Losses and Criticism Surround New Supergirl Film
Discussion among Fox News hosts highlighted the anticipated $200 million loss for the latest Supergirl movie, which was deemed “super scary” by Variety. Panelists like Jesse Watters and Greg Gutfeld reflected on actress Millie Alcock’s claim that her character is bisexual, suggesting it plays into “woke” Hollywood narratives that may have contributed to the film’s poor box office performance.
James Gunn was brought in to overhaul Warner Bros.’ DC Studios, aiming to replicate the overarching vision Kevin Feige established at Marvel Studios. Unfortunately, this reboot seems to have faltered, as evidenced by Gunn’s first two films failing to meet expectations.
The 2025 Superman film saw marginal success, but it wasn’t the blockbuster the studio anticipated. While reviews were acceptable, some moments raised eyebrows—like Gunn referring to Superman’s characters as “immigrants” and pushing political themes.
The real challenge was meant to be the Supergirl sequel, featuring Millie Alcock, which, unfortunately, didn’t perform well at all. Alcock’s promotional efforts often alienated potential viewers, with her unlikable comments and unusual suggestions—like audiences feeling an “ownership” of her body—likely backfiring and leading to a significant backlash. The trailer’s poor reception—characterized by its unoriginal antihero vibe and lackluster effects—didn’t help either.
Initially, there were predictions that Supergirl might open to around $65 million, but it managed only about $37 million instead. With a hefty production budget of roughly $175 million, plus an extensive marketing investment of at least $100 million, the film needed to earn upwards of $450-500 million globally just to break even. Disappointing opening weekend figures and lackluster international numbers only compounded the grim outlook for the film. Hopes seemed to rest on positive word of mouth potentially outweighing negative sentiments about the plot and Alcock’s comments.
However, subsequent data indicated that word of mouth may have, in fact, further damaged its prospects. By its second weekend, box office numbers fell by an astounding 80.4% on Friday, with further declines on Saturday despite the holiday. Currently, the domestic gross stands at a mere $58.4 million, against a production cost of $275 million.
For context, the film “Young Washington” from Angel Studios, which had a minuscule budget of $20 million, debuted with estimated earnings of $21 million in its first weekend. In this scenario, it garnered a higher cost per theater compared to Supergirl—a striking $7,721 against Supergirl’s $2,665 average. This illustrates the impact of negative engagement with audiences, especially when stars make divisive comments about their roles.
Interestingly, “Young Washington” has seen positive audience feedback, despite mediocre reviews from critics. This raises questions about whether a lower-budget film with strong audience engagement might outperform a major release like Supergirl at the box office.
From a broader perspective, if Hollywood were more attuned to audience preferences, they might recognize that a Supergirl film—especially the way it was portrayed—wasn’t what viewers were clamoring for. It seems many were disinterested, particularly women, and some men were likely put off by Alcock’s remarks or the film’s lackluster marketing. In contrast, “Young Washington” has resonated with audiences, showcasing enduring interest in U.S. history and its figures.
Ultimately, lazy storytelling infused with a dismissive attitude toward viewers tends to backfire. Supergirl has now become a cautionary tale of sorts. Meanwhile, a contrasting film like “Young Washington” is on track for success. Gunn’s stint at DC began with a misstep, culminating in significant financial losses on what could be viewed as an ego project. It’s hard to fathom how both Star Wars and DC, two major franchises, could find themselves in such precarious situations, but perhaps that’s just how things stand in modern Hollywood.
