Supergirl 4K 2026 Ultra HD 2160p

Story Movie

Kara Zor-El is traveling across the galaxy with her dog, Krypto. She is attacked by a pirate and a bandit, who steal her ship and injure Krypto. Joining forces with her new friend and ally, Ruti—whose family was previously killed by the pirate—Kara sets out to seek revenge.

Review 4K Movie

In 2025, DC beat Marvel for what was practically the first time since the Nolan trilogy. James Gunn’s plans clearly went beyond just one—to put it mildly—non-flop film, so the announced cinematic universe continued with a solo film about Superman’s niece. A lot could have gone wrong, but as “Supergirl” shows, you can never predict the outcome for sure. The film got the casting right, brought in a renowned director, and didn’t stray too far from the source material, but it’s almost impossible to call it a success. It seems the DC Extended Universe has taken a sharp step backward to the days of something like "Shazam!"

Kara, aka Supergirl, is idling away her time on planets beneath the Red Sun. She’s getting ready to celebrate her 23rd birthday, sleeps off her hangovers from late-night whiskey bar binges every now and then, and is madly in love with Krypto, a completely useless, mischievous flying dog. Somewhere on Earth, her cousin is waiting for her, and she carries the weight of Krypton’s destruction—a tragedy known to anyone who’s ever delved into Superman’s story. Just when she least expects it, interplanetary thugs led by the arch-criminal Krem injure Krypto by poisoning him with a toxic dart. Kara has just three days to find an antidote, and her only helper is the orphan Ruthy, whose entire family was slaughtered by the same criminals

The first 20 minutes of the film offer hope. First off, Millie Olcock is a perfect fit for this complex character. Her Supergirl is just the right amount of wild, just the right amount of troubled, and just the right amount of an unwilling hero. She’s practically devoid of malice, but she’s brimming with recklessness. Millie Olcock is, in part, a rocker in a world of endless space—quite a “Guardians of the Galaxy”-style character, or perhaps even a capital-savvy version of Alisa Selezneva. Second, the film’s opening resembles not the tear-jerking comic-book drama that “Supergirl” will eventually become, but rather a neo-western. “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” set in the world of Sergio Leone’s late spaghetti westerns

The entire subsequent short segment (which is laughably short for a comic-book movie) dashes that hope. “Supergirl” is a practical guide to how ill-conceived editing can ruin a film. It feels as though the film’s hour and a half was cut from three hours of raw footage. The narrative is driven here almost exclusively by flashbacks, and the transitions from one shot to the next disrupt the logic. One moment there’s an important dialogue about the past and the intertwined fates of Kara and Ruthie, and the next there’s a selection of (mostly boring) action sequences. “Supergirl” is one of the most chaotic films I’ve seen in recent years. The plot, the characters, the motivations—the entire structure of the film goes out the window when a jump cut occurs

Who is Lobo, and what is his role in the story? It seems as though his sole purpose is to bring yet another big star into the film (Jason Momoa is portrayed here in a very superficial way, even physically).
Could you come up with a more lackluster heroine than Ruthie? And why is the antagonist here just a generic villain, rather than something more complex with at least some plausible motivation? The main flaw of “Supergirl” is the world around it—it’s just too bland. The planets change, but the locations don’t.

Essentially, the entire movie takes place either on scorched sandy terrain reminiscent of the latest “Predator” movie, or in a cozy space diner straight out of Tatooine

The aliens are all designed in a similarly doll-like style, and the plasticine-like sets look like they’re straight out of the 1980s. The color grading, by the way, is the same. Even the simplest idea on the surface—showing the difference between various suns, on which the heroine’s superpower depends—is botched here. Yellow, red, and green all blend into a swampy ochre, turning the film into a chromatic sequel to Tarkovsky’s "Stalker". Not exactly a brilliant choice for a vibrant magazine called "Comics". On the other hand, “girl power” takes center stage in one form or another—albeit in a rather clumsy iteration. The decision to rip off "Guardians of the Galaxy"’s use of pop music during battle scenes also feels purely derivative.

There are practically no connections to the first film; there are no post-credits scenes, nor any fan-service references. Superman appears twice; Corenswet stands out in a couple of conversations and seems to underscore the difference between him and Kara. These are the film’s most lively moments outside of the first 20 minutes. Which is doubly disappointing, considering the wealth of disgruntled expressions Alcock has at her disposal. She and her cousin would probably make for a great sitcom, something like "WandaVision". But for some reason, DC went down the path of a low-budget "Guardians of the Galaxy" and ended up with a product in the style of "Master of the Universe".

In short, “Supergirl” is completely ill-suited for the mission it’s supposed to fulfill. It’s like a clown who mistook a funeral for a children’s matinee. Could it have been any worse? Yes, and the so-called “Black Adam” cemented that for good. In the end, the film got lucky with Olcock, and Kara didn’t end up being just Superman in a skirt. That’s where the positives end. Even mischievous Krypto is portrayed poorly here. They told Ganu, after all, that in the DC universe, it’s not customary to fool around too much. For that, they’d send you straight to Arkham.