Is this the new Supergirl?

[Mr. X]

https://x.com/FilmUpdates/status/1906725981093564753

[bushwackerbob]

I remember seeing her in House of Dragons as the younger version of Rhaenyra Targaryen. I actually liked her more than the adult version of the character that followed. The young lady is a heck of an actress. I like the idea of the Australian actress playing Supergirl.

[Malice]

I remember seeing her in House of Dragons as the younger version of Rhaenyra Targaryen. I actually liked her more than the adult version of the character that followed. The young lady is a heck of an actress. I like the idea of the Australian actress playing Supergirl.

Same as you, loved her in house of the dragon, can't wait to see what she can do as Kara.

I really want to give the benefit of the doubt to James Gunn and hope that all goes for the best for his Superman.

[argento]

enhanced_descargam.png (2.88 MiB) Viewed 55950 times

[brdiy]

Surprised this hasn't been shared here yet. Looks like SG will be sporting the skirt after all!

https://screenrant.com/supergirl-movie- ... set-photo/

https://youtu.be/t0FaJ6bzMQs?si=vW9sXdBAjUxaeGpf

[HiDef]

Surprised this hasn't been shared here yet. Looks like SG will be sporting the skirt after all!

https://screenrant.com/supergirl-movie- ... set-photo/

https://youtu.be/t0FaJ6bzMQs?si=vW9sXdBAjUxaeGpf

Nice! Supergirl is always in a skirt in my mind. Melissa will always be Supergirl for me but this looks promising so far.

[superheroinelinks]

PREVIEW
Milly Alcock WALKING around in Supergirl SUIT

www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0FaJ6bzMQs

[dingerdude]

[batgirl1969]

Rumor is she is set to be a lesbian in her own film...Win/Win for me!!!!! Delicious new Supergirl!

[HiDef]

Rumor is she is set to be a lesbian in her own film...Win/Win for me!!!!! Delicious new Supergirl!

The kiss.jpg (70.47 KiB) Viewed 54360 times

[batgirl1969]

Rumor is she is set to be a lesbian in her own film...Win/Win for me!!!!! Delicious new Supergirl!

The kiss.jpg

Nothing finer than to see her 69 her!!! Delicious duo!!

[HiDef]

Rumor is she is set to be a lesbian in her own film...Win/Win for me!!!!! Delicious new Supergirl!

The kiss.jpg

Nothing finer than to see her 69 her!!! Delicious duo!!

I can't argue with that.

[superbia19872]

enhanced_descargam.png

Is it gonna take serious legal repurcussions for y'all to stop doing this insanely unethical shit?

https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news- ... ffect.html

[Mr. X]

enhanced_descargam.png

Is it gonna take serious legal repurcussions for y'all to stop doing this insanely unethical shit?

https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news- ... ffect.html

I think he's outside the US.

[dingerdude]

Official poster.

[Mr. X]

Official poster.

Gunn is a dry rot, deconstructionist dinosaur, stuck in the past thinking he's making the world a better place by peeing all over his parents' thanks giving dinner. He bought an old classic house then burned it down to masturbate to the fire. He would probably wreck Shakespeare if he could.

Superman is not Guardians.

Now he turns Supergirl into a drunk slut.

As an older person I want to apologize to all the young people out there that you are saddled with these old deconstructionist mummies who will wreck everything they touch for a profit. They have "the toys" now and you won't get them until they are done peeing on them.

[Malice]

Official poster.

Gunn is a dry rot, deconstructionist dinosaur, stuck in the past thinking he's making the world a better place by peeing all over his parents' thanks giving dinner. He bought an old classic house then burned it down to masturbate to the fire. He would probably wreck Shakespeare if he could.

Superman is not Guardians.

Now he turns Supergirl into a drunk slut.

As an older person I want to apologize to all the young people out there that you are saddled with these old deconstructionist mummies who will wreck everything they touch for a profit. They have "the toys" now and you won't get them until they are done peeing on them.

James Gunn never made movies about heroes, only about magnificent losers, and his vision for Superman and Supergirl is in line with what he’s produced in the past.

All I ask is that future productions stay entertaining. If they want to deconstruct, fine, but give the characters more screentime to actually develop.

I agree that Guardians is a different beast. Keep the levity, but add more gravitas to the plot of Supergirl, and it could be good. I'm sold on the actress anyway.

[Mr. X]

Superman is about hope. As a child you came out thinking you could do something great with power. What hope does Gunn offer kids?

[Malice]

Superman is about hope. As a child you came out thinking you could do something great with power. What hope does Gunn offer kids?

I would argue that the message is: despite your failure, you can aspire to be better.

Now, does that fit Superman, and by extension Supergirl, as characters in the traditional sense? No

But hoping Gunn would produce a traditional movie in that regard is just setting yourself up for disappointment.

[shevek]

Mr. X is correct.

I just read an article about the promo image that dingerdude posted.
That article was on the site Movieweb.
It contained several instances of the terms "drunk", "disheveled" and "total mess" when describing Supergirl.

Is that what you think of when you recall any of the seven Supergirl comic runs, even the latest one running right now?
Is that what you think of when you recall Helen Slater or Melissa Benoist?
Is that what you think of when you recall any of the DC animated films where Supergirl appears?

No. "Drunk", "disheveled" and "total mess" describes Silk Spectre, not Supergirl.

Need I say more about Gunn's intent? It's deconstruction, and not even original deconstruction, because Alan Moore already did it.

[Femina]

SSDD

I'm just curious........ Has no one actually read Woman of Tomorrow?

It begins with Supergirl drunk on an alien world, disheveled and kind of a wreck....... it's like, the starting point of the series. She's in that exact f'kn trench coat.

It's ABOUT Supergirl in a rut, part of it is her pulling herself out of that rut, but it's got a lot more going on. It's a story about surviving trauma, and picking yourself up to be a hero and role model?

Read a book sometime maybe before you say something stupid? Or even just f'kn Wiki it? They told you exactly which Supergirl story they were telling when they announced it... it's not their problem if you never actually read the book.

And in at least two of those seven 'ongoing' series, Supergirl spent large portions as an emotional wreck. Her being an angry teenager poorly dealing with the extinction of a species she was old enough to remember, for example, is a common trope for Supergirl serials, it's simply finally given the full weight it deserves in WoT. She is ABSOLUTELY NOT always just a placidly plucky Girl Next Door sweetheart. That's a complete fiction you would only come to if you'd never actually read the books.

I don't honestly think we should WANT another Supergirl film mirroring the yawn fest that was the Helen Slater film. Say what you like, she looked the part sure, and that's what people remember, the FILM sucks which is why it never got a sequel or even Slater a guest appearance in Superman 4. We don't want another Supergirl film that's so boring nobody bothers to make another Supergirl property for 30 years. Far be it for them to make a Supergirl movie where Supergirl flies around and whups cosmic ass in flashy and powerful moments while dealing with internalized guilt and trauma... instead of passively wandering around while dudes tell her what to wear and where to go, and half heartedly dealing with fashion witches who are angry they aren't the 'fairest one of them all' any longer now that Supergirl is on Earth. WOE be the state of cinema that women can be real characters in movies now!

[shevek]

SSDD

I'm just curious........ Has no one actually read Woman of Tomorrow?

It begins with Supergirl drunk on an alien world, disheveled and kind of a wreck....... it's like, the starting point of the series. She's in that exact f'kn trench coat.

It's ABOUT Supergirl in a rut, part of it is her pulling herself out of that rut, but it's got a lot more going on. It's a story about surviving trauma, and picking yourself up to be a hero and role model?

Read a book sometime maybe before you say something stupid? Or even just f'kn Wiki it? They told you exactly which Supergirl story they were telling when they announced it... it's not their problem if you never actually read the book.

Yes. I read it. It's not even the first time that Supergirl ventures out into space to get answers with regards to Krypton's destruction. The Andrekyo run also did that (she even brought Krypto along) and it was not that long ago (2015).

If you go all the way back to The Specials (2000) and Super (2007) you'll find that James Gunn's material about superheroes is frequent, but it's never really aspirational. That is to say, the characters are never really better than us. They're incredibly flawed individuals who somehow get their shit together after enduring various traumas and setbacks. Internal anguish is one way to write a heroic arc but it's not the only one.

Meanwhile, you'll find that Tom King, the writer of the limited edition series Woman of Tomorrow, often deals with emotional themes and deconstructs his characters to crack open facades of bravery and heroism to get to the emotional flaws and traumas within. A good example of that is his "Bat/Cat" run where Selina Kyle is not so much Bruce's passionate lover as his emotional support mommy. He's been praised for approaches like this because that's what the progressive-leaning panel which votes on the Eisners prefers to see in comic book content nowadays (which is not necessarily the same content which paying customers want to read).

Let me reiterate: Woman of Tomorrow was not technically a 'run'. It didn't bring up Kryptonian lore and Supergirl's personality within the context of an ongoing book that featured multiple storylines and interactions with many characters from the DC Universe. It didn't even offer an interesting plot twist such as Supergirl's rage taking over so much that she temporarily becomes a Red Lantern (which was a hot concept). It didn't even totally rework the entire character of Supergirl like Peter David did (which really wound up creating another alternative universe version).

It was merely a MINI-series, meant to introduce Tom King to the character because he is one of the biggest-name writers and therefore DC could count on a good-selling book. The art? Bilquis Evely draws exquisitely, but she has a very specific style which is not meant for mainstream comic runs because it is very stylized and intricate. That's why she did a mini-series but not a regular comic run.

So, yes, my problem is inherently that the Supergirl reboot is using Woman of Tomorrow as the kickoff. Because it is by far not the best example of how to launch a franchise. It's a "Brat Summer" approach meant to pander to younger audiences who spend their lives watching women stumble around drunkenly and rage at the camera on Tiktok, while calling each other "bro" and "dude". The movie exists because it is a deconstructive approach to Supergirl - the approach that Tom King and James Gunn can both agree on.

Nobody wants to just see another bland Helen Slater movie. That's not the point, and I did not say that. I was only mentioning Helen Slater to note the fact that Milly Alcock does not match Slater's attractiveness.

But you know what most people DO want to see? A movie that feels like the first season of the Supergirl TV show. The one that everyone watched because it was on CBS. The one that 1) showed her origin story, 2) placed her firmly within the context of how she's fitting in on Earth with her job and her friends, 3) pitted her against major DC villain threats, and 4) used the incredibly beautiful Melissa Benoist in a stunning tight costume to do all of that.

From what I understand (having read Woman of Tomorrow, having read various articles emphasizing terms like "total mess" and "disheveled", and having seen the cameo at the end of Superman) the James Gunn Supergirl movie doesn't do any of that. It's quite nearly a blank slate: tossing her almost immediately into action in faraway space locales nobody's heard of (i.e. not Krypton, not Metropolis, not Central City), alongside a character nobody's heard of (Ruthye Marie Knoll), pitting her against an enemy that nobody's heard of (the pirates and plunderers who are blamed for the destruction of Krypton). Not to mention making up yet another reason for Krypton's destruction (haven't there been five or six explanations by now within the context of DC's terrible continuity?).

Does it make any sense to you to introduce so many unknown and new elements in a reboot of the Supergirl character? I'm not saying that the Woman of Tomorrow movie should never be made. Maybe it should be made somewhere down the line after the potential viewing audience is familiar with the character, like the way the meandering Supergirl CW show eventually sends Kara's storyline into the Phantom Zone or the Mxyzptlk realm or to Mars, etc.

But first, introduce the character correctly to the new audience. And if possible, use an actress who is maximally attractive and expressive.

That's just my take. It has almost nothing to do with our own niche fetish perspective. If it did, I would say two things about Woman of Tomorrow: 1) It all depends on how good Alcock looks in a tight costume, and 2) looking forward to the absolute perilous thrashing she receives during that fight with the pirates, because yes, I read the book.

It simply has to do with common sense, storytelling acumen, and my general familiarity with both the Supergirl character since the 1970s (Adventure Comics etc - remember that I first encountered Supergirl when reading the Dial H for Hero backup stories) and James Gunn's general approach to his superhero movies. What worked in the Guardians movies (which are space opera romps) and his indie superhero films shouldn't be applicable here.

We can firmly agree to disagree if you like.

[Malice]

I was only mentioning Helen Slater to note the fact that Milly Alcock does not match Slater's attractiveness.

I'm curious, is the optician confident, or did he schedule a couple more appointments?

I'm only teasin', we'll agree to disagree on this point, my friend.

As for the rest, I'm not against a different approach. I'm just not so sure the audience will follow on that one, and that's what worries me.

I think the wider audience might not see the appeal for that type of story, unless the marketing does what Barbie did and makes the movie feel like a unique experience. I’d say it’s equally in the hands of the director and the marketing team.

[Mr. X]

It begins with Supergirl drunk on an alien world, disheveled and kind of a wreck....... it's like, the starting point of the series. She's in that exact f'kn trench coat.

So you use ONE RECENT RUN as your example. Not the countless others? A run written during a time of writers looking to dry rot everything they touch and tear things down like angry children.

Yeah that's pretty myopic.

That's more of an example of what's being complained about - someone ignoring a character and turning her into some mess.

"hey... giggle giggle... snicker snicker... what if we like... giggle giggle... total make Santa evil....hee hee".

[Femina]

It begins with Supergirl drunk on an alien world, disheveled and kind of a wreck....... it's like, the starting point of the series. She's in that exact f'kn trench coat.

So you use ONE RECENT RUN as your example. Not the countless others? A run written during a time of writers looking to dry rot everything they touch and tear things down like angry children.

Yeah that's pretty myopic.

That's more of an example of what's being complained about - someone ignoring a character and turning her into some mess.

"hey... giggle giggle... snicker snicker... what if we like... giggle giggle... total make Santa evil....hee hee".

I'm using the run they specifically cited as the run they are adapting from the very beginning. I merely did not infer that they would choose to adapt Woman of Tomorrow... but like, Supergirl is super nice and chaste and in a perfectly healthy psychological space.

I'm simply pointing out that you've all chosen a strange time to suddenly be annoyed by this considering you've had, since the film was announced, to educate yourselves as to the source material for the project.

It indicates to me, that you did NOT read the book, nor intend to read the book, nor care enough to read the book... while being the voices that typically cry about 'woke' stuff being produced for people who 'don't actually ever buy the products being made catering to them' etc. etc. ad nauseum. Well I am 'the Woke' and I've read the book and knew what they were going for from the moment they announced the project... but it doesn't really seem like YOU are reading them so... *shrug* what is it that you really want?

[shevek]

It indicates to me, that you did NOT read the book, nor intend to read the book, nor care enough to read the book... while being the voices that typically cry about 'woke' stuff being produced for people who 'don't actually ever buy the products being made catering to them' etc. etc. ad nauseum. Well I am 'the Woke' and I've read the book and knew what they were going for from the moment they announced the project... but it doesn't really seem like YOU are reading them so... *shrug* what is it that you really want?

Mr. X may not have read it (I can't speak for him on that), but I did.
I noticed right away that the movie was going to be based on Woman of Tomorrow, so I read the mini-series a while back,
and not only that, I believe I even commented on that mini-series in its own thread in the comics subforum!

In fact, I'm actually up to date on quite a few superheroine-led comics series recently, as I've been following
books such as the Rogue Savage Land mini-series, the Fire and Ice mini-series, and the Power Girl and She-Hulk ongoing runs.

"Feminism", as it were, now means that there are pretty much as many female-led titles at Marvel and DC as there are male (almost every X-Woman currently has her own side book, for example!). It's quite a lot to follow now, but I'm certainly willing to wade through them to spot any hotness which might still occur.

Also, no disrespect meant whatsoever, but you are the one who brought up 'woke' in this thread.
I personally did not use that term when describing the shortcomings of filming Woman of Tomorrow as the Supergirl reboot for DCU.
All I said was that Tom King wins Eisners because the award panel tends to be progressive, and therefore they prefer the themes he tackles
in his stories, which tend to be emotion-heavy and deconstructive. James Gunn probably chose the story for that reason.

I still hope we'll all find something to enjoy in the Supergirl film when it comes out next year. If there is going to be another wave of superheroine fetishists beyond the few that may have arisen from the CW series, it's certainly going to stem from that movie.

So let's hope that Gunn's ablazing with peril and tight spandex, shall we?

[Femina]

It indicates to me, that you did NOT read the book, nor intend to read the book, nor care enough to read the book... while being the voices that typically cry about 'woke' stuff being produced for people who 'don't actually ever buy the products being made catering to them' etc. etc. ad nauseum. Well I am 'the Woke' and I've read the book and knew what they were going for from the moment they announced the project... but it doesn't really seem like YOU are reading them so... *shrug* what is it that you really want?

Mr. X may not have read it (I can't speak for him on that), but I did.
I noticed right away that the movie was going to be based on Woman of Tomorrow, so I read the mini-series a while back,
and not only that, I believe I even commented on that mini-series in its own thread in the comics subforum!

In fact, I'm actually up to date on quite a few superheroine-led comics series recently, as I've been following
books such as the Rogue Savage Land mini-series, the Fire and Ice mini-series, and the Power Girl and She-Hulk ongoing runs.

"Feminism", as it were, now means that there are pretty much as many female-led titles at Marvel and DC as there are male (almost every X-Woman currently has her own side book, for example!). It's quite a lot to follow now, but I'm certainly willing to wade through them to spot any hotness which might still occur.

Also, no disrespect meant whatsoever, but you are the one who brought up 'woke' in this thread.
I personally did not use that term when describing the shortcomings of filming Woman of Tomorrow as the Supergirl reboot for DCU.
All I said was that Tom King wins Eisners because the award panel tends to be progressive, and therefore they prefer the themes he tackles
in his stories, which tend to be emotion-heavy and deconstructive. James Gunn probably chose the story for that reason.

I still hope we'll all find something to enjoy in the Supergirl film when it comes out next year. If there is going to be another wave of superheroine fetishists beyond the few that may have arisen from the CW series, it's certainly going to stem from that movie.

So let's hope that Gunn's ablazing with peril and tight spandex, shall we?

Yes, I was responding to Mr. X specifically, who commonly bandies about the argument that people he doesn't agree with don't actually buy or read comics to begin with.

At this point, it doesn't really matter who mentions 'woke' anywhere, it's on everyone's mind waiting to be bandied, so better to just own it no? Especially when it makes my point. I think what I said stands for itself in the context of my reply to Mr. X. If HE isn't reading the comics he claims the 'woke' aren't reading, but I 'the woke' am, then he doesn't really have a soapbox to stand on.

[Mr. X]

People crap on old material to make money and for social justice and for that they should never be forgiven.

[Femina]

Ain't nobody talking about how the costume is pretty good either while the predictable, if late, riots over social justice commence. It's relatively panel accurate, even the trench coat which she won't be wearing for very long in the movie realistically, is DEAD on what she's wearing at the outset of the book. So it's looking like we can expect a pretty darn faithful adaptation of Woman of Tomorrow... which is good.

Cause it's a really good book with some real things to say... which is lacking in a lot of Superhero films of late (though it does at least seem like people are starting to actually TRY again recently at least some of the time)

[vnv7272]

I have not read the book. A general thought though. If supergirl goes to red sun planets to get drunk and party, how does she get there? And how does she get back?

[shevek]

I have not read the book. A general thought though. If supergirl goes to red sun planets to get drunk and party, how does she get there? And how does she get back?

Here's your answer, from Woman of Tomorrow #1. I assume they'll try to replicate this ship in the movie.

supergirl spaceship.jpg (141.11 KiB) Viewed 53574 times

But then, the next logical question arises:

Where did she even get the ship if she is on Earth, which doesn't make ships of that advanced complexity? Did she, or the Fortress of Solitude robots, build it out of Kryptonian blueprints? Or did she purchase one somewhere else in the galaxy? Because both Kara and Kal arrived on Earth in tiny cradle ships. They didn't have anything else with them.

Answering plot hole questions like these is similar to when the Supergirl TV series focused and obsessed for a couple years on "alien refugees" who lived on Earth, in a bid to demonstrate a prolonged metaphor for America's attitude towards illegal immigrants. The alien were a fait accompli in the story, and yet the series never mentioned: 1) where are all the ships they arrived in?, 2) why were they fleeing their home planets?, 3) why would they all come specifically to Earth if it's so primitive, 4) why do they all just happen to look humanoid just like Star Trek, and 5) if they were all fleeing the same threat somewhere out there in the galaxy (say, like some kind of conquering empire swarm), why didn't Supergirl and her friends ever go out into the galaxy to fight that threat so the alien refugees could return to their home planets in peace?

Of course, none of that was ever answered because the point of it was never to cohere logically in the overall story. I'm not sure if it's ever explained in Woman of Tomorrow why Supergirl has a spaceship, either. Perhaps Gunn will flesh that out in the movie - ultimately, he has to offer some kind of *reason* why she decides to go on drunken binges - perhaps because she is trying desperately to tamp down depression over the destruction of her home planet. This is somewhat similar to the way Yelena Belova's depression was brought up in Thunderbolts.

[brdiy]

Answering plot hole questions like these is similar to when the Supergirl TV series focused and obsessed for a couple years on "alien refugees" who lived on Earth, in a bid to demonstrate a prolonged metaphor for America's attitude towards illegal immigrants. The alien were a fait accompli in the story, and yet the series never mentioned: 1) where are all the ships they arrived in?, 2) why were they fleeing their home planets?, 3) why would they all come specifically to Earth if it's so primitive, 4) why do they all just happen to look humanoid just like Star Trek, and 5) if they were all fleeing the same threat somewhere out there in the galaxy (say, like some kind of conquering empire swarm), why didn't Supergirl and her friends ever go out into the galaxy to fight that threat so the alien refugees could return to their home planets in peace?

IIRC, these alien spaceships on earth were referenced during the Crisis on Infinite Earths crossover episodes and were used to evacuate most of the people of Earth when that Earth was facing imminent destruction.

[GWalb]

If SG was piloting the ship herself, we can only hope she was not drunk while doing so. In fact her just flying drunk without a ship could cause catastrophic destruction.

[Femina]

I have not read the book. A general thought though. If supergirl goes to red sun planets to get drunk and party, how does she get there? And how does she get back?

I mean it's DC... I'm sure there are some spaceships laying around... and if not, some 'supergenius' who can just wake up in the morning and make one.

[shevek]

Answering plot hole questions like these is similar to when the Supergirl TV series focused and obsessed for a couple years on "alien refugees" who lived on Earth, in a bid to demonstrate a prolonged metaphor for America's attitude towards illegal immigrants. The alien were a fait accompli in the story, and yet the series never mentioned: 1) where are all the ships they arrived in?, 2) why were they fleeing their home planets?, 3) why would they all come specifically to Earth if it's so primitive, 4) why do they all just happen to look humanoid just like Star Trek, and 5) if they were all fleeing the same threat somewhere out there in the galaxy (say, like some kind of conquering empire swarm), why didn't Supergirl and her friends ever go out into the galaxy to fight that threat so the alien refugees could return to their home planets in peace?

IIRC, these alien spaceships on earth were referenced during the Crisis on Infinite Earths crossover episodes and were used to evacuate most of the people of Earth when that Earth was facing imminent destruction.

Fair enough, I don't remember that part from the Crisis episodes. Although, that only answered my first question, and let's think about that: a small fleet of spaceships, fleeing some still-unknown threat (the Khunds? the Okaarans? who knows?), probably contained a few thousand refugee aliens, right? So how did those ships evacuate 'most of the people of Earth' which would obviously total several billion souls?

I still maintain that the aliens' presence on Earth wasn't sufficiently thought through, because it was never meant to be anything but a plot point which demonstrated a particular agenda.

And sure, Femina, if it's DC, I guess an interstellar-worthy spaceship or two could be just lying around that Supergirl could commandeer for her drunken spree through the universe. Although, to you, doesn't that seem more like something the Guardians of the Galaxy would do?
(James Gunn: one mindset, two universes)

[Femina]

And sure, Femina, if it's DC, I guess an interstellar-worthy spaceship or two could be just lying around that Supergirl could commandeer for her drunken spree through the universe. Although, to you, doesn't that seem more like something the Guardians of the Galaxy would do?
(James Gunn: one mindset, two universes)

This implies that I find Marvel to be more 'silly' or 'fanciful' or 'cosmic' than DC........... and I don't. In fact, I typically find DC is the more 'anything goes' superheroes franchise with a 'bit' more willingness to just go totally bonkers on a moments notice. Gun didn't invent the spaceship in the series, it was already there in the comic book. DC has the Lanterns, the Martians etc. There's ANY number of excuses for people to have spaceships in DC that questioning a character's ownership of one strikes me as a sort of 'I'm looking for reasons to be annoyed' style of nitpick that doesn't hold any real weight or relevance. She uses it specifically when in systems she can't fly around herself, and flies around herself otherwise, which is a perfectly logical thing for a Kryptonian to do.

GotG doesn't have a monopoly on spaceships.

[shevek]

DC has the Lanterns, the Martians etc. There's ANY number of excuses for people to have spaceships in DC that questioning a character's ownership of one strikes me as a sort of 'I'm looking for reasons to be annoyed' style of nitpick that doesn't hold any real weight or relevance. She uses it specifically when in systems she can't fly around herself, and flies around herself otherwise, which is a perfectly logical thing for a Kryptonian to do.

GotG doesn't have a monopoly on spaceships.

That's not what I meant. What I meant was that Guardians of the Galaxy has a penchant for tooling around the universe in spaceships.

It's a comedic space opera. Therefore, if Gunn has an affinity for that kind of activity in his films, then he is going to have a penchant to
pick a story for the DC Universe which has the same kind of feel. Which is possibly why he picked a miniseries sidequest (Woman of Tomorrow) about tooling around the universe in a spaceship, rather than any number of other main Supergirl storylines in the comics. Gunn has a pattern of what kind of superhero portrayals he likes to do (going all the way back to 2000's The Specials) and what scenarios he likes to put characters in, and this Supergirl movie follows that pattern.

As for Martians and Lanterns, those aren't good examples of tooling around the universe in spaceships. Martians go from Mars to Earth and back. That's it. And Lanterns don't need spaceships at all to travel - they have their rings, and they can get to Oa for their Lantern Conventions in seconds when they are called - the Guardians of Oa possessing technology so Clarkean that it's really indistinguishable from magic.

D.C. doesn't quite have the vast panoply of space opera stories that Marvel's cosmic side does. With Marvel, you can choose from the New Gods, or the Phoenix Saga, or the vast empires of the Skrulls, the Kree, and the Shi'ar.

With D.C., it's more like you've got Apokolips, the Khunds, the Okaarans, the Psions, and a few others, including the aforementioned Lantern Corps (and yes, I'm quite aware of the range of Lantern-related sagas - the cover artist for our comic book was also the colorist for the Sinestro, Hal Jordan, and Cruz/Baz books. I have quite an affinity myself for the hotness of Soranik.)

And the biggest example of DC space opera, at least involving spaceships, are the Kryptonians themselves. If you recall, there was a recent multi-season TV show (not covered at all on this forum) called 'Krypton', which was a dramatic space opera about the history of Superman's family on that planet.

So, yes I understand why Supergirl might have a spaceship lying around. Our fellow Forum poster wanted to see a photo of it, so I provided one.

(As far as space opera goes, Invincible gets pretty into that in the latter half of its 150-issue run, if you've never checked that out before. Highly recommended.)

[shevek]

DC has the Lanterns, the Martians etc. There's ANY number of excuses for people to have spaceships in DC that questioning a character's ownership of one strikes me as a sort of 'I'm looking for reasons to be annoyed' style of nitpick that doesn't hold any real weight or relevance. She uses it specifically when in systems she can't fly around herself, and flies around herself otherwise, which is a perfectly logical thing for a Kryptonian to do.

GotG doesn't have a monopoly on spaceships.

That's not what I meant. What I meant was that Guardians of the Galaxy has a penchant for tooling around the universe in spaceships.

It's a comedic space opera. Therefore, if Gunn has an affinity for that kind of activity in his films, then he is going to have a penchant to
pick a story for the DC Universe which has the same kind of feel. Which is possibly why he picked a miniseries sidequest (Woman of Tomorrow) about tooling around the universe in a spaceship, rather than any number of other main Supergirl storylines in the comics. Gunn has a pattern of what kind of superhero portrayals he likes to do (going all the way back to 2000's The Specials) and what scenarios he likes to put characters in, and this Supergirl movie follows that pattern.

As for Martians and Lanterns, those aren't good examples of tooling around the universe in spaceships. Martians go from Mars to Earth and back. That's it. And Lanterns don't need spaceships at all to travel - they have their rings, and they can get to Oa for their Lantern Conventions in seconds when they are called - the Guardians of Oa possessing technology so Clarkean that it's really indistinguishable from magic.

D.C. doesn't quite have the vast panoply of space opera stories that Marvel's cosmic side does. With Marvel, you can choose from the New Gods, or the Phoenix Saga, or the vast empires of the Skrulls, the Kree, and the Shi'ar.

With D.C., it's more like you've got Apokolips, the Khunds, the Okaarans, the Psions, and a few others, including the aforementioned Lantern Corps (and yes, I'm quite aware of the range of Lantern-related sagas - the cover artist for our comic book was also the colorist for the Sinestro, Hal Jordan, and Cruz/Baz books. I have quite an affinity myself for the hotness of Soranik.)

And the biggest example of DC space opera, at least involving spaceships, are the Kryptonians themselves. If you recall, there was a recent multi-season TV show (not covered at all on this forum) called 'Krypton', which was a dramatic space opera about the history of Superman's family on that planet.

So, yes I understand why Supergirl might have a spaceship lying around, since she can't fly around the areas of red suns. Our fellow Forum poster wanted to see a photo of it, so I provided one.

(As far as space opera goes, Invincible gets pretty into that in the latter half of its 150-issue run, if you've never checked that out before. Highly recommended.)

[Femina]

DC has the Lanterns, the Martians etc. There's ANY number of excuses for people to have spaceships in DC that questioning a character's ownership of one strikes me as a sort of 'I'm looking for reasons to be annoyed' style of nitpick that doesn't hold any real weight or relevance. She uses it specifically when in systems she can't fly around herself, and flies around herself otherwise, which is a perfectly logical thing for a Kryptonian to do.

GotG doesn't have a monopoly on spaceships.

That's not what I meant. What I meant was that Guardians of the Galaxy has a penchant for tooling around the universe in spaceships.

It's a comedic space opera. Therefore, if Gunn has an affinity for that kind of activity in his films, then he is going to have a penchant to
pick a story for the DC Universe which has the same kind of feel. Which is possibly why he picked a miniseries sidequest (Woman of Tomorrow) about tooling around the universe in a spaceship, rather than any number of other main Supergirl storylines in the comics. Gunn has a pattern of what kind of superhero portrayals he likes to do (going all the way back to 2000's The Specials) and what scenarios he likes to put characters in, and this Supergirl movie follows that pattern.

As for Martians and Lanterns, those aren't good examples of tooling around the universe in spaceships. Martians go from Mars to Earth and back. That's it. And Lanterns don't need spaceships at all to travel - they have their rings, and they can get to Oa for their Lantern Conventions in seconds when they are called - the Guardians of Oa possessing technology so Clarkean that it's really indistinguishable from magic.

D.C. doesn't quite have the vast panoply of space opera stories that Marvel's cosmic side does. With Marvel, you can choose from the New Gods, or the Phoenix Saga, or the vast empires of the Skrulls, the Kree, and the Shi'ar.

With D.C., it's more like you've got Apokolips, the Khunds, the Okaarans, the Psions, and a few others, including the aforementioned Lantern Corps (and yes, I'm quite aware of the range of Lantern-related sagas - the cover artist for our comic book was also the colorist for the Sinestro, Hal Jordan, and Cruz/Baz books. I have quite an affinity myself for the hotness of Soranik.)

And the biggest example of DC space opera, at least involving spaceships, are the Kryptonians themselves. If you recall, there was a recent multi-season TV show (not covered at all on this forum) called 'Krypton', which was a dramatic space opera about the history of Superman's family on that planet.

So, yes I understand why Supergirl might have a spaceship lying around. Our fellow Forum poster wanted to see a photo of it, so I provided one.

(As far as space opera goes, Invincible gets pretty into that in the latter half of its 150-issue run, if you've never checked that out before. Highly recommended.)

Aha. Well I'm not overly worried about it. The spaceship and such are all elements in the specific comic they are adapting, and Woman of Tomorrow isn't a slapstick 'losers unite' storyline. Gun isn't even directing it. Everything I've seen thus far feels like they're trying to do a fairly faithful adaptation of Woman of Tomorrow source material, which is a pretty 'heavy' storyarc.

On the other hand, I don't mind Kara having a sense of humor or anything. As I've said before, the conception of Kara as the chaste and uber-polite girl next door aren't precisely a give-in, as several iterations of Kara have been angry and vicious at her origin point, with an arc that LEADS towards 'Responsible heroine'

[Malice]

I'm just not sure the wider audience will connect with it unless it's sold in a way that screams “Girls just want to have fun” and makes it feel like a can’t-miss cinematic event.

Milly Alcock is stunning and I wish her the best, to her and this movie.

That said, raising eyebrows and trading POVs isn’t toxicity: it’s fandom. We give a fuck, which is why we question and nitpick every choices and share our frustrations, remarks and ideas time and time again.

As for the spaceship conversation, well, to me, it makes sense you'd need a ship to bring the booze back, and/or to travel with friends, etc.

It also makes sense that Kara would arrive to Earth in a spaceship in the first place, so not exactly a shocker. Especially if they're using it as a narrative device to show her side of the story regarding Krypton's destruction.

[shevek]

I'm just not sure the wider audience will connect with it unless it's sold in a way that screams “Girls just want to have fun” and makes it feel like a can’t-miss cinematic event.

Milly Alcock is stunning and I wish her the best, to her and this movie.

That said, raising eyebrows and trading POVs isn’t toxicity: it’s fandom. We give a fuck, which is why we question and nitpick every choices and share our frustrations, remarks and ideas time and time again.

As for the spaceship conversation, well, to me, it makes sense you'd need a ship to bring the booze back, and/or to travel with friends, etc.

It also makes sense that Kara would arrive to Earth in a spaceship in the first place, so not exactly a shocker. Especially if they're using it as a narrative device to show her side of the story regarding Krypton's destruction.

Well, neither of the spaceships that brought Kal or Kara to Earth are big enough to them ride in as adults, nor to back bring booze or bring along some friends, so that idea's out.

But you reminded me of something: There's a recent storyline (I forget in which comic, maybe someone can help me find it, please?) where Supergirl's Kryptonian spaceship literally becomes evil and turns into a nemesis which is secretly trying to destroy her. That would have been a fun movie!

[Femina]

I'm just not sure the wider audience will connect with it unless it's sold in a way that screams “Girls just want to have fun” and makes it feel like a can’t-miss cinematic event.

Milly Alcock is stunning and I wish her the best, to her and this movie.

That said, raising eyebrows and trading POVs isn’t toxicity: it’s fandom. We give a fuck, which is why we question and nitpick every choices and share our frustrations, remarks and ideas time and time again.

As for the spaceship conversation, well, to me, it makes sense you'd need a ship to bring the booze back, and/or to travel with friends, etc.

It also makes sense that Kara would arrive to Earth in a spaceship in the first place, so not exactly a shocker. Especially if they're using it as a narrative device to show her side of the story regarding Krypton's destruction.

Nitpicks aren't real criticism is the thing that's beginning to REALLY bother me in this space. We live in a world where reactionary 'critics' cry about the smallest things in stuff they hate (or even just WANT to hate) while acknowledging those nitpicks as the necessary storytelling devices they typically are in the media they love.

To harp on an old instrument: Bombs dropping in space, IS NOT a problem in a franchise that includes SONIC MINES detonating to grand effect in the very same outer space, it is instead a point of obsessive fixation latched onto in order to aid one's psyche in accepting that it hates the film primarily, in the case of TLJ, because they lacked the education to understand why they REALLY hated the film... now sometimes, such as the case with The Last Jedi above, that fixation is latched to a film that indeed has problems deep in its bones that the 'supposed critic' simply isn't qualified to or capable of recognizing... but just as commonly these nitpicks are lobbied at things that are perfectly soundly produced... or even worse, things that do not yet exist to BE criticized properly.

Instead of looking for nitpicks to be pissed off about, one ought to first explore logical reasons behind why a thing might be in the film and examine if that thing is ACTUALLY out of place or not given ones knowledge of the surrounding information... But no one wants to do that see because they saw a poster of Supergirl drinking a slushie in a trench coat, they've decided they are mad about it and hate it without really knowing anything about it (See Mr. X's rant above ignorant of the source material), and then SUDDENLY a few 'concerned citizens, are disquieted about the existence of spaceships in the DC universe!

That's not criticism! It's a form of obsessive compulsive, SELF-SELECTIVE ignorance. These people are CHOOSING to ignore the logic of a setting in order to reinforce their opinion that the thing is bad. Now I don't have AS MUCH a problem with this in released media, as often a film or project that is out and was anticipated, if it's full of blind critics nitpicking, it used to be there was at least a half decent chance the thing is bad in its bones and that's why it has so many non-critical thinkers harping on small details... but I DO have a problem with this new brand of 'precognitive' blind-critique which only serves to incept phantom problems with an unreleased media project into peoples minds AHEAD of time, to reinforce over the long period before the media releases in order to incite the SAME selective critical blindness into the minds of people who would otherwise go into the media with an open mind. I've seen this song and dance done about 50 times now, and if y'all want to tank the Supergirl franchise BEFORE IT EVEN COMES OUT, this is a good way to do that... but I don't really know WHY you want to do that. You're only curating out your own fetish into obsolescence the more you resist superheroine movies and material from which people might arrive here in the future... and we've had almost two years now to read the book and see what Supergirl film they were going to make. It's VERY late to suddenly have a problem with the particulars of the upcoming story... but it's not to late to start nitpicking small, unproblematic, details I suppose...

[dingerdude]

James Gunn from the Rolling Stone interview: https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/ ... 235389024/

Fair enough. Did you ever think about a bigger role for her in this film? Or was it always as we see it in the final cut?

Yeah, it was always that. When I took this job, Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow [the graphic novel that inspired 2026’s Supergirl] was, like, number one for me of the things I knew I wanted to do. Ana Nogueira just killed the script right away and saw what I saw in how the comic could be adapted to film, where [Supergirl is] even rougher in the film than she is in the comic, I think.

People who’ve read the Woman of Tomorrow graphic novel might have reason to be concerned about Krypto in Supergirl. You cut a scene where Ultraman punches Krypto because it upset audiences. If he can’t be punched in this movie, how do you have a scarier thing happen to him in a Supergirl movie?

Remember, this is a different movie than Supergirl. Supergirl is a way more rock & roll film. It’s a little bit rougher, in certain ways. She’s a tougher character. She’s not Superman at all. And so it’s not the same. This movie really is for everybody. And so is Supergirl, but it’s a little bit edgier in some ways than this film. Mind you,I’ve seen all the dailies, but I haven’t seen the cut. I see it next week, I think. So I’m very excited about that.

[rogeer007]

Dingerdude, thank you so much for that article, that should stop the ranting about Gunn’s intentions about this new Supergirl ! Guys, this is just a Superheroine movie, the costume and the girl looks great, just hope for the best and have fun !!

[shevek]

Dingerdude, thank you so much for that article, that should stop the ranting about Gunn’s intentions about this new Supergirl ! Guys, this is just a Superheroine movie, the costume and the girl looks great, just hope for the best and have fun !!

OK, great, let's just sit back and wait for this movie to come out.

[dingerdude]

First trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqdAEdkHrwo

[Femina]

It looks good. It's got some of that 'sameness' we're starting to get from the 'GotG' vibes...... but there's enough underlying elements of what makes GotG GOOD in there too. The dialogue, for starter's, is darn good. "Krypton didn't die in a day, the Gods are not that kind." and "He see's the Good in everone, I see the truth." are good lines written and performed with the gravitas they need... and if any DC book was begging to be shot in the style of a GotG movie to begin with... it was Supergir: WoT.

I know a lot of people here never read Woman of Tomorrow as evidenced by the many earlier arguments of people complaining about what Kara looks like in the earliest promos despite having had years to look up the story that is being told here... but it's not silly tale. It's the story of a woman with survivor's guilt and struggling with the genocide of her entire race (Something Clark never really has to contend with since he never KNEW Krypton) and CHOOSING to be a hero for somebody who needs one in spite of a lifetime of hard shit that would lead a great many people down another path.

She's not in the costume much in this trailer here, but what we do see, she looks pretty darn close to how you'd imagine Supergirl should look in the flesh, probably Moreso than anyone whose previously played her. Maybe it's just that she's still so young whereas I feel like all previous Supergirl actresses are cast a bit too old to be the 'classic' Supergirl. IDK. Moreover, she's got the CHOPS to perform here, which I'd argue has been lacking in basically every other Supergirl adaptation....................... in fairness Sasha Calle didn't get to do much performing at all in the Flash to judge how she might have stacked up given more opportunities, she's BARELY in that movie... but of course she was NOT playing the classic 'iconic' Supergirl to begin with.

I hope the film winds up as good as its trailer... Superheroine media is in DIRE need of a GOOD movie. I can now begin to feel optimisitc.

[sneakly]

First trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqdAEdkHrwo

Loved the trailer. She has a dirty-sexy way about her, the visuals were great and she has Blondie, the epitome of 80's sexy-tough banging in the background. Kind of a Jessica Jones attitude...

[Malice]

It looks good, and I stand by my first impression of Milly Alcock as Supergirl: Great choice!

The trailer showed just enough to pique my curiosity, though not enough to hype me.

No major red flag, but I worry that the quick shot of Supergirl in full costume might be all we get in the movie.

[Visitor]

My worry is we seen the best parts. Finally some humor that the recent WB movies mostly lack. You don't see Superman say this kind of stuff.