At the end of the day, the heroes win. It’s expected. It’s the formula. Happens so much, it’s the standard for many stories that involve superheroes. Villains try and try to win but most times all they could get at the end are moral, even philosophical wins. But that permanent, ever lasting win seems to be the impossible accomplishment. Why? It goes against the standard. But one superhero project went against that standard and that style was a part of the DNA. That was The Boys. It was a show – based off the comic book run – that was more of bad vs worse. And that ‘worse’ was Homelander. Homelander, at the surface, is another image of an evil Superman. On top of that he is mentally fragile, power hungry, power drunk, egotistical, twisted, unpredictable, hostile, and savage. In The Boys universe, he is the strongest and the most powerful. Homelander was fighting battles in different fronts, particularly with Vought and Billy Butcher and his gang. And for the most part, Homelander was able to get some victories over them. Even got some victories after a few seasons’ ends. However, that final victory was still elusive to the best supervillain in recent years. But should the standard have changed to allow Homelander to get that final victory?
Homelander does have some victories under his belt, which help give merit to handing him that final victory. One of the first and memorable ones, was eliminating a tie to his humanity. In season one, he was being manipulated, played, and quarreled. Most of it was because of Madelyn Sitwell, who served…many roles…for Homelander. But he got fed up with the power she had over him, so he took her off the board. Another win was another elimination of a tie to his humanity. Black Noir was really the only person that Homelander relied on and trusted. But after Black Noir withheld the information of Homelander’s father, Homelander got rid of him too. Homelander went even deeper in an attempt to rid himself of his humanity by going back to the lab and scientists who created him. He made them relive every painful and embarrassing moment he went through as a child. In their case though, those scientists did not live through the experiences. After he settled affairs, Homelander was smiling wide. It was also a mission for him to run Vought to which he was successful in doing. Then he set his attention on something bigger; the control over the U.S. And he did by being the puppet master to a planted President. Homelander had goals, went through the steps to get them fulfilled and achieved some goals. So, Homelander did end up winning some important fights which gave credibility that he could be the winner once the last bit of smoke settled.
The standard has always established the good guys win at the end. It’s what has been the formula for superhero stories. It could be difficult to find a story or stories that has the villain truly wining at the end, especially in live action outings. Superhero stories are not the only ones. Any story that has good vs evil follows this standard. But, The Boys did an acceptable job of getting the standard and twisting it. The superhero genre was the show’s plaything. It went against the grain. Played against expectations. And at times, fully embraced the absurd expectations. The show’s blueprint gave way to an ending that saw Homelander winning.
It’s always a safe bet to see the hero winning at the end. The Boys had a tendency to not play it safe. Many great stories set up a perfect villain but never allowed the villain to win. The Boys had believable potential to allow Homelander to grab the win. It was set up quite nicely. Many components lined up. A dark, mature, violent tone. A well written villain. An actor who made all evil actions terrifying. Believable ways the villain could defeat the protagonists. A drive for the villain to win. An unstoppable villain who got even more powerful due to a boost of V1. Even fans who embraced the win. Nearly everything that The Boys used to tell its story, led to an ending that had Homelander winning. Some circles may say that if Butcher did not kill Homelander at the end, then what would have been the point of all the seasons prior? The point behind those seasons would have built up anticipation that led to the belief the standard was going to be lived up to. Then at the final moment, a huge, positive bait-n-switch. Fans would have settled in their seats waiting for the good guys to win, let their guard down but experience genuine shock at the first instance Homelander is going to do it. If that was the route the show went, it would have been an outcome that would have been surprising, mind blowing, but at the same time expected and welcomed. Maybe even applauded since the ending would have taken a risk and not play safe. And since Homelander was a well written villain, the ending would have felt earned and believable. Everything that came before – moments and tone – gave reasonable belief Homelander had the war won at the end.
The Boys did a great job in getting what fans expect from the superhero genre then quickly doing something twisted with it. That method supplanted The Boys as a premier super hero story during its run. What helps a show last well after its conclusion though, is the effect the ending has. More particularly, how does that ending linger on the fans. If the ending doesn’t hit on a high note, fans will criticize. If it ends well, fans will praise it. However, if an ending goes somewhere unexpected and actually executes a risky move, fans will immortalize the ending. The show had the type of ending within its grasp but for a show that played with a lot of risk, twists and defying conventions, the ending did play it safe. Having Homelander win could have helped The Boys stand tall among others.
