Muskaan Chaudhry

Professor Christina Kellagher

English Composition FOUN101

October 15th, 2019

Superman vs The Homelander

In a new world that lacks almost no cinema representation, it’s easy to use an already set

template as a crutch for new underdeveloped ideas. In the midst of the never-ending character

confusion, we rarely come across a successfully incorporated character fusion, in this case, the

re-birth of a new age of an anti-superman based off America’s popular boy scout. In a pseudo

world full of the ironic juxtaposition that incorporates similarities and differences, does a balance

become hard to find while creating two virtually similar characters with polar opposite origin

stories, or does it help establish how essentially different two carbon copies may be?

Although the very core of these characters represents two very different ideologies, they

were literally created from the same skeletal idea of an undefeated, all powerful being. Created

almost a whole century apart these heroes look the same but are actually very different. The

character of Superman first appeared in Action Comics #1, a comic book published on April 18,
1
1938. Whereas the character for The Homelander first appeared in The Boys #1, a comic book

first published in 2006.

When Superman was first adapted for Television and Film it was one of the few

superhero films that had a franchise. As Rubin states on a WIRED article “Since then, we’ve

seen not just superheroes but superhero meta-commentary enter the Hollywood pipeline. Heroes

1 Catalog of Copyright Entries. New Series, Volume 33, Part 2: Periodicals January-December 1938.
United States Library of Congress. 1938. p. 129
became assholes in a series of book-to-screen projects, from Watchmen and Kick-Ass to Wanted

and Powers. In most cases, the results left viewers wanting.”2

The Homelander has been heavily described as an analogue to Superman, although

depicted as terribly evil. Ennis describes Homelander as: "an almost entirely negative character.

He is really just a series of unpleasant urges kept in check by his own intelligence, which is

enough to understand that he can have anything he wants so long as he doesn’t push his luck too

far.”3

Analysis of their individual back stories for instance, suggests that one crucial difference

between the two is the fact that The Homelander is only portrayed an alien in a cover story but

he was in fact grown in a secret laboratory, the progeny of genetic material, who was injected

with a Compound V. He spent most of his life with a hydrogen bomb strapped to him in case he

tried to escape. He possesses powers similar to superman, namely heat vision, super strength,

durability, flight and enhanced vocal cords, and the Compound V causes him to age slower.

Whereas, an article on Superman’s powers explains “Many of what are now consider to

be Superman's most iconic powers — his heat vision, his freezing breath, the ability to fly and

even venture out into space — were not part of his power set when he started out in the Golden

Age. In fact, as the very first page of his very first story shows above, his only real power is an

enhanced strength and physicality that granted him the ability to run faster than a speeding train,

lift incredibly heavy objects, and (very specifically) leap up to the height of 1/8th of a mile. It's

surprisingly grounded for the Superman we've come to know over the years”4 Regardless, when I

2 Rubin, Peter. "Amazon's 'The Boys' Tests the Limits of Superhero Fatigue | WIRED." WIRED. WIRED,
26 Jul 2019. Web. <http://www.wired.com/story/review-the-boys-amazon/>
3 Ennis, and Rybrandt. " The Writer and his Editor: Ennis & Rybandt ." Wayback Machine.
Newsarama.com, Web. <http://web.archive.org/web/20160603211739/www.newsarama.com/981-the-
writer-and-his-editor-ennis-rybandt.html>
4 Whitbrook, James. "The History Behind Superman's Ever-Changing Superpowers." Gizmodo. Web.
<http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-history-behind-supermans-ever-changing-superpowers-1684736603>.
read some old articles released around the time of Superman’s transition from Action Comics to

his own comics, they had a completely different view on what superman’s true powers and

purpose was. Saturday times post in 1941 stated “Superman is never allowed, for example, to

destroy property belonging to anybody except the villain, and then only when absolutely

unavoidable. He will readily project himself through a building, rendering it utterly

uninhabitable, but only when Lois Lane's predicament inside is so desperate that to use the

conventional entrance might mean a fatal delay. Superman never kills anybody and never uses a

weapon other than his bare fists. He knocks evildoers silly at the drop of a hat, tosses them clear

into the stratosphere and generally scares the daylights out of them. But those who get killed are

always hoist by their own petards, as when a gangster whams Superman on the skull with a

crowbar, only to have the crowbar rebound and shatter his own noggin.”5

To the contrary In one of his comics, Homelander is described to exhibit signs of extreme

megalomania, causing him to attack and kill innocent people. An article in the NY Times

describes him as “Superman gone sour”6. While earlier mentioned Whitbrook states they’re “not

all that heroic” and he is an Aryan fever-dream version of Superman wrapped in an American

flag.7

Regardless of every notion that is explored by the individual creators for each character, I

find it extremely hard to distinguish between an actual difference. Their powers are shown to be

relatively same and their motives in television seem just as vague. Superman holds a higher

5 " Home of The Saturday Evening Post." The Saturday Evening Post , 21 Jun 1941. Web.
<http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/rise-of-superman.pdf>.
6 Hale, Mike. "Review: âThe Boysâ Deconstructs the Superhero, With a Light Touch - The New York
Times." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Web.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/arts/television/review-the-boys-amazon-prime.html>
7 Whitbrook, James. "The History Behind Superman's Ever-Changing Superpowers." Gizmodo. Web.
<http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-history-behind-supermans-ever-changing-superpowers-1684736603>.
importance universally in terms of fictional superheroes but the Homelander has just as big of a

fan base today in 2019.

I see a clear difference in their motives which stands to prove their point on the character

choices for each comic. Superman was created in a time where the world thought of simpler

solutions for simpler problems. In an era where less was more. The Homelander was introduced

to the people in a time where we glorify a good anti-hero. We can make a clear distinction but

can we explain how the same audiences could favor Superman and The Homelander

simultaneously? Or have we reached a time in visual representation where we don’t necessarily

judge the characters based off their motives alone. Is it time to start widening our judgement

when it comes to choosing a favorite hero or anti-hero? Or does the audience really not mind

anymore?

I have had similar questions burning through my mind while I researched both of my

characters, I found distinctive similarities in their skeletal structures and I found big differences

in their characteristics and motives. The evidence keeps piling up and does nothing but explain

the same point in different words. That The Seven (aka The Homelander led superhero group) is

essentially an analogue to the Marvel and DC superheroes, with of course, an unbelievable twist.

This a topic I choose to relentlessly pursue due to the great interest I have

developed in the characters. These two were based off the exact same skeletal structure and have

impacted their audience in a very similar manner.

I do believe people seem to have lost the coherent ability to explain why they feel drawn

to certain characters, but with the correct research you can decipher why you felt the need to feel

drawn to a character in the first place. I don’t believe there is a pattern, I just believe we need our

reasons to explain things better, maybe with all the information we need.