Star Wars: Why Darth Vader’s Redemption Worked, But Kylo Ren’s Didn’t
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker gave redemption to Kylo Ren/Ben Solo, but the story didn't work as well as it did with Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker.
Kylo Ren was redeemed in Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, but his return to the light side paled in comparison to that of Darth Vader, aka Anakin Skywalker, in Return of the Jedi - why? Redemption has long been a core part of the Star Wars movies, and that is in thanks to Vader's story in the original trilogy - his journey from being the all-powerful, all-evil villain to the tragic hero who saves the day at the cost of his own life defines the first six films in the Skywalker saga.
It was no surprise, then, that his heir apparent was given a similar story. Kylo Ren is the new masked, red lightsaber-wielding villain introduced in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, but from the moment it's revealed he is the son of Han Solo and Leia Organa, it already started to seem like Disney would be intent on redeeming the person formerly known as Ben Solo, and so it proved to be in 2019's The Rise of Skywalker.
Although the film opened up with Kylo Ren as Supreme Leader of the First Order, it ended with Ben Solo, brought back to the light and given his redemption, just as his grandfather was before him. Unfortunately for the sequel trilogy, and despite the best efforts of Adam Driver in the role, the story just doesn't work in the same way.
The redemption of Darth Vader is an incredibly powerful and iconic moment in Star Wars, and it's one that works on many severals. On first watch, it does have an element of surprise - while Luke believes there's still good in his father, the acts he has committed in the name of the Empire suggest that it may not be possible, and so while redemption is discussed throughout, it isn't necessarily a guaranteed thing, which helps it pack a lasting punch.
On top of that, it cements what is one of the all-time greater character arcs, which stretches through the original trilogy and is made even better by the Star Wars prequels, even with Hayden Christensen's widely criticized performance as Anakin Skywalker. Knowing the rise, fall, and redemption of Anakin/Darth Vader makes it a story that is one of sheer tragedy, encompassing the failings of the Jedi Order, the remarkable manipulation skills of Emperor Palpatine, the power and lure of the dark side, the heartbreak that comes with losing a person you love dearly, and the ability to somehow, with all of that, still find your way back to the light side. Redemption stories have happened before and since, but taken across six movies it's truly epic in scale and speaks to so many of Star Wars' core themes: family, love, power, and sacrifice.
It's also, though, just a thrilling moment in and of itself. Watching as Palpatine nearly destroys Luke gives the Star Wars saga one of its most intense moments, and its most astonishing display of power thus far upon release. For Darth Vader to finally break free, kill the true villain of the trilogy, and then share a poignant scene with the son whose life he has just saved, before becoming one with the Force and re-emerging as Anakin's Force Ghost and a beacon of light, having brought balance to the Force, is pure Star Wars.
Darth Vader's redemption provided the blueprint for Kylo Ren's own arc: introduced in the first movie as the villain, given greater complexity in the second (complete with his own "join me" moment), and finally finds redemption in the third film by battling against the Emperor, ultimately dying so that the hero may prevail. So far, so much like Vader, but for a variety of reasons there's not the same power in Kylo Ren's redemption as there was in the original story. Part of that comes with the issue of Palpatine himself, whose return marked one of the biggest mistakes of The Rise of Skywalker.
Having Darth Vader's redemption come against Palpatine was great when Return of the Jedi released, since it was moving against the villain who controlled him, and given whole new layers by the prequels. In contrast, although it's revealed that Palpatine has been manipulating Kylo Ren all along, this is something only revealed in The Rise of Skywalker, changing Kylo's relationship with Snoke and his worship of Vader's mask. Kylo only meets Palpatine for the first time in this film, sharing brief scenes with the Emperor, after which he's already somewhat decided that he won't work with him, and then fully taking him down at the end as Ben Solo. There's no weight behind that dynamic, and so it's harder to invest in that moment of redemption, not least given how much more powerful his killing of Snoke in The Last Jedi was (something The Rise of Skywalker only serves to undercut by turning the former Supreme Leader into a clone).
The problem isn't just Palpatine though. The Rise of Skywalker also fails Kylo Ren by forgetting about him for a chunk of the movie: between being stabbed and healed by Rey and then seeing Han Solo again, and then making his way to Exegol, there's nothing shown of him on-screen. The attention is diverted elsewhere, which means that there's a big gap from Kylo Ren being left behind and Ben Solo returning, and audiences only get to see part of the picture. It would've been much stronger to spend even more time with him after he throws his lightsaber away, allowing viewers to further see inside his head rather than cutting away from such pivotal moments.
Then there's the simple matter that The Rise of Skywalker is a narrative mess, where various ideas are thrown at the screen in the hope that some of it will stick and perhaps even make sense. A bunch of stuff just happens, there's no emotional weight to any of it, and much of it is left so confusing that it took tie-in novels to explain crucial plot elements. With Kylo Ren specifically, this happens in a few key areas: there's the fact that the character is subject to several death fake-outs, meaning his final redemptive act comes after audiences have watched him die three times already. There's the fact that Han Solo is a memory, which is left deliberately vague. And there's Leia's part in the return of Ben Solo, which, while well-intentioned, is incredibly muddled and does a disservice to both characters.
In fairness to The Rise of Skywalker, it was always going to be a difficult task in redeeming Kylo Ren, and certainly doing so in a way that could compete with Darth Vader's own redemption. Part of that is because the story had been done so well previously with Anakin Skywalker, meaning that it needed to do something different, if not better. Not only that, but it was already starting from a disadvantage: Darth Vader did plenty of terrible deeds in the original Star Wars trilogy, including killing Obi-Wan Kenobi, but none so horrific as murdering such a beloved character as Han Solo (Obi-Wan may have become that in time, but he wasn't back then).
For many, that was an act there was no coming back from, and that gave Kylo Ren's redemption an uphill battle. It would have needed something extra special to make it work - although some of the groundwork had been laid, especially with the flashback to Ben and Luke in The Last Jedi - but J.J. Abrams' movie wasn't capable of delivering.
This then begs the question of whether or not Kylo Ren's redemption could have been improved, had The Rise of Skywalker chosen to do things differently. And there are definitely things that would have helped this arc work better within the movie. One idea that would've bettered things is if Anakin's Force Ghost had appeared to Kylo Ren, rather than Han Solo. This would've given a much greater link between Darth Vader's redemption and Kylo's, with Vader showing the way forward for his grandson. It would've given an extra meaning to The Rise of Skywalker, but also helped his redemption tie in more closely to the Force itself, rather than a memory. It would've truly shattered Kylo Ren's perceptions of Vader and the dark side, which would've then better sold his return to the light.
Several other narrative decisions would need to be tweaked too, such as the death fake-outs, and spending more time with Kylo/Ben prior to his death would've been welcome (even if, admittedly, it wasn't so necessary for Vader in Return of the Jedi, but that film didn't have the same structural issues this one does). Another compelling option might've been to have Ben Solo live; this would've allowed his redemption to be very different from Darth Vader, and showed how the saga had moved on from the idea of sacrifice (better tying into the idea of "saving what you love" from The Last Jedi). Unlike Darth Vader, whose body was kept going by his suit, Ben Solo was a younger, healthier person who still had plenty to offer, and there's a sense of wasted potential in killing him off just to confirm his redemption, rather than allowing viewers to spend even more time with the redeemed form of the character.
Alternatively, The Rise of Skywalker might've been better off not going down the redemption route. Rather than bringing back Emperor Palpatine, it could've committed to the setup of Kylo Ren as the new big bad in the galaxy, leaning into him as the major threat to be defeated - because as is, Kylo's menace significantly decreases with each passing film, which can't be said for Darth Vader. They could've had Kylo killed off, or gone further into the idea of him being completely torn apart by the dark and light side, so much so that it costs him his life. That internal conflict was what made Kylo Ren such a fascinating character, but it isn't fully observed in The Rise of Skywalker, which instead feels like it has to tick the redemption box, but doesn't truly understand how or why.