Killing Off a Character

[JCVaughn]

Used to be able to say at Marvel, nobody stays dead except for Bucky, now we can't even say that.

Actually, it used to be Bucky and Uncle Ben. Now it's just Uncle Ben and his darn rice.

Gwen Stacy

Didn't she come back as a clone?

Gwen came back as a clone a long, long time ago. Mid-1970s?

[Drift]

I don't care who they kill or even if they bring them back, as long as it is written well.

They can do what they want as long as I get to read a good story.

I 99.99999999999999999% agree with this.

The problem with DC and Marvel doing this with their heavy hitters in comparison to smaller publishers like VALIANT and Wildstorm is that V and WS don't have half a century or more of history behind them so hadn't got the fan base for their characters that the big two had. That is why the Death of Superman was such a big deal at the time; Supes had been a household name and a Worldwide institution for damn near 60 years at the time. When the decision to kill Torque came about or the Stormwatch team, they had been around for how long? A couple years?

When DC killed Ted Kord, I was shocked. They killed one of my favorite characters. The fact that he was a second stringer means there was more chance of him staying dead than there ever was Bruce Wayne despite being around for nearly 30 years. When Booster Gold got his own series again, I was ecstatic and then they looked like they were bringing back Ted but I think they have done right by honoring him and keeping him dead no matter how much they have hinted and teased me (and I am sure it is aimed solely at me).

So if a character that has almost 30 years of established history hasn't got a chance why would we care about some comparatively new guys (in the case of Wildstorm) or some characters most people have hardly even heard of?

I am sure that if VEI are still around in 50 years and everyone knows them and their characters, they will shed the "Dead is Dead!" thing and resurrect people as much as the other guys because it makes no sense from a business stand-point to kill off characters that give you a license to print money. That is why Marvel and DC bring these guys back all the time. Shock factor generates fast cash and getting the fans back on board afterwards keeps the cash flowing.

[Elveen]

For Marvel and DC (IMO) it would be foolish to kill off a major character. Major characters is how they make $$$$. Now creating stories that make it appear like a major character is dead, especially in films, is smart.

You need to bring everyone back for a sequel.

[BloodOfHeroes]

Shadowman. In 1999. End the speculation.

[sanman]

I think Drift has nailed down some strong points. I guess the short answer is “it depends,” but let me elaborate—I apologize for only using DC characters but it’s what I know best...

Take a character like Jason Todd, Robin II, for two decades he served the Batman mythos better as a dead character—haunting Batman maybe more than his dead parents. And while I enjoyed the initial story arc and annual in which he returned I ultimately think bring him back was a mistake.

On the other hand, for me Oliver Queen and Hal Jordan’s replacements didn’t live up to their predecessors where as Tim Drake did and then some. And the DUC is much better today with Olie and Hal back in it. Time will tell on Barry Allen...

On the other hand I don’t believe that you can really compare Bruce Wayne’s death in this context. From almost the start we knew that Bruce was somehow alive—it was just a matter of how was he going to get back to the present time or reality.

Superman’s death could have been a lot better if DC would not have milked the story at the end. Any real effects have been minimal with maybe the exception of Conner Kent which is another can of worms. Looking back on the Doomsday story arc I’d say it was a waste, but it was fun at the time and I know of people who got into comics because of it.

It’s probably true that the gimmick death and resurrection is too common. Granted, future creative teams can undermine past work which is often the real issue at hand. But writers need to find creative ways to bring excitement back other than the death or resurrection of a significant character. If a character’s death and/or resurrection is deemed necessary that creative team should consider the legacy they are working with while having a strong vision for the character’s future.

For Valiant I think it’s too soon to talk about killing off characters for the big sales—it’s not really relevant as the Valiant Universe has been dead for so long. I honestly don’t think readers who don’t regularly participate on this forum or the other one will really care—just look at the buzz over at Dark Horse.

Should there be new books published I think the best solution is a reboot. Most of us are not crazy about the later VH1 books and are somewhat divided about the Acclaim runs. Even Acclaim recognized the need to start over with Unity 2000. Once the new universe is established, however, it really depends how well the death and resurrection is handled first. And though maybe self serving, how bad I want to see the character back.

[dhudson1]

Used to be able to say at Marvel, nobody stays dead except for Bucky, now we can't even say that.

Actually, it used to be Bucky and Uncle Ben. Now it's just Uncle Ben and his darn rice.

Gwen Stacy

Didn't she come back as a clone?

Gwen came back as a clone a long, long time ago. Mid-1970s?

mid-1970's, seems like yesterday.

[tmcneil82]

Didn't acclaim already settle this? Aren't all of the non GK characters dead? VEI are just the nails in the coffin, making sure they stay that way.

[sanman]

Didn't acclaim already settle this? Aren't all of the non GK characters dead? VEI are just the nails in the coffin, making sure they stay that way.

Indeed if we stuck to “dead is dead” to its most fanatical conclusion, by obligation we should never expect any Valiant character to rise from the ashes at this point. I guess VEI is just maintaining the status quo.

[ian_house]

Well I'm glad this started some debate, even if it wasn't quite what I'd expected.

I was talking about a mythical Valiant Universe that was still going on and not the mythical universe of VEI (they'd have to publish something to kill anyone).

Definitely some good points on the use of deaths in modern comics from you guys though!

I'd kill off Archer and watch Armstrong fall into an even deeper state of drunkeness and bad situations. Eventually Archer could be brought back by Darque or someone to get at Armstrong and once defeated could return to Armstrongs side. Nice year or two of comics in there I reckon.

And Drift, do you not think we'll be seeing much more of Ted soon? I have a feeling he may become quite important in Booster Gold soon.

[Drift]

And Drift, do you not think we'll be seeing much more of Ted soon? I have a feeling he may become quite important in Booster Gold soon.

Well, Ray Palmer is currently looking for a way to resurrect people by reversing the effects of the Black Ring corruption while keeping the life force in the reanimated body so it could be coming. I hope he comes back soon and we get a real Blue and Gold comic and not just the tease we were hit with last year.

[ian_house]

And Drift, do you not think we'll be seeing much more of Ted soon? I have a feeling he may become quite important in Booster Gold soon.

Well, Ray Palmer is currently looking for a way to resurrect people by reversing the effects of the Black Ring corruption while keeping the life force in the reanimated body so it could be coming. I hope he comes back soon and we get a real Blue and Gold comic and not just the tease we were hit with last year.

Definitely. I'm all for giving a new guy a chance as a character but the new Blue Beetle doesn't seem to have any personality.

[Cyberstrike]

I think Drift has nailed down some strong points. I guess the short answer is “it depends,” but let me elaborate—I apologize for only using DC characters but it’s what I know best...

Take a character like Jason Todd, Robin II, for two decades he served the Batman mythos better as a dead character—haunting Batman maybe more than his dead parents. And while I enjoyed the initial story arc and annual in which he returned I ultimately think bring him back was a mistake.

On the other hand, for me Oliver Queen and Hal Jordan’s replacements didn’t live up to their predecessors where as Tim Drake did and then some. And the DUC is much better today with Olie and Hal back in it. Time will tell on Barry Allen...

How is Jordan being back a good thing?
Seriousally.
He's still the same dull boring character that he was before when he insane and "killed" the DCU.
What other than him being a silver age character makes him appealing? He's the most BORING character in comics. No one has ever made him as a GL interesting to me (as the Spectre was the only time that I liked Jordan at all).
Geoff Johns can't do it.
Ron Marz couldn't do it.
Denny O'Neil couldn't do it.
If three good writers can't make me give a damn about character then he's not a good character.

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Mark Waid said it best about Barry Allen "His death made him the patron saint of the DCU."

[Drift]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

[xodacia81]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

When KR was first introduced, back in 93, he was a great character and stayed that way for a good 3 or 4 years. Don't know about since then.

[Cyberstrike]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

Did you read the Judd Winnik run? He turned Kyle Rayner into a mature and complex character. Johns turned him into a drooling Hal Jordan fanboy.

[xodacia81]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

Did you read the Judd Winnik run? He turned Kyle Rayner into a mature and complex character. Johns turned him into a drooling Hal Jordan fanboy.

That is because Johns and the majority of the current "writers" at both Marvel and DC are nothing but slovenly, half hack fanboys trying to recapture the 60's and 70's.

[sanman]

How is Jordan being back a good thing?
Seriousally.
He's still the same dull boring character that he was before when he insane and "killed" the DCU.
What other than him being a silver age character makes him appealing?

It’s too easy to say to each his own but really that’s the case—isn’t it? I liked Hal Jordan as a kid, never got into Kyle Rayner nor did I really like Hal as the Specter. While I wasn’t reading many monthly titles, I rediscovered Hal through the Hard Traveling Heroes trades and thought the run was awesome.

Later when Rebirth was first announced I was intrigued and when I read the issues totally hooked. In all fainess to you I gave up on Kyle early in his run and will respect that he may have turned out to be a great character. He however wasn’t my Green lantern and I didn’t care for him.

[Drift]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

Did you read the Judd Winnik run? He turned Kyle Rayner into a mature and complex character. Johns turned him into a drooling Hal Jordan fanboy.

The majority of my experience with Kyle has been from the JLA series and from the recent run of GL and GLC. Once I have some more of the run I will hit the GL v2 stuff.

[sanman]

That is because Johns and the majority of the current "writers" at both Marvel and DC are nothing but slovenly, half hack fanboys trying to recapture the 60's and 70's.

I can see where many would feel this way. However, I’m enjoying the retro-ness of the today’s DCU. I recognize that it probably alienates certain fans, but when I didn’t recognize anything familiar I stopped reading current comics for several years.

During that time I mostly picked up back issues. And actually it was Rebirth that got me back into picking up other titles again besides Batman and Detective.

[xodacia81]

That is because Johns and the majority of the current "writers" at both Marvel and DC are nothing but slovenly, half hack fanboys trying to recapture the 60's and 70's.

I can see where many would feel this way. However, I’m enjoying the retro-ness of the today’s DCU. I recognize that it probably alienates certain fans, but when I didn’t recognize anything familiar I stopped reading current comics for several years.

During that time I mostly picked up back issues. And actually it was Rebirth that got me back into picking up other titles again besides Batman and Detective.

The current trends in comics are what have driven me away from superhero based books into the outter reaches of comics. The closest thing I come to reading a current, ongoing "sh" book, is CHEW, and that doesn't really fit it or do justice to that magnificent work.

[sanman]

The current trends in comics are what have driven me away from superhero based books into the outter reaches of comics. The closest thing I come to reading a current, ongoing "sh" book, is CHEW, and that doesn't really fit it or do justice to that magnificent work.

I hear where you are coming. I guess with every change someone gets alienated—glad you found something you like.

[Chiclo]

Kyle Rayner is a far more 3-Dimensional, complex, and interesting character.

Umm-ing and ah-ing and constant self doubt don't make him a compelling character, they make him Peter Parker.

You just want Marvel Lite

Wouldn't hurt.

Marvel has Dark Reign which is interesting and compelling with original directions taken with established characters, like the Dark Avengers. Other major story lines going on right now include Realm of Kings which is awesome and Fall of the Hulks which is ok.

DC has Blackest Night which is predictable, being stretched out too long, becoming stagnant and forced onto other books almost like it has taken them hostage. It is turning new, interesting characters and turning them into bad cartoon characters (Larfleeze) and forcing boring characters into the forefront. Other major storylines have all been put on hold until Brightest Day and even then, who is sure how much of the DC line is going to be held hostage then?

PS - the White Lanterns are going to be what the black rings say are "at peace" like the various Doves. See how predictable that is?

[steverino]

I'm reading the Flash Rebirth and I'm enjoying the hell out of it! I don't know if it's Barry Allen's character or all the characters in the book that make it great, but I really don't care. Most of the time, it's not the character that makes a book great, but the supporting characters.

Garth Ennis's run on Punisher wouldn't have been half as fun if Soap and the Russian weren't in it.

[X-O HoboJoe]

I'm reading the Flash Rebirth and I'm enjoying the hell out of it! I don't know if it's Barry Allen's character or all the characters in the book that make it great, but I really don't care. Most of the time, it's not the character that makes a book great, but the supporting characters.

Garth Ennis's run on Punisher wouldn't have been half as fun if Soap and the Russian weren't in it.

Soap . . .

[sanman]

I had a frat brother nicknamed Soapy...