'Supergirl' opens well below expectations after Milly Alcock's comments, guaranteeing huge loss for Hollywood
Hollywood may not excel at much these days, but if there's one thing you can count on from the modern entertainment industry, it's churning out bad movies and alienating potential customers.
This bizarre phenomenon has created a long list of major financial flops in recent years, from "The Marvels" to "The Bride!" to "Madame Web" to "Captain America: Brave New World," to Disney's live-action remake of "Snow White."
And now we can add "Supergirl" too.
In late May, pre-release tracking for "Supergirl" hit the internet, suggesting that the film could make as much as $70 million in its opening weekend at the domestic box office. $65 million to $70 million would have been a tremendous disappointment for "Supergirl," considering the film cost an estimated $175 million to make, and at least $100 million to market. Warner Bros. even secured a record-setting campaign with major brands like Cold Stone for cross promotion. They went so far as to stage "Supergirl" display booths at baseball games.
Even $175 million might have been an underestimate, as Deadline reported late last week that it had cost around $186 million to make. That report, clearly informed by industry sources, said that expectations had "cooled," but the studio still hoped to exceed $80 million globally and around $50 million domestically in its first weekend.
Well, the weekend numbers are out, and they are disastrously short of those expectations, to put it mildly.
Remember, just a month ago, expectations were that "Supergirl" could make $70 million from the United States alone over the Friday-Sunday period. So what did it actually make? $38 million. Nearly half of what the studio had initially hoped.
Globally, the news was even worse. Despite a wide international launch and prolific marketing campaign, the film made just $30 million from other territories, for a $68 million opening weekend. Total box office, from the entire world, came in under original expectations for the United States alone. Expectations quite literally just a few days ago were that it would clear $80 million internationally and reach $50 million domestically. It made $68 million and $38 million.
Disaster is an understatement.
'SNOW WHITE' HAS BRUTAL BOX OFFICE OPENING WEEKEND, FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS DESPITE HUGE BUDGET
Given the 50/50 revenue split between studios and theaters, and the massive production and marketing budget, it's possible the film needed to make $450 million to $500 million globally to break even. James Gunn's "Superman" made around 57% of its box office from domestic ticket sales. That conservatively implies "Supergirl" would need to make around $270 million in the United States, assuming a similar split, to reach its break-even point. Yet with 40% to 45% of a film's box office coming in the first weekend, particularly in the busy summer season, the actual opening weekend implies the film may come up short of $100 million.
If that 40% rule holds steady internationally, we're looking at $170 million in total box office. This film is going to lose hundreds of millions of dollars for Warner Bros. and DC Studios. And it's their own fault.
The film stars Milly Alcock, who had one job to do in her promotional media campaign in the lead-up to release: don't be divisive, off-putting, and make potential ticket buyers the enemy. She failed.
"It definitely made me aware that simply existing as a woman in that space is something that people comment on," she told Vanity Fair in an interview a few months before release. "We have become very comfortable having this weird ownership of women’s bodies. I can’t really stop them. I can only be myself."
Then, when receiving criticism for that bizarre comment, she doubled down in a recent Variety interview entitled "Milly Alcock's Supergirl Interview: Sexism, Superheroes, and More."
"I didn’t even say ‘men’ — I said ‘people!’" she claimed. "And they got so angry. I was like, ‘You’re proving my point. You’re proving my point!’"
She added that she was happy to have "pi----- off" the right people, including those who identify as a "Christian" and "Dad."
"And it’s from a lot of people whose profiles have no photo, who are burner accounts," Alcock said. "Or someone’s name and then ‘Dad of four, Christian,’ which is hilarious to me."
Then, just ahead of the release, she said the character "probably goes both ways" after Queerly Radio questioned her about the film's sexuality. When asked whether she had "explored" her character's supposed "queerness" in preparing for the role, she answered, "It wasn't, but in honor of 'Pride month,' as I'm getting all these questions...I don't know. I think that what makes this film beautiful is that it's not centered around a man, it's not centered around love at all. I don't really know. I don't know. I don't know. She probably goes both ways."
It's like a clinic in what not to do.
The failure of "Supergirl" isn't all down to Alcock, though. There's plenty of blame to go around. The writer, Ana Noguiera, had quite literally never written a full-length movie before this one. Her most recent writing credit, prior to "Supergirl," was a short film in 2018 entitled "We Win." Why or how did she get the job with that resume? Who knows.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON'T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
Even critics, who love to promote a film they believe is getting criticism from "the right" or those they believe are "misogynists" or "sexist," widely panned it. Audiences gave it a woeful B- CinemaScore. The trailers looked awful, and Gunn, the creative force behind DC Studios, spoke about his desire to make a female-driven superhero where the character is a "total mess." Very much what audiences are looking for.
But this entire process has been an ideal example of why Hollywood continues to hemorrhage ticket sales. Because they are incapable of understanding what audiences want. They hire unqualified people, for any number of absurd reasons, and give them massive budgets. They cast actresses or actors who are so narcissistic and ideologically obsessed that they cannot and will not accept that they are in a customer-facing business. That not everyone cares or agrees with their, often bad, opinions. They churn out repetitive, unoriginal slop with no interest in quality, originality, or visual interest.
Contrast that with "Project Hail Mary," where the author said he specifically avoided politics and wanted to make crowd-pleasing entertainment. That film exploded at the box office, well past expectations, grossing nearly $685 million internationally and generating huge profits for MGM and Amazon.
"Supergirl," by contrast, might lose $130 million conservatively, and at least $200 million in a more negative scenario. This just keeps on happening, and will keep on happening, because Hollywood continues to have the wrong priorities, little interest in fixing their political and ideological biases, and a complete lack of awareness as to their failings. They blame fans, critics, the right, men...anyone but themselves. Guess, for them, it's worth it.