Man of Steel (SPOILERS)

[Boba Ben]

Heh. Well, the pic on the bottom is my son (10),and that was taken after he came out of seeing it a second time (which he requested). He whooshed through the parking lot after having seen in the first time, and wore that cape for 2-3 days. He even slept in it.

I've very much enjoyed experiencing the release of the movie with his enthusiasm. It's amazing how much fun these little dudes have, without the cynicism we "grown ups" are cursed with.

That's pretty awesome. It is kind of sad how most of us lose that sense of wonder that we had as kids. Just a part of life, I guess.

Rating has nothing to do with Wolverine: Origins being a terrible movie. It should be rated "S" for ****

A Wolverine movie doesn't need to be R to be good, it just needs to be well written and directed.

You don't know the kind of dirty twisted sick things Wolverine can do to a body if it's not R rated, have you ever read Wolverine the best there is?

For the plot sake you don't need an R rated movie, but you do to get a full grasp of how much of an animal Wolverine can actually be.

You can do a lot with PG-13 these days. Dark Knight was plenty violent and dark, made a billion dollars and was PG-13.

With a good script and a good director, a PG-13 Wolverine could be amazing.

I agree with all of this. Wolverine can still be a likable hero even if he's a violent killer. I'd say people might like him even more that way. Characters like that seem to be what's in these days. I think it could be done in PG-13 as well. You can get away with quite a lot with a PG-13 rating. I don't know if Hugh Jackman is the Wolverine to display these qualities on the big screen since he's already been established as the nice guy Wolverine that cries a lot, but if they reboot some time in the future, I'd prefer to seem him portrayed this way. Wolverine's also supposed to be really short. They should cast Peter Dinklage in the role(mostly a joke).

 

[IrishJedi]

I blame my cynicism on Carl.

Get in line.

 

[chewblacca]

I took him to SUPERMAN RETURNS, but he was only 3-4 at the time.

He's seen all of the live action movies (including Quest For Peace : ) and all of the animated shows and movies on DVD/Blu-ray. He's well acquainted with Superman. Your parenting tips are noted, but not necessary.

Wasn't giving pareting tips, just asking a question. I do so because when I saw it there were a few parents trying to explain what Superman had done to Zod at the end. And one even whispered to another how this was not a movie for kids. So excuse MY "cynicism". If your son had a great time

 

[IrishJedi]

Didn't Superman kill Zod in the second movie? Lois killed Ursa. And Nod, suicide I guess. They all fell to their deaths.

Unless you go by that one edit where they are lead away in cuffs by the Arctic Police!!!

Yeah, and that was a scene filmed for the sole purpose of the network tv broadcast.

 

[King Darkness]

Didn't Superman kill Zod in the second movie? Lois killed Ursa. And Nod, suicide I guess. They all fell to their deaths.

Yeah but there was story and stuff

 

[IrishJedi]

Wasn't giving pareting tips, just asking a question. I do so because when I saw it there were a few parents trying to explain what Superman had done to Zod at the end. And one even whispered to another how this was not a movie for kids. So excuse MY "cynicism". If your son had a great time

He did.

 

[karamazov80]

Speak for yourself.

I'm glad it works for some kids, because I think Superman really is, more than lots of other comic characters, something that kids should be into. Darkest things I was into as a kid was probably Gremlins, Goonies, or Monster Squad, though, so it is hard to try and imagine that little version of me watching stuff like Ledger Joker and really understanding or liking it.

But if kids get something out if it, it isn't because filmmakers have that in the forefront of their minds. The filmmakers of these films are clearly targeting adolescents and adults more than kids. Considering that, the simplistic wonder of an ET, Star Wars, or Superman 1 just aren't really a priority as these movies are made to be more sophisticated and "mature."

 

[Boba Ben]

I think I was four when I went to see Batman in the theater. I wasn't scarred and my parents didn't need to shield my eyes when Batman tied Joker's leg to a stone gargoyle so he'd plummet to his death. I enjoyed it quite a lot, actually.

 

[karamazov80]

But didn't the conflict and mayhem in that film feel more surreal and cartoony to you? Like it was a universe where Batman's justice on Joker felt completely appropriate and consequence-free? Even though it was violent, do you think '89 Batman is disturbing on the same level as The Dark Knight? Burton was always dark of course, and even Pee-Wee had some frightening moments, but I don't think kids were asked to pretend it could be real. And that seems to add a different dimension to some of the movies we're seeing nowadays. This is just my opinion of course, and I know I am biased. Obviously I grew up in a specific time when specific things felt more appropriate to me. I'm sure that kids growing up in the '50s would have been horrified by some of the things I was into as a kid.

 

[King Darkness]

Watching '89 Batman when you were a kid growing up in the 80's is likely very close in experience to a kid watching TDK who grew up in the 2000's.

 

[karamazov80]

Do you think it's because society is different? Like, a post-9/11, post-Cold War thing? Or do you think they're just very similar as movies to a young kid, social context aside?

 

[King Darkness]

Do you think it's because society is different?

That and kids have sensory overload now. Growing up in the 80s we had about 18 channels on the TV, if you were lucky a friends older brother might have had a playboy to see a boob, Duck Hunt was about as violent as your video games where, Ozzy was the music your parents feared etc....it was just so different.

Parallel those things to what is the equivalent today AND they have the intenet. I don't think kids are as vanilla as we were in the 80's.

 

[Boba Ben]

But didn't the conflict and mayhem in that film feel more surreal and cartoony to you? Like it was a universe where Batman's justice on Joker felt completely appropriate and consequence-free? Even though it was violent, do you think '89 Batman is disturbing on the same level as The Dark Knight? Burton was always dark of course, and even Pee-Wee had some frightening moments, but I don't think kids were asked to pretend it could be real. And that seems to add a different dimension to some of the movies we're seeing nowadays. This is just my opinion of course, and I know I am biased. Obviously I grew up in a specific time when specific things felt more appropriate to me. I'm sure that kids growing up in the '50s would have been horrified by some of the things I was into as a kid.

That's Burton's style but there was still Joker shooting Bob point blank, Batman blowing up a ton of guys, Joker gassing tons of people to death, etc. It's a pretty violent movie regardless. I think many of today's parents wouldn't want to take their kids to see if if it was released now. There seems to be a lot more sheltering of kids these days. However, I do agree that Joker hanging that fake Batman guy for example, was a lot more realistic and disturbing than anything in Burton Batman(the Penguin nose bite was pretty graphic, though). Bringing it back to Man of Steel, I think the movie wasn't really that dark or brooding and grounded in reality. The Zod neck snap wasn't worse than anything that I saw in Batman '89.

 

[karamazov80]

You both make good points. Al Gore's wife trying to restrict access to Ozzy Osbourne and Twisted Sister seems extremely quaint in hindsight. And I know kids know more than we try to pretend they do, but when a kid can play Call of Duty, watch Dark Knight, or have access to things on the internet that we couldn't dream about at that young age way back then, it makes me a bit uncomfortable. Particularly when I have young kids of my own now that are about to confront these issues. But we can't turn back time.

 

[krec9]

 

[King Darkness]

You both make good points. Al Gore's wife trying to restrict access to Ozzy Osbourne and Twisted Sister seems extremely quaint in hindsight. And I know kids know more than we try to pretend they do, but when a kid can play Call of Duty, watch Dark Knight, or have access to things on the internet that we couldn't dream about at that young age way back then, it makes me a bit uncomfortable. Particularly when I have young kids of my own now that are about to confront these issues. But we can't turn back time.

You never know, they may be better for it. Growing up with a much broader knowledge of the world may be great for this generation. I hope so, cause my niece knows a hell of a lot more about the evils of the world at 9 years old then I did at the same age. When I was 9 all I thought about was G I Joes and Transformers, my niece asks about soldiers who die and kids who get shot in school and stuff like that. That's not to say she doesn't have an obsession with Littlest Pet Shop, but she is much more aware of the world around her..... so

 

[jye4ever]

Movies I was exposed to as a kid: Exorcist with crucifix to a young girls gina then ordering her mother to lick it.

And I turned out just fine.....twitch.

 

[King Darkness]

Movies I was exposed to as a kid: Exorcist with crucifix to a young girls gina then ordering her mother to lick it.

And I turned out just fine.....twitch.

Exorcist is an anomaly. There is no place or time for that movie to exist and not scare the fawk out of kids

 

[jye4ever]

You never know, they may be better for it. Growing up with a much broader knowledge of the world may be great for this generation. I hope so, cause my niece knows a hell of a lot more about the evils of the world at 9 years old then I did at the same age. When I was 9 all I thought about was G I Joes and Transformers, my niece asks about soldiers who die and kids who get shot in school and stuff like that. That's not to say she doesn't have an obsession with Littlest Pet Shop, but she is much more aware of the world around her..... so

You are nailing it, kids are seriously more advanced now at a much younger age than previous generations.

Not saying better, i'm just saying that their discovery phase today is instantaneous compared to prior generations.

 

[Boba Ben]

You are nailing it, kids are seriously more advanced now at a much younger age than previous generations.

Not saying better, i'm just saying that their discovery phase today is instantaneous compared to prior generations.

Could end up being a bad thing, actually.