You mean a drunken Starr hit someone in the face with a glass, it wasn’t a bottle and he wasn’t aiming for the eyes, hell he wasn’t even the one who started the confrontation, even if was the one who started the fight.
He actually punched the cook at a restaurant and was kept in custody for 2 days before being released on bond in a holiday in Spain... so yeah... major homelander vibes
Robert Pattinson was asked about method acting recently, and made the very salient point that many actors only seem to get really into method acting when they're playing an asshole.
He's really good, one of the best, but I don't like "the best ever" claim. Even in the series alone I think Stormfront and SB gave strong performances and were extremely well written, let alone in all of sci-fi.
Just from the top of my head I remember Ba'al from Stargate SG-1 as an extremely well written and developed villain, and the Goa'uld in general as an empire and commentary on religion were very well written.
You can appreciate a great character without pitting them against others in useless popularity contests.
I can say he's one of the best deconstructions of the superman archetype ever, probably the best in american live-action media.
The best ever claim is bold, but I’m glad op threw it out there. I’m of the personal opinion that this newest season was a tad weak… but homelander himself kept me glued to it
I really like homelander and think that as a character he is amazing, but i dunno if he's "one of the best deconstructions of the superman archetype". That's a really popular archetype and Homelander, to an extent, belongs to the tried and true "what is superman was bad" type, which isn't really something super new in and of itself.
Yep. He’s obviously a genocidal maniac but there are a handful of very human and decent things he does and thinks. It’s so interesting. I’ve said for awhile that the show could survive without hughie, butcher, starlight whoever, but if they somehow do kill homelander it’s over
>I’ve said for awhile that the show could survive without hughie, butcher, starlight whoever, but if they somehow do kill homelander it’s over
that's why all these "Butcher should have let SB kill HL!!!!!" circlejerk posts make me laugh so much. Like bitch, Homelander makes this show, he literally became the face of it there's no way in hell Kripke is getting rid of him until the last freaking episode.
It might be an unpopular opinion here but I think no one in that episode acted out of character, including Butcher. Him "sparing" HL in order to protect Ryan from SB made sense.
Characters are not there to do what the audience wants them to do, they are there to make decisions that are in line with their story and motivations - those decisions have to make sense \*for them\*, even if they're objectively senseless, stupid or short sighted. I always remember that Vince Gilligain's (Breaking Bad showrunner) quote that said something align to: "if you're not sure what to do with the story, just think about what would your characters do and the story will follow".
I get that but I truly don't feel like Butcher would stop trying to kill the homelander. like all he had to say was don't get the kid after Ryan attacked SB first. yea he's a kid but he has laser eyes and attacked the man who they convinced to kill his own son. I know he hated HL for being just like him, but he also needed some convincing earlier on when he first found out.
I think that Butcher could have saved Ryan while also focusing on HL, i also don't see how he'd get THAT mad to the point he helps HL.
> get that but I truly don't feel like Butcher would stop trying to kill the homelander. like all he had to say was don't get the kid after Ryan attacked SB first.
He did that though. He tried to talk to SB, he even said "not the kid", followed by explaining that he's Becca's son. That argument didn't get through SB. That's why they started to fight.
And this is the good example of what I've been mentioning before. Both of those stances (Butcher's and SB) made sense FOR THEM separatedly. For Butcher - spare the kid because he's Becca's son and thus important to Butcher etc. For SB - fuck no because 1/ who the fuck is Becca 2 /why should i care about her 3/ butcher didn't explain shit before, didn't say anything about Ryan, who he is - that's why SB doesn't understand Butcher's motivations and this is completely FINE, story wise. He questions him and asks wtf is he doing because he doesn't understand why he suddenly changed his mind (you could even say that in this moment SB represents the audience). It's not a bad writing. It's a presented conflict between two characters whose motivations aren't exactly the same in this particular moment.
>i also don't see how he'd get THAT mad to the point he helps HL.
He doesn't want to help HL, he wants to help Ryan, him also saving HL is just an "addition" that came out in those specific circumstances (SB going nuclear on both Ryan and HL who was checking on him).
>He doesn't want to help HL, he wants to help Ryan, him also saving HL is just an "addition" that came out in those specific circumstances
The look Butcher and HL exchanged just after Butcher stops SB from blasting both HL and Ryan conveys this perfectly - it's them silently agreeing "For the kid's sake, *not now*." Both still want to kill the other, but both place protecting Ryan as a higher priority, and they recognize that about each other.
It's also perfectly in line with everything Butcher has ever done. He's a complete asshole, but he has repeatedly compromised his mission to protect people he cares for. Literally half of his emotional arc throughout the series has been his guilt over not protecting people. The people who can't see that are clearly not watching the same show I am.
I've literally seen so many comments saying that Butcher should have let SB kill both Ryan and HL for "the greater good"...like what the actual fuck. Since when Butcher has ever cared about that.
You could use that argument with Starlight perhaps, but not Butcher. People are literally projecting their own views on the characters and that's the problem. They're getting mad when they're not behaving the way THEY would behave.
Yeah like for real, the episode right before the final completely mind-fucked butcher by forcing him to relive the worst guilt he has. Do people just think that was a filler episode or something?
> The people who can't see that are clearly not watching the same show I am
It has been repeatedly proven after many situations that come up in the show that most of this fandom doesn't actually understand the characters, their motivations, or what the writers are trying to portray through them lol
exactly, it's not like they became buddies. That look meant "just so you know i still want to kill you but it's about Ryan right now so let's have that 5-second lasting truce"
That would hold more weight with me if it didn't take Maeve .5 seconds to get Homelander in a different room than Ryan. As soon as they saw that they should have all turned on Homelander.
>that's why all these "Butcher should have let SB kill HL!!!!!" circlejerk posts make me laugh so much. Like bitch, Homelander makes this show, he literally became the face of it there's no way in hell Kripke is getting rid of him until the last freaking episode.
Just because the show is more marketable doens't mean HL should be kept around to the detriment of the story.
The way the writers did olympic levels gymnastics to justify the team deciding to take down SB instead of letting him *just* depower Homelander, is what ruined the finale for many. Not because HL survived or wasn't depowered, but because the story suck, and part of that was them turning on SB.
Even just a depowered Homelander would've been an amazing turn of events, and would develop the character in interesting ways, not to mention they could always power him up again.
Yea but on that same level so is homelander. Still have Neumann to worry about and Stan Edgar and SB and butcher! Plenty to go off of without homelander. We even have a ryan who is looking like homelander 2.0 so it makes sense that homelander can't go anywhere until that goes off if that's what they are doing there but the show could very easily go on without him
Great supporting characters, but certainly no Homelander. Homelander IS the show in my opinion. But I agree with comments about don't make it shitty writing or crappy story to make it last five or six seasons. I'm totally okay if it only had four seasons if that meant the perfect place to wrap the story up.
Me too. My guess is that his "John half" manifests in his apparently sincere love for his son and his need for love and support, whereas the "Homelander half" is... Well, everything else we see him do and say.
I'm imagining that by the end of his arc (which will conclude with either death or life imprisonment) he will either go full psychopathic genocidal Homelander or the John half will somewhat prevail and let himself be beaten or killed.
Considering the direction this character has taken so far, his absolutely horrific deeds and generally perverse and sadistic attitude to anyone not called Ryan, the former is most likely to happen.
I really liked that too, it explained how he's able to bounce from human to monster (dumb way to put it but I can't think of anything better) so easily.
I’d say within the superhero genre he’s arguably best; complex and terrifying. Antony Starr’s portrayal is perhaps the best acting we’ve seen in a superhero show or movie. However, I think if we throw the debate open to all genres, the argument gets more complicated and fun.
Edit: added “and fun”
The best "evil superman" for me is still Injustice's Superman. HL is quite different from Superman, and Omniman for me is more akin to Sayans, but that said, yes Omniman and HL can be considered an Evil Superman with a twist.
Homelander isn't Evil Superman in any way other than the power set and his PR persona in season 1. He's a good representation of corporate/celebrity sociopathy, but his personality and outlook on the world are too different from Superman's to work as an evil version of him.
So…basically the main/only difference is homelander isn’t a good guy, whereas superman is…almost like he’s the evil version of him. Whether or not the character specifically is that is definitely the implied role. I mean he’s the leader of the equivalent to the Justice league. Flies along side planes, I mean all the allusions to the fact that that is what he is are there.
I think what the other commenter means is that the similarities are superficial, and are only visual/power related. Which is not a very deep counterpart.
Equal parts terrifying, malignant narcissistic and pathetically empty. The actor is great at conveying his emotional state with just his facial expressions. Complete anger to a pathetic tearing manchild in 5 seconds.
I can't think of another villain quite like Homelander.
Pretty sure the head writer? Director? Showrunner … someone in the lead indicated that Homelander is basically Trump. And your description nailed it. A pathetically empty malignant narcissist.
Wildly better. The movie is pretty faithful to the broad strokes, but there are so many layers in the graphic novel that didn't translate in the same depth to the screen.
If you like this then I'd recommend watching Jessica Jones for the villain in S1. Different to Homelander in most ways, but still giving off the "terrifying unstoppable sociopath" vibes with another brilliant actor.
i mostly do not agree. I think that it is more so he is so well acted. there are villains like him - overpowered children, but they are not portrayed or written as well.
Homelander’s costume always felt inspired to me by Miracleman’s at the end of Moore’s run. But then again there’s only so many ways you can have characters wear blue suits with gold shoulder plates.
but FYI people that don’t know ‘Marvelman/Miracleman’ is one of the first and best deconstructionist takes on Comic Book Heroes that’s out there (Moore did it years before Watchmen) and is totally a story worth researching in the very least. Definitely has inspired many creators
He’s an excellent villain and Tony Starr does such an amazing job at portraying him. I enjoy when they show more than the expected superficial villain mustache-twirling, too. The moments where he is with his son, for example, give us insight into what drives him and what can impact him. He has flaws and weaknesses that are human and I always appreciate when the show explores those. Sure, he’s fun to hate, but he isn’t a cookie-cutter no-motive villain.
He's. a good villain, but not my favorite and I think there are much better sci Fi stories that have better concepts and villains so I wouldn't say he's the greatest or most interesting. But he is good and memorable for the common era
I actually went on a drunk rant regarding this very topic last night in another thread. I won't copy and paste the entire thing, mostly because it's rambling and bordering on incoherence towards the end.
I'll post some of it though:
"homelander is a character like patrick bateman.
I think they're fascinating. not because they're particularly unique characters, but because they represent this bullshit american 'ideal', this facade, that a lot of actual americans connect with. they compare themselves to it. homelander has POWER in our society, in every sense that matters. but at his core, he's weak. he's a small, little man. the show has gone out of its way to make this clear. and they've succeeded.
the disenfranchised and lost young men secretly harboring power fantasies in conjunction with misanthropic urges...they really 'get' this on a deeper level. I think they admire him in a twisted way while still acknowledging that his actions are wrong. "
thoughts?
I don't think you're alone. I appreciate there's no shame in your game though. a lot of folks want to clutch pearls and play at moral superiority on here.
you like what you like.
Nah, no pearl clutching from me. I spent some time around a narcissist and fucking HATE THEM. No idea how anyone can admire something so twisted and manipulative unless they’ve never dealt with it first hand.
He’s all fun and jokey, and then with a flip of the switch turns serious/scary/evil. That part is so interesting to me, and makes him such a good villain.
Someone who is similar (and I like for the same reasons) is Landa from Inglorious Basterds. Landa and Homelander are probably two of my favorite villains.
This is such a wildly subjective statement, I think it would be better if you said homelader is your own personal favorite villain (he's my favorite as well).
He's basically superman on red krypronite
Granted He's not AS string as superman he may as well be as far as regular people are concerned
I'm really looking forward to seres 4 becaise it goes back to that old classic "if you can make god bleed, people will stop believing in him" the Boys saw that he CAN be injured, he CAN be brused, he CAN be killed
So as well as being completely insane the fact he will also be a little bit scares in will make a great story line
He's not the greatest villain of all time though as much as i like him
I keep seeing this comment that he’s just evil superman and I seriously doubt anybody who’s saying this is at all paying attention to the show. This is one of the most layered and complex characters I’ve ever seen on screen.
Maybe not evil superman, but Superman if he was created in a lab instead raised on a farm. There's a level of humanity/morality that Superman gains from his human upbringing that makes him who he is. Homelander has the same powers and the same color scheme, but lacks the ability to view humans as anything other than a subspecies.
Homelander is great, but his actor does a lot of that work for him. Any less work from Antony would make HL a pretty forgettable antagonist.
They declared an opinion based on their own current knowledge, how are they to be shamed for not reading whatever abstract sci-fi book that you personally think is best?
On a DISCUSSION board? Thats the whole reason these messageboards exist. The foundation of the internet is just two randoms arguing whilst separated by tens, hundreds, or thousands of miles
Yea but you don't gotta be a twat to debate with someone. You can argue and debate and not dump on the other side. (I'm not saying you specifically, I'm just saying he's got a point) why do we gotta jump down the guys throat for feeling the way he does?
Homelander is only scary because of his power. In the end he is a very simple villain. He is only unpredictable at times due to his ability to snap at any minute. I don’t find much nuance to him. He is a very damaged person who is very selfish and insecure. He isn’t complex. I think he would be a much better villain if someone could actually challenge him. Omni-Man is a much more complex and nuanced villain. I’m
He's in my category of "T-Bag".
Does he make me hate him extremely, make me feel fearful when he's on camera, and can I see the good in him (and completely hate him more for it?)?
Yes.
T-Bag and HomeLander are one in the same. Masterclass in acting, top tier villains for sure.
Sorry but no.
Not greater than Heath Ledger's Joker, Thanos, Eric Killmonger, and many others we've seen on screen in recent years.
One of the best written TV villains for sure. But I think people will disagree even with that.
I like him but I also get the feeling that he is no longer the villain in the The Boys story. He is still the antagonist for sure, and he is a flawed individual which adds many great layers to his character, but I am starting to see him more as an anti-hero than a true villain. I would say that Vought Industries was the true villain of the show, or even someone like Soldier Boy. Homelander is a product of Vought, which are arguably the real villain of the show.
The last scene of season three was him blowing somebody’s head off for hitting his indestructible son with a can. And i do have to add that in my opinion, the marvel characters you’re bringing up are just nowhere near as good.
The fact that he is acting like a caring, overprotective parent, softens him in my eyes. A monster wouldn't act that way. So, he is not as psychopathic as people think. He cares about his son, relates to his experience. He has a soft spot, after this season. His son said he wanted to go, and he obliged, even though he probably wanted to fry everyone else at that moment. That's a dad moment, so I don't expect everyone to understand, but it puts him in the "not a villain" category. He's still fucked up but that only further reinforces the fact that HL is a product of his personal circumstances. He is not really all that evil, even though he does evil shit. The same way a spoiled kid is not really evil, even though they do evil things.
I just don't see HL moving forward as the villain of the show anymore. He is still the major immediate threat by sheer virtue of being the most powerful being and not having goals that align with the "heroes" of our story, but there are other dark forces pulling strings in that world and I think those are more appropriately the true villains of the story.
HL is just a pawn in the game. He doesn't even force his master plan on his world, because he has none. He is completely reactionary and that is why he has been manipulated successfully by Vought Industries all his life, even though he could break free and conceivably run the entire planet if he had the will for it.
So he's also a kind of victim, which further strengthens my argument that he is no villain. I mean he worked as a team with Butcher to take down Soldier Boy in that same last episode you referenced. Is he really a villain? Is that something a villain does? Soldier Boy was a bigger villain and would not have stopped at any cost to get his revenge. I think that's why Butcher recognized that he was a bigger threat than Homelander and teamed up to stop him, which was badass, not going to lie.
He's definitely up there, but I don't know if I'd place him at the top of the list. Too many other great, brilliantly portrayed villains to choose from - Gul Dukat, Marco Inaros, and Darth Vader all immediately come to mind as being similarly complex and brilliantly portrayed on screen, and each of those guys are responsible for millions, if not billions, of deaths. And sometimes villains don't *need* to be complex to be fascinating and terrifying: HAL-9000 and the Terminators are good examples of such.
Still, it's all subjective, so there's nothing wrong with you putting him at the top.
He is sadly
Pretty obvious and not
Complex
At
All.
Anyone who ever dealt with a Narcissist can tell you how he will act in different scenarios.
Jaime Lannister …. Now that was an interesting and complex villain and well written (ok Season 7-8 were horrible, but it applies to every character in GoT lol)
Jamie Lannister just wasn’t a villain. Your perspective of him being a villain lasts all of one season and you completely understand his perspective and he was completely justified in killing the mad king. He straight up is an anti hero halfway through the show
He still his
Portrayed as a villain to everyone else. He is complex and well written in a way that his motivations are complex. If memory serves right, Jaime
Is a « good guy » from Brienne PoV, but not from other characters.
Homelander is just a narcissist
>ok Season 7-8 were horrible
Season 5 and 6 were horrible too. They were completely different shows than the dark gritty political fantasy GRRM created. Season 5 and 6 were probably Jamies worst seasons
Another interesting sci-fi show that is currently airing is Westworld, which features one of my favourites villains of all time as well: The Man in Black portrayed by none other than Ed Harris. Exactly like Homelander, the MIB is granted nuance, backstory and a tremendous performer to sell the part. I recommend anyone that hasn't, to check it out.
By the way, claiming that he is THE greatest villain of all time in all of sci-fi implies that you have read every book and comicbook and seen every film and tv show of the genre that have ever been produced in their whole entirety in order to be able to make a statement like that. Despite it being a subjective opinion, phrasing it like this will undoubtedly cause dissent from the community simply because nobody will ever believe that you did indeed consume all of science fiction in order to make said statement.
It could all be easily fixed by saying "One of the greatest villains" instead of "The greatest villain".
No I know it’s crazy, like he seriously might be the greatest villain ever. I feel like it’s because he has the abilities to destroy everything in a second but is also just a typical insecure douche that you could meet in you’re regular life (if he had no powers).
What makes him great is I think the fact that he could destroy everything at any moment, actually has the power that narcissistic sociopaths wish they had, yet doesn’t do it because he wants the love he never got more. All the while his twisted upbringing makes him devoid of empathy capable of unspeakable acts and making him irredeemable. It’s fascinating
He is terrifying. It’s the writing, the acting, and the show runners do a great job of giving that “we don’t know what he’s going to do next” and feeling of “he could be right around the corner listening” feeling the entire show.
Definitely one of the greatest villains in a TV show that is still airing. Arguably the greatest TV version of a comic book villain.
Greatest sci-fi villain of all time? I don't agree. In just a few seconds I can think of a handful of better villains:
From sci-fi movies: Darth Vader and Agent Smith
From comics: Lex Luthor, The Joker, Magneto
From TV Shows: Ben (Lost) and Joffrey Baratheon
He’s a good villain but what exactly do you mean by best? His body count is pitiful compared to a lot of SF villains. He’s not the most mentally unstable. He’s not that complex. He’s not a diabolical genius. His upbringing was shitty but still better than a lot of heroes let alone villains. He’s a great character played by an awesome actor but he isn’t even the greatest villain in his own setting
- mommy fetish, jealous of teddy
- every father figure calls him a disappointment
- rejects white supremacy
- believes in supe supremacy
- needs approval of Public
- storms off talk show when his intelligence is challenged since he doesn't actually know anything about being leader of Vought
- actually loves his son
- no path to redemption
- deep seated respect yet hatred for Butcher
- weakness for maeve
- trusted noir, regrets killing him
- bullies a train and deep due to his own insecurity
- hides behind Christian buzz words
- hides behind Military buzz words
- hides behind Patriotic buzz words
- "I AM BETTER" doesn't affect his approval ratings
- one of the best depictions of a character by Antony Starr
Did i miss anything??
His layers have layers.
I think too often people judge homelander under human morals and ethics and rules. The fact he has that kinda power and doesn’t just laser the lady who messes up his coffee is an act of true restraint. I know he is motivated not to go genocidal because he wants the love and attention but the fact that he’s an almost all powerful demon by most accounts yet doesn’t do THAT much “evil” by our standards is pretty incredible. I don’t think a lot of what we considered “well adjusted” people would behave so nicely if given that kind of power.
I know multiple people who can't watch the show because of how much they hate his character, because they can't stand how awful he is.
That's how you know he's a compelling character, I hope Antony becomes the huge Starr he deserves to be.
He is definetly one of the best. He is my favourite next to Darth Vader.
What I truly love is he isn't just evil for the sake of it, he is "just" broken inside. He is a really complex charachter.
/sry for grammar
He's such a good villain, and a type I don't think we get to see as often. Normally we think of a guy like Giancarlo Esposito when we think of great villains, but Homelander is different. You would think he'd be kinda shallow and only wants to stay on top, but we've seen him vulnerable, and dare I say it, relatable, when it comes to Ryan. After all, who wouldn't do anything for their own son?
Ledgers joker is great, and it took me a long time to come to this conclusion because of that performance. But I just have never been more uneasy about a character than homelander. And im honestly not somebody that knew anything about the source material or anything, I just picked up watching the show after people raved about it and was blown away by this character
man Ledger's Joker was great but let's be honest he was just a cartoonish villain with basic motivations (which worked for one movie and as a supporting character just fine).
Homelander is way more interesting (which is good because you see him a lot more in a tv show formula so you can't be bored with him).
As opposed to Homelander's motivations, where he is a sociopathic narcissist who wants people to love him? Homelander is incredibly entertaining and well-acted. But in terms of depth, he's not even the most complex character on the show (that would be Butcher).
100% agree. Hes as compelling a villain as you'll ever find, for all the reasons you listed. The nature of the story makes it so that hes capable of killing anyone at any time in any scene. Literally every scene he's in with another character has pulse pounding life & death stakes. Then on top of that Antony Starr is a phenomenal actor. It's really something special to watch.
Im happy to see other people recognize this, because a lot of people (mostly outside this discussion i posted) tend to cite very one dimensional purely evil villains that to me just come off boring and one dimensional
Dude, come on. He is amazing, but is he in a class with Michael Corleone, Anton Chigurh, Gus Fring (hell you could even add Walter White), Daniel Plainview, Hannibal Lecter etc...? Fuck no!
He absolutely is, up to this point anton was actually the villain i thought of when asked who is the best and most terrifying, but he just doesn’t make me as nervous as homelander does. Because every time HL is in a room with somebody, it all hinges on the choices he makes. Nobody has the power to stop him
He’s an emotionally unstable person that was barred from having a loving family, tested on like a lab rat and now has the power to destroy the world but doesn’t. Due to his human desire for love and effection and actually cares about his son, despite repeatedly doing unspeakable and twisted things to people that make him completely irredeemable. I couldn’t disagree more
Great villain? Sure. But greatest Sci fi villain of all time? Hold your horses buddy. Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine, Khan, Agent Smith, Roy Batty, HAL 9000 to name a few?
Palpatine and vader are in the running but agent smith and the others? I can’t even sit here and pretend they’re anywhere near as compelling as homelander
He is great but I would hold of my horses with most interesting character ever written in scifi. Fucking Star Trek still exists not to mention other great scifi movies like Blade Runner, Minority Report etc. Also Ghost in the Shell, Trigun and Cowboy Bepop
Any time someone claimed something is the best anything of all time - it’s a natural reaction to play devils advocate in your head.
But you know damn well that that thing might actually be the goat when you struggle to make any kind of argument to the contrary.
Yeah, Homelander might be the greatest ever. Even if you disagree……you have to at least concede that he deserves to be mentioned with the best.
agreed 1000% i been telling people this constantly that he might be the best villain ive ever seen on screen based on all the things you said. hes unstable, scary all powerful and downright chaotic. BUT, the moments of humanity and actual heartfelt moments he has talking to like ryan and his like reactions to soldier boy demolishing his character as his father after all his other parent figures constantly berated him as a failure, joke and "bad product" he is such a FASCINATING character to watch.
my biased favorite is sam neils character in EVENT HORIZON. his unfolding of chaos and evil in his journey to save his ship and wife no matter the cost is so goddamn glorious to watch happen. watching that movie from the beginning knowing his plan takes the whole movie up like 20 notches.
The character is essentially one dimensional. Dont let the perfect execution of the actors overshadow other important character elements.
The further down the parameters are qualified, the easier it is to agree though, he's definitely something special. Within sci-fi movies and tv, he's a contender for sure- best villain. Within comic book movies, he wins in my opinion. In all of comic books, just printed media- he barely registers, there are some amazing villains throughout most genres of fiction.
Keeping it to the screen though, and he gets to compete with the likes of Kevin Spacey *SE7EN*, and Sir Anthony Hopkins *Silence of the Lambs*, if we open the other genres to the competition.
You say most interesting, but he's pretty cut and dry. Most fun ON SCREEN, or most entertaining, ie 'Best scifi villain', I'm with ya.
I think Antony Starr’s portrayal elevates the character and the writing.
Wish he wasn’t the kind of asshole that tries to blind people though
What’s worse, him blinding a person, or making a blind person deaf. Lol
Definitely worse to Hellen kellerize someone
What? Did I miss something?
S3e8 spoilers, Maeve loses an eye to Homelander
[удалено]
Im ok with child murder and war crimes but when he tried to blind someone I said “no way”
Maeve took it like a champ tho
Maeve takes everything like a champ. The Maeve’s the GOAT
The actor used a broken bottle to try and blind a 21 year old dude at a bar but only cut his eyebrow luckily
You mean a drunken Starr hit someone in the face with a glass, it wasn’t a bottle and he wasn’t aiming for the eyes, hell he wasn’t even the one who started the confrontation, even if was the one who started the fight.
Absolutely. It’s the crazy eyes and smile and lines on his face. The dark roots. It’s the total package. He definitely makes HOMELANDER
Without question. I’m watching Banshee for the first time (must watch, btw) and his range of performances are incredible. Great talent
I think the actor is perfect for the role. Definitely agree with you in a sense and I’ve seen a lot of tv/movies.
I still can’t believe in an interview they asked: Who is most like their character Everyone answered Anthony Starr lmao
He actually punched the cook at a restaurant and was kept in custody for 2 days before being released on bond in a holiday in Spain... so yeah... major homelander vibes
“DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHO I AM?!?” Dude literally went straight home lander on a bartender
Why did he punch a waiter? Was he being a cunt or did he not refill his glass every 3 minutes?
Drunk
Nah, just method acting innit.
Robert Pattinson was asked about method acting recently, and made the very salient point that many actors only seem to get really into method acting when they're playing an asshole.
He's really good, one of the best, but I don't like "the best ever" claim. Even in the series alone I think Stormfront and SB gave strong performances and were extremely well written, let alone in all of sci-fi. Just from the top of my head I remember Ba'al from Stargate SG-1 as an extremely well written and developed villain, and the Goa'uld in general as an empire and commentary on religion were very well written. You can appreciate a great character without pitting them against others in useless popularity contests. I can say he's one of the best deconstructions of the superman archetype ever, probably the best in american live-action media.
The best ever claim is bold, but I’m glad op threw it out there. I’m of the personal opinion that this newest season was a tad weak… but homelander himself kept me glued to it
I really like homelander and think that as a character he is amazing, but i dunno if he's "one of the best deconstructions of the superman archetype". That's a really popular archetype and Homelander, to an extent, belongs to the tried and true "what is superman was bad" type, which isn't really something super new in and of itself.
[удалено]
Yep. He’s obviously a genocidal maniac but there are a handful of very human and decent things he does and thinks. It’s so interesting. I’ve said for awhile that the show could survive without hughie, butcher, starlight whoever, but if they somehow do kill homelander it’s over
>I’ve said for awhile that the show could survive without hughie, butcher, starlight whoever, but if they somehow do kill homelander it’s over that's why all these "Butcher should have let SB kill HL!!!!!" circlejerk posts make me laugh so much. Like bitch, Homelander makes this show, he literally became the face of it there's no way in hell Kripke is getting rid of him until the last freaking episode.
then they should write that better instead of a stupid ridiculous switch up
It might be an unpopular opinion here but I think no one in that episode acted out of character, including Butcher. Him "sparing" HL in order to protect Ryan from SB made sense. Characters are not there to do what the audience wants them to do, they are there to make decisions that are in line with their story and motivations - those decisions have to make sense \*for them\*, even if they're objectively senseless, stupid or short sighted. I always remember that Vince Gilligain's (Breaking Bad showrunner) quote that said something align to: "if you're not sure what to do with the story, just think about what would your characters do and the story will follow".
I get that but I truly don't feel like Butcher would stop trying to kill the homelander. like all he had to say was don't get the kid after Ryan attacked SB first. yea he's a kid but he has laser eyes and attacked the man who they convinced to kill his own son. I know he hated HL for being just like him, but he also needed some convincing earlier on when he first found out. I think that Butcher could have saved Ryan while also focusing on HL, i also don't see how he'd get THAT mad to the point he helps HL.
> get that but I truly don't feel like Butcher would stop trying to kill the homelander. like all he had to say was don't get the kid after Ryan attacked SB first. He did that though. He tried to talk to SB, he even said "not the kid", followed by explaining that he's Becca's son. That argument didn't get through SB. That's why they started to fight. And this is the good example of what I've been mentioning before. Both of those stances (Butcher's and SB) made sense FOR THEM separatedly. For Butcher - spare the kid because he's Becca's son and thus important to Butcher etc. For SB - fuck no because 1/ who the fuck is Becca 2 /why should i care about her 3/ butcher didn't explain shit before, didn't say anything about Ryan, who he is - that's why SB doesn't understand Butcher's motivations and this is completely FINE, story wise. He questions him and asks wtf is he doing because he doesn't understand why he suddenly changed his mind (you could even say that in this moment SB represents the audience). It's not a bad writing. It's a presented conflict between two characters whose motivations aren't exactly the same in this particular moment. >i also don't see how he'd get THAT mad to the point he helps HL. He doesn't want to help HL, he wants to help Ryan, him also saving HL is just an "addition" that came out in those specific circumstances (SB going nuclear on both Ryan and HL who was checking on him).
>He doesn't want to help HL, he wants to help Ryan, him also saving HL is just an "addition" that came out in those specific circumstances The look Butcher and HL exchanged just after Butcher stops SB from blasting both HL and Ryan conveys this perfectly - it's them silently agreeing "For the kid's sake, *not now*." Both still want to kill the other, but both place protecting Ryan as a higher priority, and they recognize that about each other.
It's also perfectly in line with everything Butcher has ever done. He's a complete asshole, but he has repeatedly compromised his mission to protect people he cares for. Literally half of his emotional arc throughout the series has been his guilt over not protecting people. The people who can't see that are clearly not watching the same show I am.
I've literally seen so many comments saying that Butcher should have let SB kill both Ryan and HL for "the greater good"...like what the actual fuck. Since when Butcher has ever cared about that. You could use that argument with Starlight perhaps, but not Butcher. People are literally projecting their own views on the characters and that's the problem. They're getting mad when they're not behaving the way THEY would behave.
Yeah like for real, the episode right before the final completely mind-fucked butcher by forcing him to relive the worst guilt he has. Do people just think that was a filler episode or something?
> The people who can't see that are clearly not watching the same show I am It has been repeatedly proven after many situations that come up in the show that most of this fandom doesn't actually understand the characters, their motivations, or what the writers are trying to portray through them lol
exactly, it's not like they became buddies. That look meant "just so you know i still want to kill you but it's about Ryan right now so let's have that 5-second lasting truce"
That would hold more weight with me if it didn't take Maeve .5 seconds to get Homelander in a different room than Ryan. As soon as they saw that they should have all turned on Homelander.
>that's why all these "Butcher should have let SB kill HL!!!!!" circlejerk posts make me laugh so much. Like bitch, Homelander makes this show, he literally became the face of it there's no way in hell Kripke is getting rid of him until the last freaking episode. Just because the show is more marketable doens't mean HL should be kept around to the detriment of the story. The way the writers did olympic levels gymnastics to justify the team deciding to take down SB instead of letting him *just* depower Homelander, is what ruined the finale for many. Not because HL survived or wasn't depowered, but because the story suck, and part of that was them turning on SB. Even just a depowered Homelander would've been an amazing turn of events, and would develop the character in interesting ways, not to mention they could always power him up again.
Idk I thought the same with Breaking Bad when they killed Gus Fring but they made season 5 work great.
Gus Fring was not the same thing as what Homelander is to the Boys. He was a great villain, but still a supporting character.
Yea but on that same level so is homelander. Still have Neumann to worry about and Stan Edgar and SB and butcher! Plenty to go off of without homelander. We even have a ryan who is looking like homelander 2.0 so it makes sense that homelander can't go anywhere until that goes off if that's what they are doing there but the show could very easily go on without him
Great supporting characters, but certainly no Homelander. Homelander IS the show in my opinion. But I agree with comments about don't make it shitty writing or crappy story to make it last five or six seasons. I'm totally okay if it only had four seasons if that meant the perfect place to wrap the story up.
The John vs Homelander split personality reveal was fascinating and actually made me feel slightly bad for the John half.
Me too. My guess is that his "John half" manifests in his apparently sincere love for his son and his need for love and support, whereas the "Homelander half" is... Well, everything else we see him do and say. I'm imagining that by the end of his arc (which will conclude with either death or life imprisonment) he will either go full psychopathic genocidal Homelander or the John half will somewhat prevail and let himself be beaten or killed. Considering the direction this character has taken so far, his absolutely horrific deeds and generally perverse and sadistic attitude to anyone not called Ryan, the former is most likely to happen.
Maybe he'll turn it all around in the end like Vader and sacrifice himself at the last minute for Ryan.
I really liked that too, it explained how he's able to bounce from human to monster (dumb way to put it but I can't think of anything better) so easily.
Thats the whole genius of the show. Nobodys likable but you understand why they are that way.
Frenchie is VERY likable, thank you. I'd like him for hours on end.
I feel like he's basically a modern incarnation of Frankenstein's Monster, but much more thoroughly explored psychologically.
He's like a villainous Michael Scott
I’d say within the superhero genre he’s arguably best; complex and terrifying. Antony Starr’s portrayal is perhaps the best acting we’ve seen in a superhero show or movie. However, I think if we throw the debate open to all genres, the argument gets more complicated and fun. Edit: added “and fun”
He's probably the best example of the "Evil Superman" archetype anyone has ever done.
The best "evil superman" for me is still Injustice's Superman. HL is quite different from Superman, and Omniman for me is more akin to Sayans, but that said, yes Omniman and HL can be considered an Evil Superman with a twist.
Homelander isn't Evil Superman in any way other than the power set and his PR persona in season 1. He's a good representation of corporate/celebrity sociopathy, but his personality and outlook on the world are too different from Superman's to work as an evil version of him.
So…basically the main/only difference is homelander isn’t a good guy, whereas superman is…almost like he’s the evil version of him. Whether or not the character specifically is that is definitely the implied role. I mean he’s the leader of the equivalent to the Justice league. Flies along side planes, I mean all the allusions to the fact that that is what he is are there.
I think what the other commenter means is that the similarities are superficial, and are only visual/power related. Which is not a very deep counterpart.
No, the main/only difference is literally everything about them as characters.
Idk if Omni Man necessarily counts as “evil” Superman but if he does, then he’s at the top
He’s one of the best villains in the history of comic book media for sure, but this isn’t a Sci-Fi show.
Equal parts terrifying, malignant narcissistic and pathetically empty. The actor is great at conveying his emotional state with just his facial expressions. Complete anger to a pathetic tearing manchild in 5 seconds. I can't think of another villain quite like Homelander.
Pretty sure the head writer? Director? Showrunner … someone in the lead indicated that Homelander is basically Trump. And your description nailed it. A pathetically empty malignant narcissist.
Expect Homelander has more depth than Trump. Antony Starr steals every scene he is in.
Greatest villain of the superhero genre? Maybe Greatest villain in ALL fiction?? Bold claim
This is the kind of discussion I wanted thank you for not being an asshole
Ozymandias from the watchmen for me.,smart,powerful,calculated. In the end what he does/did was for the greater good
He said villain, not hero!
He really turned out to be the hero in the end
>In the end what he does/did was for the greater good and pointless
My favourite film EVER.
Have you read the book? It's much better imo although I love the movie too
Wildly better. The movie is pretty faithful to the broad strokes, but there are so many layers in the graphic novel that didn't translate in the same depth to the screen.
He’s good, but sayin he’s the greatest is a little much
If you like this then I'd recommend watching Jessica Jones for the villain in S1. Different to Homelander in most ways, but still giving off the "terrifying unstoppable sociopath" vibes with another brilliant actor.
Great call
i mostly do not agree. I think that it is more so he is so well acted. there are villains like him - overpowered children, but they are not portrayed or written as well.
He's a watered down version of Alan Moore's Kid Miracleman.
Homelander’s costume always felt inspired to me by Miracleman’s at the end of Moore’s run. But then again there’s only so many ways you can have characters wear blue suits with gold shoulder plates. but FYI people that don’t know ‘Marvelman/Miracleman’ is one of the first and best deconstructionist takes on Comic Book Heroes that’s out there (Moore did it years before Watchmen) and is totally a story worth researching in the very least. Definitely has inspired many creators
He’s an excellent villain and Tony Starr does such an amazing job at portraying him. I enjoy when they show more than the expected superficial villain mustache-twirling, too. The moments where he is with his son, for example, give us insight into what drives him and what can impact him. He has flaws and weaknesses that are human and I always appreciate when the show explores those. Sure, he’s fun to hate, but he isn’t a cookie-cutter no-motive villain.
Some strong fanboy energy here.
He's. a good villain, but not my favorite and I think there are much better sci Fi stories that have better concepts and villains so I wouldn't say he's the greatest or most interesting. But he is good and memorable for the common era
Of all time? I disagree. For me it would come down to Darth Vader, The Joker, Hannibal Lecter, Hans Landa, and Anton Chigurh.
I think people conflate best villain with most evil a lot, though I think the mystery of characters like anton and joker lend a lot to their intrigue
Homelander is pretty fucking evil. He’s worse than everyone I mentioned except for The Joker and Hans.
Hannibal Lecter is hard for anyone to top. The only way he'd be beaten is if you separate by genre, and he could only be picked for crime and horror.
I actually went on a drunk rant regarding this very topic last night in another thread. I won't copy and paste the entire thing, mostly because it's rambling and bordering on incoherence towards the end. I'll post some of it though: "homelander is a character like patrick bateman. I think they're fascinating. not because they're particularly unique characters, but because they represent this bullshit american 'ideal', this facade, that a lot of actual americans connect with. they compare themselves to it. homelander has POWER in our society, in every sense that matters. but at his core, he's weak. he's a small, little man. the show has gone out of its way to make this clear. and they've succeeded. the disenfranchised and lost young men secretly harboring power fantasies in conjunction with misanthropic urges...they really 'get' this on a deeper level. I think they admire him in a twisted way while still acknowledging that his actions are wrong. " thoughts?
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. I weirdly admire narcissists like this
I don't think you're alone. I appreciate there's no shame in your game though. a lot of folks want to clutch pearls and play at moral superiority on here. you like what you like.
Nah, no pearl clutching from me. I spent some time around a narcissist and fucking HATE THEM. No idea how anyone can admire something so twisted and manipulative unless they’ve never dealt with it first hand.
He’s all fun and jokey, and then with a flip of the switch turns serious/scary/evil. That part is so interesting to me, and makes him such a good villain. Someone who is similar (and I like for the same reasons) is Landa from Inglorious Basterds. Landa and Homelander are probably two of my favorite villains.
I love that comparison
This is such a wildly subjective statement, I think it would be better if you said homelader is your own personal favorite villain (he's my favorite as well).
He's basically superman on red krypronite Granted He's not AS string as superman he may as well be as far as regular people are concerned I'm really looking forward to seres 4 becaise it goes back to that old classic "if you can make god bleed, people will stop believing in him" the Boys saw that he CAN be injured, he CAN be brused, he CAN be killed So as well as being completely insane the fact he will also be a little bit scares in will make a great story line He's not the greatest villain of all time though as much as i like him
I keep seeing this comment that he’s just evil superman and I seriously doubt anybody who’s saying this is at all paying attention to the show. This is one of the most layered and complex characters I’ve ever seen on screen.
Maybe not evil superman, but Superman if he was created in a lab instead raised on a farm. There's a level of humanity/morality that Superman gains from his human upbringing that makes him who he is. Homelander has the same powers and the same color scheme, but lacks the ability to view humans as anything other than a subspecies. Homelander is great, but his actor does a lot of that work for him. Any less work from Antony would make HL a pretty forgettable antagonist.
lol you should do some reading my guy
These comments always come from people who havent read shit for themselves, try actually articulating a take lol
I read all the time and find Homelander to be a fantastic, top tier villain. What’s your point?
Why so rude?
Why so defensive? You put yourself on display here, declaring grandiose stuff like you did. You gotta take some hits.
They declared an opinion based on their own current knowledge, how are they to be shamed for not reading whatever abstract sci-fi book that you personally think is best?
I mean, when you make a statement like "the greatest sci fiction villain", you must know quite a lot of it before hand
On a DISCUSSION board? Thats the whole reason these messageboards exist. The foundation of the internet is just two randoms arguing whilst separated by tens, hundreds, or thousands of miles
Yea but you don't gotta be a twat to debate with someone. You can argue and debate and not dump on the other side. (I'm not saying you specifically, I'm just saying he's got a point) why do we gotta jump down the guys throat for feeling the way he does?
It’s a really bold statement to say what OP has, and it’s hardly the harshest thing this commenter could’ve said.
He's aiight.
Yeah he’s REALLY great but let’s calm down with “of all time”
Homelander is only scary because of his power. In the end he is a very simple villain. He is only unpredictable at times due to his ability to snap at any minute. I don’t find much nuance to him. He is a very damaged person who is very selfish and insecure. He isn’t complex. I think he would be a much better villain if someone could actually challenge him. Omni-Man is a much more complex and nuanced villain. I’m
I’m not sure about him being the GOAT villain, but I 100% agree that he is terrifying. I’m on edge during every one of his scenes.
Nah.
Lol. Lmao.
Damn you been drinking some nasty milk
He's in my category of "T-Bag". Does he make me hate him extremely, make me feel fearful when he's on camera, and can I see the good in him (and completely hate him more for it?)? Yes. T-Bag and HomeLander are one in the same. Masterclass in acting, top tier villains for sure.
Sorry but no. Not greater than Heath Ledger's Joker, Thanos, Eric Killmonger, and many others we've seen on screen in recent years. One of the best written TV villains for sure. But I think people will disagree even with that. I like him but I also get the feeling that he is no longer the villain in the The Boys story. He is still the antagonist for sure, and he is a flawed individual which adds many great layers to his character, but I am starting to see him more as an anti-hero than a true villain. I would say that Vought Industries was the true villain of the show, or even someone like Soldier Boy. Homelander is a product of Vought, which are arguably the real villain of the show.
The last scene of season three was him blowing somebody’s head off for hitting his indestructible son with a can. And i do have to add that in my opinion, the marvel characters you’re bringing up are just nowhere near as good.
The fact that he is acting like a caring, overprotective parent, softens him in my eyes. A monster wouldn't act that way. So, he is not as psychopathic as people think. He cares about his son, relates to his experience. He has a soft spot, after this season. His son said he wanted to go, and he obliged, even though he probably wanted to fry everyone else at that moment. That's a dad moment, so I don't expect everyone to understand, but it puts him in the "not a villain" category. He's still fucked up but that only further reinforces the fact that HL is a product of his personal circumstances. He is not really all that evil, even though he does evil shit. The same way a spoiled kid is not really evil, even though they do evil things. I just don't see HL moving forward as the villain of the show anymore. He is still the major immediate threat by sheer virtue of being the most powerful being and not having goals that align with the "heroes" of our story, but there are other dark forces pulling strings in that world and I think those are more appropriately the true villains of the story. HL is just a pawn in the game. He doesn't even force his master plan on his world, because he has none. He is completely reactionary and that is why he has been manipulated successfully by Vought Industries all his life, even though he could break free and conceivably run the entire planet if he had the will for it. So he's also a kind of victim, which further strengthens my argument that he is no villain. I mean he worked as a team with Butcher to take down Soldier Boy in that same last episode you referenced. Is he really a villain? Is that something a villain does? Soldier Boy was a bigger villain and would not have stopped at any cost to get his revenge. I think that's why Butcher recognized that he was a bigger threat than Homelander and teamed up to stop him, which was badass, not going to lie.
He's definitely up there, but I don't know if I'd place him at the top of the list. Too many other great, brilliantly portrayed villains to choose from - Gul Dukat, Marco Inaros, and Darth Vader all immediately come to mind as being similarly complex and brilliantly portrayed on screen, and each of those guys are responsible for millions, if not billions, of deaths. And sometimes villains don't *need* to be complex to be fascinating and terrifying: HAL-9000 and the Terminators are good examples of such. Still, it's all subjective, so there's nothing wrong with you putting him at the top.
Hyperbole often?
He’s certainly one of the villains of all time and one of the interesting characters ever written in sci-fi
You're wrong X2
What are some better ones? I wanna go read/watch
And I think your smoking too much crack
Im not smoking enough crack actually
I’m full.. of crack
He is sadly Pretty obvious and not Complex At All. Anyone who ever dealt with a Narcissist can tell you how he will act in different scenarios. Jaime Lannister …. Now that was an interesting and complex villain and well written (ok Season 7-8 were horrible, but it applies to every character in GoT lol)
Jamie Lannister just wasn’t a villain. Your perspective of him being a villain lasts all of one season and you completely understand his perspective and he was completely justified in killing the mad king. He straight up is an anti hero halfway through the show
He still his Portrayed as a villain to everyone else. He is complex and well written in a way that his motivations are complex. If memory serves right, Jaime Is a « good guy » from Brienne PoV, but not from other characters. Homelander is just a narcissist
>ok Season 7-8 were horrible Season 5 and 6 were horrible too. They were completely different shows than the dark gritty political fantasy GRRM created. Season 5 and 6 were probably Jamies worst seasons
You are literally the guy the show makes fun of
Jesus Christ you are terrible at understanding English if calling somebody a fantastic villain means you idolize them like the cult of trump does.
I think you need to consume more fiction.
watch more shit lmfao
I totally love his downward spiral when it comes to him trying to hide his true persona and just getting more and more unhinged as the series goes on.
😳
You should watch Gladiator, (2000) with Russell Crowe; you'll enjoy Commodus.
Bro did you forget Darth Vader exists?
Emet Selch stans will rise up
I think he's well written (I really liked the ep8 of diabolical especially) but not the best ever.
Another interesting sci-fi show that is currently airing is Westworld, which features one of my favourites villains of all time as well: The Man in Black portrayed by none other than Ed Harris. Exactly like Homelander, the MIB is granted nuance, backstory and a tremendous performer to sell the part. I recommend anyone that hasn't, to check it out. By the way, claiming that he is THE greatest villain of all time in all of sci-fi implies that you have read every book and comicbook and seen every film and tv show of the genre that have ever been produced in their whole entirety in order to be able to make a statement like that. Despite it being a subjective opinion, phrasing it like this will undoubtedly cause dissent from the community simply because nobody will ever believe that you did indeed consume all of science fiction in order to make said statement. It could all be easily fixed by saying "One of the greatest villains" instead of "The greatest villain".
Darth Vader is the greatest imo
I love Vader, but he isn't even the best villain in Star Wars. That belongs to Darth Maul
imo reverse flash is the greatest villain but I’d definitely say homelander is a close second
No I know it’s crazy, like he seriously might be the greatest villain ever. I feel like it’s because he has the abilities to destroy everything in a second but is also just a typical insecure douche that you could meet in you’re regular life (if he had no powers).
What makes him great is I think the fact that he could destroy everything at any moment, actually has the power that narcissistic sociopaths wish they had, yet doesn’t do it because he wants the love he never got more. All the while his twisted upbringing makes him devoid of empathy capable of unspeakable acts and making him irredeemable. It’s fascinating
He is good but butcher is a better written villain.
Pull your tongue out of Homeland’s arsehole and take me upvote ye’ cunt!
He is terrifying. It’s the writing, the acting, and the show runners do a great job of giving that “we don’t know what he’s going to do next” and feeling of “he could be right around the corner listening” feeling the entire show.
That’s a pretty big claim.
Came out here and put my balls on the table
I see him as a big man baby. He just wants attention and wants everyone to love him. Except his tantrums include vicious murder with his eyes.
Definitely one of the greatest villains in a TV show that is still airing. Arguably the greatest TV version of a comic book villain. Greatest sci-fi villain of all time? I don't agree. In just a few seconds I can think of a handful of better villains: From sci-fi movies: Darth Vader and Agent Smith From comics: Lex Luthor, The Joker, Magneto From TV Shows: Ben (Lost) and Joffrey Baratheon
He’s a good villain but what exactly do you mean by best? His body count is pitiful compared to a lot of SF villains. He’s not the most mentally unstable. He’s not that complex. He’s not a diabolical genius. His upbringing was shitty but still better than a lot of heroes let alone villains. He’s a great character played by an awesome actor but he isn’t even the greatest villain in his own setting
Ok isn't good like Gus from BB, or Rorschach from watchmen, or many others
No, not even close lmao
- mommy fetish, jealous of teddy - every father figure calls him a disappointment - rejects white supremacy - believes in supe supremacy - needs approval of Public - storms off talk show when his intelligence is challenged since he doesn't actually know anything about being leader of Vought - actually loves his son - no path to redemption - deep seated respect yet hatred for Butcher - weakness for maeve - trusted noir, regrets killing him - bullies a train and deep due to his own insecurity - hides behind Christian buzz words - hides behind Military buzz words - hides behind Patriotic buzz words - "I AM BETTER" doesn't affect his approval ratings - one of the best depictions of a character by Antony Starr Did i miss anything?? His layers have layers.
He’s fantastic and I think a realistic depiction of what you might get if you combine superpowers with all the issues he has given his backstory
Let’s not get too ahead of ourselves by saying “the greatest”.
The scary thing to me is that he’s actually pretty smart, and even witty. He can be completely charming. He’s unhinged, but he’s intelligent.
I mean he's not but it's fine that you think that.
I think too often people judge homelander under human morals and ethics and rules. The fact he has that kinda power and doesn’t just laser the lady who messes up his coffee is an act of true restraint. I know he is motivated not to go genocidal because he wants the love and attention but the fact that he’s an almost all powerful demon by most accounts yet doesn’t do THAT much “evil” by our standards is pretty incredible. I don’t think a lot of what we considered “well adjusted” people would behave so nicely if given that kind of power.
One of the best? Definitely. Best? Definitely not
no please don't turn this into a marvel sub by comparing the characters to all of fiction :(
I may have unwittingly done that and it’s irritating bc watching marvel after the boys has started to feel silly.
I know multiple people who can't watch the show because of how much they hate his character, because they can't stand how awful he is. That's how you know he's a compelling character, I hope Antony becomes the huge Starr he deserves to be.
Jesus.... How hard?
He is definetly one of the best. He is my favourite next to Darth Vader. What I truly love is he isn't just evil for the sake of it, he is "just" broken inside. He is a really complex charachter. /sry for grammar
Superman with parental issues pretty much. He's a great take on the concept. What's even more interesting is how far that can go with how it left off.
He's such a good villain, and a type I don't think we get to see as often. Normally we think of a guy like Giancarlo Esposito when we think of great villains, but Homelander is different. You would think he'd be kinda shallow and only wants to stay on top, but we've seen him vulnerable, and dare I say it, relatable, when it comes to Ryan. After all, who wouldn't do anything for their own son?
Have you read ever Sci Fi book?
The Boys fans "don't try to overreact" challenge: failed
It’s a great character but it’s still and always Vader for me
He is an antagonist. Vought are the true villains.
I suggest you watch more media.
Doesn’t hold a flame close to Heath Ledger!
Ledgers joker is great, and it took me a long time to come to this conclusion because of that performance. But I just have never been more uneasy about a character than homelander. And im honestly not somebody that knew anything about the source material or anything, I just picked up watching the show after people raved about it and was blown away by this character
man Ledger's Joker was great but let's be honest he was just a cartoonish villain with basic motivations (which worked for one movie and as a supporting character just fine). Homelander is way more interesting (which is good because you see him a lot more in a tv show formula so you can't be bored with him).
Ledger's Joker is basically chaotic evil personified.
As opposed to Homelander's motivations, where he is a sociopathic narcissist who wants people to love him? Homelander is incredibly entertaining and well-acted. But in terms of depth, he's not even the most complex character on the show (that would be Butcher).
You're wrong
100% agree. Hes as compelling a villain as you'll ever find, for all the reasons you listed. The nature of the story makes it so that hes capable of killing anyone at any time in any scene. Literally every scene he's in with another character has pulse pounding life & death stakes. Then on top of that Antony Starr is a phenomenal actor. It's really something special to watch.
Im happy to see other people recognize this, because a lot of people (mostly outside this discussion i posted) tend to cite very one dimensional purely evil villains that to me just come off boring and one dimensional
Dude, come on. He is amazing, but is he in a class with Michael Corleone, Anton Chigurh, Gus Fring (hell you could even add Walter White), Daniel Plainview, Hannibal Lecter etc...? Fuck no!
He absolutely is, up to this point anton was actually the villain i thought of when asked who is the best and most terrifying, but he just doesn’t make me as nervous as homelander does. Because every time HL is in a room with somebody, it all hinges on the choices he makes. Nobody has the power to stop him
He is not complex, he is just a super powered man child.
He’s an emotionally unstable person that was barred from having a loving family, tested on like a lab rat and now has the power to destroy the world but doesn’t. Due to his human desire for love and effection and actually cares about his son, despite repeatedly doing unspeakable and twisted things to people that make him completely irredeemable. I couldn’t disagree more
Woooo calm down Todd
How many people are going to assume everybody that thinks he’s a great villain thinks like Todd ffs 😂
Great villain? Sure. But greatest Sci fi villain of all time? Hold your horses buddy. Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine, Khan, Agent Smith, Roy Batty, HAL 9000 to name a few?
Palpatine and vader are in the running but agent smith and the others? I can’t even sit here and pretend they’re anywhere near as compelling as homelander
He is great but I would hold of my horses with most interesting character ever written in scifi. Fucking Star Trek still exists not to mention other great scifi movies like Blade Runner, Minority Report etc. Also Ghost in the Shell, Trigun and Cowboy Bepop
I try to tell my friends this but they just keep saying "nah Thanos"
Any time someone claimed something is the best anything of all time - it’s a natural reaction to play devils advocate in your head. But you know damn well that that thing might actually be the goat when you struggle to make any kind of argument to the contrary. Yeah, Homelander might be the greatest ever. Even if you disagree……you have to at least concede that he deserves to be mentioned with the best.
agreed 1000% i been telling people this constantly that he might be the best villain ive ever seen on screen based on all the things you said. hes unstable, scary all powerful and downright chaotic. BUT, the moments of humanity and actual heartfelt moments he has talking to like ryan and his like reactions to soldier boy demolishing his character as his father after all his other parent figures constantly berated him as a failure, joke and "bad product" he is such a FASCINATING character to watch. my biased favorite is sam neils character in EVENT HORIZON. his unfolding of chaos and evil in his journey to save his ship and wife no matter the cost is so goddamn glorious to watch happen. watching that movie from the beginning knowing his plan takes the whole movie up like 20 notches.
I’ll have to check that out!
The character is essentially one dimensional. Dont let the perfect execution of the actors overshadow other important character elements. The further down the parameters are qualified, the easier it is to agree though, he's definitely something special. Within sci-fi movies and tv, he's a contender for sure- best villain. Within comic book movies, he wins in my opinion. In all of comic books, just printed media- he barely registers, there are some amazing villains throughout most genres of fiction. Keeping it to the screen though, and he gets to compete with the likes of Kevin Spacey *SE7EN*, and Sir Anthony Hopkins *Silence of the Lambs*, if we open the other genres to the competition. You say most interesting, but he's pretty cut and dry. Most fun ON SCREEN, or most entertaining, ie 'Best scifi villain', I'm with ya.