Currently, there are 141 reviews for Super Girl, with a not-so-great rating of 58 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.
This figure may shift as more reviews come in, but likely only by a few points.
It’s rather disheartening news for Hollywood and the entertainment industry. It seems like some folks are so caught up in their perspective that they can’t just acknowledge the apparent shortcomings of this film. Instead, they label those who aren’t in favor as bigots or sexists, simply for having their own tastes.
So, apparently, we’re the issue here.
In Hollywood, it seems the customer is rarely right.
But if we look at Super Girl, one has to wonder what, or who, is to blame for its expected flop? Many critics lean left-wing, and a significant number of them have expressed dislike for this film. Even the so-called “fresh” reviews come off as quite negative.
There’s hardly a positive voice among them.
Additionally, it’s worth noting that most negative reviews appear to come from left-leaning critics. In legal terminology, such reviews could be labeled as “statements of conflict.”
In law, statements that counter a person’s interests hold significant weight, as they could harm that person’s reputation or financial status.
So, in the case of Super Girl, these negative critiques suggest the film might indeed be quite poor.
A negative review often contradicts the political stance of the reviewer, many of whom are adamant feminists, hoping for a film that aligns with their vision—like a woke production featuring an actress such as Millie Alcock.
Consider some recent films like Birds of Prey (79% fresh), Blue Beetle (78% fresh), and Flash (63% fresh)—all received favorable ratings from critics. Yet, those who’ve seen them often question whether these “fresh” ratings stem from genuine cinematic merit or if they’re simply influenced by identity politics.
Based on its marketing and production costs, Super Girl would need to earn around $450 million to $500 million globally just to break even. Even if it opens within the expected $40 million to $50 million range in its debut weekend, that seems unlikely.
It raises some eyebrows—why cast someone seen as less appealing for the role of Supergirl? And why push a narrative that portrays her as a queer icon who embraces fluidity? Who is meant to relate to this character?
Take Birds of Prey, which, despite its hype, only brought in $201 million globally. The downturn likely stemmed from the decision to shift Harley Quinn’s appeal away from what made her popular in Suicide Squad (2016), which grossed $750 million thanks to her undeniable charm.
I enjoy Paul Giamatti’s work, but casting him as Superman? That’s puzzling. When it comes to men, the gaze is often criticized as “male,” but there’s something natural about attraction.
The first Wonder Woman film raked in $400 million domestically, obviously propelled in part by Gal Gadot’s striking presence.
This isn’t rocket science, folks.
