#1 Posted by thatlad (594 posts) - - Show Bio

I know the comic book death thread has been done plenty of times already but I was thinking recently, it's now a given that every big event seems to have a 'death' and fans have come to accept that most characters will be resurrected at some point.  
As a result I think Nightcrawler's death in second coming lost a lot of it's impact, g-man's attitude in the reviews and off my mind articles was similar to mine. He'll be back so I'm not too bothered.
 
Maybe there should be embargo's following a death. E.g say a writer wants to kill a character they agree it with the editors on the understanding that character cannot be resurrected for say 5 years. Do you think this would work in helping comic book deaths be more meaningful? 
Also if there was a policy like that in effect should it be announced or kept secret? Say if the fans knew a character was allowed back after 5 years would that mean there'd be no surprise 5 years later??? 
 
Thoughts??????

#2 Posted by Cezar_TheScribe (2614 posts) - - Show Bio

A moratorium on death wouldn't make a "death" more meaningful. 
 
Look at how long Bucky was "dead." 
 
He should have stayed dead, Jason Todd should have as well. 
People called a hotline and paid to have him killed.  
 
They deserve their money back.
#3 Posted by ComicMan24 (147091 posts) - - Show Bio

Putting a limit on when he will be resurrected won't make it better, I think it will make it worse. At least now you don't know when someone will be resurrected and there is that surprise.
#4 Edited by xybernauts (858 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree, they need to keep their dead characters dead. It's the only way to make the death substantial. I've always felt that if comic book companies really want to bring back dead characters they should show them in the afterlife. Why does their story have to end when they die. Isn't death just the beginning. They have Greek and viking gods, they have demons, alien world, parallel worlds, etc. They show every facet of fiction, yet they avoid the afterlife, why? For example, instead of bringing Jason Todd back to life, how awesome would it have been I they showed what happened after he died, his journey through the afterlife, and his new mission fighting in purgatory or heaven or hell or where ever. Imagine all the dead characters you could recycle without cheapening their death.  

#5 Posted by JediXMan (30602 posts) - - Show Bio
@ComicMan24 said:
" Putting a limit on when he will be resurrected won't make it better, I think it will make it worse. At least now you don't know when someone will be resurrected and there is that surprise. "
I agree completely.
 
Comic characters will never stay dead.
Moderator
#6 Posted by Do I have to give a name? (971 posts) - - Show Bio
@xybernauts: I really like that idea. But, at the same time the logistics of it could get a little over the top when it comes to interacting with the normal world. For example, one person get's resurrected, why doesn't everyone just do what they did? And then there's the interactions, do all the characters that die go to the same place? Does the Punisher for example find himself surrounded by every single person he's killed? Or do they not interact at all? in which case, where's the story? Still, I think it's an awesome concept and would definitely buy it. Just I think it would need to be done as a separate universe, rather than part of main continuity (That also doesn't place any limits on which characters could be involved.)
#7 Posted by X-93 (234 posts) - - Show Bio

I know this will never happen, but I think 1 of 2 things should happen.  #1 they die and to commemorate that death they should have a giant issue (or issues) of that character kind of like a greatest hits so to speak.  When they have that final issue the that is it.  No more of that character should ever be written unless another character mentions them is remembrance.  #2 if there is not any commemorative issues then that character can come back but has to sit the bench (so to speak) for a certain amount of time.  Years is what I'm thinking not 1 or 2 either probably more like 5 to 10.

#8 Posted by The_Martian (36984 posts) - - Show Bio

If writers weren't allowed to bring back characters after they have died then no one would ever be killed off.

#9 Posted by mistrx75 (207 posts) - - Show Bio

Then they would have to *gasp* create new characters!  Which they do anyway.  I get why they bring some characters back, but what I don't understand is why it seems every single supporting character that gets knocked off seems to have the interest to be resurrected.  For example, was it really necessary to bring back both formerly deceased Robins, Jason and Stephanie?  It seems like the comic world could get along fine without one of them. 

#10 Posted by IcePrince_X (4865 posts) - - Show Bio

So far... I am impressed how Top Cow handle their deaths. 
 
Dead means dead. 
so when they kill off someone, they make sure they do not comeback even how well the character had played a role in their comicbook. 
 
I still need to see though if this policy will remain after 50 years? Just look what happened to Bucky and Toro they just waited for decades to comeback. Oh, well...

#11 Posted by Crom-Cruach (8854 posts) - - Show Bio
@IcePrince_X said:
" So far... I am impressed how Top Cow handle their deaths.  Dead means dead. so when they kill off someone, they make sure they do not comeback even how well the character had played a role in their comicbook.  "
Totally agree with this, part of the reason I love Top Cow. The only time you see dead characters is in flashbacks or if some being visits a place like Hell or some outer plane where said dead character's soul dwells.
#12 Posted by thatlad (594 posts) - - Show Bio

Stephanie definitely should have stayed dead. Or at least be kille again..she's annoying

#13 Posted by Peter Petruski (12 posts) - - Show Bio

I believe the time has come for the fans to be able to vote on which hero or heroine should be killed off.  Both Marvel and DC should provide a list of 5-10 candidates and let the fans choose who should die.
#14 Edited by IcePrince_X (4865 posts) - - Show Bio
@Peter Petruski said:

" I believe the time has come for the fans to be able to vote on which hero or heroine should be killed off.  Both Marvel and DC should provide a list of 5-10 candidates and let the fans choose who should die. "

I really don't  know how it will affect people now but this is just too mean...
but it will be a good case study, nevertheless...
Remember the effect of the Killing Joke? Where people voted who will die in the end and when Robin got the vote-off people were  shocked with the result. In fact, people felt guilty with Robin's death they felt the blood in their hands.
 
I find this as a good case study because if this vote system works... it means people nowadays had really become apathetic when it comes to death and proves that violence media or the world we live in made us numb to this kind of thing. I know some of you will say, that character is just fiction so it will mean nothing but remember that that character may have a few fans and just imagine how they will take it when their character get slaughtered because the majority don't  like them.
 
 For me, leave it to the writers and the editors who gets killed. In that way, they are the one's we can burn at the stake for killing that character :-P he he he
#15 Posted by Peter Petruski (12 posts) - - Show Bio
@IcePrince_X:
You make a good point.  Being a part in someone's death, even that of a fictional character, could create a lot of guilt for some of us, myself included I am sure.
#16 Posted by xybernauts (858 posts) - - Show Bio
@IcePrince_X said:
" @Peter Petruski said:

" I believe the time has come for the fans to be able to vote on which hero or heroine should be killed off.  Both Marvel and DC should provide a list of 5-10 candidates and let the fans choose who should die. "

I really don't  know how it will affect people now but this is just too mean... but it will be a good case study, nevertheless... Remember the effect of the Killing Joke? Where people voted who will die in the end and when Robin got the vote-off people were  shocked with the result. In fact, people felt guilty with Robin's death they felt the blood in their hands. I find this as a good case study because if this vote system works... it means people nowadays had really become apathetic when it comes to death and proves that violence media or the world we live in made us numb to this kind of thing. I know some of you will say, that character is just fiction so it will mean nothing but remember that that character may have a few fans and just imagine how they will take it when their character get slaughtered because the majority don't  like them.   For me, leave it to the writers and the editors who gets killed. In that way, they are the one's we can burn at the stake for killing that character :-P he he he "

I agree totally.  
 
 
@Do I have to give a name? said:
" @xybernauts: I really like that idea. But, at the same time the logistics of it could get a little over the top when it comes to interacting with the normal world. For example, one person get's resurrected, why doesn't everyone just do what they did? And then there's the interactions, do all the characters that die go to the same place? Does the Punisher for example find himself surrounded by every single person he's killed? Or do they not interact at all? in which case, where's the story? Still, I think it's an awesome concept and would definitely buy it. Just I think it would need to be done as a separate universe, rather than part of main continuity (That also doesn't place any limits on which characters could be involved.) "
Did you see the Series finale of the TV show Lost. It might be like that. A type of reality just like the world of the living except that it's a manifestation of a collective conscious of the deceased. Kinda like the Matrix, i'd be hard for some to tell it's not the real world, but those who can accept that they are dead are able to transcend and travel to different parts of the after life. It's have iconic places like   rivers   Styx   and   Acheron  with the ferryman , Asgard might be part of this realm along with  Olympus, the gates to heaven with St. Peter, etc. It wouldn't work if it wasn't part of the main universe though because the point is to use dead canon characters without bringing them back to life. It shouldn't interfere with the main world because it's the afterlife.  
#17 Posted by ComicMan24 (147091 posts) - - Show Bio

The point is, why kill them in the first place? For the shock? That was a long time ago. Instead of killing them and bringing them back a year or so later, keep them alive and write better stories.
#18 Posted by The Devil Tiger (1263 posts) - - Show Bio

These days, death is VERY overrated on comics, more than ever. Just look at captain america, superman, Jean Grey ? 
 
Sometimes, I feel it very offensive to people who have really lost someone, more of that, it void many story of their meaning and character of their heroisme, what's the point of fighting crime without consideration of your own life if you know that you will come back in less than five year.  
 
More of that, victim of villain doesn't really come back, or come back only if they are important in the story of the super hero... 
 
I prefer never ending escaping villain like joker, it's a little least hypocrite. 
#19 Posted by joshmightbe (24885 posts) - - Show Bio

i think there should be a mandate if you kill off a character you must wait no less than 5 years to bring them back that way companies would know before they killed off a character they wouldnt be making money off them for half a decade atleast, i think that would make writers more careful about when they do deaths for shock value

#20 Posted by Do I have to give a name? (971 posts) - - Show Bio
@xybernauts: I never really got into lost, but the premise sounds almost exactly like a couple of shows we have over here called Life on Mars and Ashes to ashes. And when I think of it like that, you're right. It totally works.