Cyclops said:
So I guess I better pitch them a book in which Benjamin Grimm is a borderline psychotic, dark, and edgy character for the new millenium.
When you make a book just more of the same, which is what
the Thing is and was, your probably dooming yourself to failure.
No you do not have to do a 180 with a character, but you have to do something. Dan Slott seems to think it's about obscure characters and comic references. But it is not. Most people don't know the extent of Marvel history to have a geekgasm when Arcade and Murderworld show up.
Yeah, you do need to preserve recognizable elements of characters, but you need to inject new life into them at the same time. I am surprised
She-Hulk is still an ongoing, I like it, but it's really kind of mediocre.
This message board represents a very small portion of readership. I take two guys to the comic store every week (one a Marvel fan) and he loves
X-Men, Ultimate Universe, Civil War and
New Avengers. But I don't think I've ever seen him read
Thing. Those books just don't interest people. And I don't really think it's a shame. When you make a book called the Thing you have to give your general readership some reason to read it, and not just read Fantastic Four you lose.
The first time around
Thing's hook was he was not a member of the Fantastic Four. She-Hulk had taken his place and so if you wanted your Ben Grimm fix, you read his book. It actually did alright from what I understand.
Wolverine capitalized on two things. One the "death of the X-Men" as a reason to input this solo story into the MU. Two, the rising popularity of him as a star and the mysteries surrounding his past. They used these things to divorce him from the team and create a successful spinoff. You couldn't do that with Cyclops (however it was accomplished with the original five) or Nightcrawler.
They could do something new with Thing. Take him off the FF, have
the Thing ongoing deal with his estrangement from his allies following Civil War (or something). You can still keep the basic elements plus something new, it's not just Thing focused Fantastic Four books.
New things sell books. It's a sad fact you have to face. As much as we "hate" change, I think Quesada successfully parodied us as loving it.
I think our new store owner put it best "at least Quesada is doing things with the characters". Or as Roach says "I like change, just not bad change". Slott to me represents status quo. Let's keep everything the same and boring. Maybe it counters Quesada, but I honestly don't see the solution to him as being "no change". You need the change, I cannot see Spider-Man fight Doc Octopus just like always forever. There has to be something more the next time around, whether it's raising the stakes or changing the character.
There is potential in shifting around these characters. Thing may joke, but what if he did not. What could drive him to change. If you can hit that story and hit it well you can make it stick, and people will love it.