The Boys on Amazon

13»

Comments

  • redlancer said:

    Just one question. Why is it called "The Boys?" I'm assuming The Boys are Hughie, Billy Butcher, Mother's Milk and Frenchie, right? Nobody has referred to them as "the boys" in the narrative though. Weird title. 


    It's the worst name ever for a show. I remember months ago seeing the trailer for this play in front of a few movies (during the trailer pre-trailer advertising stuff) and thinking it looked like a fun show to check out, but literally 10 minutes later couldn't remember what it was called... and that happened 2 or 3 times with a couple of those time me actively trying to remember the name, lol

    At one point in the show I think Butcher is on the phone with someone and does say "me 'n the boys" yadda yadda yadda, but that may be me inserting the scene with my personal head canon... 
    Yeah I think "The Boys" is the name of Butcher's crew, like you mentioned he says the title when referring to the his team of misfits. I also agree the name is pretty bad, there are so many things going on and you could have called it so many other things, that said, the graphic novels are called "The Boys" so that is why they did it.
  • Let’s call it Hughie and the Supes
    JaimieTBroRad33
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    BroRad33 said:
    redlancer said:

    Just one question. Why is it called "The Boys?" I'm assuming The Boys are Hughie, Billy Butcher, Mother's Milk and Frenchie, right? Nobody has referred to them as "the boys" in the narrative though. Weird title. 


    It's the worst name ever for a show. I remember months ago seeing the trailer for this play in front of a few movies (during the trailer pre-trailer advertising stuff) and thinking it looked like a fun show to check out, but literally 10 minutes later couldn't remember what it was called... and that happened 2 or 3 times with a couple of those time me actively trying to remember the name, lol

    At one point in the show I think Butcher is on the phone with someone and does say "me 'n the boys" yadda yadda yadda, but that may be me inserting the scene with my personal head canon... 
    Yeah I think "The Boys" is the name of Butcher's crew, like you mentioned he says the title when referring to the his team of misfits. I also agree the name is pretty bad, there are so many things going on and you could have called it so many other things, that said, the graphic novels are called "The Boys" so that is why they did it.

    I've seen a bit about the graphic novel. It's so crass it would lose me as an audience, and I'd like to think I'm pretty tolerant of that sort of thing as far as women go. Also it's less inclusive in theme, doesn't handle Starlight's sexual harassment the same way, etc. The title makes more sense there. I think it really is playing for a boy audience and the author is a bit of a child.
    BroRad33
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    JaimieT said:
    BroRad33 said:
    redlancer said:

    Just one question. Why is it called "The Boys?" I'm assuming The Boys are Hughie, Billy Butcher, Mother's Milk and Frenchie, right? Nobody has referred to them as "the boys" in the narrative though. Weird title. 


    It's the worst name ever for a show. I remember months ago seeing the trailer for this play in front of a few movies (during the trailer pre-trailer advertising stuff) and thinking it looked like a fun show to check out, but literally 10 minutes later couldn't remember what it was called... and that happened 2 or 3 times with a couple of those time me actively trying to remember the name, lol

    At one point in the show I think Butcher is on the phone with someone and does say "me 'n the boys" yadda yadda yadda, but that may be me inserting the scene with my personal head canon... 
    Yeah I think "The Boys" is the name of Butcher's crew, like you mentioned he says the title when referring to the his team of misfits. I also agree the name is pretty bad, there are so many things going on and you could have called it so many other things, that said, the graphic novels are called "The Boys" so that is why they did it.

    I've seen a bit about the graphic novel. It's so crass it would lose me as an audience, and I'd like to think I'm pretty tolerant of that sort of thing as far as women go. Also it's less inclusive in theme, doesn't handle Starlight's sexual harassment the same way, etc. The title makes more sense there. I think it really is playing for a boy audience and the author is a bit of a child.
    Ya know, that is sort of Garth Ennis's style. And it is definitely one I grew out of as I got older. Some of his stuff is a tad bit more mature, but really not by much. Thankfully the show seems (and I am only a bit in) seems to handle things a bit more tactfully. If they played it exactly like the comic does, then holy cow...the juvenile level in the comics is through the roof, and things are played for laughs that have no business being played for laughs. And that isn't just The Boys, it is the vast majority of his comics. 
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    edited August 2019
    JaimieT said:
    BroRad33 said:
    redlancer said:

    Just one question. Why is it called "The Boys?" I'm assuming The Boys are Hughie, Billy Butcher, Mother's Milk and Frenchie, right? Nobody has referred to them as "the boys" in the narrative though. Weird title. 


    It's the worst name ever for a show. I remember months ago seeing the trailer for this play in front of a few movies (during the trailer pre-trailer advertising stuff) and thinking it looked like a fun show to check out, but literally 10 minutes later couldn't remember what it was called... and that happened 2 or 3 times with a couple of those time me actively trying to remember the name, lol

    At one point in the show I think Butcher is on the phone with someone and does say "me 'n the boys" yadda yadda yadda, but that may be me inserting the scene with my personal head canon... 
    Yeah I think "The Boys" is the name of Butcher's crew, like you mentioned he says the title when referring to the his team of misfits. I also agree the name is pretty bad, there are so many things going on and you could have called it so many other things, that said, the graphic novels are called "The Boys" so that is why they did it.

    I've seen a bit about the graphic novel. It's so crass it would lose me as an audience, and I'd like to think I'm pretty tolerant of that sort of thing as far as women go. Also it's less inclusive in theme, doesn't handle Starlight's sexual harassment the same way, etc. The title makes more sense there. I think it really is playing for a boy audience and the author is a bit of a child.
    Ya know, that is sort of Garth Ennis's style. And it is definitely one I grew out of as I got older. Some of his stuff is a tad bit more mature, but really not by much. Thankfully the show seems (and I am only a bit in) seems to handle things a bit more tactfully. If they played it exactly like the comic does, then holy cow...the juvenile level in the comics is through the roof, and things are played for laughs that have no business being played for laughs. And that isn't just The Boys, it is the vast majority of his comics. 

    Yeah, for instance the comic book scene of Homelander ejaculating over the city... um, no. I already understood the concept of the city being his bitch without the sexual metaphor, thanks. Super funny if you're a teenage boy who is thinking about ejaculating 24/7 and finds it relatable, though. Then it's a passing laugh. Instead of what it would have been for me, which is (1) gross, (2) a boyish impression of the character that's difficult to make nuanced in the future ("you'll always be that boy masturbating over the city" lol), (3) offensively obvious as a metaphor.

    Garth Ennis just sounds like he's having fun and isn't thinking about how his normal looks to the broad culture and why it might be smart to adapt to that (ie, you curb your cursing when you get the corporate job). Or maybe that's just an artistic choice, to be niche. But since it's sexual with him I suspect it's him writing his fetish and not "for art."

    Edit: I skimmed back in this thread because I remembered someone addressing this scene earlier, and you were the one who mentioned it being "on the nose," so you probably inspired some of my thoughts here. Credit.
    ken hale
  • JaimieT said:
    I've seen a bit about the graphic novel. It's so crass it would lose me as an audience, and I'd like to think I'm pretty tolerant of that sort of thing as far as women go. Also it's less inclusive in theme, doesn't handle Starlight's sexual harassment the same way, etc. The title makes more sense there. I think it really is playing for a boy audience and the author is a bit of a child.
    You mean Garth Ennis?  Eisner award winner Garth Ennis?  Writer of Judge Dredd, Hitman, Hellblazer, Preacher, and Punisher?  

    You mean Garth Ennis, writer of "Garth Ennis' Dicks," "Garth Ennis' Dicks 2," and "Garth Ennis' Bigger Dicks?"

    You think he's a bit of a child?  

    /s
    ken hale
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    edited August 2019
    JaimieT said:
    I've seen a bit about the graphic novel. It's so crass it would lose me as an audience, and I'd like to think I'm pretty tolerant of that sort of thing as far as women go. Also it's less inclusive in theme, doesn't handle Starlight's sexual harassment the same way, etc. The title makes more sense there. I think it really is playing for a boy audience and the author is a bit of a child.
    You mean Garth Ennis?  Eisner award winner Garth Ennis?  Writer of Judge Dredd, Hitman, Hellblazer, Preacher, and Punisher?  

    You mean Garth Ennis, writer of "Garth Ennis' Dicks," "Garth Ennis' Dicks 2," and "Garth Ennis' Bigger Dicks?"

    You think he's a bit of a child?  

    /s

    This reads like you're asking a straight up question, but then you say it's sarcastic and I can't tell how I'm supposed to read this, whether you agree or not. If you do agree and it is sarcastic, I'm not sure why you'd write it this way, so I'm responding to the scenario where you don't agree and "/s" might indicate you don't have a hard tone:

    Hey, I like Disney Princess movies. There's nothing wrong with being a child in the sense of fantasy-fulfilling stories. I like the story of The Boys overall. It's great. I'm talking about the, IMO, gratuitous sexual content. "Child" = puberty, in this case.
  • Oh no, I agree.  Ennis is a bit of an edgelord.  My comment was intended to read as a sarcastic "You don't say..."
    JaimieT
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    Oh no, I agree.  Ennis is a bit of an edgelord.  My comment was intended to read as a sarcastic "You don't say..."

    Ah, the mention of his award threw me off.
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    When he puts on his big boy pants he can do some really cool stuff. Its like he has two modes though. The mode mentioned in this message, or just entirely silly, gross-out, balls-to-the-wall stories that age entirely awful. Credit where credit is due, that he has done some cool stuff in addition. The real problem is when he tries to merge those two together. Then the tonal dissonance comes off as in entirely poor taste. I haven't made my way through the end of the first season and don't want to spoil anything in case they touch on it. But boy am I glad that the show seems to have kept the some of the crazy, while also managing to not make it feel entirely gross and off-putting. 
    JaimieT
  • They were filming B-roll shots near my work today, they had a section of the street roped off and were filming a poster that they'd put on a bus stop, some shots in an alleyway and parts of a building that was covered by green tarps that I guess will be digitally enhanced in post-production.


    majjam0770
  • Thats an interesting photo. Isnt stormfront that defunct nazi website? I have no idea what it means in the context of the show. 
    CretanBull
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited August 2019
    ken hale said:
    Thats an interesting photo. Isnt stormfront that defunct nazi website? I have no idea what it means in the context of the show. 
    Yeah, I think it was a Nazi newspaper and website...I still haven't watched all of S1 yet so I wasn't sure if "Stormfront" had a relevance to the show that I'm not yet aware of, but if you've seen it all and there's no mention of it in S1 I guess it's a plot point for S2.  It seems like a bad oversight to borrow a term associated with white supremacists though...

    ken hale
  • I liked it, but fuck me the end of the season made it abundantly clear they were planning on a season 2 lol. 
  • I've started reading the comic after binging the tv show. The comic is much more, um, colorful than the show... as hard as that might be to believe.
    ken hale
  • edited September 2019
    Need to discuss the Aron and Cecily's take on the ending.  There be spoilers below.

    On Bald Move TV, they said it was lazy writing, but I thought Madeline and Dr. Rawls' stories contradicted!  She said Mama Butcher had a miscarriage and he said he said the baby clawed/punched its way out and died 10 minutes after.  In my book, those are two different birthing scenarios.  Thoughts? 

    I realized that we can't really "discuss" lest we spoil everyone else, but a yay or nay so I don't feel like I am crazy would be a huge help.  
    majjam0770
  • MurderbearMurderbear Cold Spring, Ky
    @Vikki12 Yeah, you are absolutely right. In the second to last scene, in the house at night, Homelander said their stories didn't match so that's how he knew something was up.
    Vikki12
  • Was thinking at some point they might reveal that Homelander is the only 'true' Super that was ever born with powers.  That's why he spent his entire childhood as a lab-rat while they developed compound-V from his blood/DNA/etc. 

    That would tie in with his son being only the second person born with powers (assuming they didn't dose him with V like the other children) and why he was taken from Homelander so they could do the same experiments. Homelander has the ability to genetically pass on his abilities where everybody else is just one-and-done with compound-V doses.

    Would be a good play on the idea that all these heroes were 'touched by God' to be made this way, only to find out by the end of the season they were created by a corporation for profit. We find out Homelander is the one true Alpha that really was imbued with powers by the universe and makes him even scarier IMO.

    All the other Supers seem to be younger than him, don't think we've seen anybody definitively older. I think would be a good twist and the show is still set up to go that way if they want.

    majjam0770
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    edited September 2019
    @redlancer Yep, that's also my theory. I posted it on the Discord to cover my ass. I like it because it also explains why he even thought of using it to make supervillains... There's a reason it's on his radar, basically (because he never struck me as Machiavellian), and also why he's not threatened by its use. I believe I said, "If you cut him he'll bleed blue."
    BroRad33
  • @Murderbear Thought I was crazy for wondering why all the hate. Glad someone else is on the same page.
    Murderbearawookieemajjam0770
  • Vikki12 said:
    Need to discuss the Aron and Cecily's take on the ending.  There be spoilers below.

    On Bald Move TV, they said it was lazy writing, but I thought Madeline and Dr. Rawls' stories contradicted!  She said Mama Butcher had a miscarriage and he said he said the baby clawed/punched its way out and died 10 minutes after.  In my book, those are two different birthing scenarios.  Thoughts? 

    I realized that we can't really "discuss" lest we spoil everyone else, but a yay or nay so I don't feel like I am crazy would be a huge help.  
    I got the impression what they were calling lazy writing was the fact that they filmed scenes to show Dr. Rawls' story as though it were a flashback, lending credence to it.  Contradicted by Stillwell's story, that had no flashback scenes, making it appear incredible.  Basically, I think they were commenting on not liking when media shows you lies as opposed to tells you lies.
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    edited September 2019
    Vikki12 said:
    Need to discuss the Aron and Cecily's take on the ending.  There be spoilers below.

    On Bald Move TV, they said it was lazy writing, but I thought Madeline and Dr. Rawls' stories contradicted!  She said Mama Butcher had a miscarriage and he said he said the baby clawed/punched its way out and died 10 minutes after.  In my book, those are two different birthing scenarios.  Thoughts? 

    I realized that we can't really "discuss" lest we spoil everyone else, but a yay or nay so I don't feel like I am crazy would be a huge help.  
    I got the impression what they were calling lazy writing was the fact that they filmed scenes to show Dr. Rawls' story as though it were a flashback, lending credence to it.  Contradicted by Stillwell's story, that had no flashback scenes, making it appear incredible.  Basically, I think they were commenting on not liking when media shows you lies as opposed to tells you lies.

    I was talking to someone about this in line for my Dragon Con pass last week. I thought the visual trick was clever. It's the opposite of lazy, IMO, since it demonstrates understanding of film conventions. I think if someone disliked it it's more accurate to call it "cheap." We're all used to accepting those flashbacks as reality, but why? Because that's how it's usually done. It's a way for the creators to obscure the truth that is as valid as writing lies for a character to say. I can understand disliking it, because it undermines an accepted convention, and is "cheating," but it worked for me personally.
    majjam0770Brieanneblacksunrise7JoshTheBlackDee
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    edited September 2019
    I thought that bit of plot was pretty clever, personally. It showed that Homelander was smart enough not to believe one person he already knew was pretty dodgy, and that he was good at investigating for himself, and also that he was savvy enough to use the information when it suited him. I was a bit confused why the guys didn’t like it, but different strokes and all that. 
    JaimieTblacksunrise7
  • MurderbearMurderbear Cold Spring, Ky
    He went to the doctor twice though. Because he told her that their stories didn't match so he went back to Vogelbaum and squeezed the truth out of him. The REAL truth. That doesn't sound like the conversation we saw. They didn't lie to us on screen they just didn't show us his second conversation so that final scene would be more tense.
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    He went to the doctor twice though. Because he told her that their stories didn't match so he went back to Vogelbaum and squeezed the truth out of him. The REAL truth. That doesn't sound like the conversation we saw. They didn't lie to us on screen they just didn't show us his second conversation so that final scene would be more tense.

    (Unsure if this involves what I said?) The cheat I was speaking of was how they showed the botched birth as an ostensible flashback while someone was lying about it. What you're saying is true though. 
    Murderbear
  • MurderbearMurderbear Cold Spring, Ky
    JaimieT said:
    He went to the doctor twice though. Because he told her that their stories didn't match so he went back to Vogelbaum and squeezed the truth out of him. The REAL truth. That doesn't sound like the conversation we saw. They didn't lie to us on screen they just didn't show us his second conversation so that final scene would be more tense.

    (Unsure if this involves what I said?) The cheat I was speaking of was how they showed the botched birth as an ostensible flashback while someone was lying about it. What you're saying is true though. 
    Whoops! I thought you all were talking about the conversations and I was surprised no one caught that. That makes wayyyy more sense! Ha
    JaimieT
Sign In or Register to comment.