Yeah, according to some comments on YouTube there is going to be a fifth season. Personally, I think this one should have been the last. There’s only so much the creators can do with the premise...
Yeah, according to some comments on YouTube there is going to be a fifth season. Personally, I think this one should have been the last. There’s only so much the creators can do with the premise while maintaining the status quo, and last season it started to become obvious that they are treading water instead of advancing the plot.
I don't really understand that perspective. I'm not sure what "maintaining the status quo" is supposed to mean in regards to a, at this point, novel plot, and I think the last season was the best...
I don't really understand that perspective. I'm not sure what "maintaining the status quo" is supposed to mean in regards to a, at this point, novel plot, and I think the last season was the best of the 3 so far, and there'd be no way to wrap things up in 1 season and not have it be rushed. Most of the characters have just to their climax, or just gotten past it, so another 2 seasons or so sounds about right for falling action.
What you are saying about the characters sounds in line with what I remember, but I see that as meaning that the story must be getting to the climax and there's just one season left story-wise and...
What you are saying about the characters sounds in line with what I remember, but I see that as meaning that the story must be getting to the climax and there's just one season left story-wise and drawing it out to two seasons would require either some plot contrivances or exploring the consequences of the conclusion of the original plot. Honestly, S3 oftenS3 often seems like it had moments where they were getting close to reaching a climax of the entire series because of all of the focus on defeating Homelander.
I guess I don't follow how those two things follow. The climax, in the traditional story framework, is in the middle of the story, or often more 60%ish of the way through, so if we're at the...
I guess I don't follow how those two things follow. The climax, in the traditional story framework, is in the middle of the story, or often more 60%ish of the way through, so if we're at the climax, then two seasons seems about as much time as we'd expect left in the story. I don't think it makes sense for "defeating homelander" to be the end of the series, either - unlike the Garth Ennis comic, I don't think it's that kind of show.
What? The climax is usually right near the end. Then all that's left is for the denouement to come and wrap it up nicely with a bow. Can you name one story with a climax in the middle?
What? The climax is usually right near the end. Then all that's left is for the denouement to come and wrap it up nicely with a bow. Can you name one story with a climax in the middle?
Yes, the climax generally comes by the end. That is also true about stories! :P In a three-act structure, the climax occurs by the end of the second act, linking to the third act -- the...
Yes, the climax generally comes by the end. That is also true about stories! :P
In a three-act structure, the climax occurs by the end of the second act, linking to the third act -- the resolution, which is generally the smaller act and may sometimes be just a freeze frame. Or a freeze frame with some lettering saying what happened to the characters after that. Or an interesting ambivalent shot (Mikey Rourke flying over the ring in The Fighter).
I greatly appreciate stories with an actual third act that shows the world readjusting to the final confrontation. Like actually seeing Frodo being knighted and Sam returning to the Shire. Or Simon Pegg playing videogames with his zombie friend at the end of Shaun of the Dead. I didn't need that from a logical standpoint, but it gave me great satisfaction. El Camino is, in its entirety, part of the resolution of Breaking Bad.
I've known quite a few structures and I've never seen a single one that puts the climax in the middle. That would make for a boring second half where everything of importance is already defined. Syd Field does talk about a midpoint, but it's something else and, in my opinion, too broadly defined to be of use to an actual writer (Field's structure got needlessly complicated with time, my guess is that he wanted to sell more books). That doesn't mean there aren't movies with a midpoint climax, but that is certainly not a well-known guideline or universal trend.
The three-act structure is generally considered to include the climax in act 3 [1][2][3], but a short third act following the climax is not unheard of because the structure is relatively subjective.
The three-act structure is generally considered to include the climax in act 3 [1][2][3], but a short third act following the climax is not unheard of because the structure is relatively subjective.
The classic example is the original star wars trilogy. The climax is at the end of the second movie, or about 2/3rds of the way through - the part of the story with the most tension (which is how...
The classic example is the original star wars trilogy. The climax is at the end of the second movie, or about 2/3rds of the way through - the part of the story with the most tension (which is how climax is defined) is the flurry at the end, where Luke finds out about Vader's identity, his hand is cut off, Han Solo is turned into a popsicle, and the rebels are getting shit on. From then on, things progressively get more resolved until the end of the 3rd movie.
No, seriously, google "plot chart" - they tend to show the climax in that 60% range now, although it use to be smack dab in the middle.
In The Boys form, the stereotypical climax would be when Homelander is at his height of power, and the Boys are at their most fucked and hopeless.
I think a lot of people mistake the resolution for the climax, because of how "climax" is used colloquially (e.g, Luke's final confrontation with Palpatine is the climax), but that's not how it's defined in storytelling.
No, you are mixing up parts of the plot. "Climax" is only at the 60% point because "falling action" and "conclusion" need to physically have room to fit on the chart. What you identified as the...
No, you are mixing up parts of the plot. "Climax" is only at the 60% point because "falling action" and "conclusion" need to physically have room to fit on the chart. What you identified as the climax of the OT is the crisis. Luke's confrontation with Vader and Palpatine in RotJ (along with the destruction of the Death Star in the C plot) is the climax, Luke taking off Vader's helmet is the resolution, and the final celebration is the conclusion.
Seriously, you can't tell me that the confrontation at the end of RotJ is part of the falling action of the OT.
Look at the Harry Potter books. Look at the Lord of the Rings (which was written as one book), look at Game of Thrones, etc. The climax is nearly always near the end.
I disagree. Climax has always been the moment of highest tension in the story. Luke's confrontation with Palpatine is only the climax if you take a lens at an extremely brief period of the Star...
I disagree. Climax has always been the moment of highest tension in the story. Luke's confrontation with Palpatine is only the climax if you take a lens at an extremely brief period of the Star Wars story.
From Empire to Return, you can't possible say there was, at least on an average level, more tension in Return than in Empire. The amount of conflict and tension goes down every moment; Luke gets over it, Leia is saved, Solo is melted, the rebels mount back. Tension and conflict monotonically goes downwards.
In the LoTR, I'd put the climax somewhere in Twin Towers, probably in that stretch before Gandalf charges back for the Aragorn thread, and Shelob for Frodo's thread. Those were the moments of highest tension. Well, there's like a spike in the third movie, but on a global scale I'd put the tension triangle peaking there.
Going back on topic, I don't even think the climax, or peak tension, has hit in The Boys yet - it'll probably be in the first few episodes of season 4. It's getting there, but I think a Homelander fully unshackled from having to be the nice guy in public, and the Boys maximally conflicted over whether or not taking Compound V is okay, and how much violence is okay, will be the highest point of conflict.
And they absolutely have enough space for 2 seasons to resolve that conflict.
I'm sorry, that's just not what the climax is or how storytelling generally is described. You are describing the moments that set up the tension that is resolved by the climax. Also, I have no...
I'm sorry, that's just not what the climax is or how storytelling generally is described. You are describing the moments that set up the tension that is resolved by the climax. Also, I have no idea how you could say that the final confrontation in RotJ is not the most powerful part of the whole trilogy.
I don't know what to tell you, I disagree - the traditional climax occurs somewhere in the mid to the latter half of the 2nd act, and is the moment of highest tension. The final confrontation is...
I don't know what to tell you, I disagree - the traditional climax occurs somewhere in the mid to the latter half of the 2nd act, and is the moment of highest tension.
The final confrontation is not the moment of highest tension, because by that point the sith has suffered a series of losses and the protagonist are in a much more secure position - that's why Luke could be fighting Palpatine at all. It was hard to imagine back when he was armless falling down a reactor.
Either way, this is a somewhat pointless and never ending discussion on pedantry.
To return to The Boys, regardless of what you want to call it, I don't think the tension has been fully set up at all, so it's hard to imagine an ending in this series. I think at minimum the first half of the season will be fully selling the conflict - Homelander is free to do as he wishes, The Boys have very conflicted motives at this point, and they have to face their own questioning of humanity as people rally around the psychopathic murderer.
The second half of the season will be crossing that point and starting to build things back, and the final season will be actually defeating Homelander and what he represents.
They could definitely have cool premises after overthrowing Homelander/Vought, but that might be beter for more spinoffs. I'd certainly tune in to an exploration of the...
They could definitely have cool premises after overthrowing Homelander/Vought, but that might be beter for more spinoffs. I'd certainly tune in to an exploration of the consequences/democratization of V.
I could see them pulling it off. With S3's ending, obviously the huge focus of this season has to be homelander and how the country, and arguably his family, reacts. It's probably going to be that...
I could see them pulling it off. With S3's ending, obviously the huge focus of this season has to be homelander and how the country, and arguably his family, reacts. It's probably going to be that "well the status quo is gone but it's not chaos yet....." thing.
I could see that climaxing with homelander going scorched earth, and the 5th season is dealing with that, although I admit i'm having a hard time even imagining how you could make that a season.
All that said, I'd certainly bet against it being a good idea in most cases. I think The Boys is phenomenal given how well they've managed to take an edgy over the top comic with one or two good ideas and put in some seriously good plot lines/acting/characters. And that's probably the only reason I didn't immediately feel this idea was DOA.
This pleases me. I'm glad to see continuity in the cast has been maintained. Seems like Amazon is spending its money on the right things here (cast, production values, etc.).
This pleases me.
I'm glad to see continuity in the cast has been maintained. Seems like Amazon is spending its money on the right things here (cast, production values, etc.).
I just hope the wrap it up before it all goes to shit. Decent show for what it is.
Yeah, according to some comments on YouTube there is going to be a fifth season. Personally, I think this one should have been the last. There’s only so much the creators can do with the premise while maintaining the status quo, and last season it started to become obvious that they are treading water instead of advancing the plot.
I don't really understand that perspective. I'm not sure what "maintaining the status quo" is supposed to mean in regards to a, at this point, novel plot, and I think the last season was the best of the 3 so far, and there'd be no way to wrap things up in 1 season and not have it be rushed. Most of the characters have just to their climax, or just gotten past it, so another 2 seasons or so sounds about right for falling action.
What you are saying about the characters sounds in line with what I remember, but I see that as meaning that the story must be getting to the climax and there's just one season left story-wise and drawing it out to two seasons would require either some plot contrivances or exploring the consequences of the conclusion of the original plot. Honestly, S3 oftenS3 often seems like it had moments where they were getting close to reaching a climax of the entire series because of all of the focus on defeating Homelander.
I guess I don't follow how those two things follow. The climax, in the traditional story framework, is in the middle of the story, or often more 60%ish of the way through, so if we're at the climax, then two seasons seems about as much time as we'd expect left in the story. I don't think it makes sense for "defeating homelander" to be the end of the series, either - unlike the Garth Ennis comic, I don't think it's that kind of show.
What? The climax is usually right near the end. Then all that's left is for the denouement to come and wrap it up nicely with a bow. Can you name one story with a climax in the middle?
Yes, the climax generally comes by the end. That is also true about stories! :P
In a three-act structure, the climax occurs by the end of the second act, linking to the third act -- the resolution, which is generally the smaller act and may sometimes be just a freeze frame. Or a freeze frame with some lettering saying what happened to the characters after that. Or an interesting ambivalent shot (Mikey Rourke flying over the ring in The Fighter).
I greatly appreciate stories with an actual third act that shows the world readjusting to the final confrontation. Like actually seeing Frodo being knighted and Sam returning to the Shire. Or Simon Pegg playing videogames with his zombie friend at the end of Shaun of the Dead. I didn't need that from a logical standpoint, but it gave me great satisfaction. El Camino is, in its entirety, part of the resolution of Breaking Bad.
I've known quite a few structures and I've never seen a single one that puts the climax in the middle. That would make for a boring second half where everything of importance is already defined. Syd Field does talk about a midpoint, but it's something else and, in my opinion, too broadly defined to be of use to an actual writer (Field's structure got needlessly complicated with time, my guess is that he wanted to sell more books). That doesn't mean there aren't movies with a midpoint climax, but that is certainly not a well-known guideline or universal trend.
The three-act structure is generally considered to include the climax in act 3 [1][2][3], but a short third act following the climax is not unheard of because the structure is relatively subjective.
I believe were are in total agreement, buddy ;)
The classic example is the original star wars trilogy. The climax is at the end of the second movie, or about 2/3rds of the way through - the part of the story with the most tension (which is how climax is defined) is the flurry at the end, where Luke finds out about Vader's identity, his hand is cut off, Han Solo is turned into a popsicle, and the rebels are getting shit on. From then on, things progressively get more resolved until the end of the 3rd movie.
No, seriously, google "plot chart" - they tend to show the climax in that 60% range now, although it use to be smack dab in the middle.
In The Boys form, the stereotypical climax would be when Homelander is at his height of power, and the Boys are at their most fucked and hopeless.
I think a lot of people mistake the resolution for the climax, because of how "climax" is used colloquially (e.g, Luke's final confrontation with Palpatine is the climax), but that's not how it's defined in storytelling.
No, you are mixing up parts of the plot. "Climax" is only at the 60% point because "falling action" and "conclusion" need to physically have room to fit on the chart. What you identified as the climax of the OT is the crisis. Luke's confrontation with Vader and Palpatine in RotJ (along with the destruction of the Death Star in the C plot) is the climax, Luke taking off Vader's helmet is the resolution, and the final celebration is the conclusion.
Seriously, you can't tell me that the confrontation at the end of RotJ is part of the falling action of the OT.
Look at the Harry Potter books. Look at the Lord of the Rings (which was written as one book), look at Game of Thrones, etc. The climax is nearly always near the end.
https://thewritepractice.com/climax-of-a-story/#:~:text=Definition%20of%20Climax,tested%20to%20its%20highest%20degree.
https://www.reddit.com/r/writing/comments/c191sy/when_should_the_climax_occur/
https://fictionary.co/journal/what-is-the-climax-of-a-story/
I disagree. Climax has always been the moment of highest tension in the story. Luke's confrontation with Palpatine is only the climax if you take a lens at an extremely brief period of the Star Wars story.
From Empire to Return, you can't possible say there was, at least on an average level, more tension in Return than in Empire. The amount of conflict and tension goes down every moment; Luke gets over it, Leia is saved, Solo is melted, the rebels mount back. Tension and conflict monotonically goes downwards.
In the LoTR, I'd put the climax somewhere in Twin Towers, probably in that stretch before Gandalf charges back for the Aragorn thread, and Shelob for Frodo's thread. Those were the moments of highest tension. Well, there's like a spike in the third movie, but on a global scale I'd put the tension triangle peaking there.
Going back on topic, I don't even think the climax, or peak tension, has hit in The Boys yet - it'll probably be in the first few episodes of season 4. It's getting there, but I think a Homelander fully unshackled from having to be the nice guy in public, and the Boys maximally conflicted over whether or not taking Compound V is okay, and how much violence is okay, will be the highest point of conflict.
And they absolutely have enough space for 2 seasons to resolve that conflict.
I'm sorry, that's just not what the climax is or how storytelling generally is described. You are describing the moments that set up the tension that is resolved by the climax. Also, I have no idea how you could say that the final confrontation in RotJ is not the most powerful part of the whole trilogy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-act_structure
https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1c48o3/does_the_climax_occur_in_the_second_act_or_the/
I don't know what to tell you, I disagree - the traditional climax occurs somewhere in the mid to the latter half of the 2nd act, and is the moment of highest tension.
The final confrontation is not the moment of highest tension, because by that point the sith has suffered a series of losses and the protagonist are in a much more secure position - that's why Luke could be fighting Palpatine at all. It was hard to imagine back when he was armless falling down a reactor.
Either way, this is a somewhat pointless and never ending discussion on pedantry.
To return to The Boys, regardless of what you want to call it, I don't think the tension has been fully set up at all, so it's hard to imagine an ending in this series. I think at minimum the first half of the season will be fully selling the conflict - Homelander is free to do as he wishes, The Boys have very conflicted motives at this point, and they have to face their own questioning of humanity as people rally around the psychopathic murderer.
The second half of the season will be crossing that point and starting to build things back, and the final season will be actually defeating Homelander and what he represents.
It really obviously needs that much time.
They could definitely have cool premises after overthrowing Homelander/Vought, but that might be beter for more spinoffs. I'd certainly tune in to an exploration of the consequences/democratization of V.
I could see them pulling it off. With S3's ending, obviously the huge focus of this season has to be homelander and how the country, and arguably his family, reacts. It's probably going to be that "well the status quo is gone but it's not chaos yet....." thing.
I could see that climaxing with homelander going scorched earth, and the 5th season is dealing with that, although I admit i'm having a hard time even imagining how you could make that a season.
All that said, I'd certainly bet against it being a good idea in most cases. I think The Boys is phenomenal given how well they've managed to take an edgy over the top comic with one or two good ideas and put in some seriously good plot lines/acting/characters. And that's probably the only reason I didn't immediately feel this idea was DOA.
Hyped! This is easily the best show on Amazon. Can't wait.
This pleases me.
I'm glad to see continuity in the cast has been maintained. Seems like Amazon is spending its money on the right things here (cast, production values, etc.).