Supergirl film has divided critics after Milly Alcock’s DC debut as Kara Zor-El, with the Warner Bros. and DC Studios release praised for its lead performance but criticised for uneven storytelling, familiar franchise machinery and a darker space-revenge plot built around Krypto, Ruthye Marye Knoll and Krem of the Yellow Hills, The WP Times reported. Released on Friday, 26 June 2026, the film places Superman’s cousin at the centre of a grief-driven cosmic chase, but early reviews suggest Alcock’s screen presence carries more weight than the script around her.
The film, directed by Craig Gillespie and written by Ana Nogueira, runs just under two hours and lands after James Gunn’s Superman helped reset the DC brand in 2025. Instead of Clark Kent’s clean moral certainty, Supergirl follows a more damaged and restless Kara, whose memories of Krypton make her heroism sharper, messier and more self-destructive. Alcock, best known to many viewers from House of the Dragon, plays Kara not as a hopeful mirror of Superman but as a survivor shaped by loss, alcohol, exile and anger. That gives the film a stronger emotional premise than a standard superhero spin-off, but critics argue it struggles to balance grief, comedy, CGI world-building, franchise cameos and a revenge story that often feels less distinctive than its heroine.
What happens in Supergirl and why Kara Zor-El is different from Superman
The film opens with Kara Zor-El far from Earth and far from the polished image of a traditional superhero. She is drinking heavily, drifting through space and living with Krypto on a ship that reflects her emotional state more than any heroic mission. The early scenes are built around hangover comedy, cosmic messiness and the idea that Kara uses alcohol to escape what she remembers from Krypton. That difference matters because Kara’s origin is not simply a copy of Superman’s. Clark Kent left Krypton as a baby and was raised on Earth by loving parents. Kara, by contrast, remembers the death of her world, the collapse of her family life and the loss of a civilisation she actually knew. The film uses that contrast to explain why she is sharper, sadder and less willing to perform the easy optimism expected from a DC hero.
The plot changes when Ruthye Marye Knoll, played by Eve Ridley, enters the story after the murder of her family. Ruthye wants revenge against Krem of the Yellow Hills, played by Matthias Schoenaerts. Kara initially has little interest in becoming anyone’s guardian, but the situation changes when Krypto is poisoned and Kara is forced into a race to find the antidote. From that point, Supergirl becomes a road movie across planets, bars, alien settlements and hostile landscapes. The film mixes comic-book revenge, space western imagery and buddy-drama structure. Its clearest emotional line is not the villain plot itself, but the reluctant bond between Kara and Ruthye as one traumatised young woman is forced to stop another from becoming defined only by vengeance.
Milly Alcock’s performance is the strongest part of Supergirl
Milly Alcock gives the film its most reliable energy. Her Kara is sarcastic, wounded and often physically exhausted, but Alcock avoids playing her as only cynical. She brings a natural screen presence to a role that could easily have collapsed into attitude and costume. Even when the script moves abruptly between jokes, action and grief, Alcock keeps Kara recognisable as one character rather than a set of franchise requirements. Several critics have pointed to Alcock as the reason the film remains watchable. The New York Times described her as naturally appealing in a film that is derivative but not without entertainment value. The Atlantic also argued that her charm cannot fully lift the film beyond the feeling of franchise filler. TIME was harsher on the movie overall, but still separated Alcock from the film’s larger problems.
The performance works best when Kara is not being pushed into one clear category. She is not the pure symbol of hope that Superman represents. She is not a full antihero either. She is a survivor whose powers have not solved her pain. That tension gives Alcock material to play, especially in scenes where Kara has to decide whether she is acting from compassion, anger or habit. The difficulty is that the script often asks her to shift emotional registers too quickly. One scene wants hangover comedy, another wants moral instruction, another wants cosmic tragedy and another wants superhero spectacle. Alcock can handle each element individually, but the film does not always connect them with enough care.
Why critics say Supergirl feels watchable but derivative
The main criticism around Supergirl is not that it is impossible to enjoy. The sharper complaint is that it feels too familiar even when it tries to look strange. The film has alien bars, bounty hunters, strange planets, space buses, monsters and a violent revenge mission. On paper, that should give it a distinctive identity. On screen, many reviewers felt those ingredients recall earlier superhero and sci-fi films rather than forming a world of their own.
The influence of James Gunn’s comic sci-fi style is hard to miss. The film’s alien humour, chaotic creatures and misfit energy bring comparisons with Guardians of the Galaxy. That is not automatically a problem, but it becomes one when the locations feel visually interchangeable. Several critics noted that the planets Kara visits often look muddy, grey or brown rather than specific, memorable or dramatically meaningful.
The film also carries the burden of DC Universe construction. Superman appears in brief scenes, and Lobo, played by Jason Momoa, enters as another sign of a wider franchise map. For committed DC fans, those appearances may be useful signals. For a general audience, they can feel like reminders that the film is doing more than telling Kara’s story. It is also positioning future chapters. That is where the film’s title character risks being crowded inside her own movie. Supergirl wants to introduce Kara as a major DC figure, adapt a respected comic-book storyline, use Krypto as emotional fuel, build Ruthye’s revenge arc, establish Krem as a threat, nod to Superman and keep the door open for Lobo. The result is busy rather than deep.
Krypto, Ruthye and Krem shape the film’s emotional conflict
Krypto is not just comic relief in Supergirl. The dog becomes the trigger that turns Kara’s detached drifting into a direct mission. Once Krypto is poisoned, Kara has a practical reason to pursue Krem. The device is simple, but it works because it gives Kara’s anger a personal deadline and gives the film a clearer engine after its loose opening. Ruthye is the second emotional anchor. Her grief mirrors Kara’s but comes from a more immediate and violent loss. She wants revenge because her family has been murdered. Kara understands that impulse but also knows what it means to live inside trauma for too long. Their relationship gives the movie its most obvious moral structure: Ruthye wants Krem punished, while Kara has to decide what justice should look like.
Krem, however, is one of the weaker points in the film. Matthias Schoenaerts is a serious actor, but several reviews describe the villain as underwritten and visually heavy without becoming psychologically vivid. He functions as a threat and a target, yet the film gives him less complexity than Kara’s story requires. The revenge theme also creates tonal friction. The movie tells Ruthye that vengeance will change her, but much of the plot is built around chasing a violent criminal through a universe filled with pirates, outlaws and exploitation. That contrast could have been powerful. Instead, critics argue that the film sometimes imports Superman’s moral code without fully adapting it to Kara’s harsher world.
Craig Gillespie’s direction aims for punk energy but lands unevenly
Craig Gillespie was a logical choice for this material. His earlier work includes I, Tonya and Cruella, films built around complicated women, public images and stories that mix style with damage. Supergirl appears to want a similar approach: a female superhero who is not clean, not calm and not easily inspirational.
The opening scenes make that ambition clear. Kara is not introduced as a noble saviour arriving in sunlight. She is hungover, guarded and emotionally messy. The film tries to push against the polished superhero template by making her difficult before making her heroic. The problem is balance. The comedy around Kara’s drinking often undercuts the pain it is meant to reveal. The film says her behaviour comes from loss, but it also repeatedly uses that behaviour as a punchline. That makes the trauma feel less explored than displayed.
The action also drew mixed responses. Some sequences have movement and force, but others are described as choppy or visually unclear. When Kara’s powers are tied to different suns and planetary conditions, the film has a chance to make action feel emotionally and physically specific. At times it does. At other times, the spectacle falls back into generic digital chaos.
How Supergirl fits into the new DC Universe after Superman
The film is part of the new DC Universe overseen by James Gunn and Peter Safran. That context matters because Supergirl is not arriving as a random standalone experiment. It is designed to expand a connected world after Supermanreintroduced the franchise with a brighter and more earnest tone. In that structure, Kara is positioned as a contrast to Clark Kent. Superman represents responsibility, faith in people and old-fashioned heroism. Supergirl represents damage, memory and discomfort with being turned into a symbol. The film repeatedly uses that contrast, including in moments where Superman’s presence reminds the audience that Kara is living under the shadow of a more beloved cousin.
That is a strong starting point. It gives the film a real reason to exist beyond gender-swapping the Superman template. Kara’s story is not about learning that she has powers. It is about learning what those powers mean when survival itself has left her angry and detached. Still, the franchise machinery is visible. Lobo’s appearance, Superman’s brief scenes and the wider DC references all point beyond this film. That can excite fans, but it also weakens the sense that Kara’s emotional journey is the only priority. The film works best when it forgets the universe and stays with Kara, Ruthye and Krypto.
What major reviews are saying about Supergirl
The critical response has been divided but not random. A clear pattern has emerged: Milly Alcock is widely treated as an asset, while the film itself is seen as uneven, overfamiliar or less emotionally complete than its premise promises. The New York Times review framed the movie as watchable largely because of Alcock, while noting that the superhero genre’s long cycle of excess and repetition hangs over the film. That reading places Supergirl inside a wider fatigue around comic-book cinema, where even competent entries can feel late to a party that has already gone on too long.
The Atlantic took a more direct franchise view, arguing that Alcock’s performance cannot turn the film into more than an extension of a larger DC plan. Its criticism focused on the film’s disorganised character study, weak sense of place and the way extra universe-building distracts from Kara herself. TIME’s review was the harshest among the supplied materials, calling the film dull and dispiriting while criticising its fake-feminist framing. That review questioned whether the movie’s use of sisterhood, exploitation and female suffering becomes meaningful drama or only a hook for a corporate superhero product. Other trade and film-review responses have landed in a similar middle-to-negative range: praise for Alcock’s screen presence, concern about the script, and frustration that a respected comic-book source has produced a film that feels less original than expected.
Why the Woman of Tomorrow source matters
Supergirl is closely tied to Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, the comic-book series by Tom King and Bilquis Evely. That source material is important because it offered a version of Kara that was cosmic, wounded and morally more complicated than many casual viewers might expect. The film keeps the broad idea of Kara travelling with Ruthye through a dangerous universe shaped by revenge and loss. It also keeps the importance of Krypto and the idea that Kara’s heroism is not simple optimism. This is not a story about a young woman discovering that being good is easy. It is about someone who has every reason to be bitter and still has to choose what kind of power she will use. Adaptation changes are also central to the film’s debate. The movie simplifies some elements, reshapes others and makes choices that push Kara more directly into the moral centre of the ending. Those changes may make the story easier for a mainstream cinema audience, but they also reduce some of the strangeness and patience that made the comic stand out.
For viewers who know the comic, the film may feel more conventional. For viewers who do not, the story may still feel unusually dark for a PG-13 superhero film. That tension explains much of the response: Supergirl wants to be both a gritty space western and an accessible DC blockbuster.
Cast and production details behind Supergirl
Milly Alcock stars as Kara Zor-El, also known as Supergirl. Eve Ridley plays Ruthye Marye Knoll, the young girl whose revenge mission pulls Kara into the central conflict. Matthias Schoenaerts plays Krem of the Yellow Hills, the film’s main villain. David Corenswet appears as Superman, while Jason Momoa appears as Lobo.
Craig Gillespie directs from a screenplay by Ana Nogueira. The film is released by Warner Bros. Pictures and produced within the DC Studios framework led by James Gunn and Peter Safran. It carries a PG-13 rating for strong violence, action, language and smoking. The film’s tone combines action, adventure, science fiction and character drama. Its central visual idea is a universe where Kara’s powers and identity are shaped by the suns and worlds around her. Its central dramatic idea is that Kara’s memory of Krypton makes her fundamentally different from Superman, even though they share the same family line and symbolic costume language. For British audiences, the film also carries production interest because principal photography for the project was linked to Warner Bros. Studios Leavesden and locations in the UK. That gives the release a local industry angle beyond its Hollywood franchise status.
Background: why Supergirl arrives at a difficult moment for superhero films
Supergirl arrives after years of superhero saturation in cinemas. Marvel and DC films dominated the blockbuster market for more than a decade, but recent audience behaviour has been more selective. Big comic-book releases can still perform, but viewers are less willing to accept a film simply because it belongs to a known universe. DC has also spent years trying to stabilise its screen identity. The earlier DC Extended Universe struggled with tonal inconsistency, management changes and mixed audience response. James Gunn and Peter Safran’s new DC Studios plan is meant to reset the brand with a more coherent slate and a clearer creative direction.
In that context, Superman in 2025 was important because it reintroduced the central DC hero in a brighter mode. Supergirl now tests whether the same universe can support a messier, more damaged lead without losing audience trust. Kara Zor-El gives DC a character who can carry grief, humour, violence and cosmic scale, but the film also shows how hard it is to make a superhero story feel fresh while still serving a franchise. Supergirl herself has a long screen history, including earlier film and television versions, but this incarnation is designed for the new DC Universe. The 2026 film therefore has two jobs at once: it must make Kara compelling as her own character, and it must prove that DC’s new connected world can grow beyond Superman without repeating old franchise mistakes.