Do You Prefer Characters Dead???

[gumOnShoe]

When you are reading a story or watching a movie. Do you prefer to have the characters die and get hurt or do you prefer more of the character interaction and normal resolution of conflicts... I know there's a healthy mix of shows, but sometimes you are watching or reading something and you can't help the author was a little weak for not really addressing every issue.

Take Harry Potter & Rowling. She wrote the death of Hermione and Ron, but had to go back and undo it because it made her absolutely depressed and she couldn't go through with it.

In Stranger Than Fiction, you have a similar build up where the main character is going to die, but the author decides its better to keep him alive. Personally, I felt this was the best representation of this problem I had seen yet, even though it denied the reality of the situation which is that sometimes good people with everything going the right way just die. You never really see that in movies, and maybe that's because you don't want to see it to begin with.

[Strength]

I personally enjoy it when the main character dies at the end. It's the simplest form of closure, and it ensures there won't be a shitty sequel to the story.

[Tribal]

That mainly depends on the story, but yes. Mostly I do.

[The-Omnipresence]

It really depends on the content of the story. Like in Terminator Salvation, John Conner should of died in that movie, leaving the rest of the resistance to learn not to depend on him, but follow his example and fight back. BUT NOOOOOOOO, the quest for more money will always get in the way.

[Shikamarana]

Why not have your cake and eat it too?

Make the characters die, and then bring them back. And when people ask how they're back, just make up some bullshit that involves "magic".

[Prinzy2]

If they've been killed off then I prefer they stay dead. Nothing like Superman being resurrected by aliens to make even a fictitious story feel fake. I also don't like unexplainable rescues where someone just happens to "stumble" on a clue that leads them to save someone else.

That doesn't mean I'm not sad to see characters go though, I still miss Kutner. :(

[Strength]

At 10/30/09 12:36 PM, Shikamarana wrote: Make the characters die, and then bring them back. And when people ask how they're back, just make up some bullshit that involves "magic".

I think this is the source of all my anger.

[ErickBg3]

At 10/30/09 12:32 PM, Strength wrote: I personally enjoy it when the main character dies at the end. It's the simplest form of closure, and it ensures there won't be a shitty sequel to the story.

I agree.

ie. I am Legend

[RandomFreak]

Depends on the movie, some stories really lend themselves to character death whereas others it would just kill the feel of the film.

[Lost-Chances]

I think a story can not be complete without the death of a character. It's just trying to do it while making the character seem important and pulling at heart-strings. I remember reading The Green Mile and while the death of the prisoners felt "meh", although that's probably not to the author's fault, the rat's death was very tragic.

An example, of what I could probably consider a bad way to execute deaths would probably be death of more than one central character one-at-a-time in a too short space of time. In The Dark Tower (another Stephen King book), I always felt Eddie and Jake died in a too-short space of time. I mean, I felt bad for Eddie because his death was dragged out but considering I also read Jake's death in a night-or-two later, I just couldn't feel much about it. I think having two central characters die in a too-short space of time just leaves you with a feeling of numbness with the second character.

I think for me, it's going to be "that response". Context comes in way too much, not to mention that the ideas being addressed may not call for an extreme response, like death, in order to be translated on to a page or a piece of film. Obviously you can't avoid conflict in a conventional narrative, and seeing as external conflict is (arguably, probably just me speaking here) easier to plan out and make believable, then bringing a death in might be an acceptable idea. I believe that some conflict requires the characters in a narrative to be active and alive though, to bring in internal conflicts too, since, you know, one character's conflicts disappear the moment they're wiped out.

It can be interesting to see main character deaths carried out in unorthodox ways though, not so much experimental ways, but ambitious ways. Janet Leigh in Psycho for instance. That example rests on the question, "Is Janet Leigh's character the protagonist of the film?"Honestly, that sort of thinking interests me, haha.

I don't know if this is what you were expecting. My overall view is that death is an extreme measure of resolving a conflict, hence it is relevant in extreme circumstances. In others, it can seem horrendously out of place, and we focus ourselves on issues that the work wasn't really discussing, or something really trivial. There's an almost unlimited number of ways of reading a text of course, but fnpqd[oq.

Yeah, I'm a bit lost now to tell the truth.

[HeavyMetalGuy]

YES

[megakill]

the problem is that if the main charcters die, your remove any chance of a sequel.

personally i think its better to see the main characters die because it makes for a great, emotion filled scene, and kills any chance of a really shitty sequel

[gumOnShoe]

At 10/30/09 01:05 PM, Lost-Chances wrote: I think a story can not be complete without the death of a character.

I submit Happy Endings.

That said, if every story ends that way, aren't the truly interesting stories the ones that deal with something else?

[Alpharius120]

Some movies, like slasher films, I believe everyone should die. Other movies, not so much.
It all really depends.

[1Tyla1]

I prefer my characters left as they are in a situation, or a "good" ending that they are back to their old selves, at least, as much as possible. When characters die I feel that a part of the story has just been blown off with a shotgun.

[Lost-Chances]

At 10/30/09 01:33 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

At 10/30/09 01:05 PM, Lost-Chances wrote: I think a story can not be complete without the death of a character.

I submit Happy Endings.

Haha, it is a good point, but I think it would only work on REALLY long scale stories and romance stories. A story about, say, killer plants that manage to wipe out humanity except a few survivors who didn't get blinded the night before could end open-ended by two survivors (whom the story follows), find a camp on the Isle Of Wight (The Day Of The Tiffids). However, when it comes to closed-endings, I'd say it would have to involve the death of the main character/s.

That said, if every story ends that way, aren't the truly interesting stories the ones that deal with something else?

I wouldn't say every story ends that way, I mean Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas had no deaths but it was extremely enjoyable. However, typically good stories, for me, always include an element of death. Maybe I'm morbid? Maybe I just enjoy the conflict? Who knows really?

[boloneyman]

At 10/30/09 12:42 PM, ErickBg3 wrote:

ie. I am Legend

Robert's death makes a lot more sense in the book. It just didn't work as well in the movie.

I think it is something you have to be careful about. Killing a character should give the piece substance and make it work. Like the ending of the book I Am Legend, or Bid Time Return (also known as Somewhere In Time).

I just saw Othello for the first time a few nights ago, and I can't decide if it would have been better for Iago to die or not. I think killing off the bulk of the characters worked well in Hamlet because Hamlet is constantly pondering death, and by act 5 I think he is ready to die even though he doesn't know that he is going to be poisoned.

[pyromaniac616]

Have you heard a series called Blakes 7? It is quite good, and all the main characters die.

[TheReno]

In both reading and watching the order of the phoenix, I wanted someone (preferably Gordon Freeman) to go up to Umbridge and shotgun her in the face.

[TheLambsAreScreaming]

I prefer them to come back from the dead and eat other major characters.

[Hybrid-Of-Souls]

Watching stupid horny teenagers in typical Jason/Freddy-esque horror movies is always fun. Because it's natural for them to die stupid deaths at the hands of the killers.

[Kanon]

At 10/30/09 12:34 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

I'll give you the chance the reform your posting ways in this topic before I revoke your privileged for posting for the next 3 days. You've got an hour and a half to come up with a better response. At which point, you as a poster, will die.

gumonshoe, im starting to wonder if you are newgrounds jigsaw. I think by mentioning this i am next, oh well im waiting...

no seriously though, this is the third death threat i have seen from you in only 2 days lol.

[cool154]

I like it when the characters die. It adds a nice twist to the plot, but only if done well. If not, it's just stupid and boring.

[gumOnShoe]

At 10/30/09 02:18 PM, kanon1 wrote: gumonshoe, im starting to wonder if you are newgrounds jigsaw. I think by mentioning this i am next, oh well im waiting...

lol, links? (I've got to see this)

[Slain]

In certain movies yes, such as Public Enemies where it's loosely based on John Dillinger's life. But not movies like Pulp Fiction when you sort of have an attachment to John Travolta's character and it kind of just comes out of no where.

[Krbyfan1]

It all depends on the character. If I find I like the character, I don't want them to die, but I don't want them to continue shitty/unnessecary sequels. If I find it adds drama, intruige, emotion, or suspense then yeah, I'd love to see it.

[Innermike]

I like movies that dont have a full ending , no real closure but no sequel , like wanted the ending is so
bad ass

[Gedveikur]

law abiding citizen SPOILER ALERT!!!!!

Take for example law abiding citizen, I was disappointed when Gerard Butlers character died, but somehow I feel that just made the movie better somehow since you really weren't expecting it. What I am trying to say is that it really depends on the character and the plot development.

[ScytheCutter]

Carson Beckett.