X-Universe >> View Post
·
Post By
The Black Guardian 
Moderator

Location: Paragon City, RI
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 25,760
In Reply To
Evil G:DR

Subj: Re: Someone always has to die. That's the law around here.
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 at 07:21:44 am EDT (Viewed 83 times)
Reply Subj: Someone always has to die. That's the law around here.
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 07:35:21 pm EDT (Viewed 119 times)





    Quote:
    But even back in those days, there was still the notion that you could kill off a lower-tier superhero and they might actually stay dead. If you killed off a civilian supporting-cast character, they were probably going to stay dead. And, looking at the characters you named, Cypher was killed in response to fan-demand. Magik died because her story could only really end one of three ways; she becomes a monstrous villain, she 'fixes' herself and in doing so loses everything that makes the character who she is, or she dies.

I disagree completely. She could easily have transcended that and become a better character for it.


    Quote:
    And so she 'died', with her 'death' being a negation of her timeline, reverting her to a child

Except, as the story even stated, her timeline was not negated.


    Quote:
    The trouble with resurrecting characters for those purposes is that you have to put in all the time and effort to bring the character back, for the sake of them being able to star in a book that isn't likely to last long, with or without them. Was there really any point to the Necrosha crossover beyond "bringing back Cypher so her can be in New Mutants"? (and of all the dead characters we saw again in Necrosha, surely everyone here can think of at least 10 other characters we'd rather have back. Even if you just listed Maggott ten times, you're still right).

I'm no Cypher fan, but he would still have probably made my Top 10 characters to deserve a resurrection in 2009.


    Quote:
    Can anyone truly argue that the last New Mutants book would have tanked sooner without Magik and Cypher? It's like bringing Jean back because the X-Factor lineup needed her, taught everyone the wrong lessons about bringing characters back, and subjected us to resurrections not many people were vocally demanding, and of characters who would often be right back in limbo within a year or two anyway, so may as well have been dead still.

X-Factor taught us no such thing with Jean. People had been demanding Magik and Cypher back for decades. Heck, Doug's death in the first place earn Simonson a lot of "fanemies."


    Quote:
    I'd go as far as to argue that Colossus and Nightcrawler both probably could have stayed dead. It would have been in defiance of fan-demand, but Colossus had hardly done anything of any note since 1994, while since he left Excalibur in 1998, the only times Nightcrawler mattered were in storylines where they were actively trying to make him suck (or that one thing that was so bad it was good. You know what I'm talking about). A team book is an ensemble cast, and ensemble casts have certain characters that remain essential, and others that they can go on without, and not noticeably suffer.

No question Nightcrawler had gone down some horrible paths. Colossus too. The correct response to this is for writers to stop doing it, not killing the characters.


    Quote:
    The fact that we didn't need Colossus back is probably best shown by how, once the initial "nostalgia pop" was over, we'd run through re-tellings of him doing his old routines like "throwing Wolverine" and "getting back together with Kitty like it's still 1982", no-one really knew what to do with him, leading to a series of bizarre and drastic status quo shifts to try and make him more interesting. He's been a Juggernaut, a Phoenix, and one of Cable's paramilitaries, all in the space of about 3 years.

Writers not knowing what to do with him doesn't suggest he wasn't needed back.


    Quote:
    The X-books in particular seem to have forgotten that if you insist on using this "death and return" formula, a key element of it is making the readers feel like the dead person is mourned and missed. And the more and more that the X-Men just lurch around from one fight to another without stopping to breathe, the less and less each death matters, because no-one's taking the time to stop and care.

Agreed there.


    Quote:
    When the Spider-Man books brought back Aunt May in 1998, despite no demand for it, and her death being an acclaimed and beloved issue, I think that really marked the point where, if even civilian characters could come back from being Very Dead, and if Marvel were bringing back characters that the fans wanted to stay dead, we were living in an era where "death in comics" was utterly meaningless. With that in mind, yes, you have a strong argument for not bothering to kill anyone.

    But on the other hand, it's all in the quality of how well it's done, isn't it?

Apparently not. Aunt May's return proves this.


    Quote:
    But on the other hand, it's all in the quality of how well it's done, isn't it? And if no-one ever died and there was no sense that anyone was in any actual danger, there'd be no sense of threat, nothing really at stake in any of the super-battles. So it's not "stop doing that", it's "do better".

That's never been a good argument, but yes, "do better" and that means "stop doing that." Other, better writers do.




City of Heroes is BACK!
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 28.0 on Windows 8
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software