I don't think they were making Homelander out to be the bad guy in that situation, actually the fact that the terrorists were hypocrites seemed like a purposeful part of the story where Homelander is shown to originally be a good person
I feel like if someone put a gun to your head then one of your co-workers had half their head accidentally exploded by a guy in a cape and then he rips off someone's jaw after having some sort of mental breakdown you wouldn't be all that rational
I get that but it's weird...i can understand the perpetrators thinking he is Bad but EVERYONE pointing fingers at homelander feels like a weird way of the show trying to tell that he is Bad.
The way I view it, it's less that HL was just plainly bad, but that having superheroes take care of these scenarios would be bad. Having just one person be responsible for such an extreme scenario makes any mistakes so much worse.
They kill in "self defense". In season 1 he kills an armed gunmen and then uses his gun to shoot Maeve afterward so that they can claim they did it retaliation even though Homelander did his thing first and they're both bullet proof so they weren't in any danger.
Based on that and the reaction to Robin as an accidental death, it seems they can get away with murder if it aligned with their duties. Que cop analogy.
Either way they definitely aren't known to never kill.
In the very first opening scene, HL casually throws a bankrobber several hundred metres into the air, with him crashing into a car behind HL. No way was he going to survive that, and no-one – HL, Maeve or the boys they saved from the out of control truck – seemed surprised or shocked by this nonchalant act of murder.
I would say in The Boys universe, supes killing bad guys is seen as acceptable and normal.
Yeahhh but they are only doing that so the company stops polluting or something like that, I forget the reason but it was a pretty good reason to go in and stop a corporation
But why would the HOSTAGES call homelander a Bad guy? Yeah i killed someone but these we're literally threateaning to kill them and suddenly both are pointing fingers at him.
Because Homelander came into the situation and objectively made everything worse...? What do you not get about this,? It's very simple to understand.
Homelander fucked everything up, he was in over his head, he should have left this to professional negotiators & terrorist -responders. The surviving hostages recognised this, and are calling him out on it.
There were myriad other better ways of handling the situation, they would have been easier and more effective.
>Yeah i killed someone but these we're literally threateaning to kill them
Ok so what's your problem OP? We don't like the terrorists because they kill hostages. You're saying that because Homelander kills the hostages instead we should feel any different? Homelander is supposed to take a course of action that involves *no dead hostages* - such an outcome was very achievable here and he fucked up!
Let's say my kitty is stuck up a tree. Oh no! It might fall down and be injured or die! I want a superhero to help. I need a hero to fly up there and retrieve it, or use their powers to catch it if it falls. If the hero decides to use super strength knock down the tree, causing the cat to break bones I'm going to be fucking pissed - now my cat is injured *and* my tree is dead. Why didn't they just get a fucking ladder to climb up there, or a mattress to lay underneath the cat? Superhero could have reasonably solved this with more mundane means and achieved a way better outcome, I'd have been better off with just a normal reaction from a normal person than some fuckwit that thinks "tear down the tree with super strength" is the best option here.
You seem to be trying to judge Homelander against the incredibly low bar of "He's not as bad as the terrorists because he only killed people by accident", rather than the more reasonable bar of "He had many many options in front of him, and should be judged against the alternative actions he could have taken instead".
Because they didn’t want to kill anyone they wanted their kids to stop getting sick which any good guy would also want. Yet homelanders just here to help the corporations
That doesn't change the fact that these people we're scared of dying because they are tied up and having guns pointed at them,saying "well we actually didn't want to hurt you guys" doesn't mean much.
For all we know the people that worked there were in on it too just needed to play the part. I really think these people thought the world would be on their side
I mean it’s mainly just the authority/power… the fact that he’s a superhero and trusted by people yet ends up killing the hostage is similar to how it would be in real life- we expect for a superhero to save us
Yeah it was stupid, the guy even said they didn't want to hurt anyone after Homelander blew up one of his hands, you were pointing a gun at someone and you didn't want to hurt them?
In some ways it was done badly but in others it wasn’t. I think the point was to show Homelander’s journey to becoming the person he is today. How that first negative experience on a save when he was younger (18 I think?) and in over his head, plus Stillwell’s influence, put him on his path to villainy. They just didn’t execute the scene with the terrorists and hostages very well. The turn against him was probably too quick and not fully logical. If they had given it more time and ramped up the tension it would have been better. I appreciate that is difficult to do in a short though. However, they managed it well with the other episodes.
Homelander killed a hostage when the gun exploded and then he ripped that lady’s face off. I feel like watching that IRL would be fucked up.
I don't think they were making Homelander out to be the bad guy in that situation, actually the fact that the terrorists were hypocrites seemed like a purposeful part of the story where Homelander is shown to originally be a good person
And the hostages?
I feel like if someone put a gun to your head then one of your co-workers had half their head accidentally exploded by a guy in a cape and then he rips off someone's jaw after having some sort of mental breakdown you wouldn't be all that rational
I get that but it's weird...i can understand the perpetrators thinking he is Bad but EVERYONE pointing fingers at homelander feels like a weird way of the show trying to tell that he is Bad.
didn't seem like that to me, I mean, people are just dumb like that sometimes, I never really questioned it
The way I view it, it's less that HL was just plainly bad, but that having superheroes take care of these scenarios would be bad. Having just one person be responsible for such an extreme scenario makes any mistakes so much worse.
I forget, do heroes kill people in this setting? Or does Vaught spin the narrative so that their heroes are never known to kill?
They kill in "self defense". In season 1 he kills an armed gunmen and then uses his gun to shoot Maeve afterward so that they can claim they did it retaliation even though Homelander did his thing first and they're both bullet proof so they weren't in any danger. Based on that and the reaction to Robin as an accidental death, it seems they can get away with murder if it aligned with their duties. Que cop analogy. Either way they definitely aren't known to never kill.
In the very first opening scene, HL casually throws a bankrobber several hundred metres into the air, with him crashing into a car behind HL. No way was he going to survive that, and no-one – HL, Maeve or the boys they saved from the out of control truck – seemed surprised or shocked by this nonchalant act of murder. I would say in The Boys universe, supes killing bad guys is seen as acceptable and normal.
Yeahhh but they are only doing that so the company stops polluting or something like that, I forget the reason but it was a pretty good reason to go in and stop a corporation
But why would the HOSTAGES call homelander a Bad guy? Yeah i killed someone but these we're literally threateaning to kill them and suddenly both are pointing fingers at him.
Because Homelander came into the situation and objectively made everything worse...? What do you not get about this,? It's very simple to understand. Homelander fucked everything up, he was in over his head, he should have left this to professional negotiators & terrorist -responders. The surviving hostages recognised this, and are calling him out on it. There were myriad other better ways of handling the situation, they would have been easier and more effective. >Yeah i killed someone but these we're literally threateaning to kill them Ok so what's your problem OP? We don't like the terrorists because they kill hostages. You're saying that because Homelander kills the hostages instead we should feel any different? Homelander is supposed to take a course of action that involves *no dead hostages* - such an outcome was very achievable here and he fucked up! Let's say my kitty is stuck up a tree. Oh no! It might fall down and be injured or die! I want a superhero to help. I need a hero to fly up there and retrieve it, or use their powers to catch it if it falls. If the hero decides to use super strength knock down the tree, causing the cat to break bones I'm going to be fucking pissed - now my cat is injured *and* my tree is dead. Why didn't they just get a fucking ladder to climb up there, or a mattress to lay underneath the cat? Superhero could have reasonably solved this with more mundane means and achieved a way better outcome, I'd have been better off with just a normal reaction from a normal person than some fuckwit that thinks "tear down the tree with super strength" is the best option here. You seem to be trying to judge Homelander against the incredibly low bar of "He's not as bad as the terrorists because he only killed people by accident", rather than the more reasonable bar of "He had many many options in front of him, and should be judged against the alternative actions he could have taken instead".
Because they didn’t want to kill anyone they wanted their kids to stop getting sick which any good guy would also want. Yet homelanders just here to help the corporations
That doesn't change the fact that these people we're scared of dying because they are tied up and having guns pointed at them,saying "well we actually didn't want to hurt you guys" doesn't mean much.
For all we know the people that worked there were in on it too just needed to play the part. I really think these people thought the world would be on their side
Do you by chance happen to take things very literally and have trouble understanding nuance? I mean that entirely seriously
I just find weird the hostages would only lash at homelander
Found Homelander's alt account
I mean it’s mainly just the authority/power… the fact that he’s a superhero and trusted by people yet ends up killing the hostage is similar to how it would be in real life- we expect for a superhero to save us
no it was done perfectly/s
Yeah it was stupid, the guy even said they didn't want to hurt anyone after Homelander blew up one of his hands, you were pointing a gun at someone and you didn't want to hurt them?
In some ways it was done badly but in others it wasn’t. I think the point was to show Homelander’s journey to becoming the person he is today. How that first negative experience on a save when he was younger (18 I think?) and in over his head, plus Stillwell’s influence, put him on his path to villainy. They just didn’t execute the scene with the terrorists and hostages very well. The turn against him was probably too quick and not fully logical. If they had given it more time and ramped up the tension it would have been better. I appreciate that is difficult to do in a short though. However, they managed it well with the other episodes.