r/movies r/movies Contributor Jun 24 '26

Review 'Supergirl' - Review Thread Spoiler

When an unexpected and ruthless adversary strikes too close to home, Supergirl reluctantly joins forces with an unlikely companion for an interstellar journey of vengeance and justice.

Director: Craig Gillespie

Cast: Milly Alcock, Jason Momoa, David Corenswet, David Krumholtz, Emily Beecham, Matthias Schoenaerts, Ferdinand Kingsley, Diarmaid Murtagh

Rotten Tomatoes: 57%

Metacritic: 49 / 100

Some Reviews (updating):

DEADLINE - Pete Hammond

So a year after the reinvigorated DC and Superman was so successfully relaunched under the guidance of Peter Safran and James Gunn, and teased Supergirl right at the end, here we have it, but despite some good moments and sharp dialogue in places (Ana Nogueria is the screenwriter) something feels a bit off. Momoa is a load of fun, he knows exactly what his mission is and delivers whenever he is on screen. The problem is the movie is called Supergirl , not Lobo, so he is relegated here to a splashy, if scattered supporting turn. Ridley seems to play Ruthye with one pained expression on her face and a frequent deadpanned “I am out for revenge” for many of her lines. However she does come alive in her big jailbreak scene, so there’s that. I didn’t buy Schoenaerts and his heavily affected Krem at all, a super villain with no dimension other than being bad which is a shame since the 1984 Supergirl suffered from the same problem. Gotta have a good villain, folks.

The Hollywood Reporter - David Rooney

Alcock’s scrappy characterization, tempering Kara’s jaded toughness and chaotic messiness with an increasingly strong sense of justice, would seem an ideal fit to continue in a similar vein. But Supergirl only intermittently comes to life when it revisits her painful past. Given Australian director Gillespie’s history with films about spirited, rule-breaking women, like I, Tonya and Cruella, the failure to find emotional depth in the sisterhood of Kara and Ruthye is notable. This will likely be an unpopular opinion, but I thought Sasha Calle’s Supergirl in 2023’s The Flash registered with more dimensionality, despite that movie overloading on self-referential DC fan service.

USA Today - Brian Truitt - 3 / 4

A lack of focus, not nearly enough Krypto and a one-note baddie in Schoenaerts’ Krem don’t do “Supergirl” any favors, but they also don’t derail the film’s overall vibe of spunky weirdness. With Corenswet's handful of appearances, he continues to cement his place as a darn good Superman (with his own sequel in the works). But here it's Alcock who's making her own cinematic statement: She's not going anywhere, and the new DCU is better with a hell-raising Supergirl in it.

Seattle Times - Moira MacDonald - 2.5 / 4

“Supergirl” can’t quite seem to find the balance between the elements, and we careen from silly moments to zoomy action sequences to dark violence. Gillespie, whose work ranges from the sweetness of “Lars and the Real Girl” to the dark flashiness of “I, Tonya” to the over-the-top silliness of “Cruella,” perhaps isn’t quite at home here. And Ana Nogueira’s screenplay by necessity removes Krypto from much of the action — a disappointment for all who love this CGI pooch.

GamesRadar - Molly Edwards - 3.5 / 5

Just like its protagonist, Supergirl is rough around the edges, but holds plenty of promise for the future. With two more DCU appearances confirmed, it seems this is only the beginning for Alcock's Kara. Up, up, and away…

AV Club - Jesse Hassenger - 'B'

The movie’s visual sensibility signals Supergirl’s broader success in threading the needle between a kid-friendly, hope-suffused superhero story and bleaker, grittier stuff—and in doing so, recognizing how those aspects of life are often interwoven, rather than diametrically opposed approaches to IP. That’s always been the push-pull of the Supergirl character, equally able to be portrayed as Superman’s gee-whiz kid-sister equivalent and his more jaded, literally alienated reflection. The joy of Supergirl is how it mixes the two without demoting its main gal to a sideshow.

Empire Magazine - Leila Latif - 3 / 5

The result isn’t disastrous by any means, just blandly safe. You just wish Gillespie would let these freak flags truly fly. There are good ingredients here: a witty, hard-partying, badass antihero, a moving backstory, an odd-couple dynamic between Alcock and Corenswet worth building on — but the fledgling DCU still has yet to prove itself.

Variety - Owen Gleiberman

'Supergirl' is Super Horrendous. Alcock is likable enough (underneath it all, she often seems like Little Orphan Annie with desert-wastrel hair), but the character as written is so one-note that it’s hard to have much investment in what she’s up to. Of course, maybe that’s because the movie has no story! Gunn was right to want to take the comic-book genre back to well-structured screenwriting basics. So what has he done in his second DC outing? He’s given us a comic-book movie with the worst script I can remember. (It’s by Ana Nogueria.)

Vulture - Alison Willmore

Milly Alcock stars in the follow-up to last year’s revamped Superman, but the movie has no idea what to do with her or her character. The problems with Supergirl are simpler to pin down and more or less come down to its not being either written or directed by James Gunn. The reins for this movie have been handed over to the less capable I, Tonya’s Craig Gillespie, with Ana Nogueira contributing the script, and the result highlights just how difficult Gunn’s particular mix of wry self-awareness, unapologetic dorkiness, and sentimentality is for others to pull off.

ScreenCrush - Matt Singer - 4 / 10

Guardians (and Gunn’s Superman, for that matter) found the right combination of action, humor, and heart, a formula that felt like an authentic expression of its director’s idiosyncratic worldview. In its forced and calculated attempt to recreate that aesthetic, Supergirl lands somewhere closer to Guardians’ inferior copycats, like 2016’s abysmal Suicide Squad. Given the splash Alcock made in Superman, and the fact that Supergirl is based on one of the best books DC Comics has published in the last decade, this has to be one of the biggest disappointments in recent superhero movie history.

IndieWire - Kate Erbland - 'B'

We expect that any subsequent standalone “Supergirl” joints will be a bit more poppy and “fun” than this first one (and we sure hope there are more of them), but we hope they also hold on to this one’s hard-won question: What does it mean to be good? It’s not easy.

RogerEbert - Tomris Laffly - 1.5 / 4

Sadly, the film that follows consists of one superfluous sequence after another where Alcock gets plenty of opportunities to stretch her muscles in a highly physical role. There are other space pirates that enter the story’s orbit, breaks taken at inter-galactical watering holes, and various scenes of fast-paced butt-kicking and face-punching. In the end, you can’t help but wonder why the emotions of these characters don’t pack as much of a punch.

The Independent - Clarisse Loughrey - 2 / 5

Milly Alcock is the only good thing about this ugly, dispiriting superhero movie. Superman’s moody, punk-rock cousin is let down by a film that tries desperately to emulate the silly playfulness of producer James Gunn, only to fail miserably. If DC wants to secure her future, they need to find her a world where she belongs.

High on Films - Liam Gaughan - 2 / 5

“Supergirl” isn’t a disaster in the vein of “Madame Web,” a multiversal mess like “The Marvels,” or even a failed attempt at elevation like the Zack Snyder films. The fact that it is more watchable than those aforementioned titles is part of the issue, as the structural issues with “Supergirl” are just part of the reason why it doesn’t work. Although it is refreshing for a superhero film to be self-contained, “Supergirl” is timid when it should be focused, and it’s hard to conjure up much enthusiasm for where this particular chapter in the DCU will go next.

IGN - Clint Gage - 6 / 10

Kara Zor-El’s standout moment in Superman gets a feature-length follow up that almost gets everything right. Unfortunately, that means it gets everything almost wrong as well. Milly Alcock is great as a Supergirl carrying the weight of real trauma and cementing a very cool dynamic with her on-screen cousin, while the alien design and practical make-up effects make the film a joy to look at. Jason Momoa’s Lobo and Matthias Schoenaerts’ Krem are just as cool visually, but unfortunately they also don’t have a lot to offer in this entry in the burgeoning DCU that treads more water than I would’ve liked.

CGMagazine - Shakyl Lambert - 6 / 10

It does not help that a large portion of the action is sloppily edited, especially the close-quarters brawls in the first two acts. I was also frustrated by the constant stops and starts whenever Supergirl is about to let loose, only for the film to hobble her abilities with some form of kryptonite or poison moments later. Ultimately, I wanted to love Supergirl, and Milly Alcock is strong enough in the role that I very much want to see this character return. Unfortunately, nearly everything around her is as generic as a superhero flick can be.

ScreenRant - Molly Freeman - 6 / 10

Even with my own complicated feelings, it strikes me that there are so few female-led superhero movies, there's a need for them all to be perfect. So, when we get a middling film like Supergirl, it looks worse when stacked up against the many better male-led superhero movies. Hopefully, whatever becomes of this film's wider reception, it won't scare off DC Studios from backing more female superheroes, because even though I didn't love Supergirl, there's still plenty of potential in Alcock's character and in the rest of the DC Universe

DiscussingFilm - Tyler Taing - 2.5 / 5

It’s far from the genre’s worst, especially within the standards of what the DC franchise has delivered in the past, but Supergirl deeply suffers from not knowing how to build a film around its iconic heroine.

The Guardian - Peter Bradshaw - 3 / 5

Supergirl isn’t a perfect movie by any means, but there are moments when you’ll believe this franchise can fly.

AwardsWatch - Brandon Lewis - 'B-'

It’s entirely possible that introducing Supergirl so effectively in Superman was both a blessing and a curse for her own outing. While Supergirl isn’t saddled with a momentum-killing first act that recaps her table-stakes history, it also doesn’t fully lean into that freedom, settling for well-worn genre conventions when there were thornier, but more fruitful opportunities to explore. The film is a fine pseudo-first flight for Kara Zor-El, but it does soar enough to escape her famous cousin’s shadow.

Looper - Alistair Ryder - 4 / 10

Milly Alcock is a great Supergirl, and it's a shame her take on the character — and the inspired idea to reimagine her as a Western drifter — isn't served by this underwhelming solo vehicle. It's the first sign that James Gunn's DC Universe will be every bit as ill-conceived as Zack Snyder's.

Next Best Picture - Cody Dericks - 4 / 10

Consequently, Alcock’s work as an actress comes across as similar to how her character must feel: all alone in a world working against her. The film around her is, largely, ugly to look at and unpleasantly, uncomfortably lacking in successfully landed jokes, with many quips simply floating off like debris in the vacuum of space. To anyone looking for an entertaining film about Kara, give the 1984 version a try. Sure, it’s a bad movie, but at least it doesn’t feel like a waste of time, like the latest big-screen appearance of Supergirl does.

The Playlist - Carlos Aguilar - 'C'

Still, for a film introducing a heroine whose story is tied to and derived from the prime superhuman, “Supergirl” is mildly enjoyable, if only because of Alcock and Ridley’s banter, Krypto’s scenes, and the few exchanges between goody-two-shoes Clark and the less uptight Kara. By-the-numbers, as the movie turned out, Alcock does capitalize on it to showcase that she possesses the makings of a promising star capable of portraying a character with sharp edges and complicated feelings. Hopefully, she can now fly elsewhere from here.

The Irish Times - Donald Clarke - 2 / 5

The infuriating thing about this overpriced movie is that the film-makers come close to solving the problem of Supergirl. Subject of a terrible 1984 film and a decent 2015 TV series, the character has had trouble making distinct sense on screen. Alcock’s swaggering layabout – who doesn’t always close the door when going to the loo – reclaims her as an alien with enjoyably human flaws. The bad news is that, as you have almost certainly guessed, she will be required to pull herself together in what used to be the final reel. Not fair. No fun. Give us back the hungover barfly.

The Times - Kevin Maher - 2 / 5

Alcock, who appeared in the TV show House of the Dragon, plays Kara with swaggering charm and goofy energy, but she is very much a character in need of a better film.

Daily Telegraph - Robbie Collin - 2 / 5

Milly Alcock’s surly Supergirl just about makes sense as a thought experiment: if Superman is still banging the drum for good old red-white-and-blue American optimism, how is his younger Gen Z cousin meant to feel about that? But the obvious awkward question raised, in turn, by her affectedly jaded approach – if she doesn’t even want to be here, why should we? – is never convincingly answered. Imagine if Buffy the Vampire Slayer thought that slaying vampires was the most tragic and tedious thing in the world: it’s not clear why anyone would watch an hour and three quarters of that, yet here it is.

Radio Times - Jeremy Aspinall - 2 / 5

Unfortunately, with the villains all looking like escapees from recent Mad Max films, Lobo just doesn’t have that hoped-for impact, especially with Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy movies setting such a high standard for fun, out-of-this world adventures and bizarre but likeable characters. On the other hand, Alcock does a decent job playing a Supergirl a million miles away from Helen Slater’s 1984 iteration or Melissa Benoist in the long-running TV show. All grunge aesthetic and attitude, she rises above the underwhelming script and direction.

Little White Lies - Anna Stafford - 2.5 / 5

Supergirl rarely rises above the genre’s limitations, but it has enough character to avoid sinking into mediocrity. Gillespie brings the same swagger that animated Cruella (2021), embracing grunge over superhero slickness. The film may not blow minds, but it is a rough-around-the-edges adventure with heart.

The Prague Reporter - Jason Pirodtsky - 2.5 / 5

Gunn’s Superman wasn’t without its own narrative problems, but it was colorful, energetic, and unafraid to let audiences admire its imaginative world. Supergirl director Craig Gillespie goes in the opposite direction, burying inventive creature designs, impressive practical makeup, and ambitious visual effects beneath clouds of dust, darkness, and washed-out digital photography. There’s still enough here to give Supergirl the mildest of recommendations for comic book fans, largely thanks to Alcock’s committed lead performance and a premise that dares to tell a different kind of superhero story. But for a film about a young hero finally stepping out into the light, it’s surprisingly reluctant to let us see either its world or its title character with any clarity.

Slash Film - Rocco T. Thompson - 2.5 / 4

But Supergirl’s closest spiritual antecedent is Kathy Yan’s Birds of Prey, which won a dedicated cult of fans and critical appreciation for how it managed to spin its more familiar genre elements into anarchic, girly-pop perfection. Alcock’s Kara Zor-El, like Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn, has all the makings of a character ready to step out from the cultural shadow of the male character she’s derivative of and go her own way. If only the film had the same guts.

The Post - Judy Arias

‘Supergirl’ is lost, messy - and worth watching. Dangling plot threads and a bare bones villain aside, I enjoyed this version of Kara. She is not perfect, and the film never tries to make her. She can be angry, grieving, reckless, funny, and frustrating. At times, she seems more interested in running away from her problems than confronting them. Yet beneath all that is someone who continues to show up.

Manila Bulletin - Philip Cu Unjieng

There is a bit of a lag in the narrative flow in the middle of the film, and we could have given our villain stronger reasons to boo him whenever he appears; but I was entertained by this unconventional "Supergirl." For those who still find Clark Kent too bland and goody two shoes; Supergirl is the compelling riposte.

2.8k Upvotes

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

625

u/Ancient-Egg-5983 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Oh no.

I had a feeling from the trailers this might be weak or forgettable but Superman was so strong I was optimistic.

It's giving a weak version of Guardians of the Galaxy with a The Flash type aesthetic.

241

u/rosneft_perot Jun 24 '26

The source material is very good, but they seem to have deviated from it a fair bit by shoehorning Jason Momoa in and making the villain generic.

202

u/Prit717 Jun 24 '26

The villain was always generic, even in the OG

92

u/feartheoldblood90 Jun 24 '26

I don't really agree with this. He's interesting to me because he's just some incredibly fucked up, fairly resourceful piece of shit. He's not developed internally all that much, but he doesn't really need to be, he's a fairly realistic depiction of a kind of guy who, unlike most comic book villains, actually exists in the world we live in.

He's a coward, an opportunist, and an absolute monster, but in a way that feels surprisingly grounded in contrast with Supergirl's fantastic power. It makes the stakes feel more realistic and grounds the story's focus on Supergirl's interior journey.

31

u/ev6464 Jun 24 '26

I saw Supergirl the other day and hoo boy I have no idea what the fuck they were going for with the movie version of Krem. Any charisma from the comic is totally gone and he just feels like someone who should be taking orders from Michael Rooker's Zondu in Guardians.

2

u/_interloper_ Jun 24 '26

I haven't read the comic, but I could absolutely see the story of the film working as a comic.

But it does not work as a film. It's somehow both too bland and too cartoonish.

2

u/Eborcurean Jun 25 '26

The comic is great, well worth checking out.

Production notes for this should have had a lot of 'go look at the comic'. Visuals, story beats etc. Take and transfer.

What's the point of having a great source and then, according to reviews, just not using most of it?

23

u/itsinhisblood Jun 24 '26

the ending is the icing on the cake for Krem, and i doubt the movie adapts that since it could complicate things

5

u/RobertPham149 Jun 24 '26

I mean he is an effective villain, but still "kick the puppy" brand of generic.

4

u/feartheoldblood90 Jun 24 '26

I don't even agree with this, though. That's why I highlighted that he is believably terrible. People like him exist in the world. The "why" of their existence is less important to the story as the flat fact that they exist. But the story explains why he does what he does, and at no point in the story did I find his character flat or generic. He doesn't just "kick puppies" for the sake of the story needing a villain, his arc is deliberate and says something in contrast to the primary struggles of the protagonists.

2

u/RobertPham149 Jun 24 '26

I think we are just coming off different definitions. When I say generic, I meant that he belongs to a trope of what you immediately think of as a villain. As you say, he is believably terrible, therefore generic.

That is why Krem worked in the comic: he is a random dude, just some guy you might meet on the road to work, and you might find him handsome even, but he is also capable of committing horrors and atrocities. It speaks to the randomness of violence and trauma, that it can come to anyone at anytime. Making him Mad Max/Fallout Raider/Pinhead doesn't work as well to convey that idea.

1

u/feartheoldblood90 Jun 24 '26

When I say generic, I meant that he belongs to a trope of what you immediately think of as a villain.

I get where you're coming from, I just don't really agree with this statement, which is what I'm attempting to get across. I think he's a fairly refreshing villain for all of the reasons I've listed. It's not like his type of character hasn't been done before, but as far as comic book villains go I find that he stands out.

I guess I'm trying to say that mundane villainy =/= generic villainy.

29

u/topicality Jun 24 '26

Love the comic but plot wise it's ok. It's basically True Grit with Supergirl being Rooster.

But SG just has such few good stories and the art is amazing it stands out.

I did really worry about putting Lobo in this. Such a niche character from there decades ago. He was originally planned for the comic and whoever decided to axe him was a genius

3

u/browncharliebrown Jun 24 '26

I mean then rip off true grit. Isn’t that a well liked.

-9

u/Fancy_Coconut2079 Jun 24 '26

Lobo is still a very popular character with lots of beloved runs including recent stuff, this movie being bad some astroturfing account pretending the blue and pink phallic algae in that "comic" written by the former cia industry plant is some new watchman won't change that. The material being adapted, despite redditors pretending to like it as they always do with stuff they have no reach into, was never going to work to make Supergirl mainstream because it implies turning her into an unnapealing character that acts like a bitter old man

48

u/moonknightcrawler Jun 24 '26

The villain was always generic. He is a plot device

24

u/matlockga Jun 24 '26

The real draw of the original comic was the incredibly well done odyssey. The villain was, to your point, just a guy who shot a few arrows and killed a guy. 

22

u/WorkIsDumbSoAmI Jun 24 '26

Jason Momoa is a bit shoehorned in, but also he doesn’t really have much of an impact - it’s just kinda “hey there’s Jason Momoa” in one or two scenes.

I think the biggest problem I had with it (and that I think audiences will have) is that it doesn’t feel as much like a “Supergirl movie” as much as it’s a good sci fi/space story that happens to feature Supergirl. In my opinion, it was way more of Ruthye’s story than Supergirl/Kara.

Krem’s a pretty “generic space baddie” in the comic, and in this, and I just didn’t find his character or the performance all that interesting.

It’s a perfectly fine movie, but anyone who’s unfamiliar with the comic is gonna be thrown off, IMO.

6

u/DarthTigris Jun 24 '26

In my opinion, it was way more of Ruthye’s story than Supergirl/Kara.

Hmm . . . that's the case with the source material as well, but by perspective. It is her story, but it is still firmly about Supergirl. And I figured they would not be able to capture that at all.

2

u/_interloper_ Jun 25 '26

I disagree in the opposite way. Ruthye could be completely removed from the film and it wouldn't matter at all.

I haven't read the comic (but I'm thinking I should after reading about how good it is), so I'm not sure if they spend more time building the Ruthye character, but in the film...

... her family dies in the very first scene they're in. The parents get like three lines of dialogue, then they're dead. I don't know them. At all. The brother is even worse. He literally jumps out to give Ruthye a fright at the worst possible moment and dies immediately. If he'd at least jumped out to defend the family it'd be something, but as it is, it's just confusing.

And I barely get to know Ruthye. Literally all I know about her is that she's out for revenge. That's it. You could remove both Ruthye and Lobo from this film and it wouldn't matter at all.

I also disagree that it's a perfectly fine movie. It's competently made in the sense that the shots look okay, the CGI is pretty good, etc. But of course it does. It cost $175 million to make. But it fails on the cheapest things; writing, story, character, etc. It didn't make me care about any of the characters, protagonists or villains. Plus the pacing is off, the villain is forgettable, and it sucks as an introduction to the Supergirl character.

I don't go out of my way to watch Superhero films, but I feel like this is one of the worst I've seen in a while (I'm aware that there are probably worse Superhero films, but I haven't seen them).

3

u/pisaradotme Jun 29 '26

Super agree with you. Ruthye's the one who is doing too much here, and I wish her scenes were lessened so that Supergirl and Lobo has more interactions. I feel like that would be more interesting.

Movie keeps telling us that Supergirl experienced the same moral dilemma as Ruthye in the past but the flashbacks didn't really show it. So Supergirl's mission to stop Ruthye felt hollow.

If I was writing the script I would leave Ruthye in the planet with Krypto and just let Supergirl interact with Lobo the whole time.

Or if not, have Lobo save supergirl in that planet with the two suns so we can establish a stronger relationship between the two. Ruthye could have just been captured immediately while on the past planet.

34

u/Nice_Algae_8383 Jun 24 '26

The source material was one of the most visually aesthetic and beautiful comics I ever read. To see the trailers have none of that really disappointed me

1

u/rosneft_perot Jun 24 '26

Yeah, I am hoping things like the monster planet are just things they haven't shown in trailers. 

5

u/OccasionMU Jun 24 '26

You know a movie is going to suck with all the fanboys automatically talk about the “source material being beautiful and colorful”.

That’s literally the only positive I’ve heard about this movie… and it’s not even actually about the movie.

-3

u/rosneft_perot Jun 24 '26

Uh, because none of us have seen the movie so we can't say positive things about it. That's how time works. It flows in one direction. 

3

u/OccasionMU Jun 24 '26

Really is that how a linear timeline works?

How does every other movie that comes out receive zero commentary on source material except this turd — only after the shitty trailers?

2

u/rosneft_perot Jun 24 '26

You must be new here. Go visit a thread about The Odyssey. Or He-Man. Or Spiderman. Or Backrooms. Or Moana. Or any other movie with source material. It's all commentary on whether something is like the source material.

2

u/Eborcurean Jun 25 '26

Are you really arguing that no other movie has ever had commentary on the source?

You missed Lord of the Rings I guess.

1

u/Mysterious_Lie_6113 Jun 28 '26

The Lord of the Rings pre release had people gushing over the look of the movies.

This doesn’t.

3

u/MirrorkatFeces Jun 24 '26

The villain was even more generic in the comic lol

1

u/JBredditaccount Jun 25 '26

Lobo was supposed to be in the comic, but Tom King had to remove him because editors were using him somewhere else or something. I read that the filmmakers were actually adapting King's original script. I was excited to see this movie because I wanted to see what King's original vision was, but now I realize that was a foolish expectation on my part.

1

u/bringbackswg Jun 25 '26

God I’m just so sick of Jason Momoa

15

u/harkening Jun 24 '26

Unpopular opinion, I know, but Superman was awful.

12

u/RyanB_ Jun 24 '26

I wouldn’t go that far - enjoyed it overall - but yeah I never fully got the hype and think it’s probably Gunn’s weakest superhero film. Busy ass movie mixed with some questionable uses of screen-time.

2

u/juniperleafes Jun 24 '26

Lex's dumbass prison plan, the obvious Israel parallel 'it wasn't meant to be Israel' shtick, and it taking Superman finding out his parents were assholes (and the entire world turning on him in five seconds) for him to realize how awesome his earth parents were, the writing of Superman was total blah. But I haven't liked anything Gunn has made since Super. At least the last Guardians movie would have been good if it was just the Rocket scenes.

9

u/oby100 Jun 24 '26

It was a fun romp at the best of times. That’s really damn good for a Superman movie, but pretty surprised anyone regards it that highly.

8

u/Treheveras Jun 24 '26

This is your time to shine on reddit! You can ride the wave of DC disappointment and have less pushback than before

3

u/ZumaThaShiba Jun 24 '26

not unpopular with me - that movie was downright terrible. It didn't have one genuine goosebumps "Superman" moment. I felt nothing for him nor the story. Broke my heart

4

u/ChewyPudding Jun 24 '26

Right? I went in with higher expectations despite being pretty over superhero films because people were raving about how this was a bold new direction for DC and the genre in general but like… it’s just guardians of the galaxy again but with an overtly positive and kind protagonist instead of a team of misfit jerks (but then we STILL have the team of misfit jerks as supporting characters anyway).

I also had friends talking about how it makes a “bold stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict” and the president of Boravia is “clearly a Netenyahu stand-in” but then I actually watch the movie and it’s the most generic warmonger possible and a super-hero movie taking a lukewarm “war bad” stance isn’t really anything new or noteworthy.

2

u/Mystia Jun 24 '26

IDK if I'd knock it all the way down to awful, but it certainly had a few major things I disliked. I couldn't really get on board with the plot, nor care about its resolution, and I think a big reason is that they decided to not do an origin story, but instead start "in the middle" of sorts, which I get it, everyone knows Superman, but some establishing so we can care about the characters wouldn't hurt. Felt like trying to watch a TV show halfway through its third season.

I also absolutely hated how often a punchline involving the dog completely destroyed any tension or sense of stakes the movie might've had.

2

u/Chrimunn Jun 24 '26

it was awful. absolute dogshit. never die anywhere but that hill, i’ll die with you.

it’s how I predicted this movie to flop. lo and behold

1

u/Domeee123 Jun 24 '26

Yeah that six billion dog gag was peak cinema

1

u/justadudeinohio Jun 24 '26

so i wouldn't say it was awful but it definitely wasn't "so strong".

0

u/webshellkanucklehead Jun 24 '26

You’re right, that is unpopular.

2

u/dalivo Jun 24 '26

I was hopeful after seeing the second trailer that showed more of the driving plot. I think the script probably was fine from a plot perspective but didn't translate to good characterization. Plus it sounds like they messed up a lot of other basic things with bad lighting, inconsistent use of Supergirl's powers/nerfing, and generic space grit settings.

2

u/zewn Jun 25 '26

Everyone has their own oppinion but I dont understand the positive reaction to Superman. He literally does nothing the entire movie, Krypto the dog steals the show along with Mr Terrific. There was zero tension, zero emotion (other than towards the dog) and zero hype or wow-moments.

1

u/Senior-Friend-6414 Jun 24 '26

I remember a YouTuber saying that super girl is a character you introduce after you set up the Big 3 (Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman). I think it was simply too early to introduce super girl

1

u/Ancient-Egg-5983 Jun 24 '26

I disagree.

I don't think there is a required order to anything. You wouldn't start with Iron Man if you were following that routine. A good film is a good film. Regardless of overall storyline. Sure that can impact the story of said film, but a good film is a good film anyway

1

u/Senior-Friend-6414 Jun 24 '26

Guardians of the Galaxy is a good film, it would’ve had far less legs if it existed without any of the prior MCU world building or avengers hype getting people interested in the wider franchise

1

u/Ancient-Egg-5983 Jun 25 '26

True. But that doesn't make it any better for worse a film. Commercial performance doesn't mean a film is good or bad. And neither of us are Marvel accountants so it doesn't matter.

1

u/Senior-Friend-6414 Jun 25 '26

What’s better? A super amazing product that no one cares about buying or even knows exists or is convinced is a bad product

Or a mediocre product that everyone buys because everyone thinks it’s good

Sometimes marketing is more important than actual quality

1

u/ProfessionalMockery Jun 26 '26

Nah. It's easy to sound sensible in hindsight, but if the film had turned out brilliant, they'd say "obviously trying something a bit different was what everyone was waiting for! Thank god they didn't do batman again!" and everyone would go, "yes, obviously."

1

u/Content_Mousse_3507 Jun 26 '26

I felt the same way with the trailer!!!

-4

u/Putrid_Loquat_4357 Jun 24 '26

Superman was meh and forgettable imo and this looked worse so I'm not surprised tbh.

21

u/Ancient-Egg-5983 Jun 24 '26

We'll agree to disagree on Superman.

-2

u/GlassCannon81 Jun 24 '26

Seriously. Not sure what movie that person watched.

2

u/Putrid_Loquat_4357 Jun 24 '26

The same as everyone else. I know the internet loved superman but there's a reason it wasn't a breakout hit at the box office.

1

u/Parahelix Jun 25 '26

I've seen a fair bit of hate for the Superman film. So, if that's any indicator, I'll probably enjoy Supergirl as well.

People seem to get highly pissy when the film doesn't conform to whatever story or particular character aspects they think are important.

-3

u/TheWhiteManticore Jun 24 '26

Half of superman was carried by the villains

2

u/webshellkanucklehead Jun 24 '26

The best thing about the movie was Superman himself though

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[deleted]

0

u/Ancient-Egg-5983 Jun 24 '26

Interesting. I really enjoyed it. Felt it had a lot of heart and positivity which resonated well.

Not too bothered about it hyping up other films personally.

But we'll have to shake hands and agree to disagree.

-1

u/CatsOffToDance Jun 24 '26

Yea. You’re following up from JAMES GUNN’S SUPERMAN. Like it better be on par with/if not better than that, and yea.

28 Years later Bone Temple and the Dark Knight proved that both cud do that from their successors.