Pretty much correct. Kylo's redemption had purpose in closing the loop between he and his parents. But as far as having any practical value in defeating Palpatine? No; that was all Rey, IMO.
Ben's presence did nothing more than give Palps a chance to suck the life out of the Dyad and become stronger. Had he not been there, Rey would've faced off against a more feeble version of Palpatine (in a weakened clone body). You say she would've killed Palps and fought for control of her soul in order to save the Resistance. If so, maybe she would've succeeded. She's Rey, after all; capable of absolutely anything.
No double standard. Here's why: Anakin's redemption *WAS* the focus of the narrative!! How do you not understand the difference, Khev? What has come to be known as the *Skywalker* Saga is defined by Vader's turn to the dark, and then his return to the light. To save his family!
I'm blown away that you can't tell the difference between the narrative value of Vader/Anakin turning in ROTJ and Kylo/Ben turning in TROS. Even if we just break it down to practical value, Vader killing the Emperor (and dying in the process) is an actual act of heroism that not only kills the bad guy, but also provides resolution to Luke's journey. That was the point of the OT: Luke's journey ended with becoming a Jedi and having his father redeemed. That's why we got the cheesy ghost scene at the end of ROTJ.
The ST, on the other hand, became all about Rey's journey, and was magnified by the fact that she faced off against her grandfather. *That* is what the ST narrative turned into: not about the Skywalkers, but about two Palpatines. About a Jedi against a Sith. And Ben's redemption did nothing to influence the ultimate resolution. He gave Rey new life, but only after she finished the job of resolving the conflict. So, yes his redemption has value in the sense of sacrifice on behalf of someone else, but not in terms of conflict resolution or narrative summary. Not at all similar to the value of Anakin's. But it should've been, since this 9-part story is supposed to be about the Skywalkers.
If that's how you see it, fine. But how does that have any effect at all on how Ben's redemption influenced the narrative? That's the topic that started this back and forth.
If you want to focus instead on minutia, I can keep playing that game too: If a bad guy Force user can also sense a close connection in pain and dying, why didn't Anakin feel Padme dying? Why did he need Palpatine to break the news? Why didn't he sense that his twins survived? Did Kylo also feel Luke dying? Did that have an effect on him? When the Force is involved, there are hardly ever certainties, just interpretations.
What matters most is the central issue: did Ben's redemption serve to tie the ST into the broader saga narrative about the Skywalker family? Was it worth undoing Anakin's role in Palpatine's death to make Rey's battle with her grandfather the climactic takeaway, rather than have Kylo/Ben be the central change-maker (since he was the true Skywalker) with Luke's influence? Did the resolution to Kylo's arc have the same prominence as Rey's arc? No, I don't even think it's close. And that's what bothers me. I wish this ST ended with a stronger connection to Luke, Leia, Anakin, and Ben.
If this chink in the armor was so obvious, why didn't you see it after TLJ? You were very locked into the idea that Kylo was irreedemable after TLJ. If the splitting of the soul, and the monster facade, was the clear takeaway leading up to TROS, why were you arguing it from the other side?
Believe it or not, you even refuted the idea that Kylo's hesitation to pull the trigger on the Raddus bridge meant that his conflict was building to redemption. I can find those posts for you if you want. But now you're saying that the opposite was obvious all along?
