, the Inner Rim.
Wow. There's no need to take it as 'slamming' the ESB at all.

The OT is not a sacred cow and did have some of it's own drawbacks. I was comparing the too. I apologise if some people took offense and became defensive.

I agree, Darth Vader is amazing and iconic. More so than Kylo. Though that may be a generational thing.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
9,130
Reaction score
157
It is a recognised and standard-issue tactic in some fan sub-populations who post online about Star Wars.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
13
Location
Jakku, the Inner Rim.
It is a recognised and standard-issue tactic in some fan sub-populations who post online about Star Wars.
I don’t know what that means. But I suspect people are somewhat tense.

I don’t understand why, Brexit, SW and everything else has got people in fight mode. I like DV and Kylo and appreciate the differences. Never thought ESB was all that and still don’t. Expression of this isn’t a + for the ST. It doesn’t erase it of its flaws at all.

Kylo is wonderfully acted by Adam Driver, despite the characterisation by RJ in TLJ in some places.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
491
Location
Pennsylvania
Kylo is rather convoluted IMO. I've said it before, I don't think he's terrible...just the question for me is: how exactly do they want us to feel about him? He throws literal tantrums and whines, yet there's both a sympathy angle and even a pseudo romantic angle. He murders his own father and commits attempted murder on his mother, but wait...he's not so bad? Now I'm not saying SW shouldn't have multilayered characters, but Kyo just comes off like a child with extreme bipolar disorder more than anything all that complex or all that intimidating. Now true, his story isn't fully over or revealed, but I really think the only way to make his arch sensible and congeal is to explain he gets occasionally possessed by Palpatine (potentially through the Vader helmet), thus making him an actually very tragic character and explaining away the flip-flop nature to him.
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
31,221
Reaction score
334
Location
Oregon
Vader = walk softly carry a big stick
Kylo = some youtube brat
Now I get it

With Vader you knew where you stood, there was never any question to his Villainy. He had a presence about him that, well was room filling.
Kylo seems more like someone who's bi-polar and could go off at any moment for the slightest thing.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
13
Location
Jakku, the Inner Rim.
Can we all please calm it with the bipolar assumptions. This kind of negative stereotyping is not helpful to the discussion. I know there are people here who do/have suffered mental health issues.

There’s a healthy way to discuss mental health issues and labelling a character you dislike/loathe is not the way to do it.
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
31,221
Reaction score
334
Location
Oregon
Fine forgive my ignorance as I'm no expert in the condition. I once knew a person who had severe mood swings and always said that she was bipolar.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
491
Location
Pennsylvania
Can we all please calm it with the bipolar assumptions. This kind of negative stereotyping is not helpful to the discussion. I know there are people here who do/have suffered mental health issues.

There’s a healthy way to discuss mental health issues and labelling a character you dislike/loathe is not the way to do it.
I don't see anything wrong with psychoanalyzing a FICTIONAL character. There's no HIPPA law here, it's fake. He doesn't exist! This likely comes from my Batman love. My father IS a psychotherapist. I was psychoanalyzed at every dinner table. Analysis is ingrained in my DNA. Kylo clearly, if not possessed, would thus suffer from severe bipolar disorder. That's not opinion. If this were a real person, this is factual. But it's not a REAL person. The difference is, the assumption that bipolar disorder must make you some genocidal maniac for a tyrannical oppressive regime is utterly ignorant. Kylo can be bipolar, but how many bipolar are Kylo? Hm? Is it offensive to say that Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs suffered from gender dysphoria? So by your logic then, Waggy, every transsexual must be a serial killer. Is it offensive to say that because Arthur Fleck suffered from schizophrenia and depression, everyone that does will become a homicidal criminal clown? Hence nothing I said is offensive. You just appear after me for some reason. Hence considering saying Kylo, who if not possessed, is bipolar...is not remotely offensive whatsoever. It's only offensive to someone who doesn't actually understand the actual disorder. Educate yourself, Waggy, before you speak.
 
Last edited:

JVM

Joined
Dec 12, 2011
Messages
536
Reaction score
33
Location
Illinois, USA
He is my least favorite part of the sequel trilogy by far - I actually like all of the new heroes in theory, even if many of them are not used well.

For me, the ultimate problem is that Disney has simply tried too hard with Kylo Ren. It has been very popular in recent years to assign villainous characters full character development arcs analogous to the heroes - either a parallel towards redemption, or a parallel as they sink further into the abyss. These sorts of stories are often praised for emotional complexity - Breaking Bad's Walter White and the new Joker film comes to mind - but in reality, most of the more praised efforts succeeded by having the focus singularly on a villainous character in an episode/film in which the central themes were, primarily, about how terrible everything is. I feel Disney has been trying to craft something like this here - a compelling, three-dimensional villain with ongoing development. I just can't say they succeeded for me. Worse, I often feel the additional time spent on Kylo Ren is time that could have been spent better fleshing out Finn, Poe, and so forth in better ways.

So much attention is drawn in the two released films to suggest that Kylo Ren is "struggling between the light and dark sides" but at no point in either of the established films do his actions ever feel to represent that to me. There is some debate about his interaction with Solo in The Force Awakens, but by and large to me, it looks as if Kylo Ren is killing people and causing chaos and for some reason we're supposed to believe he's also struggling with a pull towards the light side? Feel sympathy for him on that front? To me, it often feels as if the characters are constantly making excuses for his behavior. I believe Adam Driver has played the part too well and allowed people to assign more nuance to the character than the outline and script ever really give him.

A major reason I did not enjoy The Last Jedi comes down to the simple notice that Rey is set up as desperate to reconnect with her family, and sees Kylo Ren murder his father in front of her, and then a few days later, willingly turns to him amid her disappointment with Luke. There is nothing Kylo Ren has done to suddenly invite her sympathy; nothing has changed besides the forced bond. It just doesn't make character sense for me for Rey to decide to feel sorry for him, no matter how upset she is with Luke. I can't reconcile that Rey with the more headstrong character portrayed in the previous film. She simply accepts the things he says and what he means with zero skepticism within days of him killing his father, a man she cared about, injuring her closest friend, trying to kill her, and causing the destruction of an entire system of planets.

Lucas has been criticized at times for not developing Darth Maul and the other prequel trilogy villains very extensively, but I always felt this was in line with Star Wars' mythological fairy tale style, and that's something I sort of miss with the sequel trilogy.
 
Top