ST The Knights of Ren talk only

That’s what’s commonly known as *headcanon*. I like the headacanon that states they were actually undercover Ewoks, on stilts, and because they didn’t know Ben had turned back to the light, they mistakingly attacked him… and our furry heroes were slaughtered. Rey kept their pelts and used them as a draft excluder.

 

But it's not a headcanon, as we see the movie suggest that they're working with Palpatine by having them on Exegol.

The rest may be headcanon, but the top i don't think is. I think the top is more an interpretation of information the movie presented.

 

I think it’s opaque at best… and as I said before, them working for Palpatine, and Kylo Ren not knowing, doesn’t make sense on several kind of levels…. and when one has to start creating scenarios as to how the Knights of Ren secretly worked for Palpatine all along, whilst keeping Kylo in the dark, then that’s headcanon.

 

Maybe that they always did is, but I don't think coming to the conclusion that they work for Palpatine is a headcanon.

I don't agree in any way shape or form that them working for Palpatine and Kylo not knowing doesn't make sense.

 

That an explanation has to be invented in order for it to be a thing *is* headcanon. That’s the very definition of headcanon I.e. where the absence of internal logic requires the viewer to fabricate their own. You’ve also not put one single argument forward as to the entire point of *why* the other knights of Ren purposely kept Kylo Ren (their leader) in the dark re. who they were really working for, how Kylo wouldn’t know (is he that stupid?), and what the entire point of that subterfuge would be. And none of that is substantiated in any of the films without the requirement of excessive headcanon. Taking an ill thought out plot element (which was lazily included in the final film out of desperation) I.e. Palpatine secretly running the show, and then attempting to argue that it doesn’t create internal logic issues within the previous films (let alone TROS itself) is counter productive to any intellectual discussion.

 

I don't think it's an explanation that's invented. I think the movie is suggesting that they're working for Palpatine.

I don't think they need a why they'd keep him in the dark if they're working for Palpatine. I think that's self explanatory. I don't see a real reason why Kylo wouldn't be in the dark.

Is Kylo that stupid? yes.

I don't think I said that it doesn't create internal logic issues.

 

So kindly quote me the dialogue where it explains it all???

That you state 'you think' and 'suggest', in the same sentence, kind of demonstrates that the films don't explain it... even implicitly... otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. Not only is it never suggested in TFA and TLJ, it's not even stated in TROS. All we get is them on Exegol attacking Ben. That they are on Exegol 'suggests' that they may now be working for Palaptine (we can assume that), but that doesn't mean it makes sense... In these scenarios common sense should be applied i.e. given the general lack of continuity and cohesion throughout the ST, it's much more likely that Abrams and Johnson didn't consider the intra-dynamics and continuity of the KOR, and what it would mean by introducing Palpatine back into the final film (especially as Palaptine was a Sith and not a KOR)... and one can be perfectly fine with that, but that doesn't mean it isn't a writing issue/gap in internal logic.

It's patently not self explanatory. I'll ask again, why do the other Knights of Ren report directly into Palaptine, but keep Kylo Ren in the dark? Where in the films does it explain that and what is the purpose of not telling Kylo Ren?

You've just stated it's 'self explanatory', which suggests that it doesn't create issues with the internal logic.

 

I don't think I said it was explained, but that I think it's there, that they're working for Palpatine. I don't think it's a headcanon to say that the movie has that happen.

I don't think I said it was explained well or that it wasn't a retcon or that it was well written. Just that I think it's there. We can talk forever about perceptions and opinions, but at the end of the day, it doesn't mean it's not there.

I don't think this is an issue. The movie shows that Palpatine is keeping Kylo in the dark. If the KOR are working for Palpatine and Palpatine wants to keep Kylo in the dark, then why wouldn't they keep him in the dark?

What is the purpose? I think the movie also suggests Kylo is willing to betray Palpatine. And Palpatine, even in this movie, has a mole within the FO doing his bidding. As far as I think the movie suggests, Palpatine just uses Kylo. But also, I don't think I argued there was a real purpose to it, before this.

We can debate how whether or not it's a well written movie. I don't think it is. But I think these things are still there. If you don't see them, that's your opinion, but it doesn't mean it's not in the movie.

I don't think I agree with that. I think why they wouldn't makes sense, if they are working for Palpatine. Not that it explains any of how and why they came to this place and such.

 

What is it exactly that you think is 'there'? What's headcanon is the explanation one has to create to fill the gap. If one just accepts something happens without rhyme or reason, that's just a wilful acceptance of plot and gaps in logic.... and that can be applied to every gap in logic or plot hole.

You understand that works the other way right? Just accepting everything the film throws at you doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist. Ive asked you to explain to me several times where in the movie it states that the Knights of Ren report directly into Palpatine and that they have purposely done this, thoroughout the ST, without Kylo Ren's knowledge. But you seem unwilling to do that.

You haven't provided an explanation. Therefore we can take it as red that the film doesn't provide that explanation. As I say, your willing defence of it can be applied to every continuity/logic/plot gap in cinematic history.

So you're arguing that the film purposely shows that Kylo Ren is left in the dark by the other Knights of Ren, but that there's no purpose behind the action??? That doesn't really make sense in terms of how plot and dialogue work, and would usually be categorised as an inconstancy, gap in internal logic/plot hole.

You keep saying 'these things are there', and I'm giving you the opportunity to present what you believe those 'thing's' are, and where they occur,... but you seem to be purposely not answering. Why don't you just say you don't know?

 

The Rise Of Kylo Ren is definitely a good read. Not only do we get some background to the KOR we also see a slightly different Snoke (with some hair) and the early history between the two. As for KOR I liked them. I like the idea behind them and would like the full gang in both TVC and BS lines.

 

Order 66 says hi.

Yes Palpatine is always secretly running the show.

 

Palpatine/Sidious was the Sith Lord who plotted revenge against the Jedi in the PT. That was the story written by Lucas, and had the internal logic to carry the thematic downfall of the Republic/Jedi. Are you saying that, as far as age ST is concerned, Abrams and Johnson had always planned that Palpatine would be the main villain of the sequels?

 

Nope i think its fairly clear they didn't plan that. But id say its within Palpatine's character to play all sides.

 

I don’t really care logically why the Knights were seemingly waiting for Ben on Exegol.
It’s more symbolic, his receiving the Skywalker saber when he no longer whiningly demanded it, and executing his previous ties to his darker persona quickly and stylishly humanely. I dunno it worked for me.

 

The KOR working for Palpatine. I didn't create that. I think the movie suggests that.

I don't think it's a plot hole, in going against the flow of logic established by the movie's plot. I think that doesn't not make sense. I think it's not really anything in either direction in making sense or not making sense, I think it's empty, as the movies never give them characters or motives or goals or backstories or any established developed personal loyalty to anything, so, even if it's poorly written, they can be almost whatever the movie wants them to be.

I don't think I stated, factually, that my stance was factually right. I think you've done that, when you don't have a monopoly on the intentions of the movie. I don't think I stated that they did report directly to Palpatine throughout the whole ST. By the same measure, the movies never establish any kind of loyalty between Kylo and the knights. So to assume that it's somehow out of sorts for that to happen would be to assume how the KOR work. And the movies never establish that.

I don't think you've given a real explanation for your reasoning. You seem to just take issue with why he'd be in the dark, but I don't see a reason why he wouldn't be. I think you're adding a headcanon about the knights, so you apply some form of inconsistency with their actions, but they're never developed and neither are their loyalties.

I gave a purpose. But I said I didn't say there was one before. I don't think I ever argued the movie was well written. But that doesn't mean I think the it doesn't make sense for him to be left in the dark, within the movie.

I've pointed out where those things are, in the knights being on exegol and Palpatine's man in the FO. There's also Kylo saying that they can kill Palpatine together and take the throne, which shows that there's a reason why Palpatine would betray him (as if he'd needed a reason, he's Palpatine). There's also Palpatine telling Rey that he never wanted her dead, he wanted her here.

 

The movie doesn't suggest it. It's that you infer it. Two different things.

By being contrary, the automatic implication is that you believe you're right... unless you're simply playing the devils advocate, or arguing something you don't necessarily believe just for the sake of being contrary.

So you don't believe that the KOR reported into Palpatine in TFA and TLJ? If not, then what is it you think they were keeping secret from Kylo Ren? Remember this is your hypothesis, not mine...

I think you miss the point. The other Knights of Ren secretly working *against* Kylo Ren (your theory not mine) would be a fairly significant plot point. It's incumbent on the film/filmmaker to make that pertinent/relevant within the story/plot. It doesn't. Therefore your theory is 100% speculation, and that' what you're using as justification to create the logic as to why the KOR would be on Exegol and automatically attack Kylo Ren.

I've explained fully what the issue is, several times, and you've not really offered anything but you're own speculation as a rebuttal...

So now your defence of those scenes is that the Knights of Ren are so underdeveloped that their actions are irrelevant within the plot/story? That's probably the most risible, and acutely ironic, defence of it yet.

None of that really makes sense... sorry... Your 'purpose' are your own extrapolations and speculation. You're basically arguing that yes it's badly written, but continuity and internal logic is still sound... but bad continuity and poor internal logic are often the first consequences of bad writing... as evidenced here.

 

Or you didn't infer it, so you assume the movie isn't suggesting it.

I don't really necessarily agree with that.

I didn't say that they weren't. I think I was talking about, here, in this discussion, that them working for him in TROS is what Kylo would be in the dark about. I don't know what the intentions of the idea that I think is being suggested in them working for Palpatine is supposed to explain, wholesale. I think it's possibility it may have been the intention, but that's never shown in the movie, and I think would more align with headcanon for me to try and claim.

But I didn't state here, that the movie was well written.

I don't think it's %100 speculation because I think it's suggested in the movie itself that the KOR are working for Palpatine by them being on exegol and fighting Kylo.

I think you haven't offered anything but your perception on my rebuttal. Everything you've said doesn't confirm that your point is correct.

I think it's not a new defense. I think I've said more than once that I think the movie (or any of the ST) isn't well written.

The KOR aren't developed, by this movie or any of these movies, so far, to be anything so there isn't really bad continuity or poor internal logic, for them specifically, as a whole. In this context the poor internal logic is them having nothing going on as characters or a real much of a point, to me.

 

The Rise Of Kylo Ren from Marvel does shed some light albeit not much on the KOR. When Ben meets Snoke and they are having a chat Snoke recommends that Ben seeks out the KOR so its obvious they are working for Snoke and by extension Palpatine. Ben also proves himself to the KOR becoming their leader. Its a really enjoyable story. So the chain of command as of TROS was Palpatine-Kylo Ren-KOR even if Kylo goes to challenge Palpatine at the start of TROS.
It wouldve been cool if we saw them throughout the ST rather then just in TROS.

 

I believe I've already highlighted to you the difference between imply and infer. And what is implied is germane to the point in question. Anything can be inferred right?

You're either being deeply ironic or you've lost some self awareness. "Is this the right room for an argument?"

So what you're actually admitting to is that you don't really know what the intent is, because the film doesn't give you enough information to know the intent... Why not just admit that in the first place, rather than automatically deflecting the criticism of a film (one you're not personally responsible for)? It would make these conversations a lot more unnecessarily protracted.

But you've already confessed that you're assuming that they are working directly for Palaptine, which may be an educated one, but it's still an assumption nonetheless. Besides, this really isn't about the assumption (educated or otherwise) that the KOR are working for Palaptine at the end of TROS, it's about what it means re. the wider context of the films, which is what creates the inconsistency. If there'd been a scene where Palpatine was addressing the KOR saying "I was Snoke all along and Kylo Ren has betrayed us"... then maybe we'd not be having this conversation now. But even then, if Palpatine had that conversation, it creates other issues that we won't go into here. But you're actually making that scenario even more unbelievable by stating (based on nothing) that the KOR did actually all along report secretly into Palaptine, and that Kylo Ren was left out of the loop. That is headcannon.

And I think you haven't offered anything but your perception on my rebuttal... see how you've denigrated the debate?

The internal logic issues are a consequence of characters whom have little function or utility in the story, and whom then get moved around or edited out due to the rather substantial re-writes.

 

The answer to the backstory of a new character/characters?

Not the movies.

The comics/novelization's other EU stuff. The trio of DK Ultimate Guides to the ST as well.

 

@Darthvader1975 But OG Ren says that the Knights owe their allegiance to no one, not even Supreme Leader Snoke, only to The Ren.

 

Yes indeed but the comics suggest that kylo ren proved himself and became the leader

 

I like the idea that the Knights of Ren are not actually a big deal, just something Snoke uses to let Kylo feel accomplished (“Master of the Knights of Ren”) for something Snoke to say “good job” to, earning Ben’s loyalty.

After all we know he humors Kylo at the start, allowing him to wear the helmet, pretending to be Vader, before ultimately revealing his true thoughts on it later. I bet if Snoke was around he might have belittled the Knights at some point as well.

With regards to their loyalty, I bet they could have lost faith in Kylo, tantrums and all, and jumped ship. Or maybe Palpatine ended up replacing the guys under the helmets with loyal clones or something (the same type as the Red guards). It seems perfectly Kylo for him to act like a hotshot in TROS walking around with his new helmet showing that he still has a loyal posse (at a time where he likely feels the FO’s loyalty waning, what with news of Palpatines survival), not realising that that posse is actually Palpatine’s.

 

i just realized something that didnt occur to me - why were the knights of ren on exegol at the end? their leader was kylo. i wonder if palpatine communicated to them directly (them being force sensitive of course so force skype calls are valid communication).