Ultimate Wolverine could still be alive with this loop hole.

[Trallis]

The problem is when a death is not well written, the audience has no problem having that death overturned. If a death is really well done, the audience is more likely not to want be overturned. Frankly pretty well all the deaths in Ultimatum are horribly written, so the writers and audience have no reason to respect those deaths, Wasp's death in particular came off as disrespectful to the character. So the deaths are not well written in the first place, why shouldn't the writer overturn it?

You're right. It sucks that a writer has the power to kill a character even if they're not willing to give the character the death they deserve. However, that doesn't mean some other writer should go find some cheesey loophole and bring the character back. My answer to why is complimentary to your reason for why the characters shouldn't be killed off in a stupid way: If a character can be easily brought back by some loophole or classic "comic book death and resurrection" move, the deaths themselves start to be just as meaningless. If there is no rule that a character can't be brought back, why should anyone bother to write a great death story. Why would anyone care if the character got the death they deserved. We need to demand quality in these things. Hell they're $4 each. I know the rule has been broken, but if the UU didn't have a loyal fanbase that liked the rule "Dead is Dead in the UU", Peter Parker's death would have meant NOTHING, and because of this, Bendis wouldn't have been as motivated to write such an amazing story. If it is understood that we won't accept cheesey resurrection, Marvel will think twice before letting their writers have that much power. Writers will also think twice before writing a crappy death for a character like Loeb did to so many. Want more Loeb deaths like in Ultimatum? Let Marvel know that you don't mind cheesey resurrections.

[Trallis]

Isn't that what Jimmy is? A teenage Wolverine clone?

Yes. X-23 would be something else entirely, and I think it would be pretty awesome. I like Jimmy. Both characters would be very different. I only know of 616 X-23 but her back story is awesome and she is freakin lethal. I've said it before.. I'd be picking up Ultimate X-Men every month if X-23 was in it.. instead of just picking it up for divided we fall

[MrV]

Yes. X-23 would be something else entirely, and I think it would be pretty awesome. I like Jimmy. Both characters would be very different. I only know of 616 X-23 but her back story is awesome and she is freakin lethal. I've said it before.. I'd be picking up Ultimate X-Men every month if X-23 was in it.. instead of just picking it up for divided we fall

In my Ultimate X-Men fan fiction I tried ultimatizing X-23 and making her/him something unique and unexpected.

Link:http://forums.comicbookresources.com...el-Fan-Fiction

X-23 debuts in page 5 of the thread, I think.

[The Master Meglomaniac]

You're right. It sucks that a writer has the power to kill a character even if they're not willing to give the character the death they deserve. However, that doesn't mean some other writer should go find some cheesey loophole and bring the character back. My answer to why is complimentary to your reason for why the characters shouldn't be killed off in a stupid way: If a character can be easily brought back by some loophole or classic "comic book death and resurrection" move, the deaths themselves start to be just as meaningless. If there is no rule that a character can't be brought back, why should anyone bother to write a great death story. Why would anyone care if the character got the death they deserved. We need to demand quality in these things. Hell they're $4 each. I know the rule has been broken, but if the UU didn't have a loyal fanbase that liked the rule "Dead is Dead in the UU", Peter Parker's death would have meant NOTHING, and because of this, Bendis wouldn't have been as motivated to write such an amazing story. If it is understood that we won't accept cheesey resurrection, Marvel will think twice before letting their writers have that much power. Writers will also think twice before writing a crappy death for a character like Loeb did to so many. Want more Loeb deaths like in Ultimatum? Let Marvel know that you don't mind cheesey resurrections.

Except there no evidence that if there was "no resurrections" rule, that Loeb wouldn't have killed off all those characters in Ultimatum in a cheap and disrespectful ways. Loeb didn't kill off those characters because he thought he could bring them back later, he killed them off because he is a hack. Heck there is never going to be a "no resurrections" rule, because everything will always be up to the discretion of the writers and the editors and if they think there is some gain to brining a character back, they will do it. This rule has already been broken in the UU, its little late to say it applies, it only applies when the writers feel like it. Heck the death of Spider-Man story only happened because Bendis brought back Green Goblin, so the great death story in USM started with a resurrection.

Also there have been some good stories where a dead character comes back, most people like the Winter Soldier story and I had no problem with them brining back Dr. Octopus in the 90s, because his death really sucked, it was there to make the big new 90s villain look cool by killing a established villain.

The problem I have with death and the UU, is often characters way to quickly and often write themselves into a corner. Not only did they kill all those characters in Ultimatum, but even before that they killed off characters after only a few issues, like Shaw. Sometimes the writers don't seem to think about the fact that if the character is killed off, they either have resurrect them or not use them again. You have to be really careful killing off a character then most of the UU writers have been. If the deaths were written better and felt like a natural exit for the character, then almost no one would be talking about brining them back.

[Kurolegacy]

Isn't that what Jimmy is? A teenage Wolverine clone?

As I've said before, at this point, he might as well be. At least then there'd be an excuse for him acting like a teenage version of Wolverine.

[CaptainMarvell]

Geez, no wonder Earth-616 is so shitty. There are no real consequences to time travel because they play it safely.

You're misinformed about how Earth-1610 functions. The rules for time travel of Earth-616 are irrelevant to Earth-1610.

THE PROOF: (found below)

In the Ultimate Fantastic Four story arc "President Thor" the changing of the past had real effects in the present timeline. That is why Ben had to go back in time to restore the original timeline, otherwise the changes would have been permanent. That is also why the F4 had to follow the Chrono-Bandits back in UFF #21, because they went to the past and were going to kill the first evolved amphibian in history--which if they did would have resulted in everything in the present ceasing to exist.

All that is canon, as is the existence of the Argiopes, which devour time travelers who attempt to mess with the timeline.

This proves that Cable won't come back, because like Butterfly-Girl he doesn't exist anymore, and young Bishop will grow into the old one but won't marry Psylocke anymore because she died and the future has been changed.

Yes, I read President Thor, its one of my favorites. I really think its up to what the writer believes. Time travel is a tricky thing. If you go back and change something and make the future the way you want it, it would prevent you, in the future, from going back to change something.

For example, if you go back in time and kill Hitler, then in the future, you'll never go back in time to kill Hitler because you'll have never known who he is, thus if you're not going back in time to kill him then he's not getting killed by a time traveler. However, if you go back and kill Hitler, you're creating a new circumstance, a new reality which basically orphans you from your home timeline/reality (unless you had some sort of "return" device, but it would take you back to the timeline that didn't have Hitler get killed by a time traveler). That's kind of what Back to the Future is like. When Biff went back in time, his changes should have erased the Marty and Doc Brown that were time traveling, but they remained in existence because their home reality was intact. So long story short, you can't alter the present by time traveling. All you can do is create a new reality and make it better (or worse) for that timeline. So Cable/Wolverine still exists, but in an alternate universe detached from the Ultimate universe.

[CaptainMarvell]

As I've said before, at this point, he might as well be. At least then there'd be an excuse for him acting like a teenage version of Wolverine.

Lol I keep forgetting, that's my theory and not fact. Technically he isn't a Wolverine clone, but I keep thinking since Wolverine didn't tell him who his mother was, that's the case.

[Trallis]

Except there no evidence that if there was "no resurrections" rule, that Loeb wouldn't have killed off all those characters in Ultimatum in a cheap and disrespectful ways. Loeb didn't kill off those characters because he thought he could bring them back later, he killed them off because he is a hack. Heck there is never going to be a "no resurrections" rule, because everything will always be up to the discretion of the writers and the editors and if they think there is some gain to brining a character back, they will do it. This rule has already been broken in the UU, its little late to say it applies, it only applies when the writers feel like it. Heck the death of Spider-Man story only happened because Bendis brought back Green Goblin, so the great death story in USM started with a resurrection.

Also there have been some good stories where a dead character comes back, most people like the Winter Soldier story and I had no problem with them brining back Dr. Octopus in the 90s, because his death really sucked, it was there to make the big new 90s villain look cool by killing a established villain.

The problem I have with death and the UU, is often characters way to quickly and often write themselves into a corner. Not only did they kill all those characters in Ultimatum, but even before that they killed off characters after only a few issues, like Shaw. Sometimes the writers don't seem to think about the fact that if the character is killed off, they either have resurrect them or not use them again. You have to be really careful killing off a character then most of the UU writers have been. If the deaths were written better and felt like a natural exit for the character, then almost no one would be talking about brining them back.

I never said it would have stopped Loeb from doing what he did. I said it will stop other writers from doing more things like what Loeb did. And you proved my point with your last sentence. The reason people want to bring characters back is because of crappy deaths. If characters can't come back, crappy deaths won't happen so often.
Also: you're entitled to your opinion but it's pretty disrespectful to call Loeb a hack. Yeah, Ultimatum sucked. He did a terrible job, but the guy has written some amazing comics and any comic book fan should be appreciative of Loeb's contributions.

[Kurolegacy]

Lol I keep forgetting, that's my theory and not fact. Technically he isn't a Wolverine clone, but I keep thinking since Wolverine didn't tell him who his mother was, that's the case.

Jimmy's entire origin is one of the most convoluted things in post-Ultimatum. Somehow Logan remembers that he has a son despite the fact that throughout Ultimate X-Men he remembers nothing about his past or even hinted at having a son (something that would have otherwise been brought up in all the times it was mentioned about his family) and during the time that Jimmy would have been conceived he was either in the possession of Weapon X or with Magneto.

[_Pandora_]

I'm glad this conversation is still going.

I just wanted to add that my reason for making this thread wasn't really overall for coming up with ideas to bring characters back to life. I just really thought that there is still more X-Men characters still alive that were in the previous pages of Ultimate X-Men. I just believed that not all of the old characters (beyond the ones featured in the book now) that were part of the team before Ultimatum wouldn't all be dead.

This conversation as been pretty productive. So far I've discovered that a younger Bishop is still around. I previously knew Jubilee was still around. She hasn't been on the Ultimate X-Men team yet.....that's just not yet.....though she can still join the team. I'm still looking for other characters.