Supergirl (1984) - Action, Adventure, Fantasy

Hohum Score



After losing a powerful orb, Kara Zor-El, Superman's cousin, comes to Earth to retrieve it and instead finds herself up against a wicked witch.

IMDB: 4.4
Director: Jeannot Szwarc
Stars: Helen Slater, Faye Dunaway
Length: 124 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 33 out of 160 found boring (20.62%)

One-line Reviews (102)

I recommend you clean your house, go help your neighbors with something or watch paint dry instead of watching this.

Its fun, exciting, and funny- a true classic

Although many critics disliked it when it came out, I found Supergirl to be a very enjoyable movie.

And the scenes of Supergirl flying over the Chicago skyline at nighttime are crisp and breathtaking.

It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen--boring, poorly written and acted, and woodenly directed--and that is saying something.

So it was with some anticipation that fans went to watch the latest Super film from the Salkinds and Pierre Spengler, the men who had brought us three enjoyable if uneven Superman movies in '78, '81 and '83.

What began as an eclectic and creative adventure gets painted in a banal, colorless corner…Not even an 11th hour Phantom Zone meeting with Peter O'Toole can save us from the muddled mid-section that marred any potential.

Her character is idiot, boring and silly and Dunaway chews her ridiculous lines with unjustified gusto because her Selena remains the lamest and worst of all the villains from the Superman-related movies.

Not a good movie, but personally enjoyable .

The film is so exciting, wonderful, lovely, and the film keeps you watching until the very last end credit!

While not an epic like "Superman: The Movie", "Supergirl" is an enjoyable movie and it has a special place in my heart just like the first Superman movie.

As pure escapism it's a very very entertaining film and that's what cinemas all about.

This movie is only entertaining as a look into the past and a peep show at Helen Slater in tights and a mini-skirt.

The movie would like to adjourn Superman' saga with the women as the lead-characters but the specials effects are like B-movie, the script is dull and silly, direction anonymous and then it ends for be digestible only from an audience lower to twenty years-old.

Rewrite after rewrite failed to bring forth a coherent, logical, enjoyable script--even in the 138 minute director's cut.

However, Supergirl has an interesting plot and is quite the entertaining film and loads of fun.

If you know the facts, you will see how enjoyable this film is...

It's fascinating because of it's ineptness.

A gentle tale worth watching with a relaxed mind.

Three successful "Superman" films starring Christopher Reeve led to this uninspired mess that has Helen Slater starring as the boring title character.

The picture has any merits: French director Jeannot Szwarc gives to the movie the right atmosphere easy and free and the photography with bright colour makes the images such a really comic book, the music-theme from Jerry Goldsmith was wonderful and all this does to tolerate the absurd screenplay by David Odell and the banal dialogue.

boring and rubbish.

Alan Humes photography is simply stunning and Jerry Goldsmiths Themes are superb.

Plenty of action, a decent plot, good performances, and awesome special effects make this movie very entertaining.

Meanwhile, the only action sequences are a few boring and prolonged battles between Supergirl against Selena's wind-gushing spells.

Mia Farrow is bland and Peter O'Tool turns in an "oh well the planet will blow up" delivery.

Faye Dunaway was mildly entertaining as Selena, the sorceress.

All in all - Supergirl is messy, boring and packed with goofs.

There are some brief moments where there is nice cinematography, but the picture seems to commit the ultimate film evil- that it is boring.

Unfortunately, Faye Dunnaway is left with very little to do despite be a cause for a multitude of special effects as her acting in this seemed unmotivated and formulaic.

First time I saw this movie was 2 days after the premier in Stockholm and I walked out after 40 minutes.

Peter O'Toole hams it up for all he's worth (whilst still managing to look distinctly bored), Simon Ward has a blink-and-you'll-miss-it role with a 'what the hell am I doing here' look on his face, and Faye Dunaway was - for me - miscast (although she seemed to be having fun).

I would venture a guess that David Odell's original storyline (and I mean original as in "fresh") was probably diluted by Supergirl Mythos concerns: for example, you've gotta have Midvale, the school, the whole Linda Lee Danvers secret identity thing etc, etc. That's is probably what pulled the focus away from this new and potentially intriguing story idea.

The movie is a 2 hour+ ridicules bore-fest, without even a good camp-value.

But really Dunaway is the only reason for watch this movie because her camping is so over-the-top and her appearance is so bad than she becomes fascinating to watch in its terribleness.

My analysis of some of the confusing plot points in the movie.

Remember how stunning the non-CGI props/sets/effects were in the opening Krypton sequence of 1978's "Superman"?

There is a monster which really is out of place and totally unexplained really and seems to leave a lot of the film empty and badly scripted.

Hart Bochner's contrived "romance" is embarrassing, especially the poetry scenes.

My favourite scene is when Supergirl is flying over Chicago looking for the Omegahedron - the beautiful aerial scenery is just breathtaking, and paired with Goldsmith's score is nothing short of beautiful.

By the way, is there anyone over six years old who believes that Peter Parker could've made such a stunning costume by himself when it took a small army of designers and seamstresses to make the ones used in the movie?

A supermess, but still intriguing.

Very Enjoyable .

Actually quite action-packed and entertaining.

It is cheesy, often boring, and while I felt sorry for O'Toole, Dunaway and Brenda Vaccaro, I was completely underwhelmed by Helen Slater who in a highly anticipated film debut seemed so in need of stronger direction.

Just about everything else this movie attempts comes off insipid and boring to anyone with a critical eye.

Some other, some typical, usual Superman villain and be done with it… this movie is waste of time and money… the only thing good is music.

it was one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

Cheesy, campy superhero flick is entertaining and heartwarming despite itself .

The opening and end scenes (Supergirl's origins in Argo City and the final battle between Selena and Supergirl) are downright laughable and totally uninspiring.

They just want to be pretty, the music is very bland and almost like not their and doesn't engage me in the film.

The audio commentary with Szwarc is dull and tedious, filled with banal or obvious observations, repetitive opinions, vague answers, frequent misunderstandings and awkward pauses.

I think I watched perhaps the worst movie ever made...

Unless you really like the superman movies, or are under the age of six, the movie would probably be utterly boring.

If Helen Slater on movie-debut was really wonderful as Supergirl and for me she's a perfect choice for the role, Dunaway as the evil witch was utterly unbearable.

As fascinating as a train wreck, "Supergirl" definitely beats "Plan 9 from Outer Space".

My recommendation is that this movie is a cure for insomnia.

Watch this and you will enter a Phantom Zone - of boredom...

the movie is very slow at times,in fact it can be downright boring.

But this is a fun film, and that makes up for any shortcoming, because it is actually enjoyable to watch.

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.

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.

It was barley watchable at times and just utterly boring and uninteresting.

If we ignore that flaw, this movie is really beautiful and entertaining, and most of all, it's really well done.

Although the problems the screenwriter is guilty for dialogs among the worst in movie history, for a plot full of holes and nonsense but especially he's responsible for a villainess absolutely groundless and dull that represents the real movie's disappointment.

The superhero is uninteresting as Slater is simply a poor actress.

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.

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.

Good to while away a slow afternoon .

It was in retrospect that I realized the movie's script essentially copied in color-by-the-numbers fashion the script of Superman I, this time done in a duller and less interesting manner.

A Very Enjoyable Adventure .

Still it was a fun way to spend a rather dull Monday afternoon, and I give this film a far higher rating than it deserves because of Peter's superb performance.

Magically, the demon with her bore food and Bianca all fade away through the mirror to the Phantom Zone.

* * (2 out of 5) Supergirl Directed by: Jeannot Szwarc, 1984 Tedious, hokey and bland superhero movie.

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.

The pacing is dull and many scenes are badly scripted (and acted).

audience, failing miserably at the box office and with every major critic promoting it as garbage; my favorite critic, Leonard Maltin called it "a superdrag: dull, long, and heavy-handed.

The narrowness of dull rival is testified from the fact that even if seems be part of her plan for world domination, the witch is more worried to be able to have a man more young than her.

But Helen Slater was pitch-perfect - and gorgeous - as Supergirl (it's a shame she never got to repeat the role), Hart Bochner was spot-on as the himbo/'dude in distress', David Healy was entertaining as the headmaster, and Peter Cooke (always a favourite of mine) was funny.

We had these fantastic players, set against fantastic backdrops, but we went through a slow story hoping it would pick up.

I first saw this movie when i was still a kid, and I enjoyed it then, as would all other children.

However, when the movie is taken as a whole, I found it enjoyable and entertaining.

Literally nothing happens until an incredibly slow, unexciting sequence with a tractor.

Tedious, boring and technically lacking in all aspects.

Most action and suspense scenes are trite and silly and the story never really makes any sense (or takes off.

The "Making of" featurette was rather boring, as they usually tend to be.

Helen Slater, Faye Dunaway, Peter O Toole, Jeannot Szwarc, Jerry Goldsmith, and Ilya Salkind all did their absolute best to make sure that this film is a thrilling experience, and I think they have done their job.

The story is trite and the action sequences are muddled with silly attempts at comedy.

This film however is so bland and stupid that this 1984 film comes across like a British made 1960's film.

Anyway, this movie is very stunning, with powerful effects, and even better acting by Helen Slater as "Supergirl".

While the actors try really hard to make things entertaining, the cinematography is competently shot and the music well composed, it is ultimately not enough.

This is just pointless.

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.

And, except for the drawn-out ending, is paced very nicely.

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.

Square-jawed Hart Bochner, known for playing bully jerks in BREAKING AWAY and THE WILD LIFE, is terribly miscast as a construction working stud, Ethan, put under an intense love potion spell by Selena that winds up being accidentally unleashed on Kara – a Sleeping Beauty to Selena's Evil Queen with Ethan her dopey Huntsman.

the stunning Helen Slater, a perfect ten (still beautiful today) Perhaps some day I'll get to see the director's cut and be able to rate this film more highly.

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.

Both are breathtaking and unforgettable, in amazing "iconic" costumes.

An enjoyable film .

Hart Bochner is dull as the love interest.

Except for the absolutely, fabulously beautiful Helen Slater, her name-brand cast mates, the energetic score, and the high-flying photography, the movie is rather ho-hum, compared to other movies featuring DC superheroes.