Was MOS a good introduction to Superman for younger kids?

KalMart

239-Bean Irish Chili
Joined
Dec 4, 2005
Messages
16,732
Reaction score
1
Points
58
I'm wondering about this....I see STM as a very good all-ages movie, but I think much of MOS's appeal is in more mature sensibilities. Not that a movie has to be 'dumbed down' for younger kids, but do we think that a Superman movie in particular has sort of an extra responsibility to be more accessible than others in that area?

I think some of that gets left behind when discussing these films in places like this, as we bring a lot of more mature and often intense sensibilities into the equation. But does anyone feel that some of that appeal has been neglected while trying to thematically update things in in this 'one-upsmanship' of superhero movies? I think it's a tough call because on one hand, a lot of that 'goody-goody' stuff was what many felt held Superman back compared to other grittier characters et al. On the other, in trying to 'keep up', it runs the risk of not standing out as well when it perhaps counts the most...the earlier formative years of children.

I'm kind of divided. I've often felt that kind of Superman movie I'd like is probably not one that I'd necessarily recommend for young kids or expect them to fully appreciate. I don't have children but many of my friends do, and a lot of them sort of turn to me as to what movies and such are okay for the kids...and I'm pretty serious and protective of that not just because of mature material but also quality (I recommend the Pixar movies above all else). And I've advised then on other superhero and sci fi movies as well. I wonder what I'd say about this one for a 7-8 yr. old. Gut reaction is that I'd still recommend STM over MOS at this point, but maybe I'll think differently later on.
 
As long as they don't get the idea that this Superman kills like a lot of kids did when Batman 89 did, I'd say maybe.
 
As long as you don't show them III and IV, I'd say yes now.





:hehe:
 
The way I look at it, MOS is more like the animated series or superman cartoons.. you see a lot of explosions, a lot of crashing, entire cities being decimated, but you don't see anyone being killed up front... even zod's neck was done quickly... not enough to truly sink in (like imagine if superman slowly twist zod's neck until it breaks and you see his eyeballs slowly roll upwards in groan... and blood dripping down his lips?)

So, to me, this is a kid friendly movie...

Except for how they tell the story.. the back and forth.. i don't think many younger kids will understand it at all.. it's too complicated...
 
Nah,this is sort of the equivalent of what TDK was to Batman.I don't think I'd start out a younger kid with this film.
 
I'm wondering about this....I see STM as a very good all-ages movie, but I think much of MOS's appeal is in more mature sensibilities. Not that a movie has to be 'dumbed down' for younger kids, but do we think that a Superman movie in particular has sort of an extra responsibility to be more accessible than others in that area?

I think some of that gets left behind when discussing these films in places like this, as we bring a lot of more mature and often intense sensibilities into the equation. But does anyone feel that some of that appeal has been neglected while trying to thematically update things in in this 'one-upsmanship' of superhero movies? I think it's a tough call because on one hand, a lot of that 'goody-goody' stuff was what many felt held Superman back compared to other grittier characters et al. On the other, in trying to 'keep up', it runs the risk of not standing out as well when it perhaps counts the most...the earlier formative years of children.

I'm kind of divided. I've often felt that kind of Superman movie I'd like is probably not one that I'd necessarily recommend for young kids or expect them to fully appreciate. I don't have children but many of my friends do, and a lot of them sort of turn to me as to what movies and such are okay for the kids...and I'm pretty serious and protective of that not just because of mature material but also quality (I recommend the Pixar movies above all else). And I've advised then on other superhero and sci fi movies as well. I wonder what I'd say about this one for a 7-8 yr. old. Gut reaction is that I'd still recommend STM over MOS at this point, but maybe I'll think differently later on.

You have a great point. If a parent is extremely conservative about what their kids are exposed to then said parent would have them watch Superman The Movie. But if that kid already plays video games, can work the internet, and watch plenty of televsion at home, he would have no interest in watching Superman the movie. Not as a kid at least. When he gets older he can appreciate STM with an understanding of when it was made.
 
It's the best since it doesn't require preovous knowledge of the comics to understand its better than superman returns which feature a ****** superman who was selfish
 
If they can handle the darker moments, I'd say it would be a good introduction to Superman.
 
I'm wondering about this....I see STM as a very good all-ages movie, but I think much of MOS's appeal is in more mature sensibilities. Not that a movie has to be 'dumbed down' for younger kids, but do we think that a Superman movie in particular has sort of an extra responsibility to be more accessible than others in that area?

I think some of that gets left behind when discussing these films in places like this, as we bring a lot of more mature and often intense sensibilities into the equation. But does anyone feel that some of that appeal has been neglected while trying to thematically update things in in this 'one-upsmanship' of superhero movies? I think it's a tough call because on one hand, a lot of that 'goody-goody' stuff was what many felt held Superman back compared to other grittier characters et al. On the other, in trying to 'keep up', it runs the risk of not standing out as well when it perhaps counts the most...the earlier formative years of children.

I'm kind of divided. I've often felt that kind of Superman movie I'd like is probably not one that I'd necessarily recommend for young kids or expect them to fully appreciate. I don't have children but many of my friends do, and a lot of them sort of turn to me as to what movies and such are okay for the kids...and I'm pretty serious and protective of that not just because of mature material but also quality (I recommend the Pixar movies above all else). And I've advised then on other superhero and sci fi movies as well. I wonder what I'd say about this one for a 7-8 yr. old. Gut reaction is that I'd still recommend STM over MOS at this point, but maybe I'll think differently later on.

The average person who goes to theaters is between the ages of 12 to 24. Anything outside of that age group should be on parental discretion.
 
Yeh kids today are desensitized to violence much more than kids of 35 years ago, so the violence in MOS is just par for the course. Of course, breaking Zod's neck was a bleak moment in Superman's career that kids won't soon forget. They remember Batman saying "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you" to Ra's and they'll definitely remember Superman killing Zod.
 
You have a great point. If a parent is extremely conservative about what their kids are exposed to then said parent would have them watch Superman The Movie. But if that kid already plays video games, can work the internet, and watch plenty of televsion at home, he would have no interest in watching Superman the movie. Not as a kid at least. When he gets older he can appreciate STM with an understanding of when it was made.

Yeah, the big thing is that kids just grow up with more sensory/visual stimulation these days than we who grew up earlier did. But just like with a lot of things, you just hope that that doesn't include more insensitivity to violence and such. I agree that there is more responsibility with the parent these days to watch over that and also teach the child how/where to draw the lines between entertainment and real-life behavior and such.


Yeh kids today are desensitized to violence much more than kids of 35 years ago, so the violence in MOS is just par for the course. Of course, breaking Zod's neck was a bleak moment in Superman's career that kids won't soon forget. They remember Batman saying "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you" to Ra's and they'll definitely remember Superman killing Zod.
But aside from the violence, I also wonder if the story is really 'sinking in' the way it did before, or if it is but just at a different rhythm.
 
Yeah, the big thing is that kids just grow up with more sensory/visual stimulation these days than we who grew up earlier did. But just like with a lot of things, you just hope that that doesn't include more insensitivity to violence and such. I agree that there is more responsibility with the parent these days to watch over that and also teach the child how/where to draw the lines between entertainment and real-life behavior and such.



But aside from the violence, I also wonder if the story is really 'sinking in' the way it did before, or if it is but just at a different rhythm.

I'll tel you what though, movies make great conversation interms of philiosphy, life, tough choices etc.
 
The average person who goes to theaters is between the ages of 12 to 24. Anything outside of that age group should be on parental discretion.

It's always been that way. But the kind of entertainment a child is conditioned with outside of movies hasn't, so perhaps proportionally, it's not quite as 'abbreviated' as some older folks may feel it is.
 
I'll tel you what though, movies make great conversation interms of philiosphy, life, tough choices etc.

And you know what...and this may be a bit of a tangent...I think it's very important that movies are actually watched by parents WITH their kids...that it's an activity they do together, and not just sat in front of a TV to quiet them down. If it's a movie that they're going to enjoy, it's important that you were there with them for it.
 
If kids can run around enjoying the likes of cap and even batman, I don't see why this superman is any different.

If anything this a good film to watch for this very reason, The character has a responsibility, he doesn't just kill when he get's an opening and he doesn't make a quip afterwards.

If I was a kid I probably would have lost my mind watching this. It's pretty awesome, learning to fly and all that good stuff. Can't remember did they show him learn to fly in the original?

And that scene in my avy is probably a wonder through a childs eye.
 
I would have said no but my little cousin saw it (he's around 6 or 7) and he loved it. I tell you hearing that he'd asked his Mum for a red cape made me smile so god damn much :woot: so maybe it is.
 
Well, when I was a young kid, I first watched the George Reeves Superman series on TV, and I think Superfriends before STM came around. And I wasn't even a big fan of Superman (liked Batman more). But the movie made him live, and maybe even at my age I was impressed by just the idea of having a big live-action movie about any superhero. It was a new kind of thing altogether. You're just not going to get that sort of novelty today, so i that respect it's rather unfair to hold any current movie up to that standard...it's just not the same kind of 'event' as it was back then.
 
Yes, it's a Superman they can relate to the.most and kids seem to really love it so far, probably because they can see aspects of themselves in young Clark such as having to deal with bullies, feeling alone, dealing with parental complications (I'd say most kids live in some form of a "broken" home these days (broken is a poor word for it, I'd just say - different)), and wanting to rise above it. So, with all of that I"d say it's very inspiring for kids and that's why they like it so far. Child Clark's scenes didn't talk down to them - they talked to them and that's something very important.

Also there's cartoons.as per Superman killing - a kid in front of me was similarly sniffling at that moment and not saying "cool!" So kids seem to get the importance and weight of that scene as well.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the big thing is that kids just grow up with more sensory/visual stimulation these days than we who grew up earlier did. But just like with a lot of things, you just hope that that doesn't include more insensitivity to violence and such. I agree that there is more responsibility with the parent these days to watch over that and also teach the child how/where to draw the lines between entertainment and real-life behavior and such.

But aside from the violence, I also wonder if the story is really 'sinking in' the way it did before, or if it is but just at a different rhythm.

Good points. I look at it this way, from an "introduction" to Superman to a child....let say a 5 year old.

First of all, if you have a 5 year old who doesn't know who Superman is, he's been under a rock. There's probably more Superman toys and merchandise, cartoons, video games than any other hero. But let's say your kid never heard of Supes and his first time ever getting to see this character is MOS. He's going to be overwhelmed by the spectacle of the movie, and blown away by Superman's abilities.

But as far as the character of Superman....well I won't beat this dead horse anymore. He's not seeing the characteristic traits of Superman that we from older generations have seen.

But he does see Supes allow his father (Pa Kent) die, he sees Supes battle Zod and wreak havoc through Metroplois with no regard for human casualties, and finally he sees Supes kill Zod by breaking his neck. That's his intro to Superman. It wasn't my intro to Superman. Maybe this is the Superman for the hardened, desensitized generation that we live in. Maybe this Superman speaks to them and their condition. It doesn't speak to me however.

Give me the Superman from DC Comics, Superfriends, JLA, George Reeves, Christopher Reeve, and even that Brandon Routh dweeb. The stories weren't always the best, the acting wasn't always crisp, but the character was always Superman.
 
But he does see Supes allow his father (Pa Kent) die, he sees Supes battle Zod and wreak havoc through Metroplois with no regard for human casualties, and finally he sees Supes kill Zod by breaking his neck.

So he sees the bravery of a father who risks and sacrifices his life to save his son from what he fears might happen to him, he sees Superman doing everything he can protect everyone around him (he had to stop these guys as fast as he possibly could - he saved the Pilot who was falling and told the people around him to get in doors) and in the end having to break his one rule of never having to kill (sacrifice something he holds dear and placing a stain in his life) in order to save a family, and he sees the devastation (not the "oh cool, Bond just killed another bad guy!") that taking a life actually does to a person.

I don't see that as hardened at all.

Look at how fun the Avengers are having KILLING aliens left and right. Now, I loved that film, but really looking at it - the Avengers were much darker.
 
Last edited:
So he sees the bravery of a father who risks and sacrifices his life to save his son from what he fears might happen to him, he sees Superman doing everything he can protect everyone around him (he had to stop these guys as fast as he possibly could - he saved the Pilot who was falling and told the people around him to get in doors) and in the end having to break his one rule of never having to kill (sacrifice something he holds dear and placing a stain in his life) in order to save a family, and he sees the devastation (not the "oh cool, Bond just killed another bad guy!") that taking a life actually does to a person.

I don't see that as hardened at all.

Look at how fun the Avengers are having KILLING aliens left and right. Now, I loved that film, but really looking at it - the Avengers were much darker.

I'm just saying its a lot to process for a 5 year old, that's all. It doesn't mean I would rather support a bubblegum, campy Superman, but I see this film as definitely hardened, with an edge....especially "what taking a life actually does to a person". How is a 5 year old supposed to process a superhero killing someone and showing the torment and anguish afterwards?

I guarantee you there were more than a few 5 year olds asking his/her parents why Superman had to kill Zod and why did he left Pa Kent die. Character arcs and analysis won't help mom and dad there.
 
So he sees the bravery of a father who risks and sacrifices his life to save his son from what he fears might happen to him, he sees Superman doing everything he can protect everyone around him (he had to stop these guys as fast as he possibly could - he saved the Pilot who was falling and told the people around him to get in doors) and in the end having to break his one rule of never having to kill (sacrifice something he holds dear and placing a stain in his life) in order to save a family, and he sees the devastation (not the "oh cool, Bond just killed another bad guy!") that taking a life actually does to a person.

I don't see that as hardened at all.

Look at how fun the Avengers are having KILLING aliens left and right. Now, I loved that film, but really looking at it - the Avengers were much darker.

Actually the lesson to let your father die to safeguard your own identity is the most immoral thing you can teach a child... it goes against our own genes...

It doens't make sense in so many levels... You have to be completely selfish or a total psychopath to let your own father die when it's so easy to save him)... this was the scene i hated the most in the entire MOS... (different people different strokes i guess)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"