Tag: Movies

5 Comic Book Villains Who Could Be The Main Character

5 Comic Book Villains Who Can Be the Main Character

Published on by KyraLeave a comment

Happy Monday, Geekly Gang! Kyra Kyle here with another list of five. Today’s Top 5 list centers around comic book villains who could be the main character in a television series or movie. The DCU and DCEU have been better showcasing their villains. Penguin, Black Adam, Joker, Clayface, and even Harley Quinn have all had television shows or movies featuring them as the main characters. Marvel has been less prolific. This may be a Marvel-heavy list of five, but I’ll try to sprinkle in some DC Comics characters who haven’t yet seen the limelight. Let’s get started with our list of Comic Book Villains who can be the main character in a movie or television series.

Honorable Mentions

We have multiple characters who could claim an honorable mention spot, so we’ll run through a few here. Darkseid can and should get the Thanos (in Avengers: Infinity War) treatment, and Kingpin could have his own series akin to HBO Max’s Penguin. None of them make this list because this is more of an inevitability. While we won’t shy away from obvious choices (more on that with our top spots), we don’t want to include characters who are all but assured a movie or show. With that said, we’ll give a shout-out to anti-hero and sometimes villain Lobo. I’m writing this post early and haven’t yet watched Supergirl, but if Lobo captures fans’ hearts, he could easily get his own movie or show. Consider this the Penguin effect. Fans loved Colin Farrell’s portrayal of the character and demanded a show.

5: Vermin

Vermin is a strange choice, especially when he’s the only Spider-Man villain who made this list, but his inclusion makes some sense. I’d love to see a Marvel show, film, or special presentation of the Spider-Man story, “The Child Within.” Vermin is the main character in that story. Geekly has mentioned “The Child Within” in the past, but we’ll give you a quick breakdown. Vermin encounters a nine or ten-year-old child in the sewer. The child asks Vermin to help take him home. Vermin reluctantly agrees. He leads the child to a mansion (his home), but the boy is too scared to enter. We learn the child is Vermin’s inner child. This mansion is his family’s home.

“The Child Within” tells Vermin’s backstory. Vermin is one of Marvel’s most tragic villains, so what this show portrays may not be for everyone. But “The Child Within” explores identity and the power of acceptance. Both of these topics have a strong pull in today’s climate. This story is long overdue for a live-action telling. Make it happen, Marvel.

4: Poison Ivy and Bane

My head tells me Bane should take this spot. My heart insists Poison Ivy claims the fourth spot. I went with both. Let’s begin with Bane.

Bane seldom gets a fair shake on the big screen. Ironically, he was little more than Poison Ivy’s mindless pawn in Batman and Robin, and he served as an underboss in The Dark Knight Rises. Neither one of these versions does Bane justice. Heck. Bane often gets sidelined in his own stories. “Knightfall,” the storyline where Bane builds a Gotham empire, breaks Batman’s back, and arguably Bane’s most well-known story, pushes Bane aside to focus on Azrael (the replacement Batman), midway through its arc. Not everyone likes Tom King’s run on Batman, but I thought it did a great job showing Bane at his conniving best. “City of Bane” could showcase this underrated villain like no other big screen project has.

Simply put, Poison Ivy is a fan favorite. She co-stars in the Harley Quinn Animated Series, but has rarely seen the limelight on the big screen. Poison Ivy is more of a sure thing. I could easily see her featured in a future movie or show.

3: Atrocitus

Wonder Woman and Superman villains don’t lend themselves to solo movies too well. I can’t really see Lex Luthor outside the context of a Superman movie. I’d love to see that, but I question if it could work. I also didn’t want to include multiple Batman villains on this list, and Flash hasn’t landed as a big-screen superhero…yet. That leaves Green Lantern villains. Several could’ve made this list. Star Sapphire is more of a hero at this point. Nekron and Black Hand could certainly headline a film, but we may need to wait several years for the DCU to set up those characters. Sinestro is Green Lantern’s longest-running foe, but Atrocitus serves a specific purpose in Green Lantern lore. The Guardians of the Universe (the ones behind the Green Lanterns) make mistakes and can commit atrocities.

Hey! Atrocitus sounds close to atrocities. Coincidence? I think not. The Guardians destroyed Atrocitus’s home world and murdered his people. He gains the red power ring, fueled by rage (part of the emotional spectrum, with green meaning will and yellow fear), and goes on a revenge tour. Atrocitus has a clear goal. Fans could even root for him to succeed. This can make Atrocitus as compelling a villain as Thanos for a solo movie. Sure, Sinestro recruits his army of yellow lanterns, but his goals reek of selfishness. Atrocitus believes in a righteous cause. And I like the idea of the Guardians owning a checkered past.

2: Apocalypse

Ever since his first appearance forty years ago (1986), Apocalypse has been one of the X-Men’s most consistent villains. As the oldest known mutant, Apocalypse’s origin stretches back to Ancient Egypt. He has a simple philosophy: Survival of the Fittest. Apocalypse embodies this philosophy. And it’s this philosophy that makes Apocalypse a great villain with which to focus a movie or show. Funny how having clear goals makes a villain a good candidate as a main character. While I could see several Apocalypse storylines translated to the big screen, “Age of Apocalypse” may be the most fun.

“Age of Apocalypse” asks what would happen if Apocalypse got his way, where only the strong survive. This storyline contains some of the bleakest storylines in X-Men lore. There are too many to count, but believe me, they can tug at one’s heartstrings. And “Age of Apocalypse” hasn’t graced the big screen in earnest. I’d love to see A Pair of Lips, I mean, Apocalypse headline a Marvel movie or show.

1: Doctor Doom and Magneto

Doctor Doom and Magneto had to top this list. They’re the obvious ones. They’re two of the most recognizable villains in comic book history. They have compelling backstories, and I don’t believe Marvel has plans to give either one their own movie or show–at this time. Sure, Avengers: Doomsday includes Doctor Doom’s name in its title, but this team-up movie will include so many characters I can’t imagine Doctor Doom will get significant screen time. We need a Doctor Doom and Magneto story like Avengers: Infinity War had with Thanos. These are two of the most complicated villains in comic books. Both could single-handedly carry a movie.

That’s our list of comic book villains who could be a movie or show’s main character. Which comic book villain would you like see get their own movie or show? Let us know in the comments. Thank you for reading, and wherever you are, I hope you’re having a great day.

Whatcha Watching: August 2026

Published on by KyraLeave a comment

Happy Wednesday, Geekly Gang! Kyra Kyle here, and today, our writers share what they’ve been watching over the past month. Feel free to share what you’ve been watching over the past month because we’re all part of the Geekly Gang. I’ll get the post started with what I’ve been watching over the last month.

Kyra’s Movies

Netflix has some true crime documentaries that are wild, and then there’s Maternal Instinct. This may be the most bizarre true crime doc on the streaming giant. Maternal Instinct follows the actions of Taylor Parker. Before the events of this documentary and Parker’s crimes, Parker had two prior children. She wanted a third. Fun fact: Parker had a hysterectomy. She couldn’t get pregnant, but that didn’t stop her from catfishing her fiancé.

Yeah. Maternal Instinct gets strange. Throughout the documentary, I thought she must have had a mental illness. The doc briefly explained she has frontal lobe dysfunction, frontal lobe syndrome, which can cause cognitive, emotional, and behavioral symptoms. But like I said, Maternal Instinct glosses over this fact. Parker would get caught and go to trial. Her legal team didn’t use the not guilty by means of insanity plea. That makes sense. Most insanity pleas get denied. To date, only two people in the United States have ever received a not guilty verdict by means of insanity: one of them is Ed Gein. And in terms of how over-the-top it gets, Taylor Parker’s story sounds a lot like Gein’s.

So, Parker catfishes her fiancé, making him think she’s pregnant. She orders pregnant belly bumps from Amazon. She even springs for one that simulates a baby kicking. But at some point, she’s going to have to “produce” a baby. Months before she “became pregnant,” Parker served as a photographer at Reagan Simmons Hancock’s wedding. The two formed a bond and hung out every month or two after the wedding. Parker knew Hancock was pregnant soon after her wedding. Hancock’s pregnancy coincided with Parker’s fictitious due date. Well, Parker missed her “due date” by a couple of weeks. So, Parker YouTubed how to perform a C-section, drove to Hancock’s house, killed her, and took the baby still inside her womb.

Yikes! Parker’s case is bizarre. I don’t know if I’ve seen a more upsetting Netflix true crime documentary than Maternal Instinct. It’s up there with the most disturbing. But that makes me wonder. If Parker’s defense team chose to plead not guilty by means of insanity, would she have been the third person in United States history to do so? But Maternal Instinct glosses over Parker’s mental impairment. It didn’t factor into the trial. But I say that Parker’s case reminds me of Gein’s because she did things out in the open, in broad daylight. She pretended she “miscarried” the baby she cut from Hancock’s womb. She had to know a doctor would examine her. Her hysterectomy would be in her medical chart. Yikes! Just yikes.

I’m a sucker for small-market professional sports teams, so I follow the Portland Trail Blazers quite a bit. The “Jail Blazers” of the early 2000s were one of the most intriguing teams of that era. They came dangerously close to winning an NBA championship, challenging the Shaq and Kobe-led Lakers. I put the name “Jail Blazers” in quotes because the few members of the team who got in trouble with the law got caught with marijuana possession, which is now legal in Portland. “Jail Blazer” is a harsh term. Even at the time, I wondered if one of Bonzi Wells, Rasheed Wallace, or Damon Stoudemire had done anything worse than getting caught with weed. I did like how Untold: Jail Blazers showed the Dave Chappelle clip lampooning Wallace and Stoudemire getting pulled over by the cops. That clip is iconic.

Untold: Jail Blazers was eye-opening. I had no idea what happened to Damon Stoudemire after his encounter with the police that night. Afterwards, they raided Stoudemire’s house. Stoudemire is from the area, and still, Portland treated him like an outsider. Portland was unkind to the trio of players who brought excitement to the Pacific Northwest. They all but chased them out of town, not in small part because the young basketball stars had houses in predominantly white neighborhoods. Untold: Jail Blazers shows these young Trail Blazers as young. They made mistakes because they were young. Some of those “mistakes” of the early 2000s wouldn’t be mistakes today. And yet, the name “Jail Blazer” persists.

Before watching Untold: Jail Blazers, I used to refer to the early 2000s Portland Trail Blazers by that moniker: “Jail Blazers.” I did so out of affection. I never thought they were “Jail Blazers.” The term was a shorthand for remembering a stellar young team that had all the tools to win an NBA championship but fell just short. After watching Untold: Jail Blazers, I won’t refer to the early 2000’s Portland Trail Blazers by that moniker. Stoudemire, Wells, Wallace, and Zach Randolph deserve better. Fortunately, Portland has celebrated its early 2000s team. I don’t blame Rasheed Wallace for refusing an offer to return.

X-Men 97 Season 2 A Force to Be Reckoned With Jubilee

Kyra’s Show

I won’t go into too much detail with X-Men ’97. Season and I have been reviewing the series as it airs. I will say that X-Men ’97 is the definitive X-Men adaptation. While I liked the first season, X-Men ’97’s second season is stellar. Some of the best storytelling in animation. It’s a love letter to the original X-Men: Animated Series. Whenever Geekly does another Top 10 Animated Shows based on Comic Books List, X-Men ’97 will be near the top. I’m calling it now.

Those are the shows and movies I’ve seen this past month. Let’s see what Skye has been watching.

Skye’s Movies

Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure has been on my radar for a while. Recently, I inherited a hefty chunk of time to watch whatever I wanted, so I finally took initiative and watched Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure. Overall, I’d call Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure “lovably goofy.” It’s a nice combination of creative, wacky, sentimental, and mysterious that you don’t find in most other kid’s films. Only once the credits started rolling did I notice I had never stopped smiling, and that’s a sign the movie’s doing something right. While it’s not a film that’ll blow your mind, Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure is still a fun way to spend an hour and a half.

I’ve had my eye on the film adaptation of Stephen King’s The Long Walk. Put simply: every year, 50 young men from all 50 U.S. states are selected to participate in a challenge where they’re forced to walk or die. Setting aside the physical impossibility of being forced to walk nonstop for days on end, I found myself invested in the relationships that formed among the walkers onscreen. While some participants were more competitive, others tried forming bonds with their fellow man and make the most of the situation they were forced into. I’m still hung up on the technicalities of The Long Walk, but the film itself portrays brotherhood and companionship in a special way.

I’ve seen Labyrinth several times, but during my time in surgery recovery I was feeling nostalgic. Luckily, I had films like Labyrinth to scratch that itch. Specifically, an itch for something familiar, creative, and odd. It also helped that I ate peaches when I decided to watch it. If you’ve seen Labyrinth, you know what I mean. Even if many of the details about the film don’t add up, Labyrinth is still a movie that offers children an endless supply of food for their imaginations, classic Jim Henson puppetry, unique scenarios, and David Bowie. That last one is very important. If you haven’t seen Labyrinth in a while, pop it in again to relive those memories; and if you haven’t seen it at all, then you’ve got some homework for this weekend.

Hey, hey! Kyra Kyle here again. Those are the movies and shows our writers have been watching this past month. Let us know what you’ve been watching, Geekly Gang. Thank you for reading, and wherever you are, I hope you’re having a great day.

Whatcha Watching, Geekly: July 15, 2026

Published on by KyraLeave a comment

Happy Wednesday, Geekly Gang! Kyra Kyle here, and today, our writers share what they’ve been watching over the past month. This’ll be movies and shows. Anything goes. Feel free to share what you’ve been watching over the past month, because we’re all part of the Geekly Gang. I’ll get things started with what I’ve been watching over the past month.

Kyra’s Movies

I’m a true crime junkie, and the genre dominated the films I watched this past month. I’ll begin with The Murder of Rachel Nickell. Oh, boy. This one hurts. Rachel Nickell was slain in front of her toddler child, the one pictured above. I can’t even imagine the horror, the guilt, the fear, and the trauma that caused. Nickell bargained her life for her son’s. Nickell’s son has to live with that for the rest of his life. He blamed himself. He blamed his father for not protecting the family. It wasn’t until after the Bisset Murders (a mother and daughter killed by the same murderer, Robert Napper) trial and conviction that Nickell’s case was solved, and she found justice.

Again, I can’t imagine witnessing the murder of one’s mother at two and a half years old. The Murder of Rachel Nickell spends plenty of time interviewing André Hanscombe (Nickell’s partner and father of her son). We get a great window into his mindset, leaving the UK for France because he was scared the killer would return for his son. We don’t get as much of Alexander Louis, the pair’s son, but I may soon watch The Witness, which is a Netflix docudrama told from Alexander Louis’s perspective. Or I might not. The Murder of Rachel Nickell isn’t an easy watch. I took frequent breaks.

I’ve seen so many documentaries and docudramas on the Murdaugh family over the past year or so, and just when you think you’ve seen it all, Alex Murdaugh gets released by a technicality. Instadocs: Alex Murdaugh, Unconvicted deals primarily with disgraced county clerk Becky Hill. In short, Becky Hill was writing a novel about the Murdaugh family’s various scandals. With her ties as a county clerk, Hill had insider information. She also stood to gain from a guilty verdict. If Murdaugh was guilty, she’d sell more books. Instadocs: Alex Murdaugh, Unconvicted briefly describes what happens and shares a couple of viewpoints. Hill may have had a juror kicked off the case, and more likely, she told the jurors to beware of Alex Murdaugh because he lies. Regardless of what former county clerk Becky Hill did, she did enough to throw out Alex Murdaugh’s murder conviction.

Instadocs: Alex Murdaugh, Unconvicted is what the title suggests, it’s an instadoc, meaning a quickly made documentary in reaction to an event. It clocks in at thirty minutes. While I like the idea of a documentary of this type (especially for a follow-up or update to a larger documentary series like Netflix’s Murdaugh Murders, which I’ve also seen), this format doesn’t give the documentary enough time to flesh out either side of the argument. Hill denies most everything. The dismissed juror escalates the allegations against Hill. The truth is most likely in the middle, but the result is the same. Alex Murdaugh is “unconvicted” of the murders of his wife and son because of a mistrial.

Netflix’s The Crash has plenty of time to show multiple viewpoints. This documentary centers on Mackenzie Shirilla and whether she purposefully crashed her car into a building at 100 miles per hour to kill the other two occupants of her vehicle. Shirilla has been convicted, and her appeals have been denied. Two major pieces of evidence led to this conviction: automobile feedback and Shrilla mentioned killing her then boyfriend, Dominic Russo, by crashing her car a week before the event.

The latter piece of evidence is self-explanatory. Russo and Shirilla had a turbulent relationship. Russo even recorded Shirilla during a violent outburst. This wasn’t when Shirilla threatened to crash her car with Russo inside, but it illustrated the couple’s relationship. Numerous witnesses corroborated Shirilla threatened to kill Russo by crashing her car. Many of those same witnesses viewed it as an offhand comment, not one Shirilla would enact. But the former piece of evidence (automobile feedback) proves more compelling.

Newer automobiles have the equivalent of an airplane’s black box. Shirilla’s car shows she had her foot firmly on the gas pedal ten seconds before impact. Not once did she take her foot off the pedal. This most likely debunks her excuse that she blacked out. The prosecution argued that if Shirilla blacked out, she wouldn’t have been able to slam her foot on the gas. Shirilla wasn’t drunk. She did have THC in her system, but she had less than her usual amount and had plenty of practice driving while under the influence. Is The Crash a tragic accident? Or did Shirilla murder her boyfriend (who some say planned to break up with her) Death Proof style?

Kyra’s Show

I’m in the middle of compiling a deep dive on The Pitt’s autism representation (Dr. Mel King) for a future post. I won’t go into too much detail about that here. Simply put, Taylor Dearden does a phenomenal job of portraying a neurodivergent character. I can’t wait to share that post with you in November. Yikes! We still have some time, but not much. Anyway, I don’t mind rewatching The Pitt. It’s the most accurate medical drama. That’s not me saying it. I’ve heard medical professionals who worked in an ER sing The Pitt’s praises. So, I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that The Pitt also has great autism representation. Okay. I’m done with that aspect.

The Pitt plays out over a single twelve-hour shift, complete with heading in early for a shift handoff and staying late for the same thing. Each episode hops from one patient and their family to the next. Some build off each other in satisfying ways. All of them show different aspects of an emergency room worker’s job. I prefer the first season slightly more than the second because you’re flying into the series blind. I also watched the two seasons back-to-back. I may have been more surprised by the second season if I didn’t watch them immediately back-to-back. Still, love the characters. The pacing is on point. The frenetic pace drives The Pitt. And I didn’t know how The Pitt would attempt to keep up the energy from season one to season two. It accomplished that. Minor spoiler: the second season takes place on July Fourth.

Oh, boy! The fact that The Pitt chose July Fourth as the date for its second season proves it understands the ER better than most shows. More accidents occur on July Fourth than on any other day in the United States. Mrs. Geekly, a nurse, has worked plenty of July Fourths. Based on Mrs. Geekly’s tales, I wrote down all the injuries I expected to see, and The Pitt delivered. If you like medical dramas, you should watch The Pitt.

That’s all we have for this month. Season and Skye will join us next month. Thank you for reading, and wherever you are, I hope you’re having a great day.

Supergirl Movie Review

Supergirl Movie Review

Published on by Kyra2 Comments

Hey, hey, Geekly Gang! Kyra Kyle here. A couple of our writers watched the DCU’s second movie entry, Supergirl, this past week. Sure. We’ve only watched the movie once, so this may be more of a reaction than a review. Typically, I like to watch a movie at least twice before dubbing my thoughts a “review.” But I do have some thoughts, and I may be joined by another of our writers for Geekly’s Review/Reaction of Supergirl.

Kyra’s Thoughts

Supergirl is a good movie. I don’t know where all the hate for the movie originates. I’d even say Supergirl is on par with last year’s Superman, with one significant flaw holding it back: “the brides.” The brides represent an even larger issue of Supergirl attempting to cater to a wider audience. We’ll return to the brides and the rest in a minute, but back to Supergirl as a whole. The acting is on point. Eve Ridley gives a great performance as Ruthye. Milly Alcock is perfect as a Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow (the movie’s source material) version of Supergirl. And Jason Momoa was more believable as Lobo in three seconds than he was as Aquaman through three DCEU films.

However, Lobo is also the reason why Supergirl isn’t as good as it could be–Lobo was a ploy to get other demographics interested in the movie, but we’ll talk more about that later, too. Again, I love Momoa in the role, but the character disrupted this movie. Other critics claim that Supergirl’s plot is scattered. Lobo is the main reason the movie’s plot goes off course. The writers shoehorned a character who didn’t exist in the source material: Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow. While a scattered plot may be a fair criticism of Supergirl, last year’s Superman had a far more scattered narrative. I didn’t look at some of these critics’ reviews for Superman, but I venture to guess they didn’t dock Superman nearly as much as Supergirl for the same flaw. And Superman was worse in that regard.

My biggest gripe with Supergirl also stems from Lobo’s presence: the brides. I told you we would return to this topic. In the source material, the main villain, Krem, is a mercenary who really loves killing people. Lobo is also a mercenary who really loves killing people. How do we differentiate between them? Make Krem a sex trafficker. No. Just no. The brides (girls around 13) gave me the ick while I was watching Supergirl. It took me a minute to figure out why the brides made me cringe. I can see why this could be a dealbreaker for some. Supergirl could’ve omitted Momoa’s Lobo (or given him a cameo, seriously, three seconds was all Momoa needed to show he embodied the character) and replaced his scenes with a hopeful scene or two from the source material. This could’ve brightened the movie. Possibly even allowed for more comedic moments, which brings me to my next point.

Supergirl’s darker tone could also be a dealbreaker for others. Supergirl is a very different character from Superman. And that’s a fantastic thing. Corenswet’s Superman never knew Krypton. Alcock’s Supergirl watched her family, her home, and her people die. I love how Supergirl showed the difference between these two characters when they shared screentime. If anything, Supergirl upstaged the DCEU’s Superman. Cavill’s Superman had PTSD for unspecified reasons. Alcock’s Supergirl has PTSD for a very concrete reason: she watched the last of Krypton die. This is the equivalent of Cavill’s Superman as a CIS man trying a menstrual cramp simulator and screaming at the first setting. Alcock’s Supergirl would claim that setting tickles.

I could even see some people disliking Supergirl’s use of trauma to propel the narrative. Sometimes, you just want a dumb, fun movie. Heck, 2025’s Superman could be categorized as a dumb, fun movie, so the DCU conditioned audiences (through one movie) that the new DCU will be bright and fun. Despite its tonal differences, Supergirl fits within the DCU. And I’d argue that Kara overcomes her trauma, and that should be lauded. Supergirl’s trauma makes her interesting. Kara possesses numerous conflicting emotions. At one point, Supergirl was a red (rage) lantern in DC Comics. The fact that she chooses hope makes her a hero. While Supergirl is dark for a PG-13 movie, it’s nowhere near as dark as 2008’s The Dark Knight. So those critics need to stop clutching their pearls or throw that same vitriol at The Dark Knight.

The final negative I’ve seen from most Supergirl critics is the movie’s sepia-toned world. Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow features vibrant colors. The Supergirl movie doesn’t. And this is where I’m bringing back the idea that Supergirl included certain things in the hopes of appeasing different demographics. Supergirl’s sepia-toned worlds resemble the Snyderverse films. News flash, DCU. Snyderverse fans only want the DCEU to return. Nothing you can do can change that, so why not go with more vibrant colors? And we return to Lobo. Yes. Lobo was that problematic of an addition to this story. At first, I thought the DCU wanted another marketable character in the Supergirl cast (sell some toys or a variant popcorn bucket), but the more I thought about it, Lobo’s presence was meant to appeal to testosteroni males. After all, Lobo is the Main Man.

Supergirl works as a worthy follow-up to 2025’s Superman. I’d like to see where the DCU takes the Superman family. Yes, there are more members of the Superman family the DCU could explore. Supergirl suffers from appealing to a lot of different demographics that it had no hope of winning over. Synderverse fans are a lost cause. And despite Lobo’s inclusion, many of the testosteroni boys whom Lobo was meant to win over still dubbed Supergirl “woke” because it’s a movie about a super-powered woman. Supergirl has the bones of a fantastic movie. The performances are phenomenal. Too bad the DCU tried to cater to certain demographics.

Those are my thoughts on Supergirl. Let’s see what Season thinks about the film.

Season’s Thoughts

I also think Supergirl got too much hate from critics. If you isolate Supergirl from Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, it’s an enjoyable movie. It’s fun to watch regardless, but I couldn’t help myself from comparing it to the source material. I’ll get to the source material later.

Supergirl showed Kara overcoming adversity, but that got overshadowed by Lobo and the sex trafficking of young girls. The reason the movie gave for the sex trafficking of young girls was because the Brigands were an all-male race. Okay. I suppose you can argue that reason, but the sex trafficking was so unnecessary and ham-fisted into the plot. It was plain gross for the sake of being gross. Krem also killed one of the girls for sport. If the Brigands really needed these girls to continue their race, why kill one of them instead of capturing them?

Speaking of Krem, an interesting design choice was made for him in Supergirl that doesn’t match with Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow. My guess is it goes back to Lobo’s inclusion. Lobo is already an interesting looking character with extreme expressions and mannerisms. In Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, Krem looks like a red-headed barbarian with crazy eyes. Supergirl made Krem out crazy-fie Lobo with several piercings across his face, leather clothes, and a rat tail turned into a braid. They also gave him red eyes. You know, to match Lobo. Since Krem was the more evil between himself and Lobo in Supergirl, he had to have a more extreme appearance. I see you, Craig Gillespie.

I’m sorry to all the Lobo fans out there, but he was a distraction. Spoiler alert: Lobo stole Comet’s scene in Supergirl. In Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, Comet is the one who saves Supergirl from the onslaught of Brigands, losing his life in the process. This is a very dark and emotional moment in the source material. I cried when I read it. In Supergirl, Lobo rescues Supergirl from the Brigands and turns it into a slapstick comedy moment. Supergirl explained Lobo’s reason for being present was that he was after the bounty of one of the Brigands. That makes sense for Lobo’s character, but Supergirl is only one-hundred and seven minutes. All of Lobo’s screentime is distracting from the main story.

On to the positives. Supergirl was fun to watch. Milly Alcock did an amazing job of capturing Supergirl as a character. Eve Ridley also did a good job of portraying Ruthye. Ruthye’s internal monologue wasn’t included in Supergirl, but I didn’t mind. The movie could have easily been lengthened to over two hours if Ruthye narrated the movie.

I didn’t think Supergirl would include the green sun. I was pleasantly surprised. Not only was it included, but it cut out the extra exposition in Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow, which was much appreciated. Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow dragged a bit on the extent of Supergirl’s affliction to the green sun. In Supergirl, Ruthye’s strength was portrayed through her restraint and perseverance. We didn’t need to watch her slay monsters.

That’s my take on Supergirl. Geekly Gang.

Hey, hey, Geekly Gang. Kyra Kyle here again. Did you agree with our takes? What do you think of Supergirl? Let us know in the comments. Thank you for reading, and wherever you are, I hope you’re having a great day.