As the showrunner grows his darkly comic satire into a franchise — and spoofs a certain trial and presidential election in the new season — he says he’s fine losing the viewers who just figured out his social agenda: “Go watch something else.”
They are not gonna “go watch something else” because as he also says:
Some people who watch it think Homelander is the hero. What do you say to that? The show’s many things. Subtle isn’t one of them. So if that’s the message you’re getting from it, I just throw up my hands.
Basically many are hopeless
As a European, I thought that was obvious from the first episode. So many stabs at a specific worldview, it’s obviously a criticism on modern politics.
I can’t believe anyone ever thought it was anything but a representation of trump and his worldview.
I stopped watching the show because it seemed a little over the top and graphic. I may check it out again, though.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
But it was a cheap, genre show on an unsexy network, The CW, so even an ensuing string of doubles (Revolution, Timeless) did little to move his needle.
But Kripke crafted a scathing satire of 21st century America where Homelander, the chiseled superhero in the American flag cape, is an authoritarian proxy for Donald Trump.
Critics immediately took a shine, but its commercial success — the most recent season earned more eyeballs than The Rings of Power, with 106 billion minutes viewed in 2022 — made Kripke a priority at the streamer.
Suddenly, we were telling a story about the intersection of celebrity and authoritarianism and how social media and entertainment are used to sell fascism.
It’s happened now almost every season, and we write them sometimes close to two years before they air and again we’ll find that the news is accurately reflecting whatever we’re talking about.
But, especially for young showrunners, I do wish there was still that Syfy channel and CW model of learning how to stretch your dollar, both in terms of writing and producing.
The original article contains 2,169 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 92%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Sometimes just cutting out paragraphs to “summarize” the text is just plain bad. This is one of those times, and time for me to finally block this thing.
You realise you are reacting with feelings to a bot? I read the whole article and it’s just an interview format which makes no sense to summarise. I mean you can always disregard, but it does save some time most of the time, helping you quickly judge if the content is worth a full read or not without opening the link. It’s a technology
I am very aware of that it is a bot 😄. And I have to say: a rather bad-its-job one, not just in this case.
Whenever I read one of its “summaries” it was blatantly obvious that it just cuts parts, often times mauling paragraphs and destroying contexts. And that does not offer any value to me, hence I permanently disregard it now by putting that account on a block list (next to other not-so-great bot accounts).
I think that this is the logical place to put those opinions - it would make less sense unlinked to the post.
I dislike that it’s been shotgunned at nearly every post I see, regardless of how relevant it might be, and I don’t trust the output to represent the link.
Given there’s no “bad bot” style feedback functionality (that I know of), what else is there to do than block it?
