The Winter Soldier Agent 13

[The Caped Knight]

Sharon had a good introduction role even better than Coulson did in Iron Man. I think she'll be more prominent in Cap 3

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Yeah, she also got a better introduction role than Private Lorraine, Hammer's assistant Jack, Major Sparr, Frost Giant #2 and others.

 

[warhorse78]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I found the character incredibly boring. Most dull and unexciting character in the movie next to the security council.

 

[Xeno]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I found the character incredibly boring. Most dull and unexciting character in the movie next to the security council.

Agreed. Any anonymous agent could have done the same things Sharon did and no one would have thought about the person twice. She only garnered attention because fans knew who she was.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Sharon is, allegedly, supposed to be a major player later, but doesn't get to do nearly as much as Natasha in Iron Man 2. So I'm doubting that she is, indeed supposed to a major player later. Especially given certain comments the Russos, Marcus and McFeely made.

You mean like these comments?:

On the sequel elements that are front and center in their minds as they start prepping the story for Captain America 3:
McFeely: We laid some threads out at the end of this one, but I think we're going to pick them up, and we don't know how long we're going to pull on them. But we're certainly going to try to.
Markus: Obviously, Bucky's out there. He's changed in some way, but he's clearly not all the way to being sentient or a good guy. So how much do we follow the Winter Soldier story, and how much do we hold that at bay?
McFeely: Sharon Carter seems to be fairly active.

On whether there’s a future for more of the Black Widow in their Cap-verse:
Markus: Potentially. I'm very glad that we flirted with flirting but didn't go there, you know? And I don't want to go there. They work really well together as friends and as comrades. Plus we're bringing Sharon up, and we don't want to have a love triangle in the middle of your Captain America movie. If there's an organic place for her in the story, yes.

 

[hafizbat]

Certainly sounds like they know what they're doing

 

[speno94]

^ That's perfect what the writers said!

I think they know exactly where they are going with Sharon and from the comments that she is active shows she will probably have a big role in Cap 3. I agree that BW shouldn't be a love interest and there shouldn't be a dumb love triangle or something in the middle of Cap 3. BW and Cap should stay as good friends and comrades like the writers said.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

You mean like these comments?:

Actually it was something else the writers as being just an option moving forward.

But thanks for the link. I'll believe it when I see it, but that's real good to hear.

 

[Ms. Marvel]

Yeah, she also got a better introduction role than Private Lorraine, Hammer's assistant Jack, Major Sparr, Frost Giant #2 and others.

Not to mention Dark Elf #3 and Ten Rings terrorist #3.

 

[Loki882]

Some people just refuse to accept the evidence that's right in front of their eyes. Better to just complain based off of nothing but their own unsupported pessimism. It's sad really.

 

[Loki882]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I found the character incredibly boring. Most dull and unexciting character in the movie next to the security council.

Yeah, you can really get a handle on her character/know everything about her based on the five whole minutes that she appears in the movie.

 

[TalismanRing]

Yeah, you can really get a handle on her character/know everything about her based on the five whole minutes that she appears in the movie.

One can't get a handle on everything about a character in so short a time but one can certainly form a strong first impression of a character and of actor's performance in that amount of time. Actors have been making great impressions in cameos and bit parts forever.

Mackie in the handful of opening minutes made a huge favorable impression. Heck, he did it in a few seconds with the "Don't Say it...". If he had no other scenes in the film he would have left a strong impression and left the audience wanting more.

That brave tech in the end scenes had a couple of lines - and less screen time than Sharon did in the same scenes - and yet he's the one that emerges a vivid character.

Can she be a better character in the next film, yes. Though I have my doubts about the actress making much of her character at least she's not Cobie who after her second appearance is an even less believable Maria Hill. But for many Sharon isn't a memorable character in this one so they have doubts about her next appearance and that's not an unfair opinion to hold.

 

[Ms. Marvel]

I like Cobie as Maria. She's a lot more likeable here than in any incarnation of the character. I absolutely detest Maria Hill in EMH.

Anyway I think Sharon will be a solid lead in the third movie if the writing is solid. The actress is very capable.

 

[TalismanRing]

I like Cobie as Maria. She's a lot more likeable here than in any incarnation of the character. I absolutely detest Maria Hill in EMH.

Anyway I think Sharon will be a solid lead in the third movie if the writing is solid. The actress is very capable.

That's precisely why I think Cobie is a poor Maria Hill. She's not supposed to be likable and if she is it's only because you have to dig deep deep deep under lots of layers of unlikable first. She's a hard ass former Marine who is at times is more ruthless and certainly colder than Fury and tends towards the military fascistic. Camera on her face she looks soft and mostly out of her depth. I thought Van Camp in a few moments was more believable as an agent even if her confrontation with Crossbones was more than a tad weak.

As portrayed by Cobie and now as written to her strengths as an actress she's completely unbelievable as Fury's second in command in the MCU and I would never buy her as the one calling the shots in SHIELD. The only time she's convincing as hardcore in this film is with her back turned to the camera when she shoots the guys coldly and efficiently.

As for Sharon, she might be solid in the next film but I don't have much faith in the actress to be anything more than solid and frankly I want more than solid . I want great because I've had great - twice - with Peggy and Natasha. I'm spoiled. Steve is already going to have a close friendship/working relationship with Sam. He's going to have his big emotional connection with Bucky. So if solid is all Sharon is bringing she's not needed in any significant screen time - especially not as a romantic interest.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Some people just refuse to accept the evidence that's right in front of their eyes. Better to just complain based off of nothing but their own unsupported pessimism. It's sad really.

The link CaptainCanada posted has been the first legit "evidence" so far.

 

[Ms. Marvel]

That's precisely why I think Cobie is a poor Maria Hill. She's not supposed to be likable and if she is it's only because you have to dig deep deep deep under lots of layers of unlikable first. She's a hard ass former Marine who is at times is more ruthless and certainly colder than Fury and tends towards the military fascistic.

As portrayed by Cobie and now as written to her strengths as an actress she's completely unbelievable as Fury's second in command in the MCU and I would never buy her as the one calling the shots in SHIELD. The only time she's convincing as hardcore in this film is with her back turned to the camera when she shoots the guys coldly and efficiently.

As for Sharon, she might be solid in the next film but I don't have much faith in the actress to be anything more than solid and frankly I want more than solid . I want great because I've had great - twice - with Peggy and Natasha. I'm spoiled. Steve is already going to have a close friendship/working relationship with Sam. He's going to have his big emotional connection with Bucky. So if solid is all Sharon is bringing she's not needed in any significant screen time - especially not as a romantic interest.

To be fair it's not like that many people had faith that Scarlet would be anything more than "solid" as BW after her appearance in IM2. And she actually had a fight scene. People were saying she didn't have what it takes as an actress. With good writing she became a great BW, yet some people still don't buy her as BW.

The same writers who wrote Peggy will be writing Sharon so she has a good chance of being written as well as Peggy if not better. EVC is just as capable of an actress as Atwell (IMHO) so I don't worry about her either.

 

[TalismanRing]

To be fair it's not like that many people had faith that Scarlet would be anything more than "solid" as BW after her appearance in IM2. And she actually had a fight scene. People were saying she didn't have what it takes as an actress. With good writing she became a great BW, yet some people still don't buy her as BW.

The same writers who wrote Peggy will be writing Sharon so she has a good chance of being written as well as Peggy if not better. EVC is just as capable of an actress as Atwell (IMHO) so I don't worry about her either.

I don't think EVC is as capable as Atwell. Not even close IMO but hey different strokes.

You have a point about Scarlett as BW. I recently re-watched Iron Man 2 and thought she was very poor in it - not convincing vocally or physically and that the character was written and directed horribly. But then she wasn't the only dud in that film so she didn't stand out as much. If I hadn't seen Scarlett do other better work over the years and known Whedon had a facility with female characters I'd have worried about her in Avengers but I did so I didn't.

But with Van Camp, she's working with the same writers and directors (who did an even better job with BW and Fury than Whedon or anyone else) and with a character from the comics that I find far less interesting than Black Widow. So I'm not expecting a huge course change or break through in terms of characterization or acting and ergo I'm not excited to see her have more to do in the next.

I also find the Steve/Sharon dynamic in the comics boring when it's not turning into something horrifiic - usully for Steve. I'd rather they bring on Diamondback for Steve and go all out with the good boy/bad girl dynamic.

 

[Loki882]

The link CaptainCanada posted has been the first legit "evidence" so far.

Not really. There have been interviews with EVC, the Russo's, the screewriters, etc for months all saying that exact same thing. If you didn't bother to actually go read them, then that's on you because they've been out there for awhile.

 

[Loki882]

I don't think EVC is as capable as Atwell. Not even close IMO but hey different strokes.

You have a point about Scarlett as BW. I recently re-watched Iron Man 2 and thought she was very poor in it - not convincing vocally or physically and that the character was written and directed horribly. But then she wasn't the only dud in that film so she didn't stand out as much. If I hadn't seen Scarlett do other better work over the years and known Whedon had a facility with female characters I'd have worried about her in Avengers but I did so I didn't.

But with Van Camp, she's working with the same writers and directors (who did an even better job with BW and Fury than Whedon or anyone else) and with a character from the comics that I find far less interesting than Black Widow. So I'm not expecting a huge course change or break through in terms of characterization or acting and ergo I'm not excited to see her have more to do in the next.

I also find the Steve/Sharon dynamic in the comics boring when it's not turning into something horrifiic - usully for Steve. I'd rather they bring on Diamondback for Steve and go all out with the good boy/bad girl dynamic.

Then it's a good thing that this isn't the comics, so that complaint is completely irrelevant. Different universe, different rules (we've seen that plenty of times already).

 

[Loki882]

One can't get a handle on everything about a character in so short a time but one can certainly form a strong first impression of a character and of actor's performance in that amount of time. Actors have been making great impressions in cameos and bit parts forever.

Mackie in the handful of opening minutes made a huge favorable impression. Heck, he did it in a few seconds with the "Don't Say it...". If he had no other scenes in the film he would have left a strong impression and left the audience wanting more.

That brave tech in the end scenes had a couple of lines - and less screen time than Sharon did in the same scenes - and yet he's the one that emerges a vivid character.

Can she be a better character in the next film, yes. Though I have my doubts about the actress making much of her character at least she's not Cobie who after her second appearance is an even less believable Maria Hill. But for many Sharon isn't a memorable character in this one so they have doubts about her next appearance and that's not an unfair opinion to hold.

Nope sorry, not buying it. Mackie's opening scene was deliberately set up to make him look cool and set up his friendship with Cap. And the tech guy was a "vivid character" by virtue of being crap his pants terrified. And she's barely in the movie, and she wasn't given anything particularly memorable to do, so of course she's not a memorable character. So yes, it IS an unfair opinion. If she gets a bigger role next time and fails, then people can criticize her all they want. I'll even join them. But as of right now, I completely reject the notion that she's not a good character (or can't be in the future) and find it to be completely without credibility at this point in time, end of story.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Not really. There have been interviews with EVC, the Russo's, the screewriters, etc for months all saying that exact same thing. If you didn't bother to actually go read them, then that's on you because they've been out there for awhile.

No, they just said it was going to be an introduction. They said it was planting seeds, but not what kind of fruit or if it would bear.

They've also made some comments before that Natasha might continue to play a role, enough that Sharon didn't seem like a sure thing.

 

[TalismanRing]

Nope sorry, not buying it. Mackie's opening scene was deliberately set up to make him look cool and set up his friendship with Cap. And the tech guy was a "vivid character" by virtue of being crap his pants terrified. And she's barely in the movie, and she wasn't given anything particularly memorable to do, so of course she's not a memorable character. So yes, it IS an unfair opinion. If she gets a bigger role next time and fails, then people can criticize her all they want. I'll even join them. But as of right now, I completely reject the notion that she's not a good character (or can't be in the future) and find it to be completely without credibility at this point in time, end of story.

What was the scene in the apt building in the hallway about flirting over laundry and coffee supposed to be about if it wasn't an on screen chemistry test? Evans was being pretty darn charming and awkwardly cute as Steve there and it was like bouncing off a soppy sponge.

The fact is Mackie had more chemistry with Evans from scene one than Van Camp did not because that scene was supposed to have chemistry and the Steve/Sharon one wasn't but because a) Mackie is a much better actor than Van Camp is and b) Sam is a much more interesting character than Sharon. Heck there wasn't a person in the film Steve didn't have more chemistry with including the Apple guy.

What was the scene with her and Captain's Orders and confronting Rumlow supposed to be about? It was to show she was tough and principled and bad ass to try and take down Crossbones. That the tech out acted her isn't because he was given more to do - its that the little he had to do he did much better than she did. She was OK, that's it.

As for saying it's not the comics so it doesn't matter what happened or what her personality is or what kind of relationship or chemistry she had with Steve in them then what exactly would be the point of having a character named Sharon Carter anyway?

 

[Ms. Marvel]

What was the scene in the apt building in the hallway about flirting over laundry and coffee supposed to be about if it wasn't an on screen chemistry test? Evans was being pretty darn charming and awkwardly cute as Steve there and it was like bouncing off a soppy sponge.

The fact is Mackie had more chemistry with Evans from scene one than Van Camp did not because that scene was supposed to have chemistry and the Steve/Sharon one wasn't but because a) Mackie is a much better actor than Van Camp is and b) Sam is a much more interesting character than Sharon. Heck there wasn't a person in the film Steve didn't have more chemistry with including the Apple guy.

What was the scene with her and Captain's Orders and confronting Rumlow supposed to be about? It was to show she was tough and principled and bad ass to try and take down Crossbones. That the tech out acted her isn't because he was given more to do - its that the little he had to do he did much better than she did. She was OK, that's it.

As for saying it's not the comics so it doesn't matter what happened or what her personality is or what kind of relationship or chemistry she had with Steve in them then what exactly would be the point of having a character named Sharon Carter anyway?

But he was given more to do. He was scared, she wasn't. I didn't think the actor for the guy was anything special anyway, I just admired the courage his character had (which has more to do with the writing).

 

[Raiden]

Happy birthday to the beautiful Emily VanCamp!

 

[The Caped Knight]

Happy Birthday EVC, Don't get even get "REVENGE" lol