Latest / HEEL HAVOC / Supergirl : BAD Movie or BAD Marketing
Transcript
- GATOR: Hello and welcome to another episode of Heel Havoc. Let me address the elephant in the room. Yes, got a wild hair up my ass. Decided after seven years of long hair, it was time. It was time to go back to the clean cut, the short hair. It was necessary. I could have done it before summer, but you know what? Live and learn. It got done. So this week. Now you've Come accustomed to me. This is Gator, by the way. For the first time viewers, thank you for tuning in. It's about damn time. But everybody else say that you have come accustomed to me talking about the heels, the bad guys, the people that make life interesting, make movies interesting, make TV and wrestling interesting, everything. But today I'm gonna actually do a movie review because I think it needed to be justified. Because the bad guy in this was the box on. Let's talk about Supergirl. I finally got to sit down and watch it. And you know what? I was not upset. I mean, I thought it was entertaining. I thought it was not a bad picture. I was not upset at all about the two hours on it. I was a little upset there wasn't an end credit, but I guess they didn't know if they were going to make another one. But it came out in early 2026. It had a Course, major DC studio budget. Miley Alcock in the lead role. Now you may recognize her from the game of throne spinoff, House of the Dragon. She played young Renera. In my opinion, the better one. And of course, they had Jason Momoa do his little cameo appearance as Lobo. And the weight of an entire new DC universe behind it. And then the box office happened. 126 million worldwide for a movie that cost 170 million to make. Financially, that's a disaster. You can't get around that. That is what it is. But here's the question: Does a movie bombing automatically mean the movie was bad? Because after actually watching it, I'm not convinced the box office tells the whole story. It's been number one streaming on HBO. So apparently a lot of other people feel the same way that it was not a bad movie. That it just either and I won't say it wasn't advertised because it was all over the place. But what made such a movie with a budget like that? Couple of one major star and a few little ones scattered around? Bomb. Well, Let's start with the numbers. Like I said, production budget was a hundred around 170 million. Domestic opening, it opened in the box office domestically at 37.1 million. Worldwide, it only did the 126.4. Rotten Tomatoes even gave it 53% critics, 72% audience. Cinema score of a B minus. Now there's been B minus movies that have made Three, four hundred million. But financially, it underperformed. But that's different from saying nobody liked the movie. I like the movie. I thought I was actually entertained. I thought it was entertaining. And 72% verified audience score tells a considerably different story from the box office headline. So the he'll have a question Did Supergirl fail because people hated it or because people didn't think they needed to see it in theaters? Now, my personal feeling is nobody wants to spend $120 to go see a movie anymore. Not whenever you could stream it for $25, $30 and sit at home, eat your own popcorn that cost about three bucks to make, go to the convenience store, get about a bucket full of candy for 20 bucks. And then you're only out 50 total, and that's for the entire family. But you get a family of four going to see there, that's $80 right there, unless you have a couple kids. Then you get lucky enough to only pay about $60, $65, actually. So does is it more the movie was bad or people weren't willing to spend the money to go see it? Cause I had had a lot of a lot of people. reviews and a lot of people talking about, another woke movie. I'm tired of woke. I did not see wokeness in this at all. But again, who am I to say that at all? The every time you ask someone what woke is, they say, What do you think it is? Well, I think it's the biggest load of crap in the history of crap. So let's talk about Miley Alcott. I mean, this should be one of the biggest talking points about the entire movie. Her performance is consistently praised, a part of the movie. critics singled her out, including Rotten Tomatoes. The review roundup and reviews from USA Today, Consequence, and other outlets. I mean, come on. There are really interesting interpretation of Kara here. I mean, it's not bad. She's not Superman's female counterport. She's not another goody two shoe. That's just saving the planet one bank robbery at a time or getting a cat out of a tree. No, she's trying to figure out her place in this world. Spoilers, by the way, if you have not seen Supergirl yet, which I highly recommend you do. It's about a young lady trying to figure out her way in this world, who she is, where she wants to be, and she just wants to feel normal. She's Kara, younger, reckless, damaged because unlike Clark, who wore Superman who Grew up on Earth with a family that loved him, she had to say goodbye to her family and watch them die. So she's damaged. She's a little bit sarcastic, which I dig it. I really do. I ain't gonna lie. I mean, she's angry and she's funny. She's trying to figure it all out herself. And this is a version of Supergirl that personally I have not seen. This isn't copying Superman in female form. Making sure that we got a female counterpart for it. This is an actual different character altogether that is not the opposite of Superman, but a different version of a hero that, to be honest, we needed. We didn't know we needed it, but we needed this. So Miley Alcock didn't play Super Girl as a symbol, she plays as a person. That's a big thing there. I mean, think about it. If you've seen the movie, then you know what I'm talking about. She's going, she's drinking, she's getting drunk on her birthday week. She's partying it up, going to different planets, going to one without a yellow sun. So she does not feel super anymore. She feels normal. That's what she's chasing is normality. Not she doesn't want to be super, she doesn't want to be powerful, she just wants to live in the world. And she can't do that on earth because she's got all the powers and she's got a Expectations that she has to uphold, and a dog that doesn't listen at all. So it isn't really a traditional superhero movie. I mean, this is where I think the movie deserves more credit. And at its core, it's a space road movie. Kara and Ruthie go on a journey together and for revenge. There's some grief in there, there's some alien worlds, there's crypto, that dog that does not do Anything but cause trouble. Of course, spoiler by the way, you might want to pause and turn it off if you hadn't seen it. At the beginning, it kind of felt like Space Alien John Wick with Crypto getting shot and her having to go save him. Then you have Lobo making an appearance. There's violence and fighting, and there's comedy. To be honest, it's a well-rounded movie, all in all. And there's surprisingly emotional story underneath it all. I mean, this the comic was actually inspired by Supergirl, Woman of Tomorrow. It influenced by the structure and themes of True Grit. That's important because you're expecting Supergirl fights a giant CGI monster for two hours like Superman did. That's not really what the movie is. It's not really what it was meant to be. It's meant to be a different character, a different thing altogether. And that's what made it really good in my mind, is because it wasn't a traditional Superman movie. It was a supergirl coming to reality moment. And I mean, her little sidekick, Ruthie, is actually important. don't let Jason Momoa steal the entire discussion, which come on, they threw him in there because probably they didn't get the third Aquaman in there and they had to make it up to him some way. But Ruthie is the emotional center of the story. She's where it begins. I mean, she's a child who loses her family and wants revenge. Kara initially doesn't want to be responsible for, and that's where the relationship starts to develop. They're interesting contrasts. Like Ruthie, I want revenge. Kara, I know where that road goes. That's where the movie has something more interesting to say than the average superhero movie. Because it's not about fighting bad guys, it's about discovering who you are. And Carr's grief, I mean, might be the best part of the movie to discuss. I mean, seriously, she isn't dealing with Kryptonian the way Clark does because crypto crypto krypton was destroyed when Clark was a baby. And Cara grew up in a different way, keeping the civilization of Krypton alive. She had the memories of her parents while Clark had none. She had a relationship with friends and family while Clark, his friends, and family were on Earth. She remembers it. She experienced more of it. She has the trauma of losing it, and she has the anger of not being able to get it back. She hasn't completely processed it all. I mean, flashbacks to Krypton in this movie were specifically highlighted by critics as some of the movie's strongest emotional material because it really shows you how devoted she was to her family and life. I mean Superman is a story about becoming a symbol. You know, the S is hope. Supergirl is a story about living with what you lost. Those are two very different people that have lived very different lives and are going through very different things. Now, of course, everybody, internet sweetheart Jason Momoa. Nobody could be mad at him. He's hilarious and he does action. Come on. Let's talk about the kid giant space biker in the room for a minute. Because everybody wants to talk about Lobo and how he's entertaining. There is no question. There's also legitimate criticism. Why is he in the movie? Didn't need him to make the movie, by the way. The the Story, he was just a little step in it. He was not a main figure. He him and Supergirl Car do not team up. It is literally they threw him in there. He like they shoehorned him in the story. Like they had to throw him in just for the hell of it. I mean, specific now, maybe they got plans for him in the future, and this was kind of like an open, here you go. This is what it is. But the rap. specifically criticized the inclusion as feeling that like the filmmakers didn't trust a supergirl movie to carry itself. And if they didn't believe in the movie they begin to begin with, then no wonder why it failed. Because come on, I mean nobody questions Superman. That movie made money. I mean we got Avengers Doomsday coming up and that one's gonna blow it out of the water. Spider-Man brand new day this is gonna be or was was a massive one. There is so much you have to believe into the movie, but if you don't believe in it enough, then you've lost before it even hits the box office. Come on. I mean, Jason Momoa gets laughs. That's true. Hands down, I laugh my ass off at several parts. And he does give the movie a little bit of energy. And not to mention he looks like Lobo and acts like Lobo. But the big question of the movie is was Lobo necessary? And like I said, I don't believe he was. I think the movie would have been great without him, regardless. I mean, he could have made a little cameo, did a little little bounty hunter, things like that, but they did not there was no backstory. He just shows up, leaves, shows up, leaves. I mean, I mean, he had to be in the movie a grand total of 10-15 minutes. That's not enough to leave an impression. That's just enough to get people interested in, like, yes, let's go see it, because Jason Momo is playing Lobo. No, I would have introduced him later on or gave him a little bit cameo to where he can come in later on. That's what I would have done. But again, I don't make the movies and I don't pay for them, so here I am. So, but just giving my honest to God opinions on them, but a lot of people would say that the movie's biggest problem was the villain. And I wouldn't defend the movie blindly on this. I mean, Matthias plays Krim. And while Matthias is talented, the character isn't particularly memorable. He's just another space pirate. I mean, come on. He's basically the back story of Guardians of the Galaxy. I mean, he's the guys in the back where nobody sees. I mean, that was a problem. It was, to be honest. But it fit the story if you actually watched it. Because your hero's emotional journey is about revenge. It wasn't about stopping a big bad. It was about revenge. And sometimes it's just a little asshole that makes a bad statement in your life. And the person she's seeking revenge against needs to be really terrifying, compelling, or both. They didn't build him up any. He was just a guy, to be honest. But a space pirate nonetheless. Like like generic space bad guy number forty seven. Pretty much. It's legitimate criticism. I ain't gonna lie. I I thought it fit the movie well, but the criticism was there and valid. Now, another thing to look at is the action was kind of inconsistent. They kind of went they did the all the flashbacks and everything, too oft or too many of them. They should have done like a couple, get the whole story in there and call it a day. But the movie has some cool action. I ain't gonna lie, I was happy with it. I was not upset. I mean, but it's not consistently great. The rap again criticized the fight choreography and the visual effects, particularly the way that some of the action was filmed. And that matters because Supergirl should look incredible when she's fighting. She's Kryptonian. She's should feel powerful. I mean, there are moments when it absolutely does, but there are other sequences in the movie that feel smaller than its $170 million price tag. To be honest, there's some times when she didn't have her. Powers and I thought those were some of the better fight scenes because even without her the powers, she was still willing to step up and step in and get the fight done. So I won't criticize that altogether, but there could have been some bigger, badder fight scenes, but all in all, I wasn't upset with them at all. I still give it a great entertainment. Now Why here's the question I know we started with now let's figure it out. Why did it bomb? Because I don't think it's one answer. Factor number one, superhero fatigue. Hell no. Maybe a little bit because it's pretty much the only thing that makes money these days. But audiences automatically aren't being buying tickets just because something says DC anymore. I mean, that's a major difference from peak MCU era and ours technica identified superhero fatigue as. the one likely factor, but I think that's a bullshit answer in my opinion. Because if you make a movie interesting, people will go see it. There's a reason why we pay money to go see Spider Man in theaters. There's a reason why Doomsday is gonna set every record out there because it makes sense and people are going to line up for it, no matter how many superhero movies you got. So I don't think it's superhero fatigue. I really don't. Not at least not in mine. I The only thing I would have done differently is I would not have pushed the Supergirl movie right now. I would have released one other DC movie, either like you could have done it after the Lantern series. You could have done it after another Superman or another the Batman continuum. If they could find a normal flash, by God, that last one, Ezra Mill to screwed up everything that was being done right. There, I said it. Sue me. I blame Ezra Miller for destroying over there because it took too long to make the Flash movie and everybody was all kinds of screwed up after that. I feel so much better after saying that. But let's look at factor number two. Supergirl wasn't a proven theatrical character. I mean, think about it. We've had a Supergirl series. We had Supergirl in The Flash. We had a Supergirl movie a long time ago. But she hasn't been a dominant force. She hasn't been pushed on people. And all of a sudden, let's make one. No, you got to ease people in. Like I said, push her in a little bit, make her appearance here, appearance there. They did great with her cameo at the end of Superman. Now they should have done that one other time. Get people excited about a supergirl. Like have her come in and do something outrageous to save the day or save Superman or one of the lanterns, whatever the case may be. But now you've given her substance. And now people are gonna want more, but it seems like the Supergirl movie was rushed into the system and not planned out properly. Because Superman, everybody knows Superman. Batman, everybody knows Batman. Supergirl, not as recognizable, not even as Green Lantern. I mean, Supergirl and Green Lantern have had the equal amount of movies, to be honest, if you count the series. But it's not guaranteed theatrical draw. You have to build it up. You have to raise the bar, so to speak, if you're gonna throw her in there. And then it could have been successful. Look at Wonder Woman. Two movies, a second one could have been better. First one, great. It wasn't rushed. They eased her in. Batman versus Superman. Give her a little cameo, let her kick ass at the end. And now it's set up for her own movie. Perfectly done. Now let's go into a factor number three. The DCU was still new. Now, this is only the second feature film of the new DC Universe, which this seems like every few years we do a new DC Universe, which Marvel is still building among building up on the original films. We haven't got another Iron Man film. You know why? Because that story is gone. We will not see that again. And they will reboot that in another 30, 40 years when people have forgotten. Superman established a new era. But audiences weren't necessarily emotionally invested in every character yet. Like I said, you have to build that emotion, and there was none. So the movie had to sell essentially Supergirl, Ruthie, Lobo, and a new cosmic corner of DC all at once, with no backstory outside of what we saw in the movie, and no buildup outside of a little bit of cameo at the end of Superman. Should have been better planned, but that's just me. What do I know? I'm just a humble man who seems to know a lot about these things. Now, the marketing factor number four: the back marketing may have sold the wrong movie. And I agree with this 100%. Because this is a big discussion point for this. If the marketing makes the movie look like Jason Momoa goes crazy as Lobo, people might expect it could be. Completely different movie. And it was not that. Like I said, he was in it maybe 10 15 minutes total. It was not a Lobo movie. It was a Lobo cameo, damn near. So why would people expect anything different? Whenever, here's Lobo in the previews. Lobo in another preview, Lobo in another pre. They did not focus as much on Supergirl and the story as they did as look at my bright, shiny little toy over here. Mr Mamoa as Lobo That matters whenever you're marketing. That marketing department should honestly be taken out, kicked in the nuts. If they're a woman, install some nuts and kick her in those. Because to be honest, that is the biggest load of crap. It was horrible marketing, in my opinion. For a good movie, to be honest, I think if they would have done proper marketing, it would have done better in the box office because it was not a bad movie, like I said. So let's Now that we've gotten those factors out of the way on why it probably bombed. Did the people really want a supergirl movie? Think about it. I mean, we has anybody begged for a supergirl movie? Has anybody's like, What I can't wait for another supergirl? Now, me, I can't wait for another Batman, to be honest. That's what that's what I like the most. And I but if people didn't want the movie, why is the audience score 72%? That's not proof that everyone loved it, but suggests the movie's financial performance and audience reaction aren't identical things. The box office measures how many people bought tickets. It does not measure how much the people who watched it enjoyed it. And that's an important distinguish distinction because you got 72% of them enjoy it. But to be honest, let's talk about the elephant in the room. Whenever you go see, and I know you will go see Doomsday, you're going to watch it once. And then you're gonna wait a couple days and then you're gonna go watch it again. Most people are gonna go see it in the theaters two to three times. These serious fans are gonna go see it five to seven times, maybe ten to be honest. It is our it is they have been marketing this one for a year. That's why it's going to succeed because the marketing has been right. They haven't let too much into the system. They've let people know people are coming back. People are have cameos, people are going to do certain things, but they are not letting out big things. And you know, Marvel likes to shoot two or three different types, so they can always say, This is it, this is it, this is it, and no leaks, just in case one is. Talking to you, Ruffalo, talking to you. So The it's not great counter argument for Supergirl. To be honest, I mean, I didn't see a bad movie. I was not a lot, I did not like a hundred percent of the things, but I was like 90% there. I enjoy ninety percent of it. And Let's let's step into the counter argument. Okay, let's devil's advocate this thing up. I'm not saying Supergirl is a masterpiece. I'm saying the box office didn't justify treating it like a disaster creativity. There are legitimate criticisms of it. Uneven action, a weak villain, lobo unnecessary, some pacing issues, mixed critical reception, and a very expensive production. Those are all valid and very true criticisms. Like I said, it was not a bad movie, but those concerns are valid. But here's what it actually did give, right? It gives Kara a personality. And I dig it, to be honest. I am happy and I can't wait to see her with Superman do something original. It's gonna be a yin and yang time because they are not the same person at all. I mean, Miley Alcock owns the role, she owns it. And Ruthie gave the story some emotional weight. Cosmic DC setting feels different because you know we're used to earthly battles and stuff, but I could have got behind it. I mean, it gives a chance to introduce some DC villains and DC heroes that don't get a lot of love in the DC universe. So to be honest, I'm not upset at that. And it isn't just another Superman movie. It attempts something smaller and more character driven. One interesting thread was that some reviewers appreciated the film for keeping its story relatively focused and emotional rather than drowning in DC mythology. So The main he'll have it question, shall I say, did Supergirl actually fail? And I'm gonna answer this in three different parts. Cause financially, yeah, it failed. I mean, I don't care how good the lawyer is, you can't say that, man. It failed in the theaters. Box office, it didn't hit. Sorry. I mean, didn't even get to one seven, didn't even get their money back for it. So critically, it was mixed, mixed opinions. 53% on rotten tomatoes puts it in right in the middle. But with people who actually watched it, more positive, 72% of the audience verified that it was a substantial portion of viewers liked it. And that is the truth of the whole thing. So that being said, I know y'all are probably digging this new look. You missed me from the past, and that's okay. I'd I missed y'all too and I missed this. So maybe Supergirl wasn't the movie people expected. Maybe it wasn't the movie DC needed to launch another massive franchise. And maybe spending $170 million on a Superman, supergirl movie in a superhero market that's already exhausted wasn't the smartest financial decision. But that's not the same as saying the movie was worthless. Miley Alcock gives Carr a personality. Ruthie gives someone to care about. And the movie gives us a different corner of the DC universe. And underneath all the aliens, explosions, and the Mamoa screaming out something. There's actually a story about grief, revenge, and learning how to live with what you've lost. So maybe the box office didn't tell us that Supergirl was a bad movie. Maybe it told us that audience weren't convinced they needed to buy a movie ticket to find out. Two very different things. man, now that I've gotten that out. All right. I'm gonna get back to my heel havoc ways. And I hope you've enjoyed this episode. And I hope you'll give Supergirl a watch because I found it to be interesting. I found it to be it's gonna be something I'll probably watch later on down the road. But I watched it last week, so I'm good for a couple weeks. But go check it out because it wasn't actually bad, it just produced bad numbers because it had bad marketing. So if this is your first time on Heel Havoc, by all means, don't forget to like, subscribe, and follow so you don't miss any more of this. Cause at this podcast, it's good to be bad.