Two Supergirl Cuts Tested After DC Creative Disputes, Sources Claim

Reported creative disagreements inside DC Studios reportedly pushed James Gunn and Peter Safran to put two different versions of Supergirl through test screenings just months before the film’s release—one cut directed by Craig Gillespie and another shaped by the studio itself.

Why the two-cut strategy signals bigger problems

Fresh behind-the-scenes reporting on the latest entry in the DCU points to a production that struggled to lock in a single creative direction for Milly Alcock’s standalone superhero debut. The details also land after a stretch of online backlash from fans who had hoped Supergirl would “take flight” before it opened to disappointing box office results.

The reporting claims “numerous sources” described the friction as more than routine. Test material reportedly had trouble reaching a score of 70 out of 100, and while some people framed the tension between DC Studios and the director as standard, others used harsher language—saying they were effectively “not creatively aligned.”

That kind of mismatch matters because test screenings aren’t just about fine-tuning a few scenes. When multiple versions are circulating, it usually means the team can’t agree on what the finished film should feel like—tone, character focus, pacing, and even how the story pays off for audiences.

As early as fall 2025, DC Studios was reportedly aware that the movie could run into trouble. Filming had wrapped in May of that year, and then, after a lukewarm screening in December 2025, Gunn and Safran’s DC film unit stepped in. The studio then assembled its own cut, with help from Mortal Kombat 2 and Moon Knight writer Jeremy Slater.

At least four separate test screenings are said to have taken place across December 2025, February 2026, and March 2026. Some of the winter evaluations reportedly landed in the low 70s, but DC Studios still requested two competing versions be produced: one aligned with Gillespie and one created by the studio.

The exact differences between the two cuts weren’t spelled out in the reporting, but earlier rumors are echoed here: Gillespie’s version was said to run about 11 minutes longer and to lean harder into Matthias Schoenaerts’ villain, Krem.

It was reportedly during the phase when the cuts were tested directly against one another that scores fell. DC Studios’ preferred version ultimately edged out the director’s by just two points, and that narrow win became the version slated for theaters in late June. One account from the reporting says that after that point, if Gillespie had strong views on any additional changes, he would have had to push for them rather than steer the process.

One anonymous filmmaker—who said they were not involved with Supergirl—offered a blunt take on why testing two cuts is a red flag. “It happens more than you think, but it’s not normal,” they said. “If a studio is going to put money into the test process, it means they feel strongly about certain things.”

Music disputes add another layer to the final cut

Beyond story and structure, the reporting also highlights music as a key issue both DC Studios and Gillespie had to address during post-production—an especially sensitive topic after Supergirl premiered. Fans have been quick to critique the soundtrack, with one late-film moment featuring a cover of Jimmy Eat World’s “The Middle” becoming a major point of contention.

Gillespie previously said Gunn was the one who approved “The Middle,” and the reporting claims sources agree. It also says a February test screening used Cyndi Lauper’s “Girls Just Want to Have Fun” at the same moment, and that Gunn allegedly selected that song as well before swapping it to “The Middle.”

For players and movie fans who follow release chatter, this kind of back-and-forth tends to read like a larger battle over identity. Music cues can define pacing and emotional tone, and when test feedback and studio preferences collide, the end result can feel stitched together—even if the individual choices are popular on their own.

Release timing and the financial hangover

Supergirl officially debuted with Milly Alcock taking center stage on June 26. Even with only a single week in theaters so far—and likely more to come—the early signs are described as unfavorable for the DCU’s newest hero.

A report earlier this week suggested Warner Bros. and DC Studios could be looking at losses exceeding $100 million tied to the film’s time in theaters. While box office totals can swing week to week, the existence of the alleged two-cut scramble and the reported test score struggles help explain why the early conversation has been so negative.

Where the audience response lands—and whether you should still see it

Review coverage has also reflected the split between “recognizable strengths” and “assembled-from-parts” concerns. IGN gave Supergirl a 6/10 rating. The review framed it as a film that borrows from some of the best, but argued that Alcock’s performance as Kara Zor-El gets swallowed by spare pieces lifted from other movies used to build the story.

So the real question for viewers isn’t only whether the film has a few standout moments—it’s whether the underlying decisions that shaped the final cut produced a cohesive experience. With reports pointing to competing edits, tonal uncertainty, and even music swaps tied to test reactions, Supergirl’s path to theaters looks less like a single creative vision and more like a negotiation under pressure.

Michael Cripe is a freelance writer with IGN. He’s best known for his work at sites like The Pitch, The Escapist, and OnlySP.