Do you guys think Submariner 1 has potential to be a big key? 2 2

[William-James88]

9 minutes ago, Pantodude said:

  It was a big deal that the Sub-Mariner received his own self-titled series in Sub-Mariner #1 despite being the first and longest-running anti-hero (all the way back to Marvel Comics #1 in 1939) and despite never having joined the Avengers up to that point (that didn't happen until 1985).  By contrast, anti-hero Hulk was a co-founder of the Avengers in 1963, years before IH#102 in 1968.  Just my 1.

Should we not count the fact that he got his own self titled series already in 1941?

[Pantodude]

Remember that both Cap and Subby were canceled in early 1950s.  In the new era of reinvented super-heroes that was the Silver Age, it was significant that Marvel succeeded in bringing back Cap and Subby, and particularly Subby to the point that he could have his own self-titled series again while remaining an anti-hero.   

Edited February 11, 2021 by Pantodude

[William-James88]

11 hours ago, Pantodude said:

Remember that both Cap and Subby were canceled in early 1950s.  In the new era of reinvented super-heroes that was the Silver Age, it was significant that Marvel succeeded in bringing back Cap and Subby, and particularly Subby to the point that he could have his own self-titled series again while remaining an anti-hero.   

I get that, thanks for the insight. What I wonder is how much significance matters in stirring interest in a book. For instance, FF 6 is a very significant book, with that being the very first Marvel villain team up. But that book hasn't moved in 10 years and I'm not sure if it will ever become hot.