Ganesh - it's signalled pretty clearly - if a tad stereotypically - via the leather trousers and pink thunderbolt, "Big Thunder's on your team", references to "the hustle" and getting "shafted"
Don't forget "the pink and the proud", I love that one. I thought Big Thunder's come-on to MGM, while playing it obvious and safe for a mainstream comics audience, only served to show up MGM's sleaziness (as in impurity of heart) at being a fauxmosexual. Although, I agree, it was a bit Carry On in it's unashamed use of a stereotypical 'big gay man' to make its point, but then, in only a few panels, how else would you get across the idea? Or alternatively, was there any need for the idea to be there in the first place? Personally, I'd say yes, as one thing this book does is to examine the sexual undercurrents running through comics, especially in superheroine stories.
That's why Paquette is such a perfect choice for this book, with his hyper-sexualised portrayal of Alix which seems to be the opposite of her true character. I mean, even as a normal human, Alix seemed to be rejecting (or more accurately, simply not conforming to) the sex-kitten image, despite her physicality. First issues are usually for setting up characters, and Alix's sexuality has been conspicuous by not being pushed to the fore, despite her husband's comments.
On a side note, Bulleteer is obviously 'the sex book' in this project. What do we think is going to happen in the girl-on-girl climax next issue? I'm interested to see where GM is going with this. I'm sure there'll be a message about gender-stereotyping/women as sexual objects somewhere admid the grunting, tearing of clothes and exposing of body parts. Or am I the only one? |
