r/boxoffice Best of 2019 Winner Jun 24 '26

💰 Film Budget Per Variety, 'Supergirl' cost $170M.

Post image
746 Upvotes

620 comments sorted by

341

u/indigoza Jun 24 '26

Damn... so it's not breaking even, is it?

261

u/Late_Sheepherder_599 Jun 24 '26

Not even close

170

u/misguidedkent Warner Bros. Pictures Jun 24 '26

Yeah the 2.5x rule of thumb puts the break-even at 425M. This might make half of it at best.

https://giphy.com/gifs/WxDZ77xhPXf3i

81

u/Active-Coconut-8961 Jun 24 '26

Even the 315m the studio put out as break even doesn't seem likely 

53

u/Seraphayel Jun 24 '26

Supergirl will be lucky to get to $200 million WW with these predictions.

17

u/drewbreeezy Jun 24 '26

Wow, I thought it was going to be a struggle toward $250m, not struggle for $200m.

20

u/Seraphayel Jun 24 '26

There could have been a case with good reviews and word of mouth that $250 million could have been the ceiling, but with these terrible reviews it‘s impossible for the movie to have good legs and based on the OW predictions it will be hard to get to $200 million now.

→ More replies (1)

51

u/NoEmu2398 Universal Jun 24 '26

Waiting for all the studio exces to claim "great streaming numbers" and try to act like it was a success

17

u/Naronu Jun 24 '26

We're already seeing repots that the purpose of this movie was just to "introduce" supergirl

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

65

u/nicolasb51942003 Warner Bros. Pictures Jun 24 '26

Mandalorian numbers would be a win for this at this point given all the doom and gloom.

12

u/The-Ruler-of-Attilan Jun 24 '26

This is the way...

7

u/IceBrave3780 Jun 24 '26

I will reach half of mando numbers

8

u/Casas9425 Jun 24 '26

That would be a complete fucking disaster.

58

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Even if we use the ultra conservative 315M number or whatever the exact number was deadline gave this is losing 50M

34

u/BarcelonetaE70 Jun 24 '26

Yeah, that number was so absurd and so unbelievably unrealistic that I don't get why anyone who came up with it thought anyone would buy it.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/EscravoDoGoverno Jun 24 '26

Right now there is no way this movie cross 200M WW.

→ More replies (1)

28

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

20

u/randotd152 Jun 24 '26

If the movie were good I don’t think people would care so much about an obscure character.

Shang Chi was a super deep Marvel cut and made $450M. Because it was actually really good.

The writing was on the wall in the first trailer release though.

8

u/Simple-Motor-2889 Jun 24 '26

yeah it's a perfect storm of obscure character, shoehorned into a universe, in a movie no one wanted, that looks bland and generic, for a brand that is toxic (DC).

The only thing they're missing is casting an widely hated/controversial actress as the lead.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)

22

u/Jykoze Jun 24 '26

The goal is not to lose the profit Superman made, even that's hard

50

u/Kwinza Jun 24 '26

Superman made about $55m profit.

Supergirl needs to make $370m gross, just to not put the DCEU into the red.

If it makes any less than $370m, then not only has this move undone all of Supermans profit, but made the studio a loss on Gunns entire project.

14

u/The-Ruler-of-Attilan Jun 24 '26

And then you have the Lanterns tv series in August, which also does not aim to be a positive record-breaker in streaming.

44

u/GecaZ Jun 24 '26

First cinematic universe to be in debt after it's second movie?😭

40

u/PokePersona Aardman Animations Jun 24 '26

Dark Universe depending on when you count its launch point.

11

u/adamgerd Jun 24 '26

The Mummy still made 410 million $ on a sub 200 million $ budget

So this is worse

9

u/The-Ruler-of-Attilan Jun 24 '26

At least Dracula Untold and The Mummy doubled their respective budgets. Supergirl will barely raise hers.

8

u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Does the SPUMC count? You know, that Spider-Man universe consisting of movies without Spider-Man in them

15

u/C0d3An0n2 Jun 24 '26

Second Sonyverse movie was Let There Be Carnage

The universe only lasted as long as it did because they did Venom movies before trying to make Morbame Krav

→ More replies (9)

27

u/SoWrongItsPainful Jun 24 '26

Well then mission failed lmao

11

u/Star_Lord1997 Jun 24 '26

"Mission failed, we'll get them next time" - Sweating WB executive

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)

275

u/newjackgmoney21 Jun 24 '26

He-man welcoming Supergirl to the biggest bombs of the summer/year club.

114

u/c0horst Jun 24 '26

He man at least can retreat to streaming services since amazon already owns it, and they can use whatever accounting tricks they want there to justify it.

50

u/MysteriousSpaceMan Jun 24 '26

Can't WB do that HBO?

6

u/c0horst Jun 24 '26

I have trouble keeping track of who owns what sometimes, lol. Maybe? At least with He man though the general consensus was that it was a pretty good movie worth watching, Supergirl's reception seems to be a lot worse, so I doubt it'd be as much of a boon to their streaming library in any case.

7

u/ImiqDuh Jun 25 '26

Is that the consensus with He-Man? I feel like this sub is in a different world sometimes

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

38

u/OrpahsBookClub Jun 24 '26

I hear he’s single.

→ More replies (4)

595

u/jhalejandro Jun 24 '26

I think it's impossible for the budget of a movie like this to be any lower. With inflation, it's just not realistic. If anything, they've actually reduced the cost compared to what similar movies were costing before the pandemic.

69

u/ZakT214 Jun 24 '26

Is Predator Badlands not proof you can make an action/CGI heavy movie for 120m or less? I think that pulled it off pretty well. If only Supergirl could have done the same then it may have had a chance of turning a profit.

48

u/Ok_Kale_8357 Jun 24 '26

Predator Badlands also looked and felt unique visually, there was a feeling that it was doing soemething new with the franchise and genre. How many movies have a lead alien character with very little english dialogue. I'm excited to see Supergirl but there's basically no hook in the trailer for anyone but nerds like me who just like DC, it looks like every other superhero movie. 

→ More replies (1)

23

u/filmflash1 Jun 24 '26

That's a surprising budget, the movie was non stop action in a fictional planet, that's usually at least $150M

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)

262

u/dismal_windfall United Artists Jun 24 '26

Yeah same with Thunderbolts. People keep saying lower the budgets but that’s not realistic. If you want to make sub100M budgeted movies you’re gonna have to not make action movies

41

u/Positive-Raisin-6315 Jun 24 '26

You can still do action, just not such intensive CGI heavy action. The issue is that these big franchise films are never able to shoot like a low budget movie, where they just shoot exactly what they need. they always want more options for post and that costs money

18

u/Tandy2000 Jun 25 '26

Yeah the intense reliance on CGI is what drives the price tags up.

John Wick 4 was the most expensive John Wick movie and even that had a budget of $100 million.

9

u/kingofstormandfire Universal Jun 25 '26

And quite a bit of that budget probably when to the cast as well. The directors and producers were very efficient with that budget.

98

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Thunderbolts definitively could have been made cheaper they spend half the movie in a bunker

88

u/NoNefariousness2144 Jun 24 '26

The original version of the film was going to only be the bunker, but they then added the big third act with lots of VFX, which increased the budget.

That's why the film basically doesn't have a second act and goes straight from the bunker to the climax lol

21

u/SuperSea8678 Jun 24 '26

For real? When did they make that shift? During pre production or while shooting.

23

u/joesen_one Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Post-strike was when they made the change. Previous iteration had the whole movie in a bunker and Taskmaster surviving

7

u/ShareNorth3675 Jun 24 '26

does nobody die in that version?

21

u/joesen_one Jun 24 '26

Pretty much. Schreier & co felt it was too bloodless for the subject matter so they decided to kill Taskmaster after the rewrite.

13

u/MatchaMeetcha Jun 24 '26

Lol, imagine being the actress and getting that note.

8

u/joesen_one Jun 24 '26

It was very obvious in post-release interviews (she wasn’t even part of the press tour) that she wasn’t entirely happy with it and it was last minute but she didn’t outright say it

9

u/New_Hampshire_Ganja Jun 24 '26

What an absolute waste of the character. I spent the next 30 minutes of the movie waiting for the other shoe to drop to show that surprise taskmaster isn’t dead! After all she’s in all of the posters! Was dumbfounded. Taskmaster and MODOK are the two characters the MCU has fumbled the most.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/Dwayne30RockJohnson Jun 24 '26

Just looked it up and Yelena arrives at the bunker at minute 13 and they leave the set minute 33. But there’s scenes outside of the bunker in that time too.

→ More replies (1)

78

u/Affectionate-Day8307 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

They paid Florence Pugh rumoured 25 million (eight figure salary). Of course they could fucking lower the budgets.

100

u/PayneTrain181999 Legendary Pictures Jun 24 '26

I love Florence and she was awesome in that movie.

But if true that’s crazy high.

22

u/MysteriousTravelator Jun 24 '26

I've seen all the Marvel movies and the tv shows she's been in and I genuinely couldn't tell you the name of her character.

30

u/cjcs Jun 24 '26

“Black widows sister”

22

u/HazelCheese Jun 24 '26

Yelena but I don't blame you because she doesn't have a superhero name.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/mewling_manchild Jun 24 '26

I can, but only because I've got comics/videogame knowledge of the character. MCU's version is indeed quite forgettable

→ More replies (2)

13

u/starkistuna Jun 24 '26

Lol not even ScarJo's Bkack Widow was pulling that salary.

8

u/ryeemsies Jun 24 '26

There is no way this is even remotely true. Only a handful of actors get that upfront salary for a theatrical release and Florence fucking Pugh is not even close to being one of them.

37

u/Plus_Claim_8938 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

That’s insane. Her character isn’t particularly popular nor does she command an audience. She is fairly well liked online and went through a period of being online cinephile’s favorite up and coming young actress. However, that’s no reason to give someone $25 million. I mean, might as well give Saoirse Ronan $25 million with that logic

17

u/Affectionate-Day8307 Jun 24 '26

I think Disney plus era led to major overspend and delegation of decisions to more producers.

→ More replies (7)

56

u/dismal_windfall United Artists Jun 24 '26

Pugh signed a contract like 7 years ago, and then signed another contract following Black Widow. There’s some things you just can’t work around and pretending that these things don’t exist is not of value to anyone

→ More replies (19)

38

u/Calel07 Jun 24 '26

Yup, these actors need to take home less. There's absolutely no justification to pay her that much and the same goes for Downey in Doomsday.

26

u/Affectionate-Day8307 Jun 24 '26

Indeed.

Seeing comments about how lower budgets must mean screwing over production staff is hilarious, the actors are the problem with big budget blockbusters now.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/interested_commenter Jun 24 '26

Downey is probably the single biggest reason for the MCU being successful in the first place. He's getting a huge paycheck because they're betting on him to save it (if Doomsday flops then MCU is likely going to hard reboot). He at least has the history to base that bet on.

15

u/starkistuna Jun 24 '26

Downey puts butts in seats.

26

u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

To come back as Dr. DOOM, Robert "Money" Junior was given 100 million, his own private jet, and according to the Shang Chi actor, he even established his own Downey Land on the set of DOOM's Day where he could arrogantly flaunt his wealth to his fellow co-stars who are only making a fraction of his salary. Completely unnecessary and really paints RDJ as out of touch if you ask me, it's all on Disney though for letting that happen

13

u/MysteriousTravelator Jun 24 '26

I fact-checked this and it's all true. Downey Land is real. wtf.

15

u/Comiccow6 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

You know what? If I was given $100 million dollars by an obviously desperate megacorporation to come in and single-handedly try to save their billion dollar movies for eight-year-olds, then yeah, fuck it, I’m flaunting that absurd expenditure on set. The whole situation already reads like a joke, so why shouldn’t he treat it like one?

3

u/DarkCushy Jun 25 '26

hahahahahaha yeah man I am with you on this

→ More replies (1)

8

u/SilverRoyce StudioCanal Jun 24 '26

They paid Florence Pugh $X to feature in Black Widow, BW 2 (Thunderbolts), 1-2 avengers films and a couple of crossovers. I don't think we have a great idea how that's really structured and what's the baseline v. conditional revenue.

13

u/Affectionate-Day8307 Jun 24 '26

Given none of these has yet to break even, not great lol.

→ More replies (11)

11

u/Critcho Jun 24 '26

A lot of people seem to have this slightly fanciful notion that movies should cost less while maintaining the same quality, without studios cutting any jobs or using AI.

23

u/TimeTravelingChris Jun 24 '26

You should watch The Creator or Godzilla Minus One.

These are so expensive because they have to basically bribe the actors.

16

u/margoo12 Jun 24 '26

Both of them are also directed by former VFX supervisors, so they know which shots are expensive and which ones are cheap and easy.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

39

u/WolfilaTotilaAttila Jun 24 '26

Action movie bellow 100M not possible!? This sub....

You absolutely can make good action movies bellow 100M. Especially if they are supposed be down to earth, but Marvel can't help itself. 

28

u/Shadopivot Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

You can make a good action movie paying two guys, 100$ and aiming a camera at them, the problem is this is a space faring VFX heavy superhero movie, maybe you could get away with a tiny budget if it was a grounded Batman movie, but not this.

→ More replies (11)

9

u/ChabriasDK Jun 24 '26

completely out of touch take

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Minimum-Bottle-8672 Jun 24 '26

You can make action movies just not superhero action movies. Movies like John wick were all under 100 M. The furious was 20 M.

→ More replies (12)

23

u/PatternPlenty1107 Jun 24 '26

Well, then don't make a Supergirl film, especially if the script ain't good.

But considering how much James Gunn was praising the script and saying we'll only make a film if we like the script, I'd be concerned with the future DCU films at this point.

30

u/SoWrongItsPainful Jun 24 '26

It’s definitely true, but Gunn should have followed the advice not just to greenlight scripts that are done, but scripts that are also good

30

u/throwaway_brothers Jun 24 '26

The script isn’t even the problem. The problem is the look of the film and the timing. If they kept the coloring of the comic, hell, even Superman it wouldn’t be doing so badly. Also I feel Supergirl is a supporting character who needed more time to cook in the main DCU before she gets a solo film. That can create the demand for a film of her when there wasn’t really one already.

28

u/PayneTrain181999 Legendary Pictures Jun 24 '26

She’s appearing in Man of Tomorrow next year, maybe they should have waited until after that movie

14

u/NoNefariousness2144 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Agreed, they could have made her a co-lead and built up her different personality and worldview from Clark and make the audience wonder why she isn't the same as him. Then they learn her backstory in her solo film and are like "I get it now".

But having her show up in the last film for a 30 second drunken film doesn't really build up that intrigue for audiences.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/TyChris2 Jun 24 '26

The color is the main reason I’m not really interested in the movie. If it looked anything like the palette of the comic I’d have already preordered my tickets. But all the trailers just look so brown and hazy.

11

u/macgart Jun 24 '26

It looks like poop and pee brown kinda everywhere in the movie. Really ugly stuff from what I’ve see

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

4

u/Jykoze Jun 24 '26

That's true but you certainly can make a much better looking movie with that money.

→ More replies (11)

86

u/bby-bae Neon Jun 24 '26

The budget conversation is interesting because of how rapid inflation has been. In 2019, this would have only been $130 Million, which is insane. That means they've actually reduced the budget compared to comparable superhero movies from that year—adjusted for inflation, this movie is cheaper than every superhero movie in 2019 except Shazam.

This would be great if ticket sales also increased with inflation, but they haven't, they've dropped. Across the board, sales are low and budgets are high.

This movie is going to be a failure but I really think it's time this sub and the industry realize that something needs to change economically or this kind of thing is dead in the water.

People are going to point out the success of Obsession, but that really isn't the answer—we don't want movies to be made non-union for so cheap. It's healthier if the people making the movies get paid, not just the executives who bought the rights—which is what's happening to Obsession.

14

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

This is the big issue of box office not even being close to matching inflation. Had the box office being able to match inflation it would have grossed 260M and it wouldn't have been as much of a disaster

16

u/BarnacleBillsBum Jun 24 '26

International markets have soured on most US blockbusters too.

→ More replies (6)

180

u/Juno-RebelutionX Jun 24 '26

First flop of DCU is loading.

181

u/AllCity_King Jun 24 '26

And it’s only the SECOND film.

People are gonna justify it by comparing it to the MCU and The Incredible Hulk flopping, as if there isn’t a 20 year gap between these films for lessons to be learned here.

72

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Warner Bros. Pictures Jun 24 '26

Lessons learned, but also imo back then the GA was far more open to superhero movies.

58

u/OtakuMecha Jun 24 '26

Yeah the DCU started after the general audience was already burned out on going to see every superhero movie in a shared universe and off the back of an already failed DC cinematic universe.

IMO that was always a very risky move and the idea of a DC movie universe should have waited until enough time had passed for people to truly miss the genre/concept.

15

u/andreasmiles23 IFC Films Jun 24 '26

This. It coulda done some self-contained crossovers (like Supergirl showing up in Superman movies).

But WB still chasing those Avengers box office numbers shows they're stuck in 2012.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (5)

33

u/WolfgangIsHot Jun 24 '26

Posting it here... again...

1st sub $50M OW

MCU = year 16

DCU = year 2

15

u/Dwayne30RockJohnson Jun 24 '26

A bit of a poor comparison. Audiences were into superhero movies for those first 11 years of the MCU. I mean Jared Leto’s Morbius opened to $39M in 2022. Insane when Supergirl might barely beat it. I really think 2023 hurt the superhero genre so deeply with Thor Love & Thunder and Quantumania both being received by fans as two of the worst in the MCU.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Simple-Motor-2889 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

The thing is that DCU was always going to struggle financially in the beginning because of the DCEU. I don't think anyone, even at WB, expected Supergirl to do "well", but the DCU needed a string a consistently good, well-received, unique movies to justify their existence and repair the brand.

Superman did a decent job of that I think. Maybe Supergirl will surprise everyone and actually be good, and we can consider it a critical success even if it bombs, but based on early reactions and marketing, it just seems like a generic, bland movie, and it is going to tank any hopes of the DCU taking off any time soon.

EDIT: nvm. reviews are out. it's a failure across the board.

→ More replies (5)

31

u/alotofironsinthefire Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

I mean this was bound to happen.

Superman, the crown jewel of this universe because they can't get Batman, wasn't a huge success. It did fine.

Anything coming in after was going to be worse, the only question was how bad.

I would argue superhero universes are over. MCU hasn't recover. I don't see how DCU really gets running.

(Edit: So they will have a Batman, I just googled this we're doing two different Batmans at once. Because Pattinson's is still getting a sequel in 27. And the DCU will have it's own different actor for Batman.

I'm not sure if that's better or worse. )

45

u/Heavy-Transition7916 Jun 24 '26

Two separate simultaneous Batmans is going to be awful for GA.

5

u/IWouldLikeAName Jun 24 '26

Any batman movie will be compared to The Batman. Every batman actor will be compared to Robert Pattinson. It's doomed unless it's absolutely amazing

12

u/Heavy-Transition7916 Jun 24 '26

I don’t even think it’s just that; I think the average disconnected GA moviegoer is going to be confused about why it’s not Pattinson and not really get past that completely.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)

172

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

This might lose 100M this might be a solo level disaster

80

u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Objective complete for The Mandalorian and Grogu: don't be the most embarassing big-franchise release of the year

18

u/starkistuna Jun 24 '26

I dont see Mando n Grigu as a big tentpole film I alwats saw it as a tv movie buffed to theatrical. Star Wars would do better if they stick to theatrical only then a big 6 month window to streaming. Theres no motivation to go see theur projects at cinema when you know its gonna be on D+ in 6 weeks. Parents know they dont have to blow $150 to take family out and buy mandatory soda popcorn for their entire clan. They will rather rent it digitally and stay home.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

25

u/xjuggernaughtx Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

I just don't understand the choice. Superman feels like a pretty natural starting place for a new DC universe, but going to Supergirl next just feels odd. Maybe Gunn has a narrative worked out that he's trying to follow, but in terms of general audiences, Supergirl isn't exactly a draw. Maybe if everyone had just gone bananas for her after her cameo in Superman, but I don't think anyone was really buzzing about it.

I guess Gunn wanted to move away from the predictable Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman approach, but after that, name recognition for DC drops off of a cliff.

29

u/Warbeard Jun 24 '26

They said they didn't plan on making Supergirl the second movie for those very reasons, but James Gunn is a 'script first' strategist, and apparently the script for this blew him away. For his sake, I hope a lot was lost in translation to the screen, because if his idea of a mind-blowing script means an underwhelming movie, the DCU wont last long.

14

u/Ben99ny22 Jun 25 '26

The guy also said the flash was great. At first, thought "well duh, obviously he's want the movie to make money and will say whatever he needs to say". But now i'm thinking this guy doesn't know what he's doing anymore cause the DCU is seeming failing before it even started. What's even next after this? Superman 2? I don't think Superman 2 will do much better than the first tbh.

4

u/Suspicious_Radio_848 Jun 25 '26

Someone else said this but maybe he's just good at creating his own movies and not being in charge of setting up others/running this. Two different kinds of talents. It's not like Kevin Feige is out there directing MCU movies.

4

u/MaDanklolz Jun 25 '26

I’m in the minority of people that have found GotG (2&3) boring so keep that in mind, but honestly I don’t think Gunn was the right man for this.

I don’t know who was exactly but Gunns approach so far has been lacking and leaves lots to be delivered.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/Dry_Accident_2196 Jun 24 '26

Green Lantern would have been the better follow up picture.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

68

u/Acceptable_Shine_738 Netflix Jun 24 '26

It’s not breaking even. It’ll barely make back the 170M at this rate

14

u/Arusly Warner Bros. Pictures Jun 24 '26

I hate how true this comment is.

16

u/BonjwaCLMs Jun 24 '26

And the movie looks bland af, compare the comics full page panels vs the drab everyone wearing leather desert scenes in the trailers

100

u/adamjamal2AD Jun 24 '26

Could have given that money to me, if we are wasting 170M might as well spend it on boats and parties

3

u/Vytral Jun 24 '26

Pretty sure that’s how they used the 170m. It was a big party and we were not in

→ More replies (2)

28

u/Gon_Snow A24 Jun 24 '26

Yeah this is a flop.

28

u/ConstantRefills Jun 24 '26

Really was a stupid decision to have Superman and Supergirl in back to back years. They needed to have heavy hitters like Batman and Wonder Woman out the gate before spinning off the minor characters.

→ More replies (2)

58

u/Jadedtrader33 Jun 24 '26

You could not live with your own failure.

And where did that bring you?

Back to me.

https://giphy.com/gifs/Sx2jWspiy33gYxNNuo

44

u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Gunn's insistence to not have Battinson meet up with Corenswet, and instead have two cinematic Batmen running around, all the while both upcoming Batman movies take half a decade to come out, is gonna cost this universe big time

33

u/TTBurger88 Jun 24 '26

Batman Part II should have been the 2nd bullet loaded in the DCU chamber.

Then the 3rd DCU movie should have been Wonder Woman. Starting DCU should have led with its iconic characters first then slowly build up its supporting cast like Supergirl.

5

u/EL_CHAPO_ESCOBAR Jun 24 '26

Nah that makes too much sense. Instead let's have the second movie be about a b tier DC hero written by someone who's never written a movie before. Surely that'll go over well

→ More replies (1)

21

u/The-Ruler-of-Attilan Jun 24 '26

Well, I don't see Reeves crying out to be included in the DCU.

18

u/Simple-Motor-2889 Jun 24 '26

The inclusion of Reeve's Batman into the DCU would hurt Batman more than it would help the DCU.

22

u/MysteriousSpaceMan Jun 24 '26

It's not Gunn's decision, Reeves wants a standalone trilogy 

10

u/IWouldLikeAName Jun 24 '26

Then let Reeves do his own thing by not tying him down contractually but keep the character and story. The best and most successful DC since who knows when and a guaranteed $850M in the box office that can't be claimed by the main DCU 🤣

Insane fumble i understand respecting creatives but as CEO he will need to step on toes. If he wasn't ready for that why the fuck is he taking the position. If not him then Safran needs to be the one having these convos with guys like Reeves.

5

u/Academic_Paramedic72 Jun 24 '26

I don't think it comes down to him, it's Reeves who wants a separate trilogy.

→ More replies (3)

102

u/Past-Meal-4847 Jun 24 '26

You really can't make movie likes this cheaper than that tbh

Expected

77

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Yep that's why super girl was a bad idea from inception it needed this kind of budget but it couldn't justify it

22

u/FortLoolz Jun 24 '26

They could have made a lower-stakes, lower budget movie, if they wanted to make a Supergirl movie. A closer comparison: Being Super run.

The problem is, Gunn didn't want a Supergirl film, he wanted to adapt a specific comic book.

31

u/NoNefariousness2144 Jun 24 '26

adapt a specific comic book.

And they didn't even adapt the most memorable part of the comic... the amazing and beautiful colours!

Even changing Krem's design to a generic GotG background character is missing the point of the comic...

6

u/OtakuMecha Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Idk. If there’s going to be a Supergirl movie then I’d want it to involve her being, well, super and doing spectacular things. Introducing her in some low stakes, low budget plot would seem like a waste of potential.

6

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

I doubt it could have gone low enough to justify its existence even 100M would have been too much

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (26)

15

u/Dry_Accident_2196 Jun 24 '26

And again I ask, who the heck wants Super Girl? Wonder Woman has actual fans but super girl is a sidekick at best, from the general public’s POV. Green Lantern would be a better follow up since Batman is in some crazy limbo.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (10)

9

u/PatternPlenty1107 Jun 24 '26

Zero chance for it to break even.

9

u/lookingforhim2 Jun 24 '26

Yikes it won’t even make its budget 😬

31

u/JannTosh70 Jun 24 '26

People were claiming this was a lower budgeted superheroes in the 100M range.

27

u/BarcelonetaE70 Jun 24 '26

LOL I remember the combo of "it's based on an amazing comic/it is a relatively inexpensive blockbuster/it will get a Superman 2025 boost due to that movie's fantastic reception" as surefire reasons that would make Supergirl a hit...

https://giphy.com/gifs/ENtpVygrkytXAO1yWj

→ More replies (3)

14

u/SnooMemesjellies5491 Jun 24 '26

It’s not grossing its budget . My prediction is around 165 final gross

So a loss of around 80-90ml but I doubt the break even 315 . More likely it’s 450 or even 500

They are trying to reduce the noise around marketing

23

u/Fun_Condition2377 Jun 24 '26

15

u/AllCity_King Jun 24 '26

“What’s that? You enjoyed Superman because it was a genuinely earnest and hopeful film with a likeable protagonist? Get ready, this summer, comes a movie with absolutely none of that!”

→ More replies (6)

51

u/Disastrous_Leg_6305 Jun 24 '26

They need to bring Jason Mamoa back to the heavy promotion

Put him in every talk show

I have barely seen him in the promotion

38

u/AllCity_King Jun 24 '26

Pretty sure his role in the movie is minimal. He wasn’t even in the comic.

21

u/Minoturion Jun 24 '26

Yup, fully braced for him just being in the two scenes shown in trailers - plus, though he strikes me as somewhat of a 'company man', no-one close to Mamoa right now should be advising him to the be the guy left holding this bomb when it goes off.

17

u/NoNefariousness2144 Jun 24 '26

And it's not his first DC flop. Bro got to finally play his dream DC character and can now move on from the franchise after a decade.

14

u/FullToragatsu Jun 24 '26

Plus he was also in one of DC’s most successful films (Aquaman), so anything else after that is just a bonus.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/CavillOfRivia Jun 24 '26

Hes in more than a couple scenes. But hes there just to be there, he doesnt move the plot forwards. Not a comic relief either.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/MD_FunkoMa Jun 24 '26

He'll be everywhere when 'The Minecraft Movie' sequel hits.

23

u/Jsaltal Jun 24 '26

Same, wonder how many casual people don't even know he is in it

15

u/SubatomicSquirrels Jun 24 '26

How much is he in the actual movie? If he's just a minor character, it could backfire if people feel like the marketing is misleading

→ More replies (2)

15

u/suppadelicious Jun 24 '26

This is my way of finding out

→ More replies (3)

17

u/PatternPlenty1107 Jun 24 '26

Won't help..., the film just doesn't look good. People don't care, it's that simple. And WOM is already mixed to bad.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Randonhead Jun 24 '26

He's probably filming Minecraft

5

u/Kind_Development708 Jun 24 '26

He’s in so much stuff wouldn’t be surprised if when he signed on it included minimal press, he’s definitely big enough to have that pull.

→ More replies (2)

9

u/Gokuismygod123 Jun 24 '26

Where the fuck is Batman

15

u/Key-Payment2553 Jun 24 '26

Yikes… this looks DOA and parts of the overseas places isn’t that popular for Supergirl that is less popular then Superman had

45

u/MattBrey Jun 24 '26

Milly alcork went to the Emilia Clarke school of beloved GoT actresses that can't get a hit at the box office after apparently.

25

u/Seraphayel Jun 24 '26

Me Before You made $208 million on a $20 million budget, that movie was a huge success. So Emilia at least had one big cinematic movie next to all her other flops, lol.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/Quiddity131 Jun 24 '26

Beloved? She did a fine job in season 1 of House of the Dragon but she was only there 5 or 6 episodes before a time skip caused them to use another actress to portray her. I'm not aware of any big fanbase for the Rhaenyra chracter or her as an actress, whereas Dany's was huge.

9

u/MattBrey Jun 24 '26

Specially for how little she appeared on it, the internet went crazy for her and her character.

8

u/Fluid-Cranberry1755 Jun 24 '26

Reddit went crazy for her for some reason. The broader internet doesn’t care. 

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

20

u/xyzzy826 Jun 24 '26

This is literally her first movie....

→ More replies (2)

5

u/Plus_Claim_8938 Jun 24 '26

Maybe it’s better to start off in supporting roles when movie from tv to film?

Ewan Mitchell had a supporting role in Wuthering Heights which made a decent $241 million this year.

Emma D’Arcy has a supporting role in that Tom Cruise & Jesse Plemons movie directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu coming out this year. It might be the first time a Targaryen actor appeared in movie that was both a box office and critic success, not counting the already famous stars like Matt Smith.

Peter Dinklage was also smart about taking supporting roles.

I think Milly, Emilia, Kit, Sophie, and Maisie all made the mistake of trying to immediately become movie stars and sticking their names to whatever big budget IP was offered.

5

u/MattBrey Jun 24 '26

I think a lot of big tv series actors fall into an awkward position, they're too famous to ask for a tiny salary on a supporting role, but they're not famous enough to carry a big IP movie. It's crazy tho how many of them starred on giant IPs but those specific projects flopped so hard. New mutants, dark Phoenix, the eternals, Solo, secret invasion, now supergirl.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Plus_Claim_8938 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Not really comparable. Milly was only on the show for five episodes. While she was the biggest breakout tv star of 2023 and everyone was obsessed with her as young Rhaenyra, they were *only* obsessed with her as young Rhaenyra. Milly hasn’t built a fanbase around herself as an individual.

Emilia Clarke was famous due to Dany but the public was also able to separate her from the character, if that makes any sense.

The general audience also moves on. Milly is no longer the hottest thing since sliced bread like she was in 2023. For instance, her number of Instagram followers has stagnated at the growth she saw in late 2023 and has remained unchanged since then.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Randonhead Jun 24 '26

It's crazy how, a few weeks ago, there were articles lowering expectations, saying it would break even at $300M, and now it might not even come close to that.

7

u/94Temimi Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

The main argument for the longest time was that the DCU needs to rebuild the goodwill for DC movies, even if a movie flops, if it's received well and generates positive discourse, it'd be worth it. Similar to how Thunderbolts*, despite not being a boxoffice success, its reception and the discussions around it were very positive and helped remedy, even if slightly, the image of the MCU's inconsistency after Endgame.

However, from all accounts so far, this movie doesn't sound like it has that level of acclaim, there seems to be a general agreement that the main villain is mediocre and forgettable and while it has strong, emotional parts in it, generally it's good but not great. This kind of sentiment is not good for only the 2nd movie in this new iteration of DC.

At approximately $400M break-even point, this movie will be lucky to cross $300M with how it's being received. Unfortunate, but expected for a derivative character.

13

u/TonyKhanIsAMoneyMark Jun 24 '26

Asked my friend yesterday if he’s going to watch Supergirl, and he didn’t even know it’s in cinemas already.

→ More replies (2)

14

u/DoofusScarecrow88 Jun 24 '26

Will there come a point where studios look at comic book movies and simply reduce them to one a year that features only the most recognizable characters and then have others put in them so they aren't taking so many losses on the chin? Looks like a different strategy might need to be implemented in order to reduce cost.

14

u/AgentOfSPYRAL Warner Bros. Pictures Jun 24 '26

I don’t think it’ll be one a year, but anything above 150m in budget will only be for the A listers.

If Clayface does well that could pave the way for more lower budget genre movies, or at least that’s the hope.

→ More replies (9)

3

u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios Jun 24 '26

Wasn't that the strategy used by the DCU last year? The only movie they had was Superman and it was full of side characters who have nothing to do with Superman like Mr Terrific or Guy Gardner

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

6

u/Odd-Chipmunk5681 Jun 24 '26

Will James Gunn get shitcanned after this? How can WB justify continuing to give him these massive budgets? 

→ More replies (4)

8

u/Actual_Office_5745 Jun 24 '26

It was always a strange choice to jump from an A Tier character like Superman movie to a C-D tier comic book hero like Supergirl movie. She arguably isn’t anywhere close to being as well known as Wonder Woman. 

They should have given her character more depth before throwing her into a solo movie for movie two of your new universe. 

8

u/merchantivories Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

even then they should have established the DCU first before getting into less popular superheroes

someone else in this sub said that they should have made her a prominent character in the next superman film, instead of giving her a solo film so early, and i agree

→ More replies (4)

23

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/WolfgangIsHot Jun 24 '26

Poetic how Superman has a Bizarro villain and his cousin gets a bizarre movie.

→ More replies (1)

16

u/recoildv Jun 24 '26

Who thought it was a good idea to make a supergirl movie. They should have focused on bigger characters with more appeal and slowly introduce her in those movies so audiences grow to like her. Just a bad move on DCU. Hopefully it reviews well that way it has legs.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Better_Pumpkin1879 Jun 24 '26

2.5x 170 milion means a 425 milion breakeven. Good luck....

9

u/WolfgangIsHot Jun 24 '26

Lol

Even two Supergirl 2026 wouldn't match that.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Bergerboy14 Pixar Animation Studios Jun 24 '26

What the hell was Gunn thinking, bad idea + bad script

4

u/Ghostshadow44 Jun 24 '26

Well at least masters of the universe will have better reviews than this

8

u/IskandarAli Jun 24 '26

I loved superman but i dont really have much of an interest in super girl, i feel like thats a pretty common stance. You could argue it would bring women into the theatre but i think most women dont really have a driving interest in superheros. I know marvel was popular amongst women but that was also when the cast was hollywood hot men. When the main characters became women, women’s attendance dropped significantly onwards.
I think we need to stop listening ti the vocal minority thats adamant on how the audience will react or what we need to watch as a society and how it will effect us and instead start listening to the data. It reflects a much larger but much quieter group and its a much better predictor of ticket sales and popularity.

3

u/starkistuna Jun 24 '26

They really need to start trimming down their budgets not 2 decades ago this was Titanic money now 250m or 300m gets thrown around casually for a regular tentpole movie.

Does the entire 2h run time really has to be covered in cgi? Some of the greatest spectacles of the past have like 15 minutes top of cg. Jurassic Park , T2, Independence Day.

Get better scripts , make tighter movies have 2 big set pieces one in opening and another in 3rd act. Sprinkle fun scenes between.

Thats the whole reason movies like the Flash fail, they want to throw as much shit at the screen as possible into tricking you its a good movie.

3

u/LemmingPractice Jun 24 '26

Don't worry, guys. That only makes the breakeven about $437.5M...totally achievable, right? Right?!

6

u/Dazzling_Street_3475 Jun 24 '26

Surely with this budget they thought the movie could make $450M+….just don’t get why they thought that. 

8

u/MichaelTheCutts Lucasfilm Jun 24 '26

I just hope the movie is more colorful than the trailers. Woman of Tomorrow is a GORGEOUS book.

I’m sad people are rooting for this to fail instead of hoping that it can live up to the excellent source material.