Why does DC like killing off characters so much?

[mrbrklyn]

Maybe you missed the whole point? Which isn't about weather they stayed dead (which was the exception not the rule), but trading on the "Death-Event" itself.
They knew they could bring any of these characters back. Even Barry's death was written with a hint of an out.

Honestly, I am having trouble finding the words to express the difference betwen the Jason Todd like event and the Superman event. The best way for me to explain it is to say that we knew, and the editors knew, that we were in for a roller coaster ride with Superman's Death and "rebirth". It was all planned out that way. It wasn't even a shock. Superman's death was announced weeks before.

Jason Todd, he wasn't designed to come back and the point of that storyline was that Jason Todd would die. It was shocking and bleak.

[Sacred Knight]

What's already been said before: it sells comics. For all the people who say "we don't want this", actual sales just don't back that up. Death sells, gimmicks sell, relauches sell. Everything the common fanboy claims to not want, sells. At least in the short term. Long-term, no one's figured that out in the big two. Its certainly not stability. Rebirth was pretty much all about that (outside of the continuity itself being a mess), and that didn't sustain either.

[byrd156]

Not exactly correct.

Morrison had a long-term story in mind that ended with Damian's death.
And his killing off Damian was no guarantee that other writers wouldn't use him; Morrison didn't own the character, and he would have known damn well that other writers could easily bring Damian back to life whenever they (or DC) wanted to.

I really wish Morrison got to keep Damian's death. I generally hate character death but if it was the creator's intention then I think it's more than okay.

[goldenknight2018]

because of not enough popular like wally and other b-list heroes, only two biggest most popular heroes are Superman and Batman.
comics once was the best seller from 1940s to late 1960s until sales were drops and into 1970s to 1980s comics get more drops.

for the reason why dc change the origin and history of Superman three time to try to raise high sales from 1986 to 2003 to 2009.

so, dc revamps Superman does not help raise high sales at all. sadly, today Superman not as popular as he was in the ‘40s to the ‘70s

isn't dc own fault characters were not as popular as Batman, even comics were poor sales. so, don't blame dc for what happens. some people don't like buying comics.

[Lee Stone]

Not the ones I know. Regardless, I understand the point, but Superman didn't really die, and it was never the plan to have him actually die. Not like Barry died, or Jason Todd died, or even Gwen Stacy.
They were supposed to die and stay dead. The death of Coast City was more of a shocker.

But, with Jason Todd, the whole thing was about killing him, really for now reason. They took a poll and this is what readers came up with.

And I'd wager that 75% of those calls were from non-comics readers trolling for a death of Jason just to either call DC's bluff or to 'make a difference' in a widely publicized event.

[Lee Stone]

Maybe you missed the whole point? Which isn't about weather they stayed dead (which was the exception not the rule), but trading on the "Death-Event" itself.
They knew they could bring any of these characters back. Even Barry's death was written with a hint of an out.

True.
But I remember the media going crazy over Superman's death. They treated it like it was going to be permanent.
And that fueled the speculators, many of them entering into comics for the first time just to cash in on it.

[Güicho]

True.
But I remember the media going crazy over Superman's death. They treated it like it was going to be permanent.
And that fueled the speculators, many of them entering into comics for the first time just to cash in on it.

Right hence again my whole point in including it as one of the Tinfoil-Era's "Death-Events" which fueled the new Speculator, and they consumed on-mass, which DC likes so much.
Again it's not about weather he stayed dead, but trading on the "Death-Event" itself.

Maybe you missed the whole point? Which isn't about weather they stayed dead (which was the exception not the rule), but trading on the "Death-Event" itself.

Not sure how anyone is arguing in this context Death of Superman wasn't part of that?
I clearly included it specifically in that context. - https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post3927810

[phantom1592]

I'm not going to take this topic seriously until it's acknowledged that Marvel does this as well. Saying that DC overindulges in killing characters: true. Suggesting that this problem is somehow exclusive to DC: slanderous.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Marvel was always WORSE at killing their characters for a cheap buck. Back in the 90's every time we turned around Reed Richards was going to die or Spider-man died, or Daredevil 'died'... but was IMMEDIATELY changed to "OHHHH they're back and didn't really DIE...


DC on the other hand... They were big into their 'legacies'. Barry died, Wally took over, Hal died, Kyle took over, Jason, Ollie, etc. etc. and they replaced them.

Marvel brought characters back... DC replaced them. Now they're interchangeable, but Marvel rode that horse more than DC did.

The 1990s? WHo is paining for the return of the 1990's?


Anyway, it really started with the death of Jason Todd. and the Dark Knight Returns.

Definitly me. I prefer the 80's, but the 90's were probably my pinnacle of buying. There was a LOT of garbage going on... but there COULD be, because there was a LOOOOOT of stuff getting printed. Darkhawk, Sleepwalker, Ghost Rider, You name a concept, they got a solid 2-3 years of a solo series right out of the gate. Most of the stereotypical crap of the 90's is even more prevelant today... so yeah, I'd rather go back to the industry back then for sure

Everyone should have known it, but a lot of speculators actually thought Supes was gone for good.

I have no pity for that. First of all, the 4 new Supermen was announced just as quickly. The 4 Superman books never actually STOPPED... And if they had actually read the books they were buying, there were ads in there for the next big thing.

And for those who DID get 'fooled'... they only lost the cover price, which is less than a normal book now days. So no harm no foul there ;P

[MajorHoy]

And I'd wager that 75% of those calls were from non-comics readers trolling for a death of Jason just to either call DC's bluff or to 'make a difference' in a widely publicized event.

People do remember there was also the possibility that a good number of those "Kill Jason!" calls were from one person?
See the section "Trivia" under http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Batman:_A_Death_in_the_Family

[byrd156]

People do remember there was also the possibility that a good number of those "Kill Jason!" calls were from one person?
See the section "Trivia" under http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Batman:_A_Death_in_the_Family

That's a "possibility" but isn't proven. Even then a silent majority could still have wanted Jason dead but didn't vote for one reason or another.

[Güicho]

People do remember there was also the possibility that a good number of those "Kill Jason!" calls were from one person?
See the section "Trivia" under http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Batman:_A_Death_in_the_Family

It doesn't mater if it was 1 or 1,000, it's the fact that they pandered to that shallow, cynical glorification of it, to sell the book.
And those telling themselves this was "mature" reading, LOL no, it was juvenile done purely for shock value seemed more done to leave 10 year olds dumb-struck. . LOL!

[phantom1592]

What's already been said before: it sells comics. For all the people who say "we don't want this", actual sales just don't back that up. Death sells, gimmicks sell, relauches sell. Everything the common fanboy claims to not want, sells. At least in the short term. Long-term, no one's figured that out in the big two. Its certainly not stability. Rebirth was pretty much all about that (outside of the continuity itself being a mess), and that didn't sustain either.

Yeah. gotta agree with that. Green Goblin was Spider-man's #1 enemy for years... but can anyone name a stand out story? I liked Amazing Spider-man #39 (obviously must have had a reprint back in the day...) but for the most part, whenever Norman Osborne is brought up it's in relation to killing Gwen Stacy... or the story where he died... or how much better he was when he was dead... or how his resurrection cheapens the later stories...

Everything revolves around that shocking issue where longtime characters are killed for shock value... and they've become the cornerstone of the franchise.

Same with Barry. Honestly his death in COIE was a pretty lame death.... but it MEANT something to people and became comic book lore.

I can't really blame writers and such hoping to capture that kind of lightning in the bottle again. Deaths make some of the most memorable stories ever.


And many of the worst... Sadly in this day and age, the writers aren't good enough to craft a good death anymore.

[goldenknight2018]

I am sure Wally fake own death because of the only person who witness dr manhattan stole ten years. Wally needs protection and hides somewhere. I don't think DC change the mind like that. God forbid.

[mrbrklyn]

Same with Barry. Honestly his death in COIE was a pretty lame death.... but it MEANT something to people and became comic book lore.

I know that we all go around pumping our chests like we all know something to talk about, and in truth, none oof us knows a darn thing, but the death of Barry Allen in Crisis of Infinity Eaths was not lame. It was an editorial decision because sales on the Flash has begun to dive and they felt the character had too much cruft on it and they wanted to start with a new slate. And they were right. IMO, the stupid thing was to bring Barry Allen back after creating a very solid mythos for Wally West... but as I have said many times... iconography usually resurrects itself for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that the trademarks are valuable. A very small number of people who are aware of comics or buy comic related products actually read comics. If it was just that little demographic. If it wasn't for the sales to causally aware consumer of comics paraphilia, comics would be all but dead in the mid-1970's.

You want to know a valuable Comic? Snoopy. The most important thing a Comic creation can do is get itself into the Thanksgiving Day parade..

[Dred]

The same folks who claim that the return of Hal Jordan and Barry Allen to their traditional roles as Green Lantern and Flash during the past 10-13 years is "pandering to Silver Age nostalgia."

See? We Pre-COIE era fans can play that card too! Since it's such a non-argument, I move that we retire it.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

You realize that continuing on from Barry and Hal necessarily means stepping back into that era, right? If the argument is that regression is bad then you can't actually play that card. It's a step forward because we took such a huge step backwards.

What's already been said before: it sells comics. For all the people who say "we don't want this", actual sales just don't back that up. Death sells, gimmicks sell, relauches sell. Everything the common fanboy claims to not want, sells. At least in the short term. Long-term, no one's figured that out in the big two. Its certainly not stability. Rebirth was pretty much all about that (outside of the continuity itself being a mess), and that didn't sustain either.

Every event sells.

Killing characters doesn't sell. Remember the cavalcade of Titans deaths in the 00s? None of that boosted sales. Every hackneyed fake out death in a solo has never upped sales.

The common factor in sales increase isn't characters dying. It's publicity, pushing, branding, and which characters are involved. This event would lose sales if Batman wasn't in it, that's a definitive, verifiable fact. Saying people will pay more money because Roy Harper died is silly. The only kind of death that sells is a major death (which none of these are), and the only reason a major death sells is because it necessarily implies an important character who draws in interest anyhow -- just a subset of a reason something sells anyhow.

What are DC's best selling books, recently? Metal? DC Universe Rebirth? Everything Batman? None of which hinged on characters dying. The fact that HiC will sell has nothing to do with characters dying and everything to do with sticking the word Crisis on it, advertising it to all hell in every single shop and in the pages of every single comic, and the fact that Batman (and to a lesser extent Superman and Wonder Woman) are on the cover. Pretending it's because some characters most of us don't care about might die? Please.