Since his introduction in The Force Awakens, but especially since his shockingly abrupt demise in The Last Jedi, the character of Snoke has been a point of controversy within the Star Wars fanbase (much like, well, everything else, but I digress). From the time he was introduced in the run up to TFA's release, Snoke was shrouded in mystery, his origin a well-kept secret. He is introduced as a literally larger than life figure, a giant Wizard of Oz like projection that towers over his apprentice Kylo Ren, deliberately invoking a comparison to Palpatine and his own wayward Skywalker, Darth Vader. Surely this mighty being, this man so great and important as to have seduced the heir of the Skywalker legacy to the dark side while leading the revanchist First Order, must have some impressive origin story or secret behind his immense power, and surely it was key to the entire narrative of this new trilogy.
Well, about that...
With a mere flick of his fingers Kylo Ren bisected Snoke and the fanbase. All of the mystery and supposedly untapped potential of this powerful character vanished with a stroke of the lightsaber. In a movie that has proven extremely polarizing, the quick execution of the enigmatic Supreme Leader has drawn a substantial amount of criticism.
Is this warranted, though? Was Snoke a character we needed to know more about? Is the story improved by either keeping him around or at least explaining his rise to power before killing him off?
No. I could simply point out how when Emperor Palpatine first made his appearance in Empire Strikes Back we knew nothing about him other than that he was the Emperor, or that by the time he was killed off (perhaps not forever, apparently) in Return of the Jedi we didn't even know his name and that worked out alright. Those arguments have been made by many people, and they are accurate, and speak to the problem that so many critics of the sequel trilogy have in that they criticize a still-in-progress narrative vs two trilogies that are complete and have had every possible detail filled in by expanded universe materials. Suffice it to say that the audience doesn't need any more of Snoke's story than they got for the plot of these films to work.
I am willing to bypass those arguments, however, and meet the critics where they are: knowing what we know after the fact regarding Emperor Palpatine, his power as a Sith, and the machinations that led him to rule over the galaxy, does the character of Snoke work without getting a similar explanation of how he ended up on the throne of the First Order?
I say yes. Snoke being little more than a bully, a mere imitation of Palpatine that badly overplayed his hand, overestimated his talent for corrupting and manipulating Ben Solo, and getting summarily dispatched for it is the best possible outcome for the character because of what it says about the First Order and what the Sequel Trilogy is saying about that organization and the nature of fascism.
