I finished every issues of Mark Waid’s Irredeemable and Incorruptible published so far and suddenly found myself in a pickle, because I’ve been reading Ennis’ The Boys as well (similar subject matter) and I cannot decide which should be called more authentic in regard of certain aspects of storytelling.

Irredemeemable centers around the heroes with metahuman abilites and it’s unbelievably well done, BUT, because it shows a continous crisis situation caused by a literal demigod, the characters rarely act the way they could be called likeable with the exception of Qubit, if you can symphatize with his strict morality.

Incorruptible on the other hand is not that good characterization-wise. The comic basically admits at several points, that the protagonist, Max Damage was a cardboard cutout villain without any goals to begin with and when he reformed, he basically took his lack of morality and turned it around - being a hero for him means doing the exact opposite what he was doing before the Plutonian went apeshit. But here comes the twist: the presentation of the society and the town’s community is exceptional, the minor characters are very well-written, and so on, I could praise the book for minor things where it really shines.

The Boys has a very thought out world, but there is no reason for denying how Ennis’ immature tendencies would alienate certain readers - that’s all I will say here, because if anyone was interested about the book, should be already knowing it’s the ultimate satire of the superhero concept, without devolving into a nonsensical farce (it dances on the fence, that for sure).

So there you have it, three different books with similar high concepts (superheroes can be evil), but very different approaches. Even though I cannot decide which is more authentic, I would recommend them all, for at least the first arcs to decide if you are interested for reading more.