Civil War Sharon carter A.K.A. Agent 13 - Part 1

[BullMcGiveny]

As I said, if you don't want to see a point, you will never see it. You will just blah-blah your way out of this.

Funny, I was often think this about you, both in this latest argument and every time you troll the thread of a character you admit to hating.

Apparently in this thread Sharon's fans want to see Peggy's death as just a plot device to get Steve with Sharon. So one last time.
Because the rule is "Show, don't tell". Because Peggy wasn't just some minor figure in Steve's life during many years and 4 films (and the last one, AoU, even showed that he still thinks about her). It's the last Cap's film, so her funeral will be a beautiful conclusion for all this. Audience will care about her death and its effect on Steve much more, than about some barely known girl, happened to be relative to her. You can't just say: "Oh, by the way, she's dead. Lets go on." Audience needs to see Steve's emotions, his grief in order to feel the rising of stakes and his motivation. And what is the better place to emphasize it all, if not at her funeral?

There's another rule; viewers aren't babies.

You don't need to spell out every last thing for them. You don't need Steve weeping and beating his chest in anguish. something like that can be conveyed in acting (Evans is certainly capable), and dialogue, say, like Sam saying, "Listen Steve, ever since Peggy passed away, you were

Either that, or Russos just really don't like her at all, and were forced by Marvel to make her important, because they don't want to talk about her.

Possibly.

If they could make Peggy's death happen off screen only for the sake of someone, it would be Sharon. They could just show that Steve is really interested in her, so made a flashback about Steve calling her after TWS and discovering about "Carter", because it's not that kind of revelation at all to require an entire funeral scene.

Might it be that flashbacks to convey story elements that could be easily set in the present is sloppy storytelling?

It's no good to show the audience, that Steve get to know her only because of Peggy.

He'll get to know her because they'll be working together. Them meeting would serve as a proper introduction, both for the audience and for Steve.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

If it was an off screen death I'd agree. Say, they met at the cemetery on the one year anniversary of her death and then had coffee and bonded. Having this meet up at the funeral actually works against rather than for any believable romantic bonding.

Have them meet one year later and then people, possibly yourself included, would point to Steve making the trip to England on the specific anniversary as proof that he's still hung up on her.

 

[TalismanRing]

Have them meet one year later and then people, possibly yourself included, would point to Steve making the trip to England on the specific anniversary as proof that he's still hung up on her.

More straw man arguments and ignoring any points made about narrative efficiency and character driven story telling.

You really think they'd film a time consuming expensive full fledged funeral set piece for Peggy just so that Steve and Sharon will have an excuse to finally have coffee?

 

[BullMcGiveny]

More straw man arguments and ignoring any points made about narrative efficiency and character driven story telling.

You really think they'd film a time consuming expensive full fledged funeral set piece for Peggy just so that Steve and Sharon will have an excuse to finally have coffee?

Not ignoring, just disagreeing with.

From my perspective Peggy dying off screen is more efficient than filming an entire scene about it, yes, even to raise the stakes.

Your 'strawman' complaint is precious, though.

Yes. I suppose I do believe that they'd make a scene so Sharon and Steve can properly meet, better than that such a scene being filmed so Steve can look sad, and then raise the stakes, higher than they already are for Steve saving his best friend.

Or it might be for both, and neither by itself would have made them make the effort.

 

[Voltron]

Well, there isn't a relationship yet, so there's nothing to cool. But I generally agree otherwise.

Peggy's funeral is important to show because:

a: she was one of the few living links to Steve's past, which will play a part in establishing the protagonist's point of view especially as he fights to protect and maybe rehabilitate his LAST living link to his past,

b: it provides an opportunity to show how close Steve's teammates and friends have become and may portend how the Civil War teams split (and it is noteworthy the absence of Stark in the funeral set photos although it may indicate nothing),

c: it gives an opportunity to reintroduce SC/A13 as the DLI and BAMF and reveal the familial relationship (if it has not already been discovered off screen). My guess is that she will also be useful in the quest for Bucky in additon to fulfilling the "coffee date", lol ,

d: all of the above and perhaps more?

This funeral is not for nothing ( and I really won't be surprised by a Haley Atwell cameo). No way. Unless they drop the scene altogether and move the death off screen, I believe it serves the plot and the character in multiple ways, whether or not there is another bookend as rumored or not.

If it's a major event like the wedding at the start of The Godfather for example, this is poised to be epic storytelling.

Agreed, all of the above most especially to let the audience know on why Cap is defying the governments/avengers and to justify his actions to protect and defend Bucky. It has been said that there will be little romance so the funeral will probably serve to maybe cement a connection with Sharon who will assist him in locating Bucky and maybe escape the government if he was to be captured.

Funny you mentioned The Godfather because the Russos or Evans likened the avengers to being a family fighting like in The Godfather.

 

[Voltron]

So the Russos pushed for BW to have a bigger part in TWS, by doing that at which characters expense? Sharon's? Hill's? Falcon's? Bucky's? M/M have mentioned using Sharon since before TFA was released, then they mentioned her being active in CW and BW taking a backseat. So thanks a lot Russos for shortchanging Sharon . [YT]X9lUWV6j6MM[/YT]

 

[Knight_SV]

So the Russos pushed for BW to have a bigger part in TWS, by doing that at which characters expense? Sharon's? Hill's? Falcon's? Bucky's? M/M have mentioned using Sharon since before TFA was released, then they mentioned her being active in CW and BW taking a backseat. So thanks a lot Russos for shortchanging Sharon . [YT]X9lUWV6j6MM[/YT]

Everyone i think. Just because russos is Fans of BW or scarjo they choose to shunt caps true supporting characters to made her shine more, they even cut her relation to bucky and made them doesn't really have relation in the past beside those encounter when bw is protecting the president that was assasinated by bucky. That's why i think TWS are overrated.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

So the Russos pushed for BW to have a bigger part in TWS, by doing that at which characters expense? Sharon's? Hill's? Falcon's? Bucky's? M/M have mentioned using Sharon since before TFA was released, then they mentioned her being active in CW and BW taking a backseat. So thanks a lot Russos for shortchanging Sharon . [YT]X9lUWV6j6MM[/YT]

Probably all the above, though Sharon was hit the worse.

Isn't it amusing, though, that the Russos had admitted to considering pairing Steve with Natasha?

Or that this platonic and not obvious duo ended up having so much romantic overtones, enough that lots of people want them together, and EW made a whole article that they should.

 

[Voltron]

Everyone i think. Just because russos is Fans of BW or scarjo they choose to shunt caps true supporting characters to made her shine more, they even cut her relation to bucky and made them doesn't really have relation in the past beside those encounter when bw is protecting the president that was assasinated by bucky. That's why i think TWS are overrated.

My only major TWS gripe is that Sharon didn't have a bigger role. Also I would've loved to see Sharon and Hill physically kicking ass/es in TWS!!!

Well since the Russos' decision to have BW play a bigger part seems to have paid off (I guess we'll never know if TWS would still have been good if BW didn't) this probably allowed them to continue with that into CW. I just hate how this probably came at the cost of Cap's main supporting characters; Sharon, Sam, and maybe Bucky having more screen time. I think the Russos should've put their love of BW/scarjo in check to see if it serves Cap's story and his main supporting characters well.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Maybe now that the Russos are doing IW we might see a director hired that looks to Cap comics and think it would be a novel idea to adapt them for a change.

 

[Voltron]

Probably all the above, though Sharon was hit the worse.

Isn't it amusing, though, that the Russos had admitted to considering pairing Steve with Natasha?

Or that this platonic and not obvious duo ended up having so much romantic overtones, enough that lots of people want them together, and EW made a whole article that they should.

Only BW gets to kick ass? There's no budget to hire a stunt woman for Sharon or Hill?

Well if they paired Steve with BW, would Joss have paired Bruce with Nat in AoU...

Russos can eat it. All this we're comic book nerds blah blah blah then they basically gave Sharon's role in the TWS comics to BW in the mcu. All I know is that M/M championed Sharon from the very beginning then the Russos shat on that. Having said that, I'm still hoping they give Sharon a chance to shine, be developed, and kick ass in a cool action sequence or two.

Maybe now that the Russos are doing IW we might see a director hired that looks to Cap comics and think it would be a novel idea to adapt them for a change.

Here's hoping. But M&M seems to know their Cap comics. It's just too bad that the Russos pushed for more BW where she's tainting the Cap franchise with her OO.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Only BW gets to kick ass? There's no budget to hire a stunt woman for Sharon or Hill?

To be fair Hill got to save Steve and co., and she shot a couple of HYDRA mooks, though her role was still a bit role.

But looking at the four women in TWS is interesting,

Maria Hill, deputy director of SHIELD? Absent for much of the story, has next to no reaction to Steve's demand to dissolve SHIELD.

Sharon Carter, who joined SHIELD because she believe in it? She's there so Natasha can hook Steve up with someone and look like a Cool Bro.

Natasha? She's an Avenger, so she's the co-lead.

Hawley? Psyche. Actually Black Widow.

Well if they paired Steve with BW, would Joss have paired Bruce with Nat in AoU...

Maybe the reason they couldn't is because Whedon vetoed them.

Russos can eat it. All this we're comic book nerds blah blah blah then they basically gave Sharon's role in the TWS comics to BW in the mcu. All I know is that M/M championed Sharon from the very beginning then the Russos shat on that. Having said that, I'm still hoping they give Sharon a chance to shine, be developed, and kick ass in a cool action sequence or two.

Here's hoping. But M&M seems to know their Cap comics. It's just too bad that the Russos pushed for more BW where she's tainting the Cap franchise with her OO.

A lot of self-described Cap nerds, including on this forum, seem to be so by way of the Avengers comics, and care very little for Cap's own books, adventures or supporting characters. Shame the Russos turned out to be two of them.

 

[Voltron]

To be fair Hill got to save Steve and co., and she shot a couple of HYDRA mooks, though her role was still a bit role.

But looking at the four women in TWS is interesting,

Maria Hill, deputy director of SHIELD? Absent for much of the story, has next to no reaction to Steve's demand to dissolve SHIELD.

Sharon Carter, who joined SHIELD because she believe in it? She's there so Natasha can hook Steve up with someone and look like a Cool Bro.

Natasha? She's an Avenger, so she's the co-lead.

Hawley? Psyche. Actually Black Widow.

I meant Hill and Sharon physically fighting, standing up, combat hand-to-hand fighting like in the comics. TWS had Cap, Brock, Sam, Bucky, and the other Strike members all men fighting hand-to-hand, but yet again it's only one female character who gets to physically fight in the MCU up to that point?

We didn't get Hill's reaction because we got Fury the director's instead.
Sharon was there as the face-rep-voice for SHIELD agents. She represented the good side of SHIELD who opposed the SHIELD-Hydra. She also served as a spy to emphasis the spy vs soldier angle of the movie and of course a potential love interest/support for Cap.

Maybe the reason they couldn't is because Whedon vetoed them.

Yeah, Joss probably called dibs on BW being a love interest and if so I'm glad if it means a chance for Staron.

A lot of self-described Cap nerds, including on this forum, seem to be so by way of the Avengers comics, and care very little for Cap's own books, adventures or supporting characters. Shame the Russos turned out to be two of them.

Double shame. And exactly, this was supposed to be a Cap franchise based on his comics with his main supporting characters and that includes Sharon.

 

[BoredGuy]

So now TWS and the Russos suck, all of a sudden?

I'm all for more Sharon Carter, but you guys have made this thread completely intolerable

 

[Rote]

Was Bucky's role small in TFA because Atwell took screen time from him too? Falcon actually have decent time in TWS, have cameo in Ant-Man and Ultron, going to have big role again in CW. And Stan is getting much bigger role this time to the extent, that Stan said his role in TWS was only an introduction. Because Russos and the audience actually liked Stan's perfomance very much. And Russos are doing what is better for the movies, it's been said multiple times, that MCU is not following comics. So, that's only comic-book nerd's problems, because TWS was nearly perfect film with all decisions, the Russos have made. And ScarJo actually is FAAAAAAR more capable and sexy actress than boring and wooden VanCamp. She's not suitable for a female lead at all.
Russos words as always are on spot:

"The Marvel Cinematic Universe is based upon all the movies that have preceded it. It's the Cinematic Universe, it's not the comic book universe. We don't have the issues that the comics do. We don't have all the daring storylines that they do and tie-ins to create what was required to make the original Civil War comics storyline. We're taking the concept of Civil War, the core concept of it, and we're applying it to our storytelling in the Cinematic Universe in its own way. We have to find stories that work within the Cinematic Universe to tell their story. I think you'll see when you see the movie, you'll understand how it takes what's come before and builds upon it to create this conflict.

"I think our job is to surprise you. As a comic book fan, I don't want to go in and see what I already know. I prefer to go in and be surprised. I like when a story teller throws a left curve at me and I'm surprised. That's why I want to go see the movie. A literal adaptation, I should just go read the book again. I think that's what's interesting about different movies. We have two hours and they have years worth of issues."

And also they are doing big changes with Cap himself. Stated Cap’s arc in his three movies is about how he begins as a patriot and idealist and ends as a dissident at the opposite end of the spectrum that he started. This is the most flawed we’ll ever see him. Joe Russo discussed how he considered Cap too perfect in the comics, someone “only Steve McQueen could pull off playing.”

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Was Bucky's role small in TFA because Atwell took screen time from him too?

Bucky's role wasn't small in TFA, which was not directed by the Russo brothers.

And Russos are doing what is better for the movies, it's been said multiple times, that MCU is not following comics. So, that's only comic-book nerd's problems, because TWS was nearly perfect film with all decisions, the Russos have made.

Ah, yes. The same old strawman argument. How dare people want to see any in the adaptation the stuff they like from the source. They must be pedantic fools who cannot comprehend change.

And ScarJo actually is FAAAAAAR more capable and sexy actress than boring and wooden VanCamp. She's not suitable for a female lead at all.

Somehow, this argument gets more and more asinine everytime you tell it.

If EVC is so terrible, why'd they hire her?

So now TWS and the Russos suck, all of a sudden?

I'm all for more Sharon Carter, but you guys have made this thread completely intolerable

Suck? No. They're definitely great director, I'm just doubting their interest in Cap's mythos as something other than a gateway to the Avengers.

Sorry this thread has became intolerable to you.

 

[TalismanRing]

There's a damn good reason Scarlett's BW is larger priority and far ahead in screen time of this pair and it's not just popularity but talent. There's a reason Atwell is so highly thought of and now has her own series.

Look at the quality of actresses the other films have and are getting and compare them to EVC who some want to make a leading lady? Gwyneth Paltrow, Natalie Portman, Cate Blanchette, Tilda Swinton, Rachel McAdams.

Which one of these is not like the other?

Maria Hill and Sharon should have been cast with far stronger actors. As it stands there's not much to do with them unless you want to degrade the quality of the films. I blame Whedon for the Cobie hire and yeah Disney, Feige, the Russos whomever for EVC and not recasting when they should have.

 

[Rote]

If EVC is so terrible, why'd they hire her?

Ohhhh, the same old talk again. Okay. Again. One last time. Are you so sure, that was their decision? And if it was, what's the point to hire her and then push for a bigger BW role? Deadline claims they were told about EVC's female lead role back then. And no word about Sharon Carter. So I believe them and still suspect, that she was pushed by Disney. So Russos had to push for BW's bigger role instead.

EXCLUSIVE: I’m told that Marvel Studios has found its female lead for the sequel Captain America: The Winter Soldier. They are in talks with Emily VanCamp, who makes the leap to the big screen after starring in such series as ABC’s Revenge, the WB’s Everwood and Brothers And Sisters. She joins Chris Evans in a sequel that doesn’t have a firm start date, but will be released April 4, 2014. The film is directed by Joe and Anthony Russo. If you recall, the first film started period and morphed into the present. I’ve heard talk that Scarlett Johansson will bring her Black Widow character to the mix. She is repped by UTA and Thruline.

Russos are still not the gods of Marvel. They can be forced to do something, they actually don't like themselves.

Bucky's role wasn't small in TFA, which was not directed by the Russo brothers.

Actually it was pretty small. So by your logic, Russos or not, Atwell took screen time from him, because her role was big.

Ah, yes. The same old strawman argument. How dare people want to see any in the adaptation the stuff they like from the source. They must be pedantic fools who cannot comprehend change.

It's no better or worse than: "How dare Russos step away from comic-books", yes.

 

[TalismanRing]

Wrong topic

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Ohhhh, the same old talk again. Okay. Again. One last time. Are you so sure, that was their decision? And if it was, what's the point to hire her and then push for a bigger BW role? Deadline claims they were told about EVC's female lead role back then. And no word about Sharon Carter. So I believe them and still suspect, that she was pushed by Disney. So Russos had to push for BW's bigger role instead. Russos are still not the gods of Marvel. They can be forced to do something, they actually don't like themselves.

Oh yeah. The Disney conspiracy.

For some reason, Disney forced Marvel to cast Emily VanCamp, even if they didn't want to.

And then they stood by and let her role be reduced.

Because it was just really important to them that she play Sharon, nothing else mattered.

Actually it was pretty small. So by your logic, Russos or not, Atwell took screen time from him, because her role was big.

He was established as Bucky's lifelong friend. He had some funny lines. He was shown fighting with Steve. HE GOT HIS FULL NAME SPOKEN.

But fine. Did Peggy's main role cause less screentime for others, and Bucky in particular having a smaller role?

Yes.

The difference, however, is that Peggy is as much a Captain America character as Bucky.

So her having a large role while Bucky has a smaller one isn't the same as Natasha, who has as much to do with Steve Rogers as Wonder Man does, being put front and center at the expense of Sharon.

 

[Voltron]

There's a damn good reason Scarlett's BW is larger priority and far ahead in screen time of this pair and it's not just popularity but talent. There's a reason Atwell is so highly thought of and now has her own series.

Yeah it's because the Russos pushed for her to have a bigger role and I found her wooden in the role. I do believe EVC also had her own series Revenge for four seasons where she played a Sharon Carter-like character and was only cancelled because you really can't stretch out a revenge story for that long.

Look at the quality of actresses the other films have and are getting and compare them to EVC who some want to make a leading lady? Gwyneth Paltrow, Natalie Portman, Cate Blanchette, Tilda Swinton, Rachel McAdams.

Which one of these is not like the other?

Television actors like Karen Gillan, Kat Dennings, Chris Pratt, Josh Dallas and Seb Stan? And look at former wrestler Dave Bautista. Natalie Portman shows that even good actors can be miscast in a role.

Maria Hill and Sharon should have been cast with far stronger actors. As it stands there's not much to do with them unless you want to degrade the quality of the films. I blame Whedon for the Cobie hire and yeah Disney, Feige, the Russos whomever for EVC and not recasting when they should have.

Yes some actors are stronger than the others, but with good writing and direction the actors can deliver decent performances. Cobie I do believe is filming John Reacher 2 as the main female lead with Tom Cruise.

 

[Spitfire]

EVC will succeed/fail based on her performance as Sharon Carter in CW. A good script and direction from the Russos will only go so far.

But for gods sake don't insult the likes of Natalie Portman and Gwyneth Paltrow by comparing them to EVC. Regardless of what you think of Gwyneth as a person she has done a great job as Pepper Potts and outshone Scarlett in IM2. As for Karen Gillan, Kat Dennings, Chris Pratt, and Dave Bautista they have all proved themselves in Marvel roles which EVC arguably remains to do.

I do feel for EVC as she's in a tough position being asked to create chemistry with Cap that matches Peggy & Nat. The possibility that she will start to bond with Cap by flirting over coffee at Peggys funeral doesn't help - I hope this isn't true as its very distasteful imo and willl just upset Steggy fans. Add in the fact that Cap is dating Peggys neice and she has a tough role to sell.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Is everything a goddamn conspiracy to hurt a character you like?

Did it occur to anyone that maybe Black Widow had the role she did in Winter Soldier because it made complete sense from a storytelling standpoint and a character standpoint (the hardened cynical morally flexible spy plays off the idealistic old fashioned steadfast moralistic hero better than a young idealistic Shield agent that has no history yet with our main hero) and an MCU continuity standpoint (did I mention that Black Widow had more history with Steve than Sharon did up to this point)?

I fail to see how Sharon got treated with a lack of respect. As a character she got assigned to watch over Steve Rogers by Nick Fury (that's a pretty important job for an upcoming agent). She was written as a character brave enough to confront Crossbones, a dangerous and highly trained mercenary at gunpoint when he wanted the Hellicarriers launched. Widow was pushing Steve to start dating her because SHE respected her that much.

So it's obvious her character got treated with respect by the directors and writers and the studio.

And she seems to have a bigger role in this movie than she did last time.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Is everything a goddamn conspiracy to hurt a character you like?

Did it occur to anyone that maybe Black Widow had the role she did in Winter Soldier because it made complete sense from a storytelling standpoint and a character standpoint (the hardened cynical morally flexible spy plays off the idealistic old fashioned steadfast moralistic hero better than a young idealistic Shield agent that has no history yet with our main hero) and an MCU continuity standpoint (did I mention that Black Widow had more history with Steve than Sharon did up to this point)?

1) "hardened cynical morally flexible spy plays off the idealistic old fashioned steadfast moralistic hero" is exactly Sharon and Steve's dynamic.

Sharon being "a young idealistic SHIELD agent" has never really been a thing.

2) The Russos came in when the script was complete, and campaigned to have Black Widow get "a much bigger role". They admitted this.

The screenplay was ready to go, but they had ideas of their own. Namely that they needed a lot more Black Widow.

For Black Widow to get such a massive role, something had to be sacrificed. Unless the movie was originally seventy minutes long.

The Russos have also said that Steve's neighbor who is actually a SHIELD agent wasn't originally Sharon.

So where was Sharon before they turned some random bit character into Sharon?

But I'm guessing none of that means anything because movies aren't comics or some other tired old rhetoric.

I fail to see how Sharon got treated with a lack of respect. As a character she got assigned to watch over Steve Rogers by Nick Fury (that's a pretty important job for an upcoming agent). She was written as a character brave enough to confront Crossbones, a dangerous and highly trained mercenary at gunpoint when he wanted the Hellicarriers launched. Widow was pushing Steve to start dating her because SHE respected her that much.

So it's obvious her character got treated with respect by the directors and writers and the studio.

How about the fact that Sharon was always a seasoned SHIELD agent, and the Russos made her into a young, inexperienced agent who lost to Crossbones even though she had a gun on him. There's your respect from the directors.

Natasha pushing Steve to date her doesn't do Sharon any favors, since the movie doesn't spend any time of showing much about Steve and Sharon, or about Sharon herself. Not many thought much about the pairing because of Natasha's recommendation.

What most took away is that Natasha is a good friend because she's trying to get Steve someone. It was for Natasha's benefit.

And she seems to have a bigger role in this movie than she did last time.

Had she had a proper role to begin with, we wouldn't be having any of these conversations about "so much going on" and her being shoehorned.

 

[Mike5575]

Man, reading all of these comments makes me feel so sad for Sharon.

I don't know. Maybe it's not a conspiracy theory. One of the reasons the Russos teamed up BW with Cap is because she's a shady character and Cap has a very black and white view of the world, where Widow sees nothing but shades of grey. I'm sure Sharon Carter is like a Black Widow clone in the comics, having a similar viewpoint and all, but the general audience wouldn't know that. Time would be needed to establish that dynamic between Sharon and Steve. Where, with Widow, they wouldn't need to establish that dynamic, it's already there. Then, there's the thing with Black Widow being popular or something. Fans want to see more of Black Widow, or maybe Kevin Feige forced them because he loves Black Widow. Or maybe Disney forced the Russos because they love Black Widow. Well, they don't love her enough to make that much merchandise. t: