What do you like/dislike about Krakoa? (As a concept)

[CoCoBandz]

The arguments against the resurrection protocols are incredibly disingenuous. Marvel in general and the X office specifically have been grossly misusing death as a narrative device for so long that it lost its bite and meaning long before Hickman came to the X-office. Death hasn't been anything more than a narrative time out for years, hell more X-men have died and recovered than have had the flu. When Wolverine, Cyclops or really anyone not named Jean Grey (because reasons) died over the last few years did anyone really believe they were going to stay dead? Hell even with Jean most people didn't think she would always be dead and kept waiting for her inevitable return. How can anyone claim that resurrection have removed stakes when no one believed in them in the first place?

Bingo! Bingo!

[Zelena]

Quire being headless isn't gore? Wolvie in half and still alive isnt gore? Domino being SKINNED isnt gore? Please.

When such things are suggested in horror movies, it's… horrible.
In gory movies, it's shown and in a complacent manner. To the point, it's sometimes ridiculous.
But… personally, I prefer the horror of suggestion.

[loke13]

Quire being headless isn't gore? Wolvie in half and still alive isnt gore? Domino being SKINNED isnt gore? Please. And no that isn't done in every iteration of X-Force by any means, and it's only made more jarring due to the inclusion of A-list mainstream characters on this squad unlike many previous ones. The idea Jean Grey and Hank McCoy should even be on an "X-Force" is part of the strained characterization that defines this run broadly, and that requires explanation which has yet to come

I was speaking in terms that you suggested that the resurrection somehow promotes the gore. Which isn't the case and never has been for an X-Force title.

[Devaishwarya]

The arguments against the resurrection protocols are incredibly disingenuous. Marvel in general and the X office specifically have been grossly misusing death as a narrative device for so long that it lost its bite and meaning long before Hickman came to the X-office. Death hasn't been anything more than a narrative time out for years, hell more X-men have died and recovered than have had the flu. When Wolverine, Cyclops or really anyone not named Jean Grey (because reasons) died over the last few years did anyone really believe they were going to stay dead? Hell even with Jean most people didn't think she would always be dead and kept waiting for her inevitable return. How can anyone claim that resurrection have removed stakes when no one believed in them in the first place?

Alas! This truth will never set them free.

[loke13]

Gore doesn’t have to be guts spilling out. It was treating fan fav characters like bodies in a casualty which is exactly what we hoped we would get away from.

No, we were trying to get away from pointless shock deaths that did nothing to serve the narrative. You can't honestly tell me that the death and Ressurection of Xavier as well as the other Krakoans and QQ didnt have narrative importance. So far the deaths in X-Force have been handled well.

[spirit2011]

I've seen it said that the resurrection system is to "take death off the table for writers". Which is just stupid. You can have a fantastic story with major stakes without killing characters like flies. Just look at almost the entire rest of the Marvel line. To put it bluntly, if you want to stop telling X-men stories about them dying, then STOP WRITING X STORIES THAT INVOLVE THEM DYING.

The resurrections are bad for me for three reasons:

1) They remove all stakes. They're no reason to be invested in any of the fights with the people out to exterminate them, since even if there's a massacre its more an inconvenience. Essentially, mutant death is still being used as a motivating factor for the cast and readers, when it functionally does not matter. Russia or Brazil could have killed every mutant present in Maruaders, and they would all be fine on Krakoa in a couple days. Everyone at the economic summit could have been slaughtered and it wouldn't change anything. Its already being used for lazy storytelling in X-factor, with people dying so much its a wonder they lasted this long. Death isn't so much off the table as its less debilitating than a broken arm.

2) Its presentation is sabotaging its narrative justification. This has to do with the lazy storytelling. Essentially, and as many users here have argued, the resurrections appeal to mutants as a way to reunite with their loved ones. The shady aspects of Krakoa are negligable to see your friends and family again. The problem is that that is not what we are seeing. Because Hickman isn't interested (by his own admission) in telling any stories about people reuniting with their friends and families, the reader is robbed of any emotional connection with the concept. We aren't given any reason to care. The only thing we are seeing is it being treated as a respawn point.

3) I've seen it before, and done better. This is entirely personal, but this is a collection of sci-fi tropes I have seen before. Quite a bit, actually. Some of it has even been used in other Marvel comics. You mention the consciousness issue? Seen it. Hell, I've seen it in stories that do and don't have confirmed afterlives and souls. I know these story beats. I know what's coming. Its boring, and makes the X men look like idiots. It feels like an obvious bad idea that's going to blow up in their faces in 6 months.



Combined with the bad idea of the resurrection, this is why I can't take Krakoa seriously. Another obvious bad idea. As soon as they showed up and got much of the leading positions, it became clear that Krakoa isn't meant to last. Its another example of a story decision that has results visible from space. Again, it makes them look like idiots, and damages they're credibility as heroes. I'm going to have trouble when it all comes apart being interested in Betsy, Rictor and Jubilee, because I'll always be thinking of that extended period where working with Apocalypse and helping him in his schemes. This is, again, entirely personal, and I know a lot of people have no trouble disassociating things like this.

The only stake ressurrection has is when something happens and they can't use it anymore.

For now we know that mutants will be fine while the ressurrection proccess is working. It puts them in a very safe position;

There is this too, we didn't saw any of these reunions.

Betsy and rictor siding with Apocalypse over Gambit was really bad.

[Tycon]

No, we were trying to get away from pointless shock deaths that did nothing to serve the narrative. You can't honestly tell me that the death and Ressurection of Xavier as well as the other Krakoans and QQ didnt have narrative importance. So far the deaths in X-Force have been handled well.

I’m not talking about Xavier, I’m talking about all the cameos that were just X-characters getting gunned down.

[myownlittleusername]

The arguments against the resurrection protocols are incredibly disingenuous. Marvel in general and the X office specifically have been grossly misusing death as a narrative device for so long that it lost its bite and meaning long before Hickman came to the X-office. Death hasn't been anything more than a narrative time out for years, hell more X-men have died and recovered than have had the flu. When Wolverine, Cyclops or really anyone not named Jean Grey (because reasons) died over the last few years did anyone really believe they were going to stay dead? Hell even with Jean most people didn't think she would always be dead and kept waiting for her inevitable return. How can anyone claim that resurrection have removed stakes when no one believed in them in the first place?

Well, C-lister and below usually stayed dead, at least until a writer forgot they were supposed to be dead.

B-listers were always resurrected, but usually we got a convoluted return story out of it.

Same for A-listers, only with the convoluted story getting more marketing and titles.

[Kisinith]

Betsy and rictor siding with Apocalypse over Gambit was really bad.

That... didn't happen. Rictor sacrificed the crystals Apocalypse wanted to save Gambit. Betsy didn't side with Apocalypse she noted that Gambit attacking him while he was performing the ritual to banish the monsters attacking the UK was bad timing because you know, magic monsters attacking all over the UK. It might be different if they had an alternative plan to stop the attacking monsters but... they didn't.

[JB]

That... didn't happen. Rictor sacrificed the crystals Apocalypse wanted to save Gambit. Betsy didn't side with Apocalypse she noted that Gambit attacking him while he was performing the ritual to banish the monsters attacking the UK was bad timing because you know, magic monsters attacking all over the UK. It might be different if they had an alternative plan to stop the attacking monsters but... they didn't.

Agreed. As soon as Gambit lunged for •-[A]-• I thought "now is not the time bruh, monsters everywhere!"

[pkingdom]

The arguments against the resurrection protocols are incredibly disingenuous. Marvel in general and the X office specifically have been grossly misusing death as a narrative device for so long that it lost its bite and meaning long before Hickman came to the X-office. Death hasn't been anything more than a narrative time out for years, hell more X-men have died and recovered than have had the flu. When Wolverine, Cyclops or really anyone not named Jean Grey (because reasons) died over the last few years did anyone really believe they were going to stay dead? Hell even with Jean most people didn't think she would always be dead and kept waiting for her inevitable return. How can anyone claim that resurrection have removed stakes when no one believed in them in the first place?

I don't think so. Marvel has been mowing down mutants for years with terrible writing, but going the extra step and making death an actual joke is a step too far. They could just as easily just stop writing stories revolving around mutant death. The resurrections don't prevent death, if anything it lets writers use it for cheap shock moves (sorry X-factor, but its becoming a problem). It feels like a solution to bad writing plaguing the franchise was more bad writing. Now instead of consequences being a joke, consequences have just been removed entirely.

Now the only stories that have stakes are ones where the Five, and only when more than 3 are at risk. Or when every Cerebro copy or every telepath on the island is at risk at the same time. If not, than it doesn't matter. If the refugees and the entire team in Maruaders get killed, big deal. They'll all be back in a week. If the team gets party wiped in Excalibur, they can try again. If they fail at making alliances in New Mutants, well, they're already basically immortal, so they don't really need any help.

[Soulsword323]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't Eyeboy die, and then was randomly brought back because the artist/X-editors didn't pay attention? He just showed up in the background one day, and then we all just ran with it.

As others have said, death had been meaningless long before Krakoa. No one ever expects it to stick. Writers always found a way to bring characters they wanted back.

[Zelena]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't Eyeboy die, and then was randomly brought back because the artist/X-editors didn't pay attention? He just showed up in the background one day, and then we all just ran with it.

As others have said, death had been meaningless long before Krakoa. No one ever expects it to stick. Writers always found a way to bring characters they wanted back.

Or they could decide not to bring them back. Now it is not possible. What a crowded place.

[Kisinith]

I don't think so. Marvel has been mowing down mutants for years with terrible writing, but going the extra step and making death an actual joke is a step too far. They could just as easily just stop writing stories revolving around mutant death. The resurrections don't prevent death, if anything it lets writers use it for cheap shock moves (sorry X-factor, but its becoming a problem). It feels like a solution to bad writing plaguing the franchise was more bad writing. Now instead of consequences being a joke, consequences have just been removed entirely.

Now the only stories that have stakes are ones where the Five, and only when more than 3 are at risk. Or when every Cerebro copy or every telepath on the island is at risk at the same time. If not, than it doesn't matter. If the refugees and the entire team in Maruaders get killed, big deal. They'll all be back in a week. If the team gets party wiped in Excalibur, they can try again. If they fail at making alliances in New Mutants, well, they're already basically immortal, so they don't really need any help.

You might be wrong...

Comic book characters themselves have made comments about the frequency of resurrections. Professor X has commented "in mutant heaven there are no pearly gates, but instead revolving doors." When Siryn was made aware of her father's death, she refused to mourn him, giddily claiming that since her father has died as an X-Man, he was likely going to be soon resurrected, shocking her friends... In one issue of The Incredible Hercules, there is a betting game for then deceased superheroes to return back to life.

6.jpg

7.jpg

...Hate to break it to you but comic book death has been an actual joke for a very long time. Xavier's comment goes all the way back to 1986.

1.jpg

Anyway, the whole idea behind the resurrection protocols and the 5, aside from fixing a lot of broken/dead X-Men toys was that removing the artificial stakes, that no one believes in anyway, makes the writers focus more on the other parts of the stories.

[pkingdom]

And I repeat, comic book death being a joke doesn't mean making it completely pointless in-story makes it better. When your story is about survival, making your heroes unkillable just make the entire thing feel pointless.