Hollywood has a multi-billion dollar problem: budget control.
Over the past few years, there has been an influx of disappointing entertainment that is upsetting audiences. Particularly in the superhero industry, companies like Marvel and DC have both pumped out expensive disasters that’ve earned a “Rotten” distinction on Rotten Tomatoes, such as “The Flash” and “The Marvels.” Now, DC’s $180 million production “Supergirl” has joined their ranks, earning a measly $37 million in its opening week — the worst box office disaster in DC history.
Hollywood should stop overspending on movie budgets because it oversaturates the industry with unnecessary sequels and spinoffs and limits the rewards of creative risk-taking. When there’s a huge budget on the line, corporate executives push for creative decisions that please shareholders, ultimately harming the film and its quality.
Film-makers are expected to break even on their film budgets in order to please shareholders. When those budgets creep up, the particularly artistic and creative decisions that create movie magic are often deemed too risky. This is because studios recognize that implementing anything genuinely new or controversial carries the risk of the film being potentially unlikeable or alienating.
Let’s take the most recent victim of this: “Supergirl.” Directed by Craig Gillespie and produced by James Gunn, the film went through eight test screening audiences — more than any film in the decade by any studio. The character Krem (Matthias Schoenaerts) was the main antagonist of the film and watered down and forgettable. The film chaotically flipped through three different composers. With so many revisions, and changes, Gillespie had to compromise on his creative vision. The end result was a disjointed film that didn’t connect well with audiences in theatres.
Another classic example of corporate prioritization was with another Warner Brothers production — “I am Legend.” The film was based on a novel in which a doctor attempts to find a cure for a fictional disease to which he is immune. The director, Francis Lawrence, faithfully followed the novel throughout the production. In the original ending, the doctor realizes that he is the real monster of the story because he destroyed families by testing them in his trials. Testing audiences hated his revelation, as they didn’t like seeing Will Smith — who played Dr. Robert Reville — portrayed as the bad guy.
Consequently, the production team reshot the ending to feature the doctor’s heroic sacrificial death. The film had a $150 million budget and similar to “Supergirl,” corporate panic led to “I am Legend” having a generic risk-averse ending instead of showcasing a gritty scene that would have made the film unique. Though the film ultimately succeeded in the box office, major audiences were often confused about the alternate endings and were upset that the original was cut.
High budgets force production companies to mitigate financial risk by releasing sequels and spinoffs to re-capture the financial success of earlier films. In many cases, like the Avengers franchise from Marvel, effective master-planning led to extraordinary artistic success. The same can’t be said for Marvel’s post-2019 run. While the 2015 film “Antman” was a commercial box office success, “Antman and the Wasp: Quantumania” was Marvel’s worst ranked project in its history. It had an absurdly bloated budget of $326 million, requiring $650 to $700 million to break even.
The script was designed to build anticipation for upcoming sequels like “Avengers: Kang Dynasty,” later renamed to “Avengers: Doomsday,” by utilizing the villain Kang the Conqueror (Jonathan Majors) and secondary antagonists like M.O.D.O.K (Corey Stoll).
The film suffered from rushed computer-generated imagery and a forgettable plot. Disney’s CEO, Bob Iger, admitted the film was a victim of superhero fatigue, meaning the film didn’t feature a truly unique story and felt mediocre. He further stated that Marvel Studios disproportionately focused on quantity, not quality. “Antman and the Wasp: Quantumania” was a clear example of how Marvel’s high budgets put strain on the creators to mitigate risk by promoting under-developed sequels, which ultimately destroyed the spirit of the film.
There is a clear clash between the arts and business that blurs the line between corporate profit margins and creative vision. Hollywood’s obsession with bloated budgets has dulled filmmaker’s creative risk-taking — trading it for formulaic storytelling that has more financial security. By prioritizing money over artistry, films ultimately falter and bomb the box office. This issue can be alleviated if budgets are more realistically set. By doing this, film-makers can focus on genuine storytelling, rather than breaking even and incorporating sequels and spinoffs into the ideology of the film.
Aarya Banerjee is an Opinion Intern for summer 2026 quarter. He can be reached at asbaner1@uci.edu.
Edited by Ruby Goodwin and Tracy Sandoval.
Interested in becoming an intern or a contributing writer for the Opinion section?
Contact us at opinion@newuniversity.org!