[ConanXXXV]

I wrote in but I'd rather have shorter story arcs but with a background thread. I'd like to see 2-3 issue arcs with a background story with small groups of Joes. Almost like Special Missions. Also ninjas in moderation. Extreme moderation. Bring back Snake-Eyes. His death was ambiguous at best and having two lame replacements stinks.

[Flints Beret]

I’ve been re-reading IDW ARAH and in a letter Column in the 220’s Larry says “Serpentor is dead for now”. I can’t believe I never caught that. To me, in his head he has an out for bringing Snake-Eyes back if he would choose to.
Also, Snake-Eyes’ death was handled in the same way his character took down Chimera in Origins #5 and he survived. I know that’s a different universe, but it just seems to be in our faces that his death might not be permenant.
Maybe my hopes are reaching. But, come on, his Death did suck.

[chuck x goren]

Given Hama's track record, "plotline is never brought up again" is probably the way it will play out. He still hasn't addressed whose dead "Sneak Peek" body Dusty carried back in Benzheen. Hama even had Dusty mention this when Sneak Peek died...again. I think Hama felt he could kill off Sneak Peek, again, and that'd be the end of it.

Like a lot of modern comics, very little actual editing seems to be done. Fans are left to connect-the-dots and come up with "No Prize Explanations" to make sense of things.

I also feel that Hama sometimes has interesting or cool ideas, initially...but then forgets what his intentions were, a few months later, and resolves the plot in a different way. Or just ignores it, altogether. Not a modern thing. He seemed to be doing it in the Marvel days, too. Example: when Rock and Roll and Clutch became Brainwave Scanner sleeper agents, circa issue 90.

Hama's not the only guy who's done this. As much as people like 80's Teen Titans, Marv Wolfman was notorious for changing, or even reversing, the direction of plots and characters during that title's supposed hey-day.


Shifting gears--- I agree that this was a good issue, though. The new plotlines could prove fruitful. Or at least full of action. If Hama resolves the Shadizar conflict with yet another off-screen bureaucratic deal that immediately tells everybody to leave... then I'll be grumpy.

[todd_m6d]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flints Beret

But, come on, his Death did suck.

Not only that but Joe Colton is the villain of that storyline, and yet he's never held accountable for causing the whole FUBAR situation even though every character is telling him its a bad idea to be using Serpentor.

Colton's actions undeniably killed Snake-Eyes, and then Hawk forces Throwdown to assume the mantle so the team doesn't look incompetent in taking out one of their own.

[skinny]

I have to weigh in on this one.
I want to ask. Honest question
What is a good death?
Because what I saw, was Snake Eyes sacrificing himself so that Scarlett and Stalker could live. The how matters not. It is the why.
He died saving his team mates and friends. Stalker. Storm Shadow and Scarlett were his world. Stalker and Scarlett were as good as dead. Oh and Duke but those two honestly never had a relationship other than Top and soldier. They were rarely if ever on the same mission even.

I want to know what people think a good death is?
Spoilers below...
Tasha Yar?
Spock?
Data?
Wolverine?
Captain America?
Superman?
Charlotte in Charlotte's Web?
Jack in Titanic?
Hamlet?
Tom Robinson?
Lennie Small?
For over two years I have seen people talking about the Death of Snake Eyes arc.

What constitutes a "good death"?
Give examples.

[chuck x goren]

Snake-Eyes' actual death wasn't too amazing... because all he did was, literally, fall on a grenade, while fighting one of the franchise's lamest villains. After all he's been through; all the death-defying situations; a simple grenade does him in.

The "funeral" the team gave for Snake-Eyes was "good", though.

In comics a lot of deaths are undone; even Bucky. But a "good" one was probably the first Jean Grey/Phoenix death in Uncanny X-men. When Jean "died" in the space shuttle and turned into Phoenix, she did it to save her team. The ol' self-sacrifice deal, which is a heroic way to go out.

About a year later, when Phoenix allowed herself to get killed by a laser canon, it was to save, potentially, the entire universe from the Phoenix Force. Kind of "I don't want you guys fighting for me, when I know I'm going to flip out again and eat planets. Let me go".

Up until Jean's unexpected resurrection in 1986, it was a "good death". She went out to save others and it had a huge emotional impact on the surviving characters.

-In no ways am I a Star Trek fan, but I always thought Spock's "death" in Wrath of Khan was another good way to go.

-Darth Vader's death was another. He finally turned (back to) good and saved his son. Without his tackle of the Emperor, Luke dies, and things carry on for the bad guys. Of course, the Death Star probably would've STILL blown up and Vader and the Emperor might've died, anyways...but what the hey!

-In the GI Joe world, Kwinn's death is probably the best. He was going to make Dr. Venom swallow a grenade... then realized that the "Weasel Spirit" was in him. Kwinn declined and walked away. Venom was a jerk and shot Kwinn in the back...but the grenade rolled out of Kwinn's hand killed Venom in a move of poetic justice. Had Venom NOT shot Kwinn, Venom could've lived.

-Despite the famous Benzheen body count in issue 109, I felt those were "bad deaths". Just random guys dying for the sake of a shock. They were people you didn't really care about. A few issues later, when Cool Breeze died, it was a "good death", as Stalker (and, presumably, readers) began to care for the guy.

So, my quick scorecard of what makes a "good death" in comics/cartoons/movies:

1- Person dies doing something heroic or noble. It can only be done once, it's a unique situation, and the hero is the only one who can do it (this is where Snake-Eyes' death falls short, IMO).

2- The death has consequences, be they emotional or otherwise.

3- The death is a significant character.

[nero9000]

The one thing that makes a good death is #2 from Chuck's list. I'd say even 1 and 3 aren't required. To put it in one one sentence, a good death has meaning. Generally it means a death has either a major impact on the story, or has an emotional resonance (both to other characters and audience). The Snake-Eyes death had neither of these. He's immediately replaced by a bargain basement blue-light special copy who everyone treats as the real thing. There's one tribute issue and after that no one (characters or audience) gives a shyt.

Good examples are the Stark deaths from Game of Thrones. All of them completely throw the dynamics of the entire series upside down, and they have an effect on most of the remaining characters.

Other good deaths I've witnessed in the last few days (haha):
-Nathan from Mad Max 2. You probably don't remember this guy even if you've seen the movie several times. He's the guy Max carries into the civilian base. Nathan made a desperate gambit to break free from the enemies surrounding his people and survived an attack by Darklon and Road Pig () that killed everybody else. He's in bad shape, but his will to live is so strong he cuts a deal with Max to take him back. Max brings him in, and Nathan's friends do everything they can to save his life, but it's too late. He's a complete redshirt whose death is just a plot point to bring Max to the base, yet it had 100% more resonance to me than Snake-Eyes' did.

-Lal from Star Trek TNG episode "The Offspring". She's the android created by Data to be his daughter. The episode has a humorous tone as it follows her quest to develop from a blank slate into a sentient being and, well, human. In a couple of weeks, she develops further than her "father" has and starts having real human emotions. This backfires when Starfleet wants to take her away from the Enterprise to study her. Lal's scared, can't deal with her emotions and has a malfunction. Data tries to save him, but there's nothing he can do. Lal is deactivated, though not before thanking Data for enabling her to live for those two weeks. To clinch it, Data, being unable to feel emotions, cannot feel the sorrow of losing her daughter so soon. But the audience can. I dare you to watch this episode and not get choked up over this character you've known for 40 minutes.

On the other side of the coin, here's what's not a good death:
-A cheap and desperate ploy to sell a few more issues of a comic book.

[chuck x goren]

Another botched "bad death" was Nighthawk in "Defenders", circa 1982. His death tried to mirror that of Jean Grey's, as Nighthawk saved the team from a buncha' mental attacks or something. He was a main character with a pretty lengthy run in the book, but his death felt unnecessary and lacked impact.

Another "good death" was Tom Thumb in the 1985-196 Squadron Supreme series. Tom dies while trying to find a cure for cancer. Now that I think about, just about every death in that series was a "good death"-- save for the new "Redeemer" villains that popped up at the end.

Nuke's death in Squadron Supreme wasn't heroic, but it was a "good death", because it was so tragic. He was the youngest member of the team, but ends up suffocating in Dr. Spectrum's bubble, while in a fit of rage after his parents died.

[Flints Beret]

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd_m6d

Not only that but Joe Colton is the villain of that storyline, and yet he's never held accountable for causing the whole FUBAR situation even though every character is telling him its a bad idea to be using Serpentor.

Colton's actions undeniably killed Snake-Eyes, and then Hawk forces Throwdown to assume the mantle so the team doesn't look incompetent in taking out one of their own.

Nailed it.

[Flints Beret]

And the first paragraph of what Chuck wrote. After ALL he’s been through.
Sigh.
He had relationships with villains that would of made more sense. Die the same way taking out Firefly, or Zartan. But no. Serpentor.
And then to be replaced instantly by Sean.
Ugh.