33 Comments
Edited by AllStarSuperman

This is kinda rude, but normally I don't find art and franco that funny, but they had me dying in this one. My answer is long enough for the a huge fanbase to want them back enough to be able to succeed. Or for the death of story and its aftermath to be finished.

Posted by Cap10nate

Until there is a good story to bring them back

Posted by hyperman

mmm, sometimes their death turns out to be pointless. i think if the character proves to be popular or good enough, the return shouldn't take that long. Otherwise, we always can turn to the reboots.

Edited by Skyhawk1

I side with Venditti and Higgins. Realistically, most of the characters who come back from the dead have toys and action figures. Can't really sell much if you don't bring back the character now and then.

Posted by BeaconofStrength

It's about time Marvel's Ares needs to come back. He was already promised that he would be granted his life back, but writers ignored that. It's been long enough.

Online
Posted by Squalleon

I think the standard about killing someone is this:
Can you keep him killed for ten years? Will you? If you can't then a character shouldn't die.

MARVEL is really pushing the concept of killing with their works lately, personally that has detracted from the quality of many of their stories.

Posted by Crimsonlord53

Or how many times can they "die" and then come back.

Cough Jean Grey Cough.

Posted by DCWarFan73

70 years or so in the case of Bucky Barnes. Perfect amount of time.

Posted by AmazingWebHead

At least a year. Jean Grey always does.

Edited by RobotMonster

@amazingwebhead: HA! Also, how about never? Stan the Man once said that a writer who has to resort to killing a character to sell books isn't doing his job right. The X-Men #137 - The Fate Of The Phoenix! and A Death in the Family weren't about selling comics, and that years and years passed between the returns of Jean Grey and Jason Todd respectively show that the immediate gratification of bringing a character back within several months alienates more readers than it attracts, regardless of the media coverage. Decades passed before the resurrection of Bucky as the Winter Soldier, and look at how well his return to the living was received, but Elektra returned from the dead after nine months and then disappeared for years. Similarly, her killer, Bullseye, wasn't seen between Daredevil #200 - Redemption and Captain America #372 - Sold on Ice and he wasn't even dead or paralyzed during that absence. My advice to aspiring comic book editors/writers is to avoid killing and bringing back immediately to try to improve units moved, and just try to tell a good story. If you're creative brainchild was meant to be, he or she will come back when it's natural.

Posted by AmazingWebHead
Edited by yfnjman

if they're going to kill characters, only to bring them back after a short amount of time, it's just pointless and a stunt.

i would've like to have seen Parker stay "dead" a bit long. Superior Spidey was a fun ride. so much more they could've done with him. but, whatever...i get it. people wanted Pete back in the webs.

Posted by RogueShadow

99.99999% They shouldn't come back, if you're going to kill a character, see it through, deaths in comics are meaningless nowadays.

Posted by Rev_Sulphur

At least a year if not that than never.

Online
Posted by nappystr8

I approve of Venditti's answer. Allowing characters to be resurrected only incentives companies and writers to kill characters who never should have been killed in the first place. The only place in comics where death means anything anymore is in the indies. And the bug is starting to spread to other media as well, which is very troubling.

Edited by majingojira

@yfnjman said:

if they're going to kill characters, only to bring them back after a short amount of time, it's just pointless and a stunt.

I agree in part, but sometimes the deaths are done as pointless stunts, and in those cases, the resurrections should come quickly if the writer does not effectively capitalize on the death's dramatic potential within the year. By then, it's too late to truly be effective as a story. Despite double shipping, Avengers Arena hit that problem waiting about 6 months to follow up on Mettle's death and by then, the people who cared about him had abandoned the series and those that only knew him from that one issue had no reason to care about him over that long a time period with no appearances.

So I say revive him and the other Arena deaths as casually as Hopeless has handled the three resurrections he's had in that series' sequel (IE: forgetting certain characters are even dead before including them in the background and one accomplished literally by a magical wave of a hand). No drama was gained from their deaths in any significant capacity, so none will be lost by bringing them back as far as I'm concerned.

@robotmonster:

Pretty spot on. A death or a resurrection needs to have consequences in order to matter. That is very true. However, like I said, if it's badly done or the dramatic potential is squandered, an equally squandered resurrection is something I certainly wouldn't complain about. There may not be a big call to get the Slinger's back together, but having the dead one's revived offsreen isn't something I'd get annoyed with either.

Because at this point, death in comics has about as much meaning as deaths in Dragon Ball.

TLDR: If it doesn't doesn't matter to the narrative, it doesn't matter when it is undone.

Posted by DarthAznable

Forever unless Batman

Edited by cobsohn

The best was Mark coming back one page later in Invincible 100.

I'm liking Dick Grayson being dead because you get to see the bat family reacting to his death while also getting a new book with him still alive.

Posted by RetconCrisis

I don't mind how long it is as long as it's more than a 3/4th of a year (or maybe at least half of a year)... To bring them back quickly in order to please a fanbase/make a plot twist is kinda dumb (unless it is for the sake of the plot of a specific story arc; if the death and rebirth is in a single arc and made with good reason, it is acceptable to me).

That, or never again... NEVER... let them rest in piece so they do not have the potential to be ruined in a cliche rebirth storyline...

Edited by Paladin_Royce

Keep 'em down 'til the fanboys come crying, and then bring them back to life so you don't lose the b!tchier part of your fanbase.

Or keep them dead long enough to span over a generation of readers, so when somebody sees their kid reading a comic they get that "Oh sh!t, HE'S back!" Moment.

Edited by Superguy1591

10 years, start with Lois Lane.

Posted by wundagoreborn

Make it the lifetime of the creator that killed the character. That could make the creator think twice. "If I kill this beloved character, all my peers will have an incentive to bump me off..."

Edited by PhoenixoftheTides

Resurrect them if the story that killed them was stupid or ended up not resulting in any meaningful impact. I prefer the dead characters to stay that way, but that being said, some stories just don't seem like the right fit for something to so important to happen in.

Captain Mar-vell has been dead for decades, but his death was well done to the point that writers don't play with it, characters accept it, and it's part of Marvel's universal mythos.

The Phoenix Saga, on the other hand, lost much of it's dramatic impact once it was retconned and writers (incl. C. Claremont) played with an eventual return so often that it's now a joke. IMO Jean should come back precisely because her dying is treated as a joke, and they might as well do something with the character.

Superman's death lead to a few interesting stories, but it ended up becoming a joke with the two Electric Supermen. The dramatic impact of The Death of Superman/Doomsday had become diluted, so bringing him back was the right choice for the character.

Posted by VoodooPenguin

99.99999% They shouldn't come back, if you're going to kill a character, see it through, deaths in comics are meaningless nowadays.

Nowadays? Deaths in comics have always been meaningless.

Posted by RogueShadow

@rogueshadow said:

99.99999% They shouldn't come back, if you're going to kill a character, see it through, deaths in comics are meaningless nowadays.

Nowadays? Deaths in comics have always been meaningless.

Gwen Stacy is DEAD. If she'd died last year she'd be back by now.

Posted by VoodooPenguin

@voodoopenguin said:

@rogueshadow said:

99.99999% They shouldn't come back, if you're going to kill a character, see it through, deaths in comics are meaningless nowadays.

Nowadays? Deaths in comics have always been meaningless.

Gwen Stacy is DEAD. If she'd died last year she'd be back by now.

Most of the character who stayed dead just belong to a couple writers and weren't major characters in the universe or even superheroes. Ease off the capslock, buddy.

Posted by Heatvision

I think characters that are killed off should stay dead. Most of the time, a character is killed off to increase sells, but you know what else will increase sells? Good writing instead of cheap tricks that have no long term impact.

Posted by Nazo_Tharpedo

The only time it should be acceptable (even then it gets annoying) to kill off a character and bring them back repeatedly is when you have a magical maguffin (the dragonballs for instance) that much or most of the plot revolves around.

Posted by Winter_Kills

@dcwarfan73:

Definitely true. And the Marvel Universe is a better place for having Bucky back and kicking ass in it.

Posted by Robert2928

If the death served a purpose (like in the dark phoenix saga) keep them dead to honor the sacrifice and show how it affects others (potential character growth anyone?) otherwise just "killing" a character for shock value is...pointless. Especially when you just end up bringing them back anyway. *cough* *cough* Jean Grey *cough*

Posted by KyreCat

Why bring them back at all if you can just create a clone, transfer one from an alternate universe or time jump?

Edited by catfightfan

I would say they should stay dead for 18-24 months.