Supergirl (1984) User Reviews

Not a good movie, but personally enjoyable

[Biggs-4 · 5/10 · 8 July 1999]

It could be because I was six the first time I saw it and had a crush on the girl that played supergirl for a long time thereafter, but I enjoy the movie. The special effects are horribly dated compared to what we have become use to in movies, and the acting is not much better. Unless you really like the superman movies, or are under the age of six, the movie would probably be utterly boring. The only good thing that I can say about the movie is that I like it, but I don't know why.

inventive, creative, HIGHLY underated, artistic

[Andras_J · 5/10 · 27 November 2002]

I could make this very long, or I could make it strict. stricted? yes... This is a truely wonderfull movie that on a mainstreame level has never gotten the attention it deserves. Faye Dunaway is a excellant adversory to Helen Slater and almost everyone in this movie seems to have a great chemistry together wich is outputed highley during it. The special FX are wonderfull and were advanced for its time, many in the movie even to today's standards. It has its roots in artistic litrature, it has heart, because the movie is about a teenager there is a vulrability to it wich feels more humane and personal to a level of a teenager myself...unlike the Superman movies where you simply feel "yes, he's super...he can do anything. good for him" This movie suffered for many reasons wich isn't about its story. It was marketed purley as a Superman "action sueprhero" sort of movie. When the fact is there is a more gentile apraoch to this film, sourcery, love and lots of imaginative things wich make it very unique to the superhero genre. unfortunatley it doesn't do it much favours considering to many it is the worst superhero movie ever. Everything about this movie is very imaginative and creative. From Supergirl flying out of a lake without getting wet to her almost flawless flying ballet (THATS when u believe a person can fly. Unlike Supermans blue screen FX) and the highly inspireing fair ground scenes. This is purley fantasy. Not a Spiderman/Superman action superhero movie wich it was promoted to be. So its real targeted audience didn't want to see it as its trailer and promotion didn't look like "their sorta thing" and the people that did see it were dissapointed as it wasn't what it was said to be. so let me say...STUPID marketting team!simply...its like making American Pie SOUND LIKE the matrix. Many people saw Supergirl and did not expect to see many of the things they saw.

If this film was marketed the way it should have been and released the way it should have been (some countries got a seriously bad edited version wich effected the charactors allot) then this would have been the success everyone thought at the time and still deserves to be This is a great movie and its one of my favourites. I don't think I could praise it enough. I think its not what many people wanted ot see back then though...they wanted explosions, action and they wanted Superman to fit into this film.

I think the fact that Supergirl arrived on earth in the supercostume without no actual logic was bad. Because firstly you need rules, and even more so in fantasy movies. Because it may be fantasy but you still should believe it. I think it could have easily been written in for Supergirl to get her costume. Zaltar could have made her it because she is a big admirer of her cousin Superman. But no, unfortunatley it isn't once explained how and were she got her costume from. Also...the instant costume portrays that she is an instant hero and she wasn't wich let many people down. As she was still nieve, cute and girly and not the strong wilded heroine she turned out to be at the end.

Also, this movie arguable did not fit into the superman mythology very well...But so be it. There is no flaw in this movie that could effect the enjoyment and believability of the movie. On its DVD release there are more visual flaws then I saw on its video release wich is surprising. Not many however but on her first ever flying shot there are...wich makes me cringe. HOWEVER, I am still to see better better flying in a movie that isn't from Supergirl. Highlights of this movie deffanitly are Supergirls flying ballet (you will never see anything as visually wonderfull and pretty as this in a film) and Supergirls scenes with Ethan. This movie is full of heart and art, with beautifull actors and its all acompanied by a wonderfull score wich captures allot of emotion and depth.

I will end this review with that you WILL believe a girl can fly. Because most of the time...it is live flying and not against a screen (when will you learn Superman?)

You're believe a girl can fly... and if you don't "Supergirl fans don't care!"

[GABaracus · 5/10 · 26 March 2005]

I have loved this movie ever since I first laid eyes on it and have always thought it was far far better then Superman III & IV. Helen Slater was perfect as Supergirl (I had a major crush on her), Faye Dunaway was campy as the evil witch Selena and Peter Cook was rather amusing as her boyfriend Nigel.

I first saw this movie in it's director's cut form when it aired on UK TV as a Premiere in the late 80's (yes, the director's cut "was shown" in the UK, regardless of what fans may have read on various websites. The only version shown after that was the "International Version" as it is known in the US which was missing various scenes from the director's cut but still had more footage in it then the cut-down US version. Jerry Goldsmith's score, while not as classic as John Williams Superman is still a great music score and I have never met anyone who did not name the main title music as either Superman or Supergirl to this day.

The reason this movie flopped at the Box-Office in the US was mainly because of poor-marketing, cuts to the US version by it's second distributor Tri-Star (Warner Bros. originally were to release this movie), certain slackers from the company kept leaking the movie to pirates in the US and other countries before it was even released so they decided to sell the movie to Tri-Star who ruined any chance this movie had of being a US hit in 1984 due to their disastrous decisions involving everything to do with Supergirl... Warner Bros. didn't drop it because it was a bad movie for all of you "think you know everything!" people out there!. It's a shame because this is clearly the only reason this movie never had any sequels made.

"The movie actually did very well overseas" which isn't a huge surprise to me at all because Supergirl had actual decent marketing there, they also got a different "superior" cut of the movie which was released in countries outside of the US, this being the "international version" which is now available in the US via both a separate DVD and a 2-disc DVD set which also includes the even longer "director's cut".

This movie is a fun, enjoyable movie that does not deserve the reputation it has received over the years, the DVD is also one of the best releases I know of, giving the movie the justice it deserved unlike the poor handing of Superman II by Warner Bros., "Anchoy Bay are one of the best DVD handlers out there for Special Editions!"

7/10

To be perfectly honest...it was one of the worst movies I have ever seen!

[Boba_Fett1138 · 1/10 · 27 December 2005]

Just finished watching the director's cut of "Supergirl". Horrbile stuff!

Biggest problem with this movie is that it has absolutely no entertainment value. Nothing interesting or spectacular happens in this movie, mainly due to its poor imaginative-less story that is beyond ridicules and isn't even completely clear at times. Lots of things in the movie are taken for granted and are not explained or deepened out. The result of all of this is that halve of the time the movie doesn't make sense and the other halve of the time its just plain ridicules. For instance when Supergirl comes to Earth, she first discovers her amazing super powers and what does she decide to do next after that? She decides that she wants to go to an Earthly school! The movie is completely filled with ridicules and totally weird plot elements that are extremely lame and are even worser brought to the silver screen by director Jeannot Szwarc, who also directed "Jaws 2". The movie is a 2 hour+ ridicules bore-fest, without even a good camp-value.

The main villains of the movie, played by Faye Dunaway and Brenda Vaccaro, are supposed to be also the comical relief of the movie, just like Lex Luthor and Otis were in "Superman". But their characters are completely not funny. Their dialog is painfully bad at times and their actions and motivations are just too ridicules for words.

Not even other fine actors such as Mia Farrow, Peter O'Toole and Peter Cook can bring some life and/or credibility to this movie!

The only real positive thing I can say about this movie concerns the musical score by Jerry Goldsmith. Unlike Ken Thorne and Alexander Courage who did the music for Superman II, III & IV, he actually comes up with some totally new themes and doesn't recycle the old classic John Williams musical score from "Superman". It's a fine piece of work that is worth listening to outside of this movie.

Like many other bad movies, it has build up a real solid fan base over the years, which is fine with me, as long as you're staying objective and give credit where it is due. "Supergirl" is a horrible movie that only deserves credit for its musical score and for some of the flying sequences that were better looking as in any of the Superman movies. I wished I liked this movie better but I just can't. It was barley watchable at times and just utterly boring and uninteresting. At least the Superman movies still had an (campy) entertainment value, this movie has absolutely zero story and style and is a complete mess to watch.

1/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Oh dear! Such potential wasted

[virtualinsanity · 1/10 · 5 January 2003]

The hardest thing to swallow about how bad this film really is, is the talent on hand such as Peter O'Toole and Faye Dunaway - what on earth possessed them to put their genius into this appalling production is beyond me.

Helen Slater's acting is as cardboard as it gets. The principal storyline just stinks and the plot is so full of holes it's untrue. The special effects are just plain awful and everything in the movie looks like a bad prop from the 1930's version of Flash Gordon. But - enough about the good points. The one thing that really annoys me is the patronising but generally incorrect use of "Sci-Fi description". Some of the words they dream up are just so lacking in imagination and condescending it's nauseating. "Omegaheadron" I ask you!

In short, if you want to make history and tell everyone you have witnessed quite possibly the worst film ever made, then watch Supergirl. If, however, you value the relatively short time we have on this planet, then please don't waste 2 hours of it watching this trite, worthless drivel.

Good choice for Supergirl, but the plot is not good.

[Aaron1375 · 2/10 · 28 August 2005]

This is one painful movie to watch. The only character to cross over from Superman is the guy who played Jimmy Olsen and you can see why no one else would want to be seen in this one. They seem to change a lot of things around that were clearly established in the Superman series and then there is the horrible plot as well. Supergirl played by Helen Slater who is probably a good choice to play the role must retrieve a ball that keeps her people alive in inner space or something. All I know is that Supergirl somehow gets to earth by way of a lake. The ball falls into the hands of Faye Dunaway who somehow knows how to use it and she does all sorts of evil things as she is trying to get a younger guy to like her (kind of desperate, eh?). She somehow even sends Supergirl to the phantom zone...in Superman it was a mirror in space; here it is an entire world. All in all this one just suffers from a really bad script and very bad overacting as well. I have only seen the original theatrical release however, and not the 140 minute cut which may explain a few of my complaints.

Helen Slater brought Supergirl to life well, but. . .

[MovieBuffMarine · 2/10 · 24 October 2017]

Unfortunately, the Salkinds seemed to be at a point where their time at making "Super" movies was waning.

Supergirl came out on the wake of the lukewarm Superman III. Other than another Superman/Kal-el sequel, the Super series of the time needed some re-boot or re-boost. Supergirl seemed like the answer, but to no avail.

The good: Helen Slater in the title role seemed to bring to life Kal-el's cousin and fellow Krypton denizen, Kara with grace and natural beauty. She looked real good in the outfit and performed the feats of the character real well.

It was good to see Marc Mclure reprise his Jimmy Olsen role to tie this to the Superman franchise of the time. Christopher Reeve declined for a proposed Superman cameo, so Olsen had to do for a crossover.

The bad: a story that drags. We had these big names that participated: Faye Dunaway; and Peter O'Toole; plus a newcomer that brought Supergirl to life gracefully. But great players are but a small part of a bigger picture which is the story. We had these fantastic players, set against fantastic backdrops, but we went through a slow story hoping it would pick up.

It never did.

This was Helen Slater's shot at a movie series and super stardom as she did the role beautifully. Tri-star and WB (who regained the rights) didn't want to go forward with the Woman of Steel after its dismal performance denying her that chance. Though she still went on to other roles in Hollywood (and seemed to be successful), this one would've propelled her higher had the movie been written better resulting in bigger audiences.

Helen Slater did Supergirl right, hands down. Unfortunately, the writers and everyone else behind the actors didn't do her or the film justice.

Supergirl can come rescue me any time!

[Coventry · 4/10 · 29 November 2004]

Okay, in all honesty…this is a pretty lousy film! The plot is awful and contains more holes than a bowl of Swiss cheese, while the editing and pacing look pretty amateurish. And yet you don't really care about all these flaws! Supergirl is cheerful kitsch with a gorgeous lead-actress and a bunch of great stars overacting (Peter O'Toole, Faye Dunaway, Mia Farrow... ). Helen Slater is Kara, superman's niece from Krypton who goes to earth herself in order to recover the lost Omega Hedron which is a power source for the planet. The mad raving amateur witch Selena found the Omega Hedron and wants to use it to obtain world domination! Yihaa! Helen Slater looks yummy in her Supergirl outfit – with miniskirt and tight top – and that's about all I remembered about this film. It is never explained how exactly this Omega Hedron works…or how Kara suddenly changes into Supergirl...or even who sewed that lovely costume. This is just colorful amusement with flamboyant visual effects and attractive stars.

Surrealist work of art

[imaloneroddy · 7/10 · 15 March 2020]

Truly I have never seen a movie that subverted my expectations like this one. It is so corny and hilariously ridiculous at times, but it is somehow...enjoyable? I am writing this two years after having seen it and I am unsure if I would watch again, but it's an experience for sure.

Not worth the effort, just like Superman III, IV and Returns

[firstruleofmethclub · 2/10 · 17 April 2015]

Set after the events of Superman III, but without Superman (whom is inexplicably off planet at an inter-galactic peace summit. despite there never having been a mention of non- Kryptonian aliens). Starring Helen Slater as Superman's magically existing cousin (from an entire colony of surviving Kryptonians, despite canon that after Superman II, Jor-El was the last living one). Honestly, I could go on listing continuity errors but I'm afraid at some point in the next few weeks, my keyboard is going to run out of batteries. So I'll just have to skip ahead to reviewing the film off of its own merits.

Eventually, sorcery (Superman's other weakness) was eventually going to have to be brought into the series, so I can forgive that lameness, most certainly. That's not what makes this a bad film. It's a combination of probably the weakest romantic plot (not subplot, which it really should have been), a chronically unenthused (to put in nicely) Peter O'Toole (Lawrence of Arabia, Troy, The Tudors), an overabundance of non-practical effects (which technology of the time was just nut ready for), nearly unbearable banter, and the flimsiest plot built of character being inconceivably stupid that make the film so bad.

But then, that's really the entire film.

At least Supergirl's alter-ego had more thought put into it than "adds/removes glasses" and Selena was an... Acceptable, I suppose, villain. But ultimately Supergirl sits with aforementioned Superman III and Quest for Peace as entirely missable.

20%

-Gimly

Overlooked

[timhayes-1 · 7/10 · 24 January 2007]

Supergirl is a fine film that has been unjustly overlooked in the years. For those expecting a straight Superman clone with a girl instead of a grown man, then it was probably a shock to have so many fantasy elements in the mix. Granted a man flying and stopping bullets is very fantastical, but his villains were always very grounded on earth. Lex Luthor anyone? So when it was announced that Superman's cousin would be getting her own movie, I'm sure everyone had their own preconceived notion of what it would be like. The fact that Supergirl is up against a witch and battles demons may have been too much of a stretch for most. Hopefully, the film finally gets its due now that it is out on DVD since it really isn't a bad movie. Helen Slater brings a wide eyed innocence to the role. Some have called Kara a half-wit but that is not true. She is merely a sheltered girl who has never seen the world and when she does get to she has trouble interacting with it. Peter O'Toole is his usual wonderful self as the founder of Argo City and Kara's mentor. Faye Dunaway does a fine job as well as the sorceress. Indeed most of the cast do just fine. The only real downer is Hart Bochner as love interest than. This guy should never have been let even near a movie set. Ouch! Still, Supergirl is good clean fun. Trivia buffs can watch for Matt Frewer in a small role as a lascivious truck driver.

Incomprehensibility

[davidmvining · 3/10 · 14 May 2022]

Well, that was something. Reeling from the financial failure of Superman III, the Salkinds were banking on this spinoff to rescue the franchise and their financial stake in the Super characters. It...it did not work. This silly look at superheroes versus witches lacks any sense of urgency even though the action is supposed to undo terrible things. Instead, we get a full act of filler that derails everything that the movie never recovers from, not that its first act was anything terribly special.

In some kind of technobabble pocket dimension that exists for technobabble reasons, saved by Zaltar (Peter O'Toole), lives a group of Kryptonians preserved from the destruction of their home planet. Among them lives Kara Zor-El (Helen Slater). Zaltar uses a device called the Omegahedron to create art projects based on Earth life for...reasons. An accident sends the Omegahedron out of the city and to Earth, so Zaltar gets banished to the Phantom Zone and Kara decides to just go to Earth to get it back so that her people won't die. There's your stakes.

And then Kara gets to Earth and she instantly forgets everything about the movie's stakes. She emerges from a lake in full Supergirl gear for reasons, start smelling flowers and chasing bunnies. Meanwhile, the Omegahedron has fallen into the picnic of Selena (Faye Dunaway), a witch, alongside Nigel (Peter Cook), who is also a witch? I guess. It's not important. Anyway, Selena sees this orb fall into her food and she instantly decides that it will help her...conquer the world. Like...there's no second to consider what this thing is that she's holding. She's going to conquer the world with it.

Now, to talk about Plato for a quick second. He established several rules for drama that dominated Greek theater at its height in Poetics. A couple of these major rules tend to work best in theatrical settings, but one is pretty easily applicable to all forms of storytelling, Unity of Action. This concept is the idea that everything in a story should feed the central point of the story. Everything should interlace together to tell one thing, one story. So, when Selena decides to use the Omegahedron to conquer the world and this has absolutely nothing to do with Kara's central concern of saving her home, it creates a dissonance in the storytelling that creates the impression that we're not watching one story. We're watching several, and they clash.

It also doesn't help that Kara then spends the next half hour trying to get into and blend in with the girls at an all-girls boarding school. Why? I assume it's because superhero convention demands that our superheroes have secret identities, and what would a Supergirl movie be without Kara leading some kind of double life even if it has nothing to do with her story, has no effect on her ability to carry out her central mission and purpose, and she has no direct tie to the planet? So, sure, let's watch Kara get stuck in math classes (taught by Nigel for inexplicable reasons), save Lucy Lane (Maureen Teefy), Lois Lane's younger sister, from a maliciously delivered ball in a schoolyard game, and, because why not, let's watch Selena decide that a man is her primary concern now.

Wait...wasn't she going to conquer the world? Not after she got some tasty man meat from Ethan (Hart Bochner), a groundskeeper at the school that she sees once and decides must be hers, for some reason. And that becomes the plot of the movie for a bit. Selena wants Ethan, so she cooks up a love potion, but it backfires and Ethan ends up falling in love with Kara's alter ego Linda Lee (with brown hair instead of yellow hair). This is after, of course, a ridiculous action sequence where Selena uses her magic to power a piece of construction equipment to literally scoop Ethan up from the ground that Supergirl flies away with to save him. Because, why not? It's not like any of this matters.

Selena ends up getting Ethan back and sending Kara to the Phantom Zone where she meets Zaltar again. I'll say that Peter O'Toole not caring about his performance is still worth watching. He was nominated for a Golden Raspberry for his performance here, but it wasn't deserved. This isn't some great O'Toole performance on par with T. E. Lawrence in Lawrence of Arabia or anything, but I'll take half-drunk O'Toole over most actors desperately trying any day. Anyway, Zaltar leads Kara out of the Phantom Zone in the one special effects sequence that looks any good with a maelstrom that they must crawl past, and Kara gets out for her final confrontation. She wins, blah, blah, blah.

I felt like using witches in a Superman/Supergirl movie was a weird choice, but I was willing to go with it. This subgenre of comic book movies feels more natural with cosmic fantasy than spells and potions, but it's all in a similar vein of fantasy. They can intersect. The problem isn't that. It's that Selena's whole plot is nonsensical. It has nothing to do with Supergirl's motives. It also functions as a complete distraction from the actual story. It probably doesn't help that about half of the film is about girls being boy crazy. At best, this is silly nonsense, but there was real money behind this. It was the final nail in the coffin of the Salkinds having anything to do with the Superman franchise, and it was a deserving end. They had absolutely no idea what they were doing, and hiring Jeannot Szwarc, the director of Jaws 2, was the exact kind of strange choice I would have expected.

"I am Kara of ARGO city, daughter of Alura and Zor-El, and I don't scare easily."

[TxMike · 2 June 2003]

I am surprised at the high percentage of very low votes for this movie, SUPERGIRL. While it is by no means a great movie, it IS a good film which makes a comic book story come to life. Helen Slater was only 19 when she played Supergirl and it is hard to imagine a better choice. She is pretty and innocent, but has a fine figure and very athletic legs, very believable as Superman's cousin, come to Earth to return the omegahedron to her society, while Superman is on self-imposed exile. For a 1984 film the production values are very high, not one wire is shown in the scenes where Supergirl flies, unlike Superman IV which is very poor in comparison. And, except for the drawn-out ending, is paced very nicely. I have the director's cut, which is 2 hours and 13 minutes of film, and another 5 or 6 minutes of credits.

Faye Dunnaway is also excellent as the archrival, evil sorceress. To me that is the best type of role for her. The DVD has a remarkably good video transfer and is an altogther fun movie, for fans of the Super series of comic book characters.

And, at 1:45 into the film, several newly-introduced Honda Sabre motorcycles were escorting Dunnaway's car.

You Will Believe That A Movie Can Stink

[aesgaard41 · 5/10 · 19 December 2000]

There is an almost decent movie in all this, but you have to dig pretty deep to find it. The problem is that as popular as Supergirl is in the comic books, she can't carry a movie by herself. This should have been a sequel in the Superman series than a movie on it's own. Helen Slater is beautiful and talented but she is wasted in a bad script dragged down by an unrealistic plot and the over-acting of Faye Dunaway and her co-horts of Mia Farrow and Peter Cook. Peter O'Toole is a delight in everything he does as he is here, but the movie is just one big embarrassment. Slater was signed on to do two more sequels had this been a success, but the magic and sorcery angle was too ridiculous as was the concept of a bumbling witch playing with and somehow learning how to use a cosmic power source. Right there the movie loses gravity and coherence.Huge holes large enough for a train to go through sideways are throughout the script as in why does Supergirl waste time getting enrolled in school when her family's life is in the balance and how in the world did she know about her cousin as Superman. Superman, himself is conspicuously absent from the movie with a stupid excuse and it's never explained as to how Supergirl's family got in another dimension. Too much of the script strayed from the comic book, and in the process got lost. I can only really watch this for Slater in the costume, but much of her best scenes in the school have been edited out of the film. If they had centered it more on her acceptance by her peers, this may have been a better movie, but the fight scenes and sorcery is really bad. Jimmy Olsen and Lois's sister, Lucy, have been tacked on to connect the film to the Superman movies, but it really doesn't help.

Cheesy, campy superhero flick is entertaining and heartwarming despite itself

[Wuchakk · 5/10 · 22 May 2016]

Released in 1984, "Supergirl" stars Helen Slater as Superman's cousin, Kara-El, in a community of Krypton survivors who lose the mysterious orb that powers their city. Kara goes to earth to recover it, masquerading as a student at a girl's school, where she meets Lois Lane's sister, Lucy (Maureen Teefy) and, later, Jimmy Olsen (Marc McClure). Peter O'Toole plays the leader of the Krypton city who is imprisoned in the Phantom Zone while Faye Dunaway plays a witch, Selena, who lives at an abandoned amusement park. When she obtains the orb she gains great diabolical power. Brenda Vaccaro and Peter Cook are on hand as her assistants while Hart Bochner plays the romantic interest of both Kara and Selena.

Remember how stunning the non-CGI props/sets/effects were in the opening Krypton sequence of 1978's "Superman"? They were so good they hold up to this day. Well, you can forget that with "Supergirl." The opening sequences at "Argo City" are laughable by comparison. Furthermore, if you thought Gene Hackman was over-the-top as Lex Luthor, wait till you see Dunaway's campy portrayal of Selena. But I don't mean any disrespect for Faye since that's how her character was written and she does an exuberant job.

In any case, if you can embrace these factors the movie's surprisingly enjoyable, particularly the second act when Kara comes to earth, discovers her powers, and hooks up with the girl's school. Slater had a winsome quality and, although physically beautiful, her costume wasn't made to over-emphasize it. Her beauty stems from within and the movie captures this. At the same time, the movie stresses her femininity and doesn't make her more masculine, like they did with Linda Hamilton in "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (not that there's anything wrong with Linda in that film).

The film runs 124 minutes and was shot in Chicago, Manhattan and England.

GRADE: C+

Helen Slater gives a respectable debut as Superman's cousin in this average screen comic book

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 13 December 2021]

This breathtaking legend begins with Kara Zor-El (Helen Slater) who lives in an isolated Kryptonian community called Argo City, in a pocket of trans-dimensional space . Zaltar (Peter O'Toole) affords Kara to watch an unique and hugely powerful item known as the Omegahedron, a baseball-sized sphere which he has borrowed without the knowledge of the city government , and which powers the city . Nevertheless , after a mishap , the Omegahedron is blown out into space . Then Supergirl travels twenty million light years to save her house and the adventure is just beginning . Much to the distress of her parents (Simon Ward and Mia Farrow) , Kara follows it to Earth in an effort to recover it and save the city. There she has all the immensely power of the universe , but she still has to learn about love . Along the way , Supergirl is in pursuit of a magic paperweight , but an evil sorceress (Faye Dunaway) and her hoodlum (Brenda Vaccaro) want it too . Her legend is just beginning . Adventure runs in her family. The most incredible girl you'll ever meet. From out of another galaxy and into your hearts comes... Supergirl . Her first adventure on Earth. She'll be with you this summer. She taught him what it was to fly. He taught her what it was to love.

Big budget bomb in which Helen Slater made her failed movie debut and nearly killed her career with the help of Kryptonite . Thrilling first Supergirl outing with action-packed , impressive feats , spectacular fights , usual romance , hilarious set pieces and overwhelming scenes . Unexciting and unsophisticated story of a young woman , cousin to Superman , with superpowers , loosely based on the comic book series , which should delight the kiddies and occassionaly tickle the adults . Slater is great to look at , but is much better in almost any other movie . The picture has gaps , flaws and silly events as when in the process undergoing an inexplicably surprising transformation into "Supergirl" . While Dunaway is a terrifically villainess with awesome black magic powers . Along with both protagonists , here shows up a lot of familar faces , giving simple and functional interpretations ; however , this stellar support cast doesn't seem to take it seriously , such as : Peter O'Toole , Mia Farrow , Brenda Vaccaro , Peter Cook , Simon Ward , Hart Bochner , David Healy , Marc McClure , among others .

Here stands out the rousing and impressive musical score by Jerry Goldsmith, as good as the former Superman's John Williams soundtracks . Likewise , colorful and picturesque cinematography by Alan Hume , adding primitive but effective special effects . The picture was regularly directed by Jeannot Szwarc . This craftsman was born 1939 in Paris, France . He is a director and producer , known for Jaws 2 (1978) , Supergirl (1984) and his big success : Somewhere in Time (1980) . During pre-production for Jaws 2 (1978), production designer Joe Alves recommended him for the director's position because of the collaborative work they did together on Rod Serling's Night Gallery (1969). He directed the following ones : the 1984 theatrical film "Supergirl" , ¨Hércules y Sherlock¨ , ¨Revenge of a Blonde ¨, ¨You'll Never See Me Again¨, The devil's daughter¨, ¨Enigma¨ , ¨Santa Claus¨ as well as several episodes of the TV series "Smallville" about the teenage years of Clark Kent , Superman . Rating : 4.5/10 . This PG-rated release can be a questionable choice for some viewers , both youngsters and old .

A gentle tale worth watching with a relaxed mind.

[dwtaxi · 7/10 · 14 December 2006]

Watching Supergirl this week for the first time since childhood I see it with fresh eyes and a newfound appreciation of the movie. Supergirl must be considered separate and unrelated to the Superman movie foursome or it will fall short. There is not supposed to be a comparison. The Superman movies are action epics, Supergirl is the story of strength growing out of innocence.

Watching Supergirl now with an understanding of focus that I did not have when younger, I truly enjoy it. Helen Slater, Peter O'Tool, Peter Cook and Maureen Teefy all put in superb performances. Mia Farrow tends to overact the part of Selena, but then the character believes herself larger than life. Brenda Vaccaro could use a little more self assertion, but does alright. Marc McClure is of course an undeniably talented actor, though his part in this film is minor. I am forced to scream at the screen however; Why the hell do you wear a camera if you aren't going to use it when a major news piece flies into your lap?

I remember being dismissive of Supergirl when I was younger; due in part to the use of magic which has no part in the Superman films, but mainly I suspect due to the ludicrous man-eating excavator scene. This scene remains the major absurdity of the movie. Supposed to be terrifying it comes off as a rather poor imitation of the hundred Volkswagens from Herbie Rides Again. It isn't scary, its stupid.

Apart from that scene, Supergirl is good gentle viewing and a nice counterpoint to Superman.

It is hard to describe my exact feelings, but I do feel that standing on its own Supergirl should be considered a success and I deeply regret never having a chance to watch the sequels that were never made.

Started out liking it

[miamigringo · 1/10 · 9 April 2004]

I started out liking this film, with its fine cast and hippy-dippy Argo City, but the film eventually gets so boring and goes on and on and on.. Especially on the "director's cut" DVD - it has 30 minutes of extra stuff that should have stayed out. If this film were skillfully edited down to about 1.5 hours it would be bearable, but some of the lines are pretty stupid, and the Dunaway character is no more than a cardborad cutout villain, with a pointless Brenda Vaccarro running around squawking about nothing. Watch this and you will enter a Phantom Zone - of boredom...

C'mon, why don't people give this film a break?

[lonelydarling78 · 10/10 · 8 July 2006]

I personally enjoy this film immensely. It is a fun, free, and at times, spooky fantasy/adventure. In other words, it's a different type of Superhero film, and that's a good thing. First off, it's about a female, so the interest is more enchanting, I think. Secondly, it keeps more true to the superhero fashion, because it has monsters and magical evils that put people in peril. In Superman, the villain was a human, who was indeed, putting many in peril, but even so, it could have been more along the lines of fighting the green-eyed monster or something. Anyway, this movie is very stunning, with powerful effects, and even better acting by Helen Slater as "Supergirl". I just LOVE Faye Dunaway as the witch Selena. Peter O'Toole is great, and so is everybody else. I know it isn't Superman, but what else would be? This film is just a good ol' fashioned Superhero film, fun for all who should see it. Obviously, some may not like it, and that's okay. However, this film has a specialness to it that true adventurers will love! a 10/10!

While not as good as Superman I & II, far better than III & IV. Definitely deserves a look!

[grnlntrn2 · 7/10 · 26 September 2005]

The formula was there. Slater like Reeve (Superman) before her was an excellent choice to play The Girl of Steel. While Dunaway isn't even close to Hackman, she is still quite good as the campy villain. I was stationed overseas when I first saw this film, so I saw the international version (japanese subtitles and all) which did a much better job of making the film cohesive. Most people rejecting "Supergirl," saw the hacked up US release, which didn't do it justice. The Director's Cut is still available on DVD from Anchor Bay. Pick it up. This is most definitely worth a look! It's not the first time Warner Bros. has dropped the ball. Look at Batman & Robin. Clooney was bad enough. Arnold totally destroyed Mr. Freeze.

Porn parodies have better acting then this

[Marthian80 · 1/10 · 10 October 2017]

I like to watch comicbook movies, even the ones that were not very well received, and now it's time for this flick about the cousin of the Man of Steel.

Supergirl starts with showing a space city which happens to be an isolated Kryptorian community in a pocket of trans-dimensional space(?? I just quote this stuff from the internet, it's not explained in the movie what trans-dimensional space is...). Some wizard dude called Zaltar (Peter O'Toole) shows Kara Zor- El/Supergirl (Helen Slater) a baseball-sized object known as the Omegahedron which powers the city but can also be used to make cheap looking jewelry or big butterflies (??). Kara Zor-El creates a big butterfly, which promptly flies out of the plastic sheet(?!) covered window causing the Omegahedron getting sucked out into space and flying straight to earth, landing in the thee of a woman known as Selena (Faye Dunaway), who immediately recognizes it as a valuable artifact.. The Kryptorians are a little angry with their power source flying out of the window and they blame Zaltar who takes full responsibility and goes to live in the phantom zone. However, Klara jumps in a "space ships" (space egg would be a better description) and flies to Earth to get the power source back. She lands on Earth as Supergirl; having the power to fly, great strength, laser-beam eyes and frost breath. But instead of using those powers to get the stone back, she decides it's better to dress up as a schoolgirl, make friends with other schoolgirls and doing schoolgirly things because that's obviously the right thing to do... The Kryptorian city could only last two "days" (Earth days?) so hopefully the schoolgirl approach will make sure Supergirl get's the stone back in time!

Now I have seen some bad movies before but I think this is one of the worst ever for me. The only thing that was decent where some of the action scenes and some set pieces. The rest was just awful! The acting and the way that lines are delivered here is below the level of porn parodies. It looks like everything was just shot in one take after the actors remembered their lines. And yeah this movie is from the 80's so special effects where not what they are today but compared to the effects in the original superman (which came out 7 years earlier) this looks like stuff thrown together on a Sunday afternoon. The worst fake flying scenes ever are shown here.

There is also nothing explained who Supergirl is and how she survived the destruction of Krypton? And who is this Zaltar guy? It's also not clear what the villain character wants, other then some big muscled guy who she has the hots for. Lex Luther in the original Superman wanted to blow up California, that sound more like a comicbook villain then some woman seducing a attractive guy. And the only reason she battles Supergirl is because she also likes the big muscled guy? Really?

And don't get me started on the "join the schoolgirls!" part of the movie. My goodness, it felt like watching a parody of "Porky's Revenge" or some other B-class 80's comedy. Who thought that watching "Linda Kent's first day at high school!" made great stuff for a comic-book movie? This should be about superheroes not some dumb teenage crap. And when Supergirl finally could actually use her powers for the good, she just stands there in her schoolgirl uniform watching the town getting destroyed! And when she finally decides to do something she only saves the hot guy and nothing else! Worst. Superhero. Ever.

I don't know if there is a Supergirl porn parody movie but I think it has better acting, plot and special effects then this piece of utter garbage. This is the first time that I regret watching a movie and feel sorry for myself to waste two hours. I recommend you clean your house, go help your neighbors with something or watch paint dry instead of watching this.

Glad I'm not the only one

[MovieRotweiler · 15 April 2004]

I guess I was 7 or 8 when my parents took me to the cinema for the first time. They picked Supergirl as something fun and unthreatening. I have been hooked on film ever since! Supergirl is a hugely under-rated movie, and while I can take on board some of the negative comments you read here, I also think they're a bit harsh. Come on people (you know who you are), it's a fantasy film! If it played the same as Superman (another great), there would be no point in making it in the first place. Sure the magic angle is slightly odd, but what the hell, it's a fun film which doesn't take itself too seriously, but doesn't go in for over the top slapstick either (take heed Richard Lester!!). And of course the effects are a little dated, it is 20 years old after all (though many still look great). Jerry Goldsmith's score it beautiful and lyrical, as it should be, becoming triumphantly heroic when it needs to (The main theme is tremendous, even with the eighties electronic whooshes and eagle squarks). Helen Slater is gorgeous in the lead role, and considering this was her first major role, she does a commendable job. Then there's Miss Dunaway: first rate as always-you can almost see the scenery going down her throat, but that's part of the charm of the character. All the actors come off well, and if you ignore some bits and pieces (there's still some huge plot holes even in the Directors Cut!) you should have a great time. It would be interesting to see a remake that perhaps didn't stray so far from the source mythology (was the omegahedron in the comics?), but on the other hand, the eighties was a different time, and perhaps today's climate (whether the world could use a super-hero or not) is not right to relaunch the poor girl to Earth. One of my all time favourites, and I'm glad to see so many other fans on the IMDB. Let's lobby Anchor Bay for an official Region 2 version. My TV can't broadcast NTSC signals, so have to watch it in black & white, or in jerky (but colour) vision on a slow laptop. Peace. Out.

Pitiful...

[guardkid · 1/10 · 4 March 2001]

I'm not going to waste too much time writing about this one. Awful acting, awful plot, awful everything. This film makes the Superman series look classy in comparison! Everybody was miscast - Peter Cook, Faye Dunaway, Helen Slater.... A couple of words spring to mind .... boring and rubbish.

I wish I had my two hours back

[mlcamilli-80034 · 2/10 · 26 July 2015]

Wow. I really wanted to like this movie. I'm not sure what movie the positive reviewers watched, but I must have watched a different version. Thought that even if it wasn't a blockbuster it would be entertaining enough to sit and watch with the kids. I never saw it when it first came out. Wish I hadn't wasted the rental fee.

This movie made so little sense and, I hate to be so blunt but honestly, was just dumb. The only good thing about it was Helen Slater. Supergirl's world is going to die within days, if not hours, if she doesn't find the lost power source, and she treats it like a field trip. She's kissing boys and playing field hockey when she should be getting in touch with her cousin Superman to help her out (and seriously, he always knows when people are in danger, why doesn't he show up? I realize Christopher Reeves didn't want to play Superman anymore, but couldn't they have gotten somebody? This woman Selena is taking over the earth and he doesn't show up?). It was just painful to watch. Young kids won't mind if it doesn't make sense, but some of the scenes might be scary. Anyone else, I recommend you only watch it if you get it for free or you've already seen it and you know you like it. There are just too many negatives to list, and not any positives. Wait, one positive: You can get your kids using their brains by pointing out all of the things that don't make sense, the filming mistakes, or what the characters would be better off doing or not doing.

I like kitschy movies and silly movies, and I don't like to knock movies, but this time I wish I had my two hours back.

Supergirl Review

[Spideyfan-963-246215 · 2/10 · 9 September 2016]

Supergirl(1984) Starring: Faye Dunaway, Helen Slater, Peter O'Toole, Hart Bochner, Mia Farrow, Brenda Vaccro, Marc McClure, Peter Cook, and Mia Frewer Directed By: Jeannot Szwarc Review From out of another galaxy and into your hearts comes... Supergirl I'm going to be reviewing one superhero movie a month and well for this month(even though I wanted this one to be later) I got Supergirl. After Superman IV: The Quest for peace the name Superman became a product for money and no genuinely cared about making a superhero movie anymore. However they decided to change it up a bit instead of it being Superman again they decide to use his cousin Kara/Supergirl. After losing a powerful orb, Kara, Superman's cousin, comes to Earth to retrieve it and instead finds herself up against a wicked witch. This movie fracking sucks. By the look of this movie, you can tell that no one gave a crap about the source material which is very sad because I hate every single female hero in the DC except the three known as Supergirl, Starfire, and Zatana. Supergirl being my favorite. The producers said lets throw in a love story, let's make the villain an evil female who's jealous and wants to be pretty, manipulative and have everyone be her slave. We can't have Supergirl save the planet, or do something noble it has to be a giant cat fight, that's what happens when old straight white men write stories about strong young women. They just want to be pretty, the music is very bland and almost like not their and doesn't engage me in the film. Which I find to be very odd because I put the disc in and I hear the John Williams Superman theme in the main menu so I'm thinking maybe this movie might be a little engaging but no it isn't. The effects are terrible as well because they just look so much better in other 80 films. I'm giving this film a one out of five.