Skip to main content

Star Wars The Force Awaken: The Fallen Pupil

The most challenging design for the movie was, undoubtedly, the design of the villain: Kylo Ren. Villains, in general, are hard in this type of movies, because they need to be threatening and iconic but not too over the top. It's really a fine and delicate balance. But in this case, it was even harder, because it had to live up to Darth Vader, arguably, the most iconic baddie ever.


All in all, I think they did a really good job in the design of the character. The biggest risk they had was making him look too much like Darth Vader and turning him into a cheap knock off. But, luckily, that wasn't the case.

KYLO REN: THE FALLEN PUPIL

Talking about his design without including spoilers is pretty difficult. Basically because the reasons behind the design are completely intertwined with his character and who he is. So..... SPOILERS AHEAD.

SPOILERS AHEAD
CONTINUE READING AT YOUR OWN RISK
------------------------



Kylo Ren is a Dark Side user working for the First Order. He used to be a pupil of Luke Skywalker, until he turned to the Dark Side and destroyed the Rebuilt Jedi Temple. He also happens to be Ben Solo, Han and Leia's son and Luke's nephew. And, of course, Darth Vader's grandchild.

He is very young, More a teenager than a full grown man.

Why is that so important? Because he is a wanna be. A fanboy. He adores his grandfather, even praying to him as if he were a God. That idea is clearly reflected in his costume.


The costume consists of dark, heavy, black robes held together by a metallic belt a ragged hood and a robotic mask. He is clearly trying to emulate the look of Vader. There's no discussion there.


The character is running away from his identity, claiming a new one centered around the dark side. That's why every single human aspect is completely covered: note how he doesn't even have his hands uncovered.

The purpose of the design created by Kylo Ren is as much to appear intimidating and inhuman as is to boost his confidence.

What sets him apart from Vader (both in character and in design) is his humanity. Darth Vader had been robotic for so long that he was barely human. Kylo only tries to appear his robotic (deep down he is fully human and pretty conflicted with his own humanity). This is shown through the materials used; textile elements are more prominent in Kylo's design that they ever were in Vader's suit. And the metallic elements are scarce, and only found in the elements he wears to create this new identity: the mask.


Vader was more machine than man. Kylo Ren is a child. And though not at first glance, the design manages to transmit that, especially when he has the mask off. It's on those occasions where the roughness of the costume manages to create a wonderful contrast with his fresh young face.

Another important element for the design is the structure of the costume itself, which doesn't resemble that of Vader's suit. Instead, it takes it's main form from the traditional Jedi robes. This simple element helps to create a visual link with his background and it underlines his connection to the New Jedi Order.


He never knew Darth Vader, but he knew Luke and the Jedi. He, himself, was trained as one. The so-called Knights of Ren are Ben's own interpretation of the Dark Side and what it should be. And so is the costume.


All those elements build up to a really well thought design that has a lot of chances of becoming iconic in and on itself. A lot of character related elements are worked into the suit, subtle but still there, which makes the costume unique.

Yes, it's reminiscent of Vader, but it's very distinct at the same time.


This movie was, all in all, a welcome return to the feel of the original trilogy and I cannot wait to see where they take these new characters (both story-wise and design-wise).

And so, with Kylo's design we bring to an end this brief series of articles about Episode VII. I hope that you've enjoyed it, and I promise that towards mid-January I will go back to writing long, fleshed-out articles.

Happy New Year!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Burning Question: What's wrong with Belle's gown?

Since the first promotional pictures of Disney's new Live-Action remake of Beauty and the Beast hit the internet, there has been a lot of discussion around Belle's iconic ball gown. And, even months after its release in cinemas, there still continues to be a lot of buzz around it. Why? Mainly, because a lot of people feel that it is just doesn't look that good.
The thing is, Belle's animated yellow ball gown is, at this point, an iconic staple of animated cinema. Everybody knows it and everybody loves it. And, as a result, everybody can see the new one and say "this is not the costume I know". Therefore, everyone can compare it down to the smallest detail and see that it just doesn't quite look right.
Today, our goal will be to try and dissect the design in order to answer the burning question everyone has been asking themselves: what's so wrong with the "new" dress? Or, to put it bluntly, why is it so incredibly underwhelming?

This might n…

Marie Antoinette: Working with an historical basis

A couple of months ago, we talked extensively about the narrative aspect of the designs for the 2006's movie; Marie Antoinette (see here). But that's only one half of the story. This movie is, after all, a period piece, so let's have a look at how they translated that period into the costumes.

MARIE ANTOINETTE: WORKING WITH AN HISTORICAL BASIS Period accurate pieces are actually the hardest to get by; that is because clothing in past centuries was way more complex and expensive that our 21st century standards. Because of this, most costume designers end up being constricted by their allotted budgets and have to make compromises with the accuracy. This was not the case with this movie.
Sofia Coppola's Marie Anotinette had a rather large budget, which allowed renowned designer Milena Canonero the freedom to create period-accurate pieces (the inaccuracies were only added for narrative purposes not budget constrictions). Because of this, Canonero decided to work of actual …

Historic Accuracy in Costume Design: The 16th century

I've never been a purist with historical accuracy as long as the changes made have a real reasoning behind (generally a narrative or symbolic one). I will always think that La reine Margot (1994) costume design is one of the most gorgeous and smart designs ever, even if said designs main premise is to purposely bend the period in regards to costume.
But there are certain things that bother me in regards to historical accuracy in costume which I realized when I found myself constantly irritated while watching The other Boleyn Girl (2008). This led me to post a question: when is it right to bend history? why is it interesting sometimes? whilst other times it's simply horrendous?
To me, when these changes are made for the narrative's sake, I'm usually on board (like the 2012's "Anna Karenina" designs, which mixed 1870's fashion with 1950's fashion in order to enhance the sense of theatricality and falsehood in Imperial Russia). But when these change…

Disney's Cinderella(s) and the evolution of the "princess" aesthetics

Every girl, at some point in life, has wanted to be a princess. It has become undeniable that the concept of the "princess" is, for better or worst, inseparable from girlhood. We live in a "princesses" obsessed era, and we have for a long time now. And a lot has been said about it, with loud people yelling over the internet about the positive and negative aspects of it. So it was about time for us to join the yelling contest, I guess.
If we're going to talk about princesses, the logical place to go is to the Global Mogul Conglomerate that has led the trend and, in many ways, defined it: Disney. They have, undeniably, redefined the fairytale and have turned the term "princess" into a best selling Licensed Entertainment Character Merchandise.

The thing is, even though princesses have been part of the fairy tale canon for a very long time, they didn't become the central figure until Walt Disney placed them there.
In the tales that the Grimm Brothers…

Crimson Peak: Dressing Edith Cushing. The Butterfly

"Beautiful things are fragile" - Lucille Sharpe -

Opposite Lucille, stands our main character in the movie: Edith Cushing, a young and naive American with ambitions to become a writer. She meets and falls in love with a handsome and charming, but impoverished, English baronet: Sir Thomas Sharpe. They eventually marry and return to England, to the Sharpe's dilapidated mansion: Allerdale Hall. There they live with Thomas's sister: Lucille. The deadly apparitions that haunt the house will force Edith to slowly uncover the buried secrets of Crimson Peak. And so, Edith is to become a fragile butterfly caught in a moth's trap.
PART II: THE BUTTERFLY



Edith has considerably more frocks and gowns than Lucille does. It's only logical. Edith is our protagonist and, as such, has a bigger emotional arc throughout the movie, and she undergoes bigger changes. These are, in part, expressed through the costumes she wears and how these change throughout the movie.
The first and…