Gizmodo57%

Iman Vellani Wants Superhero Movies to Step Up 9%

By Justin Carter72%

7/12/2026, 8:15:49 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Anecdotal, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 16.9% saturation with 93 hits. Analysis detected 896 faulty-reasoning hits from 549 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 25% and a BS Rank of 9% (20,102 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 91.80% of the article peer group.

Iman Vellani Wants Superhero Movies to Step Up 
Gen Z isn't feeling superhero movies, but the current Ms. 
Marvel thinks the genre's not down for the count yet. 
Published July 12, 2026, 4:15 pm ET 
Reading time 2 minutes 
Spider-Man: Brand New Day is out in two weeks, and its release carries some more weight than usual. 
It doesn’t just have to restart Spider-Man, it’s also got to make a ton of money and prove superhero movies aren’t dead after all. 
When Supergirl underperformed , an anonymous studio head had this to say to the Hollywood Reporter : “Gen Z doesn’t care about superheroes. 
That genre belongs to millennials.” 
It’s a claim that’s not entirely wrong; look at how that demographic’s spent the year flocking to indie works like Backrooms and The Amazing Digital Circus . 
In general, the 2020s largely haven’t been kind to supers critically or financially , but a survey from this past February revealed 10 to 24-year-olds have a greater interest in guys who can actually feel things, a bar many superheroes aren’t entirely able to clear on screen. 
But how true is that really? 
Iman Vellani, best known for playing Ms. 
Marvel in the MCU, recently did an AMA for League of Comic Geeks . 
Asked about the studio head’s thesis, she disputed the general idea that her generation doesn’t care about superhero movies. 
“Westerns, musicals, and romcoms went through this. 
Every genre goes through cycles,” she noted. 
“Our generation grew up with an abundance of superhero stories, so perhaps the novelty has worn off, which is natural. 
The bar is higher now, and we’re looking for stories that feel specific and emotional—especially in the age of AI.” 
Vellani’s advice? 
Studios need to make superhero movies that “evolve and grow alongside their audience. 
I think Gen Z responds incredibly well to superheroes when they’re treated as people first. 
We want honesty from our storytellers. 
We want our intelligence respected. 
The answer isn’t to abandon the genre, but to find new stories that can only be told through this genre.” 
To Vellani’s point, the superhero fatigue folks often talk about may be more proof that specific, older franchises are fading than a particular genre as a whole. 
Audiences of varying demographics have dug recent cape works for trying to do something different: Invincible , Thunderbolts , and even her own Ms. 
Marvel felt like breaths of fresh air for their subject matter and approach to what superhero stories are. 
We’ve still got Brand New Day and December’s Avengers: Doomsday to help determine where superheroes are culturally at, and those will probably rake in some cash. 
But to truly determine whether anyone high-up is thinking like Vellani is, we may have to wait for the superhero movies dropping throughout 2027 and 2028 . 
Want more io9 news? 
Check out when to expect the latest Marvel , Star Wars , and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV , and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who . 
Explore more on these topics 
Spider-Man: Brand New Day 
Sign up for our newsletters 
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.2%Justin Carter: 7.1%Gizmodo: 4.1%Confirmation Bias12.2%This article: 3.3%Justin Carter: 1.5%Gizmodo: 1.4%Anchoring Bias3.3%This article: 12.9%Justin Carter: 2.7%Gizmodo: 3.1%Availability Heuristic12.9%This article: 6.4%Justin Carter: 2.1%Gizmodo: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic6.4%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 2.5%Gizmodo: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Justin Carter: 0.9%Gizmodo: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 6.2%Gizmodo: 5.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.8%Gizmodo: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.6%Justin Carter: 1.4%Gizmodo: 0.4%Status Quo Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 1.0%Gizmodo: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.8%Justin Carter: 4.1%Gizmodo: 3.9%Optimism Bias7.8%This article: 4.4%Justin Carter: 1.3%Gizmodo: 2.1%Pessimism Bias4.4%This article: 10.4%Justin Carter: 9.9%Gizmodo: 7.5%Negativity Bias10.4%This article: 2.7%Justin Carter: 0.6%Gizmodo: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.6%Gizmodo: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 3.5%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 1.2%Gizmodo: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Justin Carter: 5.4%Gizmodo: 2.9%Halo Effect3.3%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.1%Gizmodo: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.6%Justin Carter: 2.3%Gizmodo: 1.6%Recency Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 3.4%Gizmodo: 4.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 8.0%Justin Carter: 3.0%Gizmodo: 1.4%False Dilemma8.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 1.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.8%Justin Carter: 7.6%Gizmodo: 5.3%Hasty Generalization9.8%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 2.1%Gizmodo: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 2.8%Gizmodo: 4.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 3.6%Justin Carter: 0.3%Gizmodo: 1.0%Begging the Question3.6%This article: 16.9%Justin Carter: 4.3%Gizmodo: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.9%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.5%Gizmodo: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.8%Gizmodo: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.2%Gizmodo: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 12.6%Justin Carter: 5.1%Gizmodo: 2.0%Anecdotal12.6%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.9%Justin Carter: 2.5%Gizmodo: 2.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.9%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.2%Justin Carter: 10.1%Gizmodo: 4.6%Unattributed Quote4.2%This article: 4.2%Justin Carter: 2.9%Gizmodo: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection4.2%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 8.3%Gizmodo: 13.5%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 2.0%Justin Carter: 2.9%Gizmodo: 1.6%Indoctrination2.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 1.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Justin Carter: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.9%Justin Carter: 7.2%Gizmodo: 3.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…12.9%

549 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers28%attributed speech393writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMarvel • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageLeague of Comic Geeks • 14 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 19 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 7 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 7 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 20 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 13 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 15 words • 0.0% coverageIman Vellani • 6 words • 100.0% coverageIman Vellani • 5 words • 100.0% coverageIman Vellani • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Iman Vellani

95%flagged-word coverage
132 attributed words85% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -18.1 ptsWriter: 18.1%Iman Vellani: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+8.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Iman Vellani: 8.3%8.3%Unattributed Quote-5.9 ptsWriter: 5.9%Iman Vellani: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.9 ptsWriter: 5.9%Iman Vellani: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.