keith71_98 wrote:
Why does it have to be "Good review for kids"? I think we underestimate kids. My 9 year old loved the copy I gave him. Did he understand it all? Of course not. But neither did I when I was 10 and buying Sgt. Rock, The Avengers, Detective Comics, etc. But I loved them and they were ALL age appropriate, not watered down for my age at the time.
I think the point Hassan was trying to make was that the "good reviews" you were citing were generally done from an adult perspective & were not explicitly reviews on how appropriate or how well received the stories would be by kids.
Kids are different and many parents are different.
While one parent does not mind their 9-year-old reading a story with a word like "damn" or something in it, another might be very opposed to that for their child. Same thing with depictions of people boozing it up in bars, or having sexual relations out of wedlock. One parent may say "Oh well, it's everywhere anyway" while another may really want to shelter their kids from that stuff until they're a bit older. Superman #1 had Lois very obviously having rolled out of bed with that Jonathan guy to answer the door. At least they didn't show them IN bed, but that still may be something some parents don't want a 9 year old reading, which is their parental right.
On the kids side, some may be fascinated by a story like the one in FF, but many others would be bored out of their minds by it. My kids are 17 & 21 and won't touch that book with a 10 foot pole. They have NEVER liked those kinds of comics, but will likely mature to like them one day (I hope).
The point is, one size does not fit all, and just because Hickman's FF gets good reviews, I agree that it's a pretty meaningless indicator on how well the book will suit kids in general. A parent should read the stuff and make the call for their own kid based on their knowledge of that kid.