‘Supergirl’s’ Rotten Tomatoes score is way worse than ‘Superman’ — despite Milly Alcock’s gritty performance
We're now in an era where superhero movies are making a comeback. While Marvel continues to release major theatrical movies every year, DC is slowly catching up under James Gunn's leadership. Since taking over as co-CEO of DC Studios, Gunn has launched a new shared franchise known as the DC Universe (DCU), beginning with the animated series “Creature Commandos,” followed by “Superman” and now “Supergirl.” As most fans know, “Superman” was a huge success in summer 2025, introducing David Corenswet as the new Man of Steel and laying the foundation for the franchise’s future.
Now, this summer we have “Supergirl,” starring Milly Alcock as Kara Zor-El. Unlike previous screen versions of the character, this take on Supergirl is far more hardened and emotionally scarred. The film draws heavily from the acclaimed comic series Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, portraying Kara as a flawed, world-weary hero embarking on a revenge-fuelled journey across the galaxy. With the movie arriving in theaters tomorrow (June 26), reviews have already landed, and critics appear divided on Alcock's big-screen debut.
If you're curious about the early reviews for "Supergirl" and want to know more before watching it, here's what critics are saying about the new DC film, and whether I agree with their verdict after attending an early screening.
What are critics saying about ‘Supergirl’?
Since the reviews started coming in, the score for “Supergirl” has been fluctuating. At the time of writing though, “Supergirl” holds a 58% rating on Rotten Tomatoes from over 130 reviews. As it hasn’t been released worldwide yet, there is no audience score (so stay tuned for that). By comparison, “Superman” holds an 83% critic score from over 500 reviews, with audiences rating it 90%. There’s a clear gap between the two, and I’m not sure that’s entirely fair.
Slant Magazine’s Rocco T. Thompson stated that “despite being fairly light on its feet, Craig Gillespie’s bratty, high-flying space western is fatiguingly overfamiliar in a genre that can’t help but keep looking backward for inspiration as it clings to relevance.”
Nick Schager from The Daily Beast said: “Its lack of originality or grandeur renders it a less than super spin-off.” ScreenCrush’s Matt Singer had more of a blunt verdict: “A DC disappointment.”
Amelia Emberwing from The Wrap gave a more mixed take, saying: “Ultimately "Supergirl" is a competent continuation of the DCU, even if it isn’t as well made as "Superman" before it. A lot of the frustration stems from potential that it just can’t seem to reach.”
On the other hand, there are some positive reviews worthy of being highlighted. Zaki Hasan from San Francisco Chronicle was especially impressed with Alcock’s performance: “Alcock’s Supergirl has to grow into the hero she’s destined to become, and by the time the credits roll, it’s her performance — not the increasingly oversized spectacle surrounding it — that leaves the strongest impression.”
USA Today’s Brian Truitt called it “an intergalactic revenge flick that boldly freshens up familiar tropes with the help of a jaded, self-destructive protagonist who needs to figure a whole lot of stuff out.”
Kate Erbland from IndieWire had a similar take to me, saying “what makes “Supergirl” stand out (and what might, unfortunately, alienate fans looking for more of the same) is its interest in staying small while asking some very big questions indeed.”
The reviews are clearly mixed. Positives tend to focus on Milly Alcock’s performance as Supergirl and the film’s more fun, space-faring adventure vibe, with it channeling “Guardians of the Galaxy” vibes. On the other hand, the negatives largely come from comparisons to “Superman” and claims of a lack of originality.
I enjoyed ‘Supergirl’ far more than the reviews suggest
Personally, I don’t think the constant comparison to “Superman” is entirely fair (in terms of the story and leads), as the two characters are fundamentally different, with distinct morals and perspectives despite sharing the same powers and Kryptonian heritage. “Supergirl” is designed as a cosmic, character-driven adventure shaped by Kara’s trauma, while “Superman” is more grounded on Earth and rooted in moral conflict and responsibility.
In my “Supergirl” review, I said “the action sequences are some of the strongest parts of the film, as Supergirl grows stronger each time she’s exposed to a yellow sun, battling space pirates and taking out groups of them in fun, slow-motion scenes backed by funky music.”
Ultimately, “Supergirl” delivers precisely what a comic book movie should: a thoroughly enjoyable experience. By linking Kara’s journey to her cousin Clark’s, the film sets up an intriguing relationship that could shape the broader DCU. It also breaks the standard mold by shifting the action entirely into deep space, trading Earth for a refreshing, full-throttle sci-fi adventure.
I’m not saying “Supergirl” is flawless, because it certainly has some issues that stop it from being a great film. That mostly comes down to its questionable CGI, Jason Momoa’s Lobo having no impact at all, and a weaker script that could’ve delved more into Kara’s trauma. But despite these flaws, “Supergirl” is a highly entertaining leap forward for the franchise, and I’m curious to know how Gunn is setting up the future for these characters.
"Supergirl" is in theaters on June 26
More from Tom's Guide
This is a preview from the original publisher. Continue reading at the source:
Read Full Article on tomsguide.com →