Led by writer-director and film executive James Gunn (“Superman,” 2025) and his longtime producing partner Peter Safran (The “Conjuring” film series, 2012-present), the DC Universe’s (DCU) sophomore feature film “Supergirl” stars Milly Alcock (HBO’s “House of the Dragon,” 2022-2024) as the titular character, who’s joined by Ruthye (Eve Ridley; Netflix series “3 Body Problem,” 2024-present) on an intergalactic race against time to save her superdog Krypto from certain death.

Craig Gillespie, known for directing “I, Tonya” (2017) and “Cruella” (2021), both stylish films about fierce, complicated and morally multifaceted women, is credited as the director of “Supergirl.” On paper, this should be a no-brainer pick—Kara doesn’t exactly feel like a conventional superhero.

There’s just one caveat: “Supergirl” feels like anything but a Craig Gillespie film. His frenetic, visually stylish language has all but disappeared in a movie that desperately needed his eye to improve its biggest problem: a painfully derivative story that’s bound to leave you with heavy déjà vu throughout the film’s runtime.

Based on the comic book series “Woman of Tomorrow” (2021-2022) by fellow DCU creative Tom King and Bilquis Evely, the story—which doesn’t necessarily diverge as much from the story beats of its source— is pretty much about a jaded hero “coming out of retirement” for someone who needs their help, a la movies like “Man on Fire,” “Logan,” and “The Equalizer.”

Not that this is a bad thing; the late journalist and author Christopher Booker posited that storytelling is built on only seven basic plots, retold in multiple divergent ways. Objective credibility of the claim aside, the sentiment itself is valid. The problem is not the story; more often than not, it is how it is told. And “Supergirl,” unfortunately, is not well told.

Written by first-time screenwriter Ana Nogueira, the script rushes through its story beats as if determined to stay within its brisk 107-minute runtime. All the viewers are left with is a blur that never quite invests you in its plot, and it is not for the principal cast’s lack of trying.

Alcock and Ridley carry the film on their shoulders and do their best to drag it to the finish line, but they can only do so much with a movie that’s content to be nothing more than mediocre. And when the movie cannot hold your attention, you’re bound to notice its unwelcome peculiarities.

Primary among these quirks is Gillespie—or the absence of his stylistic flourish. Instead, “Supergirl” has the unmistakable stamp of James Gunn’s filmmaking language all over it, and if other DCU titles are anything to go by, this could end up getting tired quickly.

That aside, there is also the problem of the film’s obsession with the Tatooine Cantina in “Star Wars” (1977), to the point that we get multiple reruns within the first two acts alone. If that ain’t enough, you’d find many eerie structural and technical similarities to Zack Snyder’s “Rebel Moon” (2023-present) series that keep reappearing through the course of a movie that both wants, and is ashamed, to be an origin story.

Music by Claudia Sarne exists. I wouldn’t be able to quite judge how good it is because the entire movie is stuffed with recognizable singles by artists like Halsey and Tom Jobim. Rob Hardy, whose collaborations with Alex Garland gave us dazzlers like “Ex Machina” (2015) and “Annihilation” (2018), is credited as cinematographer here, but “Supergirl” looks shockingly uninspired for his caliber.

The most frustrating part of the viewing experience of “Supergirl” is that, buried deep inside, there are two genuinely sincere exchanges between Kara and Ruthye near the end of the film that have more impact than any of the dull setpieces stuffed into the second half. There is genuine potential here, masked beneath exhausting superhero action comedy tropes we’ve seen an infinite number of times already.

(Oh, and Jason Momoa plays Lobo. Nothing else I’ll say can add anything more than that.)

The biggest sin of “Supergirl” is that it doesn’t wish to be anything, stand for anything, or explore anything thematically. Much like “socially conscious” advertising campaigns and rainbow capitalism, the latest DCU title is content to be a gimmick film. If that’s what you’re here for, you’ll be a happy camper. If you’re looking for a well-made female-led superhero movie, however, you’d be better off looking elsewhere.