Exactly. I mean, having Dracula in a movie running around, seducing young women just to drink their blood doesn't mean the studio wants men to perv on women and drink their blood or something.
it's also so utterly ridiculous and absurdly nihilistic that it makes him realize what a massive asshole he's been and want to die
He also was too retarded to leave the twist from the comic in the show, which also fucked things up a lot.
He could've still had that without fucking the characters into the dirt.
Not to mention that they already humanized Homelander by explaining that he's a prick because of the fact that he was experimented on as a kid.
Alan Moore wanted both sides to be right and wrong on their own way. Especially since the Cold War was still going on when Watchmen was made. Rorshach was the idealist, Ozymandias was the pragmatist.
Alan Moore probably thinks that now, since it inspired God knows how many edgy capeshit heroes who kill the shit out of people like violent lunatics.
The US gov. has no way to keep them under control. OK, so you have an army of Supermen - what do you do if they decide to take over your shit? What could you do? Produce another batch of Supermen? What if the second batch does the same?
You can program them for absolute loyalty and make it so that they genetically cannot disobey an order from the top.
Why not make robots then.
I don't think they had robots that can bench-press a truck while also flying and shooting lasers. That, and Vought's specialty is bioengineering and pharmaceuticals, not robotics. They're not Stark Industries or Baktoid Armor Workshop.
Frank Castle is a violent killdozer, but none of the shitbags he kills ever offend again.
The idea of killer villains repeatedly committing crimes of greater scope and barbarity comes from the bastardization of kids' comics and how they try to make it more adult by having villains repeatedly kill innocents, while the heroes keep sparing them, which make the heroes look stupid.
I don't think it makes heroes look stupid to not execute criminals on the spot, since that goes against what they're supposed to be as characters, but it absolutely makes the setting look stupid. There's no way Gotham would be as soft on crime as it is with how many reoffending terrorists it has. And even if the laws weren't immediately changed to hang The Joker, I can't believe that a police department known for corruption wouldn't take the long way back to jail and play dumb about how only the back seat of their cruiser got ventilated by people they never saw.
HINT: Gotham is Chicago, and just look at how Chicago operates.
I get what you're trying to say, but Gotham deals with multiple serial killers and The Joker's seasonal terrorist attacks on top of Chiraqi culture. Then they also have multiple crime families that should want things to be less crazy so they can actually make money.
Going back to the Boys, it is kinda funny that replacing Batman with Homelander in Gotham would probably lead to a more stable city, as Homie would probably kill 99% of the Rogues Gallery, leaving Gotham crime more tame once all the whack-jobs die off and are replaced with more mundane mobsters who at most rip off local stores.
I mean, living in pretty much any comic city would be a nightmare. Trying to enjoy your weekend, when bam, Darkseid boom-tubes onto mainstreet with an army of parademons, and the rest of your day off is spent in a bunker while the Justice League throws your car at him.
Not even Riverdale was safe, as Archie meets the Punisher showed us.
