Jump to content

Talk:The Boys (TV series)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 109.77.209.211 (talk) at 19:52, 9 August 2019 (→‎Press release). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sexual assault?

Isn't rape a more accurate description of what Deep did? --46.7.192.113 (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The show title card warns that it contains scenes of rape. The episode I watched implied oral rape or worse, but only the blackmail before the act was shown thankfully. Some readers may have different opinions but I think downplaying the behavior as anything other than rape is inappropriate and also inconsistent with the intention considering the source material. Instead of your opinion or my opinion is probably better to either use the title card as a source or to use reviews of the episode as source, that way we're being objective. -- 109.76.223.71 (talk) 00:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What you both said. It's 2019 people. - Immigrant laborer (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, you are both synthesizing the information, and we don't get to do that. Find a source that calls it that, and we're in business. Until then, its oral sex. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The show is a self-documenting source, correct? Literally the first thing you see when you start playback after the Amazon logo is a content card. The content card reads as follows:
The following program is intended for mature audiences and contains Adult Content, Graphic Language, Graphic Violence, Nudity, Strong Sexual Content and Rape.  Viewer discretion is advised.
There are no other scenes it could possibly be talking about. The cards are changed from episode to episode, so this is not referring to events that are shown much later. - Immigrant laborer (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with Sebastian and I don't think it is appropriate to downplay the rape of Starlight, but in theory it might refer to the series as a whole and other episodes such as attempted rape Starlight prevents or the implied the rape of Becca Butcher. I'm surprised reviewers haven't given them more flak for using rape a plot device, but it was implied not shown, and they did tone it down from a gang rape in the source material. We've a local consensus of 3 saying it's rape, those who disagree need to add to this discussion. -- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sexual Violence in THE BOYS: An Analysis and Discussion". ComicsVerse. 23 July 2019. rape by coercion is absolutely, 1000%, rape. The Deep is a rapist. Annie is a survivor of sexual violence.

I said above it would be better to have a source, to be completely objective, because there are always some who disagree, not because I believe we need a source. -- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tl:dr - Allow me to be clear: we aren't alloowed to Sherlock our way through an article. As others have pointed out, opinions will disagree (even amongst editors, if you can imagine such a thing), which is why the litmus for inclusion is not Truth, but Verification. every opinion or view in the article must be supported by an external source speaking explicitly about the issue. Contributor: 109.77.229.35 did what an editor did not: they supplied a source. This protects the article from destabilization and the regular flame-y stuff that occurs without a source.

All we needed was a source. We have that now. Source the statement, and we're good. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May it please the court, it wasn't 109.77.229.35. [1] - Immigrant laborer (talk) 17:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, fair enough. Let the record reflect the correct attribution of the editor adding the link. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
IL beat me to it by minutes and updated the article with the same link coincidentally. -- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 18:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Point out that Butcher murders Stillwell's baby?

The show just kind of zips past that. Yay? Nay? - Immigrant laborer (talk) 22:37, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We don’t know if Stillwell's baby is still alive or not because it wasn't confirmed on season finale episode. I don't think the baby should be presumed dead until it is confirmed next season or the series developer confirmed in an interview. — YoungForever(talk) 23:36, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In-universe plot development vs cast list

Myself and another editor have been reverting the character list back to something more neutral and less in-universe. The explanations (via edit summary) have been as follows:

But it pretty much started here, with no explanation.
The article is an overview of the subject - in this case, the tv series. We tend to avoid in-universe points of view,(esp. in cast sections), favoring instead the actors who give life to those characterizations. There are several GA and FA exemplars of how this is done. We do not Sherlock or Hardy Boy our way into interpreting the primary data of the character actions. If a reviewer points out a choice that an actor made in the portrayal of that character (like this, for example), then we can include that characterization. Not before. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:02, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I want to be quite as strict as you (Sebastian) are being but I appreciate a certain level of vigilance, and think descriptions should introduce a character rather than describe plot that is better left to the episode summaries.
Earlier edits by User:JonMor93 added a lot of bloat to the Cast section and were not good in my opinion. Although not ideal I thought the edits by Bluerules were better written and far less verbose. Perhaps with some discussion we can decide what details we think are most important and make sure they are included, but I'm definitely of the opinion that less is more and that Plot and Episode Summaries don't belong in the Cast section. -- 109.79.69.130 (talk) 23:17, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the article is to give an overview of the subject. That is what my edits have done. We need a full and accurate overview and that's not present in the current version of the article, especially for the Deep's description. The article currently only focuses on the negative attributes of his character - "Quick to assert himself towards those he feels are beneath him, the Deep sexually harasses Starlight and is implied to have a history of sexual misconduct." The edit I made adds that the character "is also insecure and believes that he is not respected by the other members of the Seven." - a full and accurate overview.
The explanation for the revision was "leave the character development to the plot summaries". Of the most recent edits I made, the only thing that could be interpreted as "character development" is that Hughie is "Initially meek and passive, he becomes more confident as he learns to fight back against the corrupt heroes." The other edits are not interpretations of the primary data of the character actions. A-Train being "addicted to Compound-V" is a neutral observation that gives a full overview of the character. The Female being "forced to join a terrorist organization, she was kidnapped by Vought International and injected with Compound-V, leaving her in a violent and unstable state." is a neutral observation that gives a full overview of her character. And I also removed the "He later forms a bond with The Female." information from Frenchie's section, which would be more fitting in the plot summaries.
The original point of contention was that the descriptions were too long, which I agree with and I have working on keeping them as trimmed as possible while ensuring that they provide an accurate overview of the characters. In my last edits, the character descriptions are shorter from where you claim "it pretty much started here, with no explanation." (and that edit was also fixing grammatical errors and removing unnecessary information.) The only point of contention here seems to be the information about Hughie starting off meek and passive before becoming more confident, which again, I understand how that is being perceived as "character development". So I do not have an issue with omitting that from my future edits while restoring the rest of the changes I have made because the other information provides a full overview of the subject. Bluerules (talk) 23:39, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate you coming by to talk about this, Bluerules. Respectfully, I disagree. You will note that the section is called 'Cast' and not 'Characters'. There is a reason for that. If you think the characters are described too anemically, create an article on Homelander, on Hughie, on Butcher, etc. Create episode articles to delve into the personal growth of the characters as portrayed by the actors (with plenty of references, of course). It isn't needed here. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the issue about plot development, which is why I am not opposed to removing the information about Hughie's personality. My other edits, however, are not about the personal growth of the characters. My edits to the Deep, A-Train, and the Female are to give a full overview of their characters and my edit to Frenchie is actually removing in-character development in respect to his bond with the Female. Yes, the section is called "cast", but it still contains descriptions of the characters. If it's acceptable to include the negative qualities of the Deep in this section, then it should also be acceptable to include his redeeming qualities. Otherwise, the information becomes negatively-slanted. I am also not opposed to potentially removing more from the character descriptions so long as a full overview is maintained and if the issue in regards to the Deep is simply the mention of his personality, I have no issue with removing (or at least trimming) the negative aspects as well. Bluerules (talk) 01:15, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Press release

Most watched show apparently. Trying to find the original press release ideally but haven't found it yet. -- 109.77.209.211 (talk) 17:50, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Used 2 of the sources and added to the article under a section "Audience Viewership" (since that's what Netflix streaming shows seem to list instead of Ratings). If anyone can find a copy of the original press release or actual ratings please do add to the article. -- 109.77.209.211 (talk) 19:52, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Boys_(TV_series)&oldid=910118690"