Was MOS a good introduction to Superman for younger kids?

[MrMaooz]

My 8 year old brother said it was awesome.

 

[KalMart]

My friends also ask me about Star Wars...should they show their kids the prequels first and go in order, or the original trilogy? Aside from the fact that I think the prequels are recycled and stir-fried crap, it's kind of a tough question because even though I feel the originals are maybe more mature in terms of craftsmaship and pace, and the prequels are more cartoonish....the prequels are also much more violent (I still think the record for most dismemberments) and filled with stuff about trade embargoes and treaties and midi-whatevers....that would probably be much more of a WTF to a kid.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

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.

Oh right, the Superman that sleeps with Lois and cares about her so much that he still doesn't reveal to her who he is and then just leaves her without saying anything. So its just wham, bam, see ya maam. But even without the see ya. What a wonderful role model.

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.

And that's a bad thing to have a discussion with your children about the movie afterwards?

 

[KalMart]

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)

That part makes sense...or at lest was probably intended to make sense...on a much more mature level than any kid would really understand, unfortunately. Pa Kent and Clark know it would have been easy to save him, but the sacrifice that Jon was making was something he felt was more important for Clark at a crucial point in his life, and saving Pa would have jeopardized it more.

But yeah, it didn't really play that way to many folks, and probably wouldn't to a young kid except as really tragic.

 

[TheBat812]

Personally I think it will be great for kids to be introduced to a version of supes who is learning, makes mistakes. But I would show STM first simply because they might not appreciate it as much after seeing the visuals in mos. Then they can also get a glimpse at the idealize supes before seeing a version who isn't quite as perfect.

 

[TheBat812]

My friends also ask me about Star Wars...should they show their kids the prequels first and go in order, or the original trilogy? Aside from the fact that I think the prequels are recycled and stir-fried crap, it's kind of a tough question because even though I feel the originals are maybe more mature in terms of craftsmaship and pace, and the prequels are more cartoonish....the prequels are also much more violent (I still think the record for most dismemberments) and filled with stuff about trade embargoes and treaties and midi-whatevers....that would probably be much more of a WTF to a kid.

Theres no great way to do it. Either method you'll lose something. I'd show the original trilogy first because the reveal in ep V was legitimately amazing as a kid, and theyre just more engrossing. I'd treat ep 1-3 as they are - prequels that should be seen after the originals.

 

[Ultimatehero]

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?

There was a five year old sitting in front of me and... HE GOT IT. His parents didn't need to explain it to him. When Superman was first thrust into that position and yelling "ZOD! PLEASE! NO! STOP!" and having difficulty with it, even kids got that it was hard for Superman to kill and it wasn't something he wanted to do. And how do you explain it, "sadly if Superman didn't do that, the family would have died, so Superman had no other choice. He did the hardest thing he could in order to save people like us."

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...

Jonathan held out his hand telling Clark to stop, you can literally see Clark having to force himself to hold himself back so that Jonathan's dying wish can be fulfilled.

They made it really easy to understand, even for kids, when he holds out his hand to motion "stop" (which all to most kids know that hand signal) and shake his head no.

 

[writer0327]

Oh right, the Superman that sleeps with Lois and cares about her so much that he still doesn't reveal to her who he is and then just leaves her without saying anything. So its just wham, bam, see ya maam. But even without the see ya. What a wonderful role model.



And that's a bad thing to have a discussion with your children about the movie afterwards?

Well like I said, the storylines aren't always the greatest, nor the acting, but for me, the character of Superman was there, even in SR.

And I didn't say that is a bad thing to discuss film with your children at all. Its just a lot for a small child to process. The question was is MOS a good introduction of Superman to small children, and I think the subject matter is a bit weighty for a 5 year old.

 

[KalMart]

Theres no great way to do it. Either method you'll lose something. I'd show the original trilogy first because the reveal in ep V was legitimately amazing as a kid, and theyre just more engrossing. I'd treat ep 1-3 as they are - prequels that should be seen after the originals.

Or better yet, pretend that they never existed and never show'em.

 

[robot]

Jonathan held out his hand telling Clark to stop, you can literally see Clark having to force himself to hold himself back so that Jonathan's dying wish can be fulfilled.

They made it really easy to understand, even for kids, when he holds out his hand to motion "stop" (which all to most kids know that hand signal) and shake his head no.

That part makes sense...or at lest was probably intended to make sense...on a much more mature level than any kid would really understand, unfortunately. Pa Kent and Clark know it would have been easy to save him, but the sacrifice that Jon was making was something he felt was more important for Clark at a crucial point in his life, and saving Pa would have jeopardized it more.

But yeah, it didn't really play that way to many folks, and probably wouldn't to a young kid except as really tragic.

I think there's a disconnect between 'the message that goyer wants to send' vs 'reality'... i can't think of any reality in any universe that anyone would let his own father die when it's so easy to save him... and this includes sacrificing yourself...

I know this first hand because we were once robbed by arm robbers.. they had my mom and she was screaming and i locked my door, they said if i didn't open it, they'll kill my mom.. and of course i opened it knowing it could mean my own death... I can tell you from personal experience, when it comes to parent / child relationship, it transcends logic... you will do anything to save them...

Now, if they had modified the scene where Clark hid his identity and the outcome is maybe his father goes to jail instead of dying... death is the deal breaker... the entire scene is not only totally unrealistic, but totally illogical...

In order for Clark to obey his father, like i said, he has to be a psychopath... or, maybe a 'vulcan'...

 

[Marvin]

I personally learned alot more about the value of life from shows that explored the consequences to the act. Xena baby.

As opposed to shows where heman would kill a demon and move on to the next one. I think this movie has some good lessons.

 

[KalMart]

I think there's a disconnect between 'the message that goyer wants to send' vs 'reality'... i can't think of any reality in any universe that anyone would let his own father die when it's so easy to save him... and this includes sacrificing yourself...

I know this first hand because we were once robbed by arm robbers.. they had my mom and she was screaming and i locked my door, they said if i didn't open it, they'll kill my mom.. and of course i opened it knowing it could mean my own death... I can tell you from personal experience, when it comes to parent / child relationship, it transcends logic... you will do anything to save them...

Now, if they had modified the scene where Clark hid his identity and the outcome is maybe his father goes to jail instead of dying... death is the deal breaker... the entire scene is not only totally unrealistic, but totally illogical...

In order for Clark to obey his father, like i said, he has to be a psychopath... or, maybe a 'vulcan'...

I really felt it came down more to the movie's pacing and overall feel of disconnect than the actual idea/concept of doing it. hence a lot of the critiques of the film feeling cold/soulless, etc. It unfortunately robs those emotional and deep/meaningful elements of the power to really 'sink in'. For some, at least...and I'm not talking about spoonfeeding, but perhaps more poetry and elegance in presenting it.

 

[writer0327]

There was a five year old sitting in front of me and... HE GOT IT. His parents didn't need to explain it to him.



Jonathan held out his hand telling Clark to stop, you can literally see Clark having to force himself to hold himself back so that Jonathan's dying wish can be fulfilled.

They made it really easy to understand, even for kids, when he holds out his hand to motion "stop" (which all to most kids know that hand signal) and shake his head no.

Did you ask the kid's parents his age? And do you know what else he's been exposed to in his life? Maybe you're related to them...

The point isn't did a 5 year old somewhere in the world GET IT. Naturally there are going to be children that GET IT, and no explanation will be needed. But if you think that is the situation for every 5 year old that saw the movie, you're kidding yourself.

And again, understanding he told Clark to stop and let him die is one thing. Processing all the reasons behind that is quite another.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I think there's a disconnect between 'the message that goyer wants to send' vs 'reality'... i can't think of any reality in any universe that anyone would let his own father die when it's so easy to save him... and this includes sacrificing yourself...

I know this first hand because we were once robbed by arm robbers.. they had my mom and she was screaming and i locked my door, they said if i didn't open it, they'll kill my mom.. and of course i opened it knowing it could mean my own death... I can tell you from personal experience, when it comes to parent / child relationship, it transcends logic... you will do anything to save them...

Now, if they had modified the scene where Clark hid his identity and the outcome is maybe his father goes to jail instead of dying... death is the deal breaker... the entire scene is not only totally unrealistic, but totally illogical...

In order for Clark to obey his father, like i said, he has to be a psychopath... or, maybe a 'vulcan'...

So Clark exposes that aliens are among us... the military finds out and finds out who his parents are... they have no way of knowing if he is actually a good guy. So, he's a fugitive or a possible fugitive who his parents have been harboring for quite a long number of years. Do you really think his parents were just going to get a slap on the back? What would have happened to Martha? In my mind, I would have grown up hearing horror stories and fearing what could happen to myself and to my parents. And I would be afraid that not only could I lose one parent, but I could possibly lose them both and would regretably have to stay behind to make sure she was okay. It wouldn't be easy and you can EASILY tell that it was the hardest thing Clark had ever had to do

 

[Ultimatehero]

Did you ask the kid's parents his age? And do you know what else he's been exposed to in his life? Maybe you're related to them...

The point isn't did a 5 year old somewhere in the world GET IT. Naturally there are going to be children that GET IT, and no explanation will be needed. But if you think that is the situation for every 5 year old that saw the movie, you're kidding yourself.

And again, understanding he told Clark to stop and let him die is one thing. Processing all the reasons behind that is quite another.

I'm not and I didn't. But, he was sniffling long before Superman had to snap Zod's neck. He seemed similarly sad for the situation Superman was thrust into. I don't see he could have been any older than 6 really.

And just because one didn't get it doesn't mean the rest won't either. So there's no definitive on that point one way or another.

 

[robot]

So Clark exposes that aliens are among us... the military finds out and finds out who his parents are... they have no way of knowing if he is actually a good guy. So, he's a fugitive or a possible fugitive who his parents have been harboring for quite a long number of years. Do you really think his parents were just going to get a slap on the back? What would have happened to Martha?

That's logic.. like i said, this transcends logic... no kid, no one, will let his father die... not even at the expense of their own lives...

This scene is just not realistic at all... IMO...

 

[Ultimatehero]

That's logic.. like i said, this transcends logic... no kid, no one, will let his father die... not even at the expense of their own lives...

This scene is just not realistic at all... IMO...

You're readily ignoring Martha. Personally, I'd be torn looking back and forth between them frazzled about what could happen to them both if I expose myself.

 

[The Guard]

It's a good Superman movie that also teaches you to listen to your parents, so...yeah. Yeah it is.

 

[Doc Samson]

Personally, as a kid, I went nuts for B89 precisely because it seemed darker and edgier than anything I ever saw in relation to comic books in live action. Course, I also was a child who saw Terminator, Commando & all kinds of macho 80's flicks I probably had no business viewing. But like anything else, it comes down to the individual and his upbringing.

Just from sheer scale and action, I would've spontaneously combusted from an overload of awesomeness from MoS, but that's just who I was as a child. And I also was (and still am) inquisitive by nature, so MoS would've been the springboard for me to want to read comics and/or ask questions and find out more about this character. I honestly don't find this as a dark movie at all, I'd have problems letting a young child watch TDK, but it is serious and I don't think that's necessarily horrible for a kid...

 

[Mace Dolex]

What with video games, DVD's, toys, I think Superman is pretty ingrained in todays generation of kids that they have so much to choose from.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

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.

Kid watches Superman 2. "Mommy, Daddy, why did Superman have to hurt Zod after he lost his powers? And why did he then throw him away?"

Kid watches Superman 4. "Mommy, Daddy why did Superman have to kill Nuclear Man?"

Somehow I don't think those questions were really ever asked, yet Superman was shown to kill or hurt powerless people. And now we have Superman killing again, but this time the kids will certainly ask, why did Superman have to? I guess because it was a dramatic filled pivotal moment for the superhero, not masked by any light humorous moments. Superman couldn't get away with it this time. Damn you Snyder for not making killing a villain a light moment.

 

[Marvin]

Kid watches Superman 2. "Mommy, Daddy, why did Superman have to hurt Zod after he lost his powers? And why did he then throw him away?"

Kid watches Superman 4. "Mommy, Daddy why did Superman have to kill Nuclear Man?"

Somehow I don't think those questions were really ever asked, yet Superman was shown to kill or hurt powerless people. And now we have Superman killing again, but this time the kids will certainly ask, why did Superman have to? I guess because it was a dramatic filled pivotal moment for the superhero, not masked by any light humorous moments. Superman couldn't get away with it this time. Damn you Snyder for not making killing a villain a light moment.

With all the killing in the superman book/tv/movie canon. It sure is odd that I've almost never heard a complaint till now, it's everywhere. I mean did anyone really believe those thugs got away in Returns?

Something about this portrayal is really stirring a long overlooked conversation. I wonder why.

 

[TheBat812]

You guys also have to remember that kids tend to only remember awesome parts and memorable characters they want to emulate. The flaws of this film will likely be invisible to them. And they will probably ask why superman killed zod, and hopefully any adult understood that it was something he did because he knew no other way and only knew he wanted to save humanity.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

With all the killing in the superman book/tv/movie canon. It sure is odd that I've almost never heard a complaint till now, it's everywhere. I mean did anyone really believe those thugs got away in Returns?

Something about this portrayal is really stirring a long overlooked conversation. I wonder why.

Selective criticism at its finest.

Superman killed in Superman 2 and 4.
Superman let people die in Superman Returns as a result of lifting the island.

Yet, MOS gets piled on for Superman committing an act he's done before. Where was the uproar prior to MOS?

Perhaps Superman should have joked first, "You know what Zod, you're a real pain in the neck" then snap his neck but have the Williams theme play so it feels a bit lighter. Maybe that would have satisfied more people.

 

[writer0327]

With all the killing in the superman book/tv/movie canon. It sure is odd that I've almost never heard a complaint till now, it's everywhere. I mean did anyone really believe those thugs got away in Returns?

Something about this portrayal is really stirring a long overlooked conversation. I wonder why.

Good question...maybe its the way it was done....because he snapped his neck. Brutal.