Supergirl (2026): A Colorless, Boring Super Snooze

“Supergirl” is directed by Craig Gillespie (Dumb Money, Cruella) and stars Milly Alcock (Upright, House of the Dragon), Matthias Schoenaerts (The Danish Girl, Red Sparrow), Eve Ridley (3 Body Problem, Emerald), David Krumholtz (The Santa Clause, Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle), Emily Beecham (Daphne, 1899), David Corenswet (Pearl, Twisters), and Jason Momoa (Aquaman, A Minecraft Movie). This film is about Kara Zor-El, also known as Supergirl, as she races to hunt down an adversary who harmed her dog, Krypto.

The DC Universe started with a big bang last year with the incredibly enjoyable “Superman.” It brought a particular flair to comic book movies that gave me a solid first impression of what its cinematic universe could be. It was helmed by James Gunn, who alongside Peter Safran, is forging the timeline in which this movie belongs. Now a year later, we get “Supergirl,” directed by Craig Gillespie. While I have not seen all of his filmography, he can crank out a decent picture. “I, Tonya,” while not the best sports movie I have seen, was stunning to look at and brought an excellent performance out of Margot Robbie. More recently, he did “Dumb Money,” which is not only based on an unbelievable true story, but it is also very funny. I recommend checking both movies out.

Craig Gillespie has proven that he can be a visionary director. I thought his work on “I, Tonya” came off as something that only he could helm. Sadly, “Supergirl” feels like it was made by a committee. For all I know, “Supergirl” was Gillespie’s vision. He could have had final say on just about everything. I highly doubt it, as this is a cinematic universe, and certain checkboxes need to be marked off so future stories can happen and the timeline is not ruined. That said, if Gillespie made most of the choices as this film’s director… I will praise him in certain regards.

The action scenes, while not the best I have ever seen, are sometimes fun to look at. I also saw the film in IMAX, which features an exclusive, taller aspect ratio in select scenes. I thought the occasional enhancements added to some sequences. They did a better job at enhancing the experience than “Mortal Kombat II,” which was a fun movie, but the aspect ratio switches in that project’s case were oftentimes distracting. I thought he also got some good performances out of the cast, most especially Jason Momoa. Although to be fair, I could clearly tell Momoa was just happy to be in the movie regardless of the script or director, simply because he finally got to portray Lobo, a role some would argue he was practically born to play.

But who am I kidding? I nearly fell asleep watching this movie.

If anything, “Supergirl” feels like it is directed by someone doing a lackluster James Gunn impression. I like James Gunn, for the record. In fact, he even produced this movie. I think Gunn has some bangers on his resume including “Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Slither,” and even “Superman,” which kicked this universe off. But “Superman” had elements of a project that James Gunn would normally write or direct, but those elements are not entirely effective in this case. I would want to give points in regards to keeping the cinematic universe consistent, but at the same time, not really, because I thought “Superman” was fun whereas “Supergirl” was melatonin in the form of a comic book movie. “Superman” had quite a few laughs, some good music, and a great villain in Lex Luthor. “Supergirl” on the other hand was not that funny, had some odd song choices, and had a fairly forgettable antagonist.

When I hear the terms “summer movie” or “summer blockbuster,” I think of big, loud, fun, adventurous escapes where you can munch popcorn and have a good time. This is not the only kind of movie that should come out during the summer, but that is often the stereotype that comes to mind. I expect to go into movies featuring superheroes, robots, dinosaurs, fast cars, or even robotic dinosaurs that are able to turn into fast cars, you name it, expecting to have fun. Sitting through “Supergirl” gave me the sense I was sitting in a cosmic DMV. The film felt soulless and tiresome. I hate to say that especially because this film follows an incredibly joyous and exciting “Superman” film from the year before.

I knew exactly how my experience with “Supergirl” would wind up from the opening scene. One of the first things shown on screen in this tinkle-riddled terror of a film is Krypto the Superdog pissing on a newspaper. I will not judge. When you gotta go you gotta go. But you took this adorable, albeit sometimes vicious sidekick that Superman had in his movie last year, and he does one of the most unattractive things any creature can do. Also, this is not the only reference to things coming out of particular holes during the movie. As these references continued through the dialogue and visuals, I was almost convinced someone was trying too hard to cater to the under 5s.

In fact, much of the movie revolves around Krypto. Well, sort of. Krypto does not exactly do much in this film. Krypto the Superdog is not doing a ton of “super” things. Part of it is due to what ends up being Supergirl’s inciting incident. Krypto gets shot with an arrow, leaving Supergirl with three days to keep him from dying. On paper, this should work. People want to see a dog’s owner kick butt whenever their pet gets put in peril. This could have been the “John Wick” of comic book movies! Maybe we will get to see Kara kill a guy with a pencil. For whatever reason, the movie does not give enough time to fully engage me into Kara and Krypto’s connection. I may sound like a moron, because I thought “Superman” did a good job at handling Krypto. He was cute, but not cuddly. This movie fails to give the dog a role this time around that matches the decency of the one he had in his previous go. When it comes to Krypto’s presence in “Supergirl,” he is nothing more than a pawn.

For those who have not been on the Internet that long, chances are you will run into, get this, sexist men who think women belong in the kitchen. Imagine that! If you clicked on this blog to see if there was a man running it with that viewpoint, you have come to the wrong place. I am not a woman, so my opinion here may not be as valid, but I think women deserve a better movie with its particular lead. This is not to say that Kara is a weak character. Judging by her powers and some of her actions in the film, she is quite strong. However, I wish the film gave her more of a personality. Yes, we see she loves to party. Yes, we see she loves her dog. But I never found myself attached to the character. Milly Alcock is not given the best material to work with, which may play into why a good portion of her line delivery feels flat in every other scene.

Part of my lack of enthusiasm towards Kara may be part of the film’s intentions. There is a line in this film given by Kara that sums up the differences between her and her super-cousin, Clark. She says that Clark sees the good in everyone, whereas she sees the truth. First off, did she steal Wonder Woman’s lasso? Give that back! It belongs to her! Second, I reflect on last year’s “Superman” with the sense that not only did I have fun watching it, but Clark maintained a sense of fun despite the many obstacles standing in his way. There is almost no fun to be had in “Supergirl.”

The film tries to be comedic, but I rarely even chuckled. In fact, while my auditorium was not quite sold out, there were a decent number of people there of various ages. I do not think a single person uttered a sound during the entire movie.

To top things off, Superman does appear in select sequences of the film, all of which are arguably the most fun parts of the entire runtime. “Supergirl” to DC sort of plays like “The Book of Boba Fett” does to the “Star Wars” universe. Not only does the film come off as cheap and fail to meet a certain standard, but I found the best part of it was when another character perhaps equal in terms of prominence got some of the spotlight. In this case, Superman is The Mandalorian, who shows up partway through the project and reminds the audience that it is time to have some fun. Supergirl, the “Boba Fett” in this example, is the character who, to my most unpleasant surprise, makes me want to fall asleep whenever she is on screen. Do I despise this character? No. I just was not that engaged with her, partially because I was not convinced she was wholly engaged in her own journey.

Going back to the time when I initially watched this film’s first trailer, I had a bad feeling about how this experience would go, but I was hoping to be wrong. Much like one particularly political intro to a 2016 episode of “The Simpsons,” I must say, “being right sucks.” There is a line from that trailer that made me nearly facepalm. Specifically, when Supergirl has a bunch of guns pointed at her, and she says to everyone holding said guns, “This is not going to end well – for you guys.” She sounds like a stand-up comedian dealing with a heckler, but she is turning her gears way too hard as she hopes to come up with a clever comeback, all the while she has nothing in the tank so she gives a response that makes said comedian go, “better than nothing.”

In fact, speaking of firsts, this script just so happens to be a first. The screenplay is written by Ana Nogueira, who has previous writing credits in theatrical productions and a short film, but “Supergirl” is her first feature-length script. You have to get your start somewhere, but I am not convinced that doing a second film in a cinematic universe featuring well-known comic book characters is the best way to get your feet wet. However, I do think it is smart to have a woman write the screenplay. I think a female perspective would enhance a project like this one. That said, I wish the screenplay had more to write home about and did not make me want to snooze. There is not a single character in the lineup that I found compelling, even if their respective performers are showing signs of effort.

If there is one thing I think DC has done better than Marvel, it is prioritizing female leads in their own films. We saw it in the DCEU with “Wonder Woman,” and with the current DCU, it only took two movies to make such a reality happen. Granted, we also live in a market that over time has likely become more noticeably open for female-led superhero movies. Plus, as general concepts, Supergirl and Wonder Woman have greater longevity than say Captain Marvel or Black Widow. I highly doubt that “Supergirl” is the second film simply because a woman is the lead. Though if this universe began in 2008 like the MCU did, chances are the world might not have been ready for a female-led superhero film following the failures of Marvel’s “Elektra” and DC’s “Catwoman,” at least from a financial point of view.

This is the second film in the DCU, so the timeline is still young. It is not easy to know where things will go from here. There’s “Clayface,” which sounds promising. Another “Superman” project is on the way. Also, just because this one project was a dud does not mean I am not looking forward to those other two. Sure, maybe my overall optimism about this timeline is lower than it was previously, but I am still onboard. In fact, for all I know, this universe could still turn out better than the previous one. We still have not gotten a deep dive into characters like Batman and Wonder Woman. Those characters are arguably more important to the overall state of DC than Supergirl. If those characters are featured in projects that are not up to a certain standard, then maybe an instant reboot may be necessary. The same can be said if future projects, regardless of the character, happen to showcase the same level of mediocrity that “Supergirl” did.

Also, going back to what I said about this film’s soundtrack, this film has one of the weirdest song placements I remember hearing in any movie ever. Towards the film’s end, there is a big action scene, the picture morphs into slo-mo, and in the background, Jimmy Eat World’s song “The Middle” starts playing. This is a great song. I love this song. I used to work at a Staples location, and this song would play constantly during my shifts. It was one of the highlights of my time there. Too bad they ended up playing a soft, quiet, cover version of it. For all I know, maybe there was a reason why they could not use the original song, but this cover version was not a good fit. Speaking of things that are not good fits, this movie was not exactly a good fit for my schedule. There is a list of more worthwhile things I could have done with my time. Watching this movie kept me from doing those things. Time is too valuable to waste on bad movies. I do not recommend watching this one.

In fact, to my surprise, I think I had a better experience watching the 1984 “Supergirl” movie starring Helen Slater. Sure, it looks dated at times, the villain is a bit over the top, the special effects are laughable, and some of the dialogue is plain awful. But there was a sense of wonder to be had with that film. The score is brilliant, the cinematography is sometimes beautiful, and even if her journey sometimes made for a questionable watch, I liked seeing Supergirl develop as a character. Is the movie flawed? Unquestionably. But it didn’t make me want to fall asleep unlike this 2026 counterpart.

In the end, “Supergirl” is a disappointment. Not only because this is simply a bad movie by itself, but because this sets a bad vibe for the DCU as a whole. Again, this is only the second film, so maybe this will wind up being the one bad movie in the entire run. Perhaps “Clayface” or the next “Superman” installment will change everything. But is this movie as super as its title suggests? Not really. This film lacks color, personality, and fun. I go to a big budget comic book movie with flashy heroes expecting to at the very least have fun. When these kinds of films lack fun, then what is the point of watching it? This wound up being one of the biggest bores of the year, sadly. I am glad to see Jason Momoa finally got to play Lobo, and maybe he will get to play the character again. Although I wish said character had a better start. Milly Alcock tries as the lead, but she is not given decent material to work with. If you want to watch a great DC film, just go watch “Superman.” If you want to watch a solid Craig Gillespie film, go back and watch “Dumb Money.” Avoid “Supergirl” if you can. I am going to give “Supergirl” a 2/10.

“Supergirl” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! As a reminder, in addition to putting out film reviews like this one, I am also doing a special series in honor of Scene Before’s 10th anniversary called Movie Requests, which features me reviewing movies requested by your favorite stars. Be sure to check out my latest episode featuring Sandi Harding, who suggested I should review “The Goonies!”

I am also happy to announce that the next guest who will be featured in the series is “Lord of the Rings” actor Elijah Wood! I had a chance to talk to Wood in May during a convention in Philadelphia. With his permission, I was able to get his film suggestion. Hopefully, his suggestion is good enough that way he and I can have quite the fellowship! If you want to see the episode of me reviewing Wood’s film of choice, it is going to be out Sunday August 2nd! I will share the review here, but if you want to see the episode as fast as possible, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “Jackass: Best and Last!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Obsession,” “Maddie’s Secret,” “Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass,” “The Odyssey,” and “Her Private Hell.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Supergirl?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen the 1984 “Supergirl” movie? How does it compare to this new one? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Amsterdam (2022): David O. Russell’s Latest Fast-Paced, Star-Filled, Forgettable Time

“Amsterdam” is directed by David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook, American Hustle) and stars Christian Bale (The Dark Knight, Ford v. Ferrari), Margot Robbie (Suicide Squad, I, Tonya), John David Washington (BlacKkKlansman, Tenet), Chris Rock (Madagascar, Grown Ups), Anya Taylor-Joy (The Queen’s Gambit, Last Night in Soho), Zoe Saldaña (Avatar, Guardians of the Galaxy), Mike Myers (Shrek, Bohemian Rhapsody), Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road, Nocturnal Animals), Timothy Olyphant (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, The Mandalorian), Andrea Riseborough (Bloodline, Battle of the Sexes), Taylor Swift (The Lorax, Cats), Matthias Schoenaerts (The Danish Girl, Red Sparrow), Alessandro Nivola (American Hustle, Selma), Rami Malek (Night at the Museum, The Little Things), and Robert De Niro (Raging Bull, Meet the Parents). This film is mainly set in the 1930s, and centers around three people who are framed for murder. Together, this trio uncovers a plot that will change the course of history.

I have not seen all of David O. Russell’s films. I have seen “American Hustle,” which I was not a fan of. I have mostly forgotten it by now. I saw “Joy,” which I thought was cute. The acting was great, especially on Jennifer Lawrence’s part, but it was not my favorite movie of the year. I also saw “Silver Linings Playbook,” which, while not one of my favorite movies ever, is probably the best attempt at a feature Russell has ever given. I still have yet to see films like “Flirting with Disaster,” “Three Kings,” and “I Heart Huckabees.” I am mostly familiar with David O. Russell’s recent work. That said, he has built quite a name for himself as a filmmaker and it is no surprise that names like the ones listed happen to be working with him.

When you have this many Academy Award-nominated or winning actors and actresses in your film, it builds promise. It builds interest. It reminded me of when I saw “The Circle” back in 2017. You had all these culturally relevant or critically acclaimed performers like Tom Hanks, Emma Watson, John Boyega, Patton Oswalt, and Bill Paxton. Given their resumes, I was excited to see what they could do. Unfortunately, their collaborative efforts could not escape them from this misfire. “Amsterdam,” while definitely more satisfying than “The Circle,” is in the same boat.

The best way I can describe “Amsterdam” is to say that the film is all over the place. There is a lot that goes down in just a span of two hours that I felt like I had to take some notes. The film is not wholly incompetent by any means, but it begs me to keep up with its quick pacing. I like quick pacing, but at times, the movie goes too quick. There are a lot of characters and interwoven storylines that there is a good chance that I will have forgotten a couple of them by the next couple weeks. I think this is a film that could warrant a second viewing, but I am not sure yet if it has the replay value. At times, the pacing of this movie reminded me of Guy Ritchie’s “The Gentlemen,” which I know some people like, but for whatever reason I just could not get into. One moment we’re here, one moment we’re there, and in the next my brain, which has escaped from my body, might as well have traveled to the end of the universe.

If there is any saving grace in “Amsterdam,” it would have to be Margot Robbie as Valerie Voze. I thought she had the best moments in the movie. I thought the casting matched the character and the way she was written and directed. This performance solidifies Robbie as one of my favorite actors working today. Her chemistry with Christian Bale and John David Washington is solid, and as much effort as those two put into their performances, Robbie feels like the clear winner here.

Speaking of Christian Bale, if you want me to be completely honest, I think he had a more memorable performance in “Thor: Love and Thunder” of all things. I am not saying that Christian Bale gave a terrible performance in “Amsterdam.” If anything, it was stellar. But I think when combining acting with overall characterization, Bale’s attempt at playing Gorr the God Butcher was somehow more convincing and compelling despite a movie like “Amsterdam” appearing to be more along the lines of Bale’s forte.

It is crystal clear that the story of “Amsterdam” is not the highlight of the movie. If you ask me, it had its moments. There was a specific moment that intrigued me at the beginning where our main characters find themselves in an unspeakable situation. Unfortunately, as soon as we dive away from that, the quality of the movie lessens.

If I had to look in advance at 2022 in film and predict any Best Ensemble nominees at the SAG Awards, “Amsterdam” would have been a contender based on name recognition. However, much like Garry Marshall’s unwatchable holiday-based movies like “New Year’s Eve” and “Mother’s Day,” the movie’s cast is the one glimmer of hope within what can simply be referred to as a hot mess. At least on paper. I never thought I would see the day where we have Margot Robbie, Anya Taylor-Joy, and Robert De Niro in the same movie. I just hope when that unpredictable day came along, there was good script for them all to bring to the screen.

As for other positives, the movie is attractively colorful. Not quite as glitzy and glossy as say “Elvis,” which in some ways might happen to be a good thing if you ask me. However, the look of the film is sometimes easy on the eyes. In addition to having a stacked, recognizable cast, a lot of them are wearing stunning outfits, some look handsome or sexy. If this were a silent film, this might be okay depending on what you put for text. The sets at times look presentable, elaborate, and occasionally have a vintage feel to them.

There is a saying that looks are not everything, and this movie is exhibit A as to why that saying exists. Yes, some of my favorite actors are put in the forefront. Yes, some of the costumes and sets look dazzling. Yes, the movie has an occasional feeling of immersion. Although this cannot save the film itself from providing what could be one of the sloppiest stories of the decade, and that is despite this movie claiming “A LOT OF THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED.” Just because a story is true, does not make it entertaining. You want to know a true story? I woke up today and wrote this review. Imagine if I tried to sell that as a movie. The distributor would probably go out of business!

Here is a fun fact. Christian Bale, who has worked with David O. Russell in the past, signed on to do “Amsterdam” before a script was written. I get the notion of wanting to work with a big name director. Especially one you supposedly have a decent relationship with. Heck, if I were an actor and I hear the name Christopher Nolan or Jordan Peele I automatically think “business partnership.” I hope while these two high-profile industry insiders were thinking about how great it would be to work with each other, they took a moment to think of the quality of what they were going to make. Because despite the quantity of big names, quality seems to be sacrificed when it comes to the final product of “Amsterdam.”

In the end, “Amsterdam” has occasional glimmers of enjoyment, with some extreme emphasis on the word “occasional.” The film has an okay start, but the film itself never finds a way to be as compelling or entertaining as its first ten or fifteen minutes. I liked “Silver Linings Playbook,” but I cannot say the same for “Amsterdam.” I am going to give the forgettable and dull “Amsterdam” a 4/10.

“Amsterdam” is now playing in theatres everywhere, tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming! I will soon unveil my thoughts on a couple of horror movies I watched recently, specifically “Smile” and “Halloween Ends.” Also, if you want to see more reviews from me, check out my thoughts on “See How They Run.” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Amsterdam?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie with a stacked cast whose script could not justify its star power? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!