Civil War Sharon carter A.K.A. Agent 13 - Part 3

[BullMcGiveny]

When did Steve ask her to have sex?

 

[MbJ]

^^BW and BP DOES NOT have more chemistry than Steve and Sharon.

Way better chemistry, and I say that as someone who despises that pairing.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

All these frequent invocations of chemistry are funny.

convenient, too. Since you can't break it down or analyse it. You just say that such and such didn't have chemistry. Truly the recourse of the indolent.

I thought they had fine chemistry, much better than in TWS.

I didn't think there needed to be any flirty undercurrent to BW/BP's interactions, especially given that his father also died. But I guess we're not gonna say anything about that.

But, for the same of argument, lets say EVC and Chris lack chemistry. I ask again, why was she hired?

 

[Voltron]

Yeah, why is it that when Peggy herself kissed Cap, where was the NO HOMO indignation? But when Cap himself kissed Sharon that's a NO HOMO? Such an inane reasoning, also because these Cap movies are based on the comics, Cap and Sharon have a half a century history. The NO HOMO is a plainly idiotic double standard excuse.

Also I agree, BP's father just died too, no complaints about BW/BP. More DOUBLE STANDARDS which seems to only apply to Sharon.

Extremely unfair that on top of the Russos giving Sharon a short intro in TWS, most of her original CW storyboard development and scenes were cut. Even her eulogy speech was cut where it gives light to her relationship with Peggy!

 

[ScarlettW]

All these frequent invocations of chemistry are funny.

convenient, too. Since you can't break it down or analyse it. You just say that such and such didn't have chemistry. Truly the recourse of the indolent.

I thought they had fine chemistry, much better than in TWS.

I didn't think there needed to be any flirty undercurrent to BW/BP's interactions, especially given that his father also died. But I guess we're not gonna say anything about that.

But, for the same of argument, lets say EVC and Chris lack chemistry. I ask again, why was she hired?

I didn't say that BW and BP were flirting, I said that there was a chemistry there between the actors, it was something perceived by others. Chemistry doesn't mean romance and flirtation, there is chemistry between her and Clint, they are just friends. She also has chemistry with Steve, but they are just friends.
The scenes of BW and BP were great, the chemistry helped a lot to sympathize with their interaction.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Chemistry doesn't mean romance and flirtation, there is chemistry between her and Clint, they are just friends. She also has chemistry with Steve, but they are just friends.

And yet both were perceived by many, actors included, to be a basis for more.

The scenes of BW and BP were great, the chemistry helped a lot to sympathize with their interaction.

All those glances, soft comments and cheeky smirks didn't bring anything to the table aside from showing off.

Anyhoo, we can keep dancing around this until Captain America 4: One More Day, but I'm guessing no one will will answer the question at the center of it all;

If EV/CE lack chemistry, or EVC is such a bad actress, then why did the Russos hire her, and why did they bring her back?

 

[Rote]

Yeah, why is it that when Peggy herself kissed Cap, where was the NO HOMO indignation? But when Cap himself kissed Sharon that's a NO HOMO? Such an inane reasoning, also because these Cap movies are based on the comics, Cap and Sharon have a half a century history. The NO HOMO is a plainly idiotic double standard excuse.

You clearly don't understand the concept of "NO HOMO". It's not about characters' actions, it's about how it plays out in the narrative. Steve was clearly in love with Peggy, they had a developed relationship, so their kiss felt natural and earned, no matter who initiated it, the audience saw that Steve had feelings for Peggy even before and without that kiss. On the other hand, Staron's kiss feels shoehorned, unearned and extremely rushed, not appropriate in this time and place, without any development whatsoever. It's like the filmmakers panicked: "Oh, no, we need urgent evidence, that Steve isn't in love with Bucky! Look, LOOK, HE IS INTO GIRLS! HE LIKES KISSING THEM!" Because without a need for the NO HOMO flag they would have waited with kiss until IW. Just like they are doing with Wanda and Vision. IIRC, even Evans said on the set, that Steve is ONLY looking and he and Sharon have time. I bet, the kiss was added at the reshoots, because people and media shipped Stucky too much.
Sharon's character in this movie is the very embodiment of the NO HOMO concept. No matter what happened in the comic-books, they are irrelevant to the MCU, which is its own universe.

Also I agree, BP's father just died too, no complaints about BW/BP. More DOUBLE STANDARDS which seems to only apply to Sharon.

BW/BP are not a thing and never intented to be. And never will be. And nobody wanted to make out with another one.

Even her eulogy speech was cut where it gives light to her relationship with Peggy!

They love Natasha very much, but still they've cut her scenes too: a bit with Steve about her parents and the whole scene with TChalla.

If EV/CE lack chemistry, or EVC is such a bad actress, then why did the Russos hire her, and why did they bring her back?

You've already got the answer, but you don't like it, so you dismiss it as impossible. It's on you now.
But okay. Let's say, that it was the Russos, who hired her. But they are not Gods. Yes, they are VERY good filmmakers, but it's possible even for them to make mistakes. The process of pre-production is extremely stressful and TWS was their FIRST big movie. Maybe VanCamp is not THAT bad, but simply bad, compared to all the other MCU actors with decent roles. Maybe they had very limited time to cast actress for Sharon, maybe they couldn't find any other decent or more appropriate variant. We will never know all the details. There are just too many variations.

Why did they bring her back? They said so themselves: "We can only keep Cap romantically uninvolved for so long". Maybe it's contract obligations. Again. We just don't know. Why didn't they recast her? Well, they had many and MUCH more important concernes, doing Civil War. Maybe there wasn't any time, maybe Marvel or Disney didn't want to spend extra money to find a new actress and making a new contract just for the sake of one movie. Too many possibilites.

But your argument about the Russos being obsessed only by the Avengers does not hold water. They gave Bucky a huge role here and very decent in TWS, while he's not an Avenger at all. And no, I'm not taking all these poor excuses, that he was only a plot device. He still has much time and some development. He got more of an arc and development, than Natasha, which Russos love so much. He got MUCH MORE, than War Machine in all Iron Man's films. The Russos constantly praise Sebastian Stan everywhere.
They gave Crossbones very decent role in TWS, considering, that he is a villain, not a hero and Pierce was the main antagonist. They gave Falcon decent role in TWS, while in that time he wasn't an Avenger. In CW he also wasn't sidelined. Even considering, how crowded CW was, they've found decent time for EVERY Cap's character, aside from Sharon. And no, I'm not counting the Crossbones here, because he's a villain, he still had a decent role in TWS and it's more on Marvel now, they are famous for their problem with villains. Look at what happened with Strucker. It's not on the Russos only. If they didn't need Zemo here, maybe they would have given Cross more time.

So, yes, isn't that suspicious, that of all the good characters ONLY Sharon got sidelined? The Russos have found time for everyone, who needed it, except her. Isn't that suspicious, that of all the characters in the airport fight ONLY Sharon got excluded from there? Isn't that suspicious, that even with all of this Civil War concept, she still had a bigger role initially, more development, just like everyone else, but at the end of the day got cut? (Except for the Hawkeye, but we know, that his role was scaled down because Renner needed to shoot the other movie at the same time. Which we can't say about EVC, because she didn't have any other projects filming.) Isn't that suspicious, that of all the actors ONLY VanCamp was not praised by the Russos at all? Isn't that suspicious, that they've talked more even about Pepper, which is also not an Avenger at all and even isn't in the movie? Isn't that suspicious, that rumors, which talked about her being a bad actress, predicted her small role long before the movie coming out?
The thing is, I don't believe in such a coincidences.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

You've already got the answer, but you don't like it, so you dismiss it as impossible. It's on you now.

It isn't that I don't like it, its that it is completely ridiculous and I feel myself getting older and frailer every time you bring it up.

But okay. Let's say, that it was the Russos, who hired her. But they are not Gods. Yes, they are VERY good filmmakers, but it's possible even for them to make mistakes. The process of pre-production is extremely stressful and TWS was their FIRST big movie. Maybe VanCamp is not THAT bad, but simply bad, compared to all the other MCU actors with decent roles.

Maybe they had very limited time to cast actress for Sharon,

As I recall, they were hired around 8+ months before shooting began.

Cap, BW, Bucky, Fury, Hill and Zola were all previously cast. And even Anthony Mackie was hired before the Russos.

Were they too busy casting Batroc?

They had plenty of time.

maybe they couldn't find any other decent or more appropriate variant. We will never know all the details. There are just too many variations.

Yes.

Young female actresses are a rarity in Hollywood. Almost none of them want to be in a summer blockbuster where they might kiss Chris Evans.

Why did they bring her back? They said so themselves: "We can only keep Cap romantically uninvolved for so long". Maybe it's contract obligations. Again. We just don't know. Why didn't they recast her? Well, they had many and MUCH more important concernes, doing Civil War. Maybe there wasn't any time, maybe Marvel or Disney didn't want to spend extra money to find a new actress and making a new contract just for the sake of one movie. Too many possibilites.

Pretty sure contract negotiations aren't the purview of film directors.

Even if it was a contract thing, they could have got out of it.

But your argument about the Russos being obsessed only by the Avengers does not hold water. They gave Bucky a huge role here and very decent in TWS, while he's not an Avenger at all.

The Russos constantly praise Sebastian Stan everywhere.

Except the script was for CA:TWS was already written before they were hired.

Even so, Bucky had 108 words of dialogue. Less than even Sharon.

Bucky turned out popular. Of course they capitalized on that in CW.

And no, I'm not taking all these poor excuses, that he was only a plot device. He still has much time and some development. He got more of an arc and development, than Natasha, which Russos love so much.

Yeah, he was a plot device, and hell no, he didn't. Nothing changed about his character.

He got MUCH MORE, than War Machine in all Iron Man's films.

That says more about Rhodey than it does about Bucky, frankly.

They gave Crossbones very decent role in TWS, considering, that he is a villain, not a hero and Pierce was the main antagonist.

And then wasted him in the next movie, like they did with Sharon.

They gave Falcon decent role in TWS, while in that time he wasn't an Avenger.

Again. The script was already written when they were brought in, Mackie was already hired with a certain role in mind.

In CW he also wasn't sidelined.

He kind of was, actually. He just followed Cap around.

So, yes, isn't that suspicious, that of all the good characters ONLY Sharon got sidelined?

So I notice you didn't refute the Russos being obsessed with the Avengers.

The Russos have found time for everyone, who needed it, except her. Isn't that suspicious, that of all the characters in the airport fight ONLY Sharon got excluded from there? Isn't that suspicious, that even with all of this Civil War concept, she still had a bigger role initially, more development, just like everyone else, but at the end of the day got cut? (Except for the Hawkeye, but we know, that his role was scaled down because Renner needed to shoot the other movie at the same time. Which we can't say about EVC, because she didn't have any other projects filming.) Isn't that suspicious, that of all the actors ONLY VanCamp was not praised by the Russos at all?
Isn't that suspicious, that they've talked more even about Pepper, which is also not an Avenger at all and even isn't in the movie?

I'm gonna make it simple for you.

M&M wrote the script before the Russos were hired.

Stan and Mackie were attached to the project before the Russos were.

The Russos wrote BW into the script, even though she isn't a Captain America character.

Whatever you wanna say about Bucky and Sam's role, Natasha's role was much bigger, and described universally as the co-lead.

TWS came out and Sam and Bucky turned out to be very popular.

For CW, the Russos brought back Bucky and Sam who were popular and talked them up and their actors.

EVC, having been hired after the Russos rewrote the script, drew the short straw. She didn't have much to do, and as a result, she went unnoticed.

Not gonna touch the matter of RDJ because that's a whole thing.

They lobbied for Spider-Man for months, and talked up his role, talked about him being important to the movie. They lied.

They had the start of the relationship between Vision and Wanda Why did this have to be in a Captain America movie if they aren't obsessed with the Avengers?

They brought Clint back even though he had left the Avengers. Why would hey if they aren't obsessed with the Avengers?

They brought in Scott, who is apparently willing to gi back to jail. He isn't an Avenger yet, but he is a headliner and in effect the same thing.

They made Black Panther a huge part of the movie, with his own personal plotline that doesn't effect Cap or Bucky's development in the least. Again, like Scott, not an Avenger yet, but a future headliner.

Black Panther's plotline is as big or bigger than Bucky's, and much bigger than Sam's.

With all that in mind, I find it much more likely that the Russos aren't any magnanimous than benefits them than to believe that Emily is a terrible person or actress.

Isn't that suspicious, that rumors, which talked about her being a bad actress, predicted her small role long before the movie coming out?
The thing is, I don't believe in such a coincidences.

Give me a break. We knew she had a small role because she was tweeting from holliday while filming was underway.

 

[Rote]

It isn't that I don't like it, its that it is completely ridiculous and I feel myself getting older and frailer every time you bring it up.

And for me your argument about the Russos being obsessed with the Avengers is completetly ridiculous. Because they are obviously not. Why? Are they 5 years olds? What is even their motive in doing so? Are all the Avengers interesting characters just because they are the Avengers? NO. They are interesting, because the filmmakers make them so. The Russos like interesting characters and storytelling. You can tell it, watching Community. If the character is entertaining, then it doesn't matter if he's Avenger or not.
You can see it in TWS. Well, okay, maybe they love BW too much, but she got the time female lead should get. But they didn't bring back Clint, who is the Avenger and SHIELD agent. They didn't bring back any other Avengers. They made Pierce one of the best villains of the MCU. They did justice to all the characters in TWS, aside from Sharon, and you're still bitter about her alone. I love Bucky as a character very much and I was satisfied with his time in TWS, considering what kind of the story they were telling.

They had plenty of time.

They don't spend all their time doing casting. Again, it was their FIRST big movie project. They were not THAT experienced.

Young female actresses are a rarity in Hollywood. Almost none of them want to be in a summer blockbuster where they might kiss Chris Evans.

Good actors are always a rarity.

Even if it was a contract thing, they could have got out of it.

You simply don't know that. If the studio didn't want to pay more, the Russos couldn't overpower Marvel or Disney.

Except the script was for CA:TWS was already written before they were hired.

So? They didn't cut Sam away to bring back Clint or another Avenger.

Even so, Bucky had 108 words of dialogue. Less than even Sharon.

ARE YOU EVEN SERIOUS? This was his ROLE in the movie!! He was mindless killing machine! That was all the story about! What was the purpose to make him talk more? And for what? To screw up the point of his character? Stan acted amazingly without much words. But still he got his arc, development and decent time. No one scaled down his role for the Avengers.

Bucky turned out popular. Of course they capitalized on that in CW.

So, in the end of the day, it's not only about the Avengers after all?

Yeah, he was a plot device, and hell no, he didn't. Nothing changed about his character.

Have you even seen the same movie as I have? Nothing changed? One could argue, that nothing changed about Cap since the serum. Bucky's got a redemption arc, he didn't want to trust anyone initially, even Cap, he didn't want to connect with Steve, he was concerned with laying low and staying alive. In the end he makes his FIRST important choice to go back in cryo, he chooses to sacrifice himself for the sake of other people. He is on the road to become a true hero again. Nothing really changed about Natasha, she hesitated between sides from the start. Yes, she was officially team Tony, but nothing really changed, as her heart was always with Steve. When she saw, that the situation required that, she helped him. As Tony said, she is the double agent by her nature.
And character's arc doesn't always have to be about huge changes. Once again, Cap himself hasn't changed much since TFA. If Bucky wasn't an interesting character with proper development, he wouldn't have become popular. And guess who made him popular? The Russos. Nobody remembered Bucky after TFA, that was the movie, which played him quite unfair. That was the movie, he had a small role and was more of the plot device. And Commandos too. Only Peggy has got a decent role. But still it's somehow only the Russos, who play Cap's characters dirty.
As for the Sam, yes, it was the Russos too, who made him popular. But of course, you prefer to dismiss it, as if it was all just an accident.

That says more about Rhodey than it does about Bucky, frankly.

It says more about how Marvel treat supporting characters, aside from female leads being love interests. It's not on the Russos specifically. Does Sif, for example, got a decent time in Thor movies? No, because she's not a love interest. But you prefer to ignor all of it, still bitter, because the Russos sidelined one single Sharon.

And then wasted him in the next movie, like they did with Sharon.

And still he, being a villain, got a decent role at least in TWS.

He kind of was, actually. He just followed Cap around.

Which is doing basically the majority of supporting characters in the MCU. But that's not the point. It's diffirent kind of discussion and different level of problem. At least he got a decent screen time, as all the others, aside from Sharon.

So I notice you didn't refute the Russos being obsessed with the Avengers.

No, it's actually YOU, who still can't explain my points about Pepper, about Sharon having initially bigger role with all the other Avengers, but being excluded from the airport fight, about the Russos not praising VanCamp, although they praised even Martin Freeman, who got a cameo-like role and so on. So, you just prefer to ignor them.

For CW, the Russos brought back Bucky and Sam who were popular and talked them up and their actors.

Marvel doesn't work like that. They make popular those characters, whom they want to make popular. They wanted to make Bucky and Sam popular in TWS. They did it. They wanted to make popular Black Panther, Ant-Man, Spider-Man. They did it. They even knew, who to cast to make Aunt May popular.

EVC, having been hired after the Russos rewrote the script, drew the short straw. She didn't have much to do, and as a result, she went unnoticed.

Once again, they know, how to make characters popular with a decent actors. Once again, Bucky wasn't popular A ONE BIT before the Russos. If they wanted, seeing potential and having a good actor, they would have done it.

They lobbied for Spider-Man for months, and talked up his role, talked about him being important to the movie. They lied.

They had the start of the relationship between Vision and Wanda Why did this have to be in a Captain America movie if they aren't obsessed with the Avengers?

They brought Clint back even though he had left the Avengers. Why would hey if they aren't obsessed with the Avengers?

They brought in Scott, who is apparently willing to gi back to jail. He isn't an Avenger yet, but he is a headliner and in effect the same thing.

They made Black Panther a huge part of the movie, with his own personal plotline that doesn't effect Cap or Bucky's development in the least. Again, like Scott, not an Avenger yet, but a future headliner.

Black Panther's plotline is as big or bigger than Bucky's, and much bigger than Sam's.

With all that in mind, I find it much more likely that the Russos aren't any magnanimous than benefits them than to believe that Emily is a terrible person or actress.

Did you forget the title of the movie? It's called Civil War for a reason. It's not because the Russos WANTED SO MUCH to bring all the Avengers, it's because it's the very concept of the Civil War idea. All superheroes fight. The more the better. Doesn't mean every Avenger gets a decent role. Hawkeye and Scott have very small roles. Tony is the main antagonist in this movie, well, I agree with you, that he has got too much attention, but he still hadn't prevented all the other importants characters to get a decent roles. Vision and Wanda actually haven't got THAT much.
Spider Man and Black Panther mean MONEY. It's studios agenda. Of course they got what they got, but they didn't hijack the whole movie. And I don't know what are you talking about, Bucky's arc is at the heart of Civil War. It's because of him Cap and IM fight, not because of BP. But, again, it's another topic of discussion. But still you can't compare his treatment with Sharon. He and Sam still have much more than her.

My point is, BP, SM, IM - well, maybe, yes, there was too much of them for the solo movie. But it's not quite the same problem, we are discussing here. If the Russos really wanted, they could have given Sharon AT LEAST the same time and attention as Sam. Without any doubt. They could have made it about Sharon/Sam/Bucky, not just Sam and Bucky. They could have showed what happened with her at the end of the movie, spending just 5-10 seconds on that. There could be many characters in the same scene, they are not necessary stealing too much time from one another. To think that among ALL the characters, there wasn't enough time ONLY for Sharon and only Sharon is ridiculous. Again, she was in the airport fight initially. But nobody got cut except her. You still can't find a plausible explanation for that. She had a bigger role, even though at that point Civil War already had so many characters. Clint had a bigger role too.
I still bet, that when they began rehearses in pre-production, they saw, that VanCamp is not good for a big role, so the simple solution was to scale down her role and leave only plot-device functions.
Because I can see it too. With a more important role in CW it's more evident than in TWS, that VanCamp lacks charisma and chemistry with Evans. It's simply boring to look at her. She doesn't know, how to hold screen for a long periods of time.

Give me a break. We knew she had a small role because she was tweeting from holliday while filming was underway.

Oh, really? If I go back, what would I find here? I distinctly remember, how this thread claimed, that she might be a female lead, filming until the end of the summer. And her tweeting doesn't mean that much. Many actors, including Stan, had some holiday during filming. Olsen filmed only for a 5 weeks and wrapped pretty early. Bettany wasn't there long too. EVC was still filming in August, when Olsen was nowhere to be seen. And many here were still hoping for a decent role for her even after the trailers. When she was depicted in the promo art with team Cap, many were sure, that she will got a much bigger role this time and would be in a airport fight. Many thought then, that it's Wanda, who will get a small role. But that rumor somehow knew, that she isn't in the battle and she has a small role. Even I didn't believe it back then, because of the promo arts.

 

[Rote]

This is the famous list of characters' screetime. The author clearly has some weird way to count it, because all his numbers are too low even for the leading roles. Maybe he counts only the time, the character is actually on screen. But still, you can at least compare the characters with each other. Yes, Tony gets too much, I agree on that, but on the other hand, he is the other side of the conflict. It's understandable. Yes, it's more of an Avengers movie, but still Cap's characters were not sidelined much, they are all at the top of the list, except for the Sharon. Even Zemo, being a villain in the shadows and not an Avenger at all, gets a decent time.
And no, TChalla DIDN'T get more time, than Sam.

Cap - 36
Tony - 33:45
Bucky - 21
Natasha - 11:45
Sam - 10:30
Black Panther - 10:15
Wanda - 10
Zemo - 9:15
Spider-Man 8:30
Vision - 7:15
War Machine - 6
Ant-Man - 4:45
Hawkeye - 4:45
Sharon Carter - 3:45
General Ross - 3:15
Crossbones - 1:45
Howard Stark - 1:30
T'Chaka - 1:30
Everett Ross - 1:15
May Parker - 1

 

[BullMcGiveny]

My point is, BP, SM, IM - well, maybe, yes, there was too much of them for the solo movie. But it's not quite the same problem, we are discussing here. If the Russos really wanted, they could have given Sharon AT LEAST the same time and attention as Sam. Without any doubt. They could have made it about Sharon/Sam/Bucky, not just Sam and Bucky. They could have showed what happened with her at the end of the movie, spending just 5-10 seconds on that. There could be many characters in the same scene, they are not necessary stealing too much time from one another. To think that among ALL the characters, there wasn't enough time ONLY for Sharon and only Sharon is ridiculous.

Yes, they could have. But they didn't because they didn't care.

I find that infinitely more likely likely than EVC, who has headlined her own successful show and is able to find steady work as an actress, is somehow such a terrible actress.

Not gonna address the rest of your BS because I already did that.

 

[Rote]

You know, maybe the truth is somewhere in between your assumptions and my assumptions. Maybe they casted EVC, keeping in mind, that Sharon's role for TWS is small, so Disney didn't want to spend much money on a more interesting and expensive actress. Then they thought they could squeeze from her something decent in CW, even though she's a cheap actress, but they were wrong. But it was already too late to recast another actress for the supporting, not lead, role just for the sake of one movie. And anyway, it's always not very good to change actors halfway. Maybe the contract says they can't do it, if the actor don't want to go himself.( Terrence Howard made an ultimatum, he wanted more money. Edward Norton also wasn't happy with the studio.) So, they decided to scale down her role. I'm not saying that she is THAT terrible, just not good enough, compared with other MCU actors.

Yes, they could have. But they didn't because they didn't care.

It's ridiculous. THEY are the ones, who make the characters interesting, not the other way around. And why didn't they care? Sharon is not just simple supporting character like Sam. She's meant to be Cap's love interest and his end game. Now you are simply claiming that they don't care only about Sharon, while caring about all the other important Cap's characters. Really, why? Is Black Panther interesting for them? Before them, he hasn't even existed in the MCU! Just like Zemo. It's in their power to make character interesting. Ant-Man has a very small role, but still they managed to make him even more compelling and entertaining, than in his whole solo-film.
Really, they already had the script, where Sharon was in the airport fight. Some work had already been done. They had storyboards with her having a bigger role. But you are still claiming, that they didn't care, so they cut ONLY her from that fight. It doesn't make any sense. They could have had her with Steve, Sam and Bucky since after the Berlin center escape, it wouldn't have taken much effort. Even in case if they didn't care much.

because I already did that.

No, you don't. You still don't have any explanations, for example, why they care even about non-Avenger Pepper more, than Sharon, but call BS on my arguments. Well, whatever, dude. It's not an interesting discussion for me, when my opponent just ignores the arguments, which don't fit his theory.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

You still don't have any explanations, for example, why they care even about non-Avenger Pepper more

The only time they talked about Pepper was in the context of Tony's mindset. They talked about Tony.

 

[Rote]

The only time they talked about Pepper was in the context of Tony's mindset. They talked about Tony.

One could have expected them to talk about Steve's mindset regarding Sharon, but okay I'll take that. But how would you explain, that when asked about Zemo's and Freeman's roles, which are not Avengers at all, they've said, that they play a very interesting characters and the actors are amazing? And it's when Freeman's role is actually not interesting in this movie a single bit. I love Freeman very much, but even for me Everett Ross had too little to do to praise him here. But when asked about VanCamp's role... Well, I bet, you remember that better than me. "She has a bigger role" - it's all they could manage. And even that wasn't entirely true.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I see this thread is a car wreck as always, even months after the movie has dropped.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

One could have expected them to talk about Steve's mindset regarding Sharon, but okay I'll take that. But how would you explain, that when asked about Zemo's and Freeman's roles, which are not Avengers at all, they've said, that they play a very interesting characters and the actors are amazing? And it's when Freeman's role is actually not interesting in this movie a single bit. I love Freeman very much, but even for me Everett Ross had too little to do to praise him here. But when asked about VanCamp's role... Well, I bet, you remember that better than me. "She has a bigger role" - it's all they could manage. And even that wasn't entirely true.

Freeman's role was a secret at first, and people kept asking, so they hyped it up with BS because it sounded better than admitting it was a cameo. Plus, his role is ultimately not up to them, unlike Sharon.

As for Zemo, well, he's not much of Zemo aside from the name. He's practically their own creation, so it isn't a surprise they've talked him up. And even so, the Zemo they delivered is an enemy of the Avengers on the whole, not an enemy of Cap specifically.

 

[Rote]

Freeman's role was a secret at first, and people kept asking, so they hyped it up with BS because it sounded better than admitting it was a cameo. Plus, his role is ultimately not up to them, unlike Sharon.

As for Zemo, well, he's not much of Zemo aside from the name. He's practically their own creation, so it isn't a surprise they've talked him up. And even so, the Zemo they delivered is an enemy of the Avengers on the whole, not an enemy of Cap specifically.

You just confirmed my point, you know, with your stretching. (What actually prevented Russos to hype up EVC's role like Freeman's?) It's not about the Avengers AT ALL. It's about Russos being good filmmakers, and having power to create an interesting character, regardless, if he/she is Avenger or not. And wanting to do so with good actors. It's in their power to make character relevant to the Avengers. Bucky wasn't meant to be an Avenger, or relevant to them, but the Russos liking Stan very much, figured out, how to make him relevant and being the heart of the story about the two leads of Avengers.
But you like double standards. For you, for some reason, the Russos, caring about ALL the actors, aside from VanCamp, means that they care only about the Avengers, when it's suitable for your theory. Meanwhile, they praised even Alfre Woodard, who has basically a cameo in the movie,talked how incredibly great she was in this one scene and so on.

I believe it would have been a completely different story had another actress portrayed Sharon Carter.
Emily Vancamp's lack of presence on screen and chemistry with Chris Evans. I truly thought Evans could have chemistry with a stick, but she really proves the exception. Granted, I can't help but mentally compare her with Atwell's portrayal of Peggy, and she just comes off the loser in every comparison. Atwell and Evans crackle onscreen. Atwell makes me *believe* she is punching hell out of people onscreen, whereas VanCamp's scenes with the Winter Soldier make her look as if she's doing spinkicks in ballet class. Atwell's pitched her voice to have authority; VanCamp's is just breathy and annoying. Despite the fact that she has been given more of materials to work with in CW, the actress simply does not have enough charisma to materialize any of her plot into something that the audience would find memorable or exciting.

Black Panther's Dora Milaje had 5 seconds of screen time and has only line “Move, or you will be moved” and she turned out to be about 10 times more memorable than Sharon Carter.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

You just confirmed my point, you know, with your stretching. (What actually prevented Russos to hype up EVC's role like Freeman's?)

I haven't, actually. Oh, man. See what I mean when I talk about addressing your points?

There's nothing special about Freeman's role, they hyped him because people kept asking about him.

Had people kept asking about Sharon, they might have hyped her. But people didn't, likely because of how terribly they handled her role in TWS.

But oh, that's EVC's fault too, because she's simply horrible. It's amazing how she manages to get employed at all.

If you want to argue semantics, then fine. They aren't obsessed with the Avengers, just with headliner characters, which is mostly the Avengers, and characters who will inevitably become Avengers.

 

[ScarlettW]

Doing a google search, I found this news on Deadline, one of the most trusted sites. Site list five actresses, none of them is Emily VanCamp: Emelia Clarke, Jessica Brown Findlay, Teresa Palmer, Imogen Poots and Alison Brie.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/five-ac...ole-black-widow-might-drop-by-as-well-347013/

The rumor that she was a choice of studio can be true, with her series about to be canceled, it makes sense because would attract Marvel fans to see if she was a good choice or not. Russo Brothers will not say that she wasn't their choice, it would be disrespectful to the actress. Thinking, they were more interested in Natasha that probably didn't care about the three minutes of Sharon. EVC is an actress nominated for an Emmy, less to worry about.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I am never sure what exactly the argument is in this thread or whose side anyone is on exactly.

 

[Voltron]

You clearly don't understand the concept of "NO HOMO". It's not about characters' actions, it's about how it plays out in the narrative. Steve was clearly in love with Peggy, they had a developed relationship, so their kiss felt natural and earned, no matter who initiated it, the audience saw that Steve had feelings for Peggy even before and without that kiss. On the other hand, Staron's kiss feels shoehorned, unearned and extremely rushed, not appropriate in this time and place, without any development whatsoever. It's like the filmmakers panicked: "Oh, no, we need urgent evidence, that Steve isn't in love with Bucky! Look, LOOK, HE IS INTO GIRLS! HE LIKES KISSING THEM!" Because without a need for the NO HOMO flag they would have waited with kiss until IW. Just like they are doing with Wanda and Vision. IIRC, even Evans said on the set, that Steve is ONLY looking and he and Sharon have time. I bet, the kiss was added at the reshoots, because people and media shipped Stucky too much.
Sharon's character in this movie is the very embodiment of the NO HOMO concept. No matter what happened in the comic-books, they are irrelevant to the MCU, which is its own universe.
BW/BP are not a thing and never intented to be. And never will be. And nobody wanted to make out with another one.

I understand that NO HOMO was never a narrative in the Cap movies and it's all Stucky fans' fan fiction they're delusionally projecting and forcing on Marvel. Again, Cap asked Sharon out in TWS laying the foundation for the kiss and the potential for a relationship in the third Cap movie which you're deliberately ignoring. Yep, DOUBLE STANDARDS.

They love Natasha very much, but still they've cut her scenes too: a bit with Steve about her parents and the whole scene with TChalla.

You're really comparing their generous treatment of BW where they blatantly gave her Sharon's role from the comics to Sharon? Paltry excuse.

 

[Voltron]

Doing a google search, I found this news on Deadline, one of the most trusted sites. Site list five actresses, none of them is Emily VanCamp: Emelia Clarke, Jessica Brown Findlay, Teresa Palmer, Imogen Poots and Alison Brie.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/five-ac...ole-black-widow-might-drop-by-as-well-347013/

The rumor that she was a choice of studio can be true, with her series about to be canceled, it makes sense because would attract Marvel fans to see if she was a good choice or not. Russo Brothers will not say that she wasn't their choice, it would be disrespectful to the actress. Thinking, they were more interested in Natasha that probably didn't care about the three minutes of Sharon. EVC is an actress nominated for an Emmy, less to worry about.

Sharon was initially suppose to be the female lead since 2011 according to the writers hence the reason on why these actresses were auditioned. I really love the idea of Teresa Palmer as Sharon.

What changed? The Russos were then hired and even they revealed that they fought for their fav BW to have a bigger role meaning Sharon was replaced. I bet Russos always intended for Sharon to have a small role which is why they hired for cheap EVC to save money. Even EVC said that the Russos were there at her audition. This is why it's total bullshiz they did this to Sharon. They probably thought that since Cap himself wasn't popular the audience wouldn't really know about Sharon. This is so disrespectful to Cap's mythos and Sharon.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

The rumor that she was a choice of studio can be true, with her series about to be canceled, it makes sense because would attract Marvel fans to see if she was a good choice or not. Russo Brothers will not say that she wasn't their choice, it would be disrespectful to the actress.

There is no rumor. It's entirely Rote.

Deadline's announcement of her casting came in February 1st 2013.

I've never kept up with Revenge, but looking up wikipedia page for Revenge in that year, it was barely the middle of the season at that time.

The show would have been far, far from being considered for cancellation at that time. Nevermind Disney intervening to force them hiring EVC is some bid to save the show.

And, realistically, in Feb 2013, two months before CATWS filming, if the Russos had ever intended for Sharon to be a decent role, they'd have cast someone by then.

 

[Dark Raven]

Yeah, when EVC was hired, Revenge was still at the height of its popularity. It was only considered for cancellation when the story had run its course and it felt like it was overstaying its welcome and just dragging stories out, but at that point in 2013 it wasn't anywhere near that yet, since it was still right in the middle of its big first season mystery, which everyone wanted to see to the end.

Didn't the Russos also say that they saw Revenge as almost like an audition tape for EVC for the role of Sharon, which showed what she could do, and that she even looked like the character?

So I don't think she was forced upon the Russos. It sounds more like she was their pick.

 

[Rote]

I understand that NO HOMO was never a narrative in the Cap movies and it's all Stucky fans' fan fiction they're delusionally projecting and forcing on Marvel. Again, Cap asked Sharon out in TWS laying the foundation for the kiss and the potential for a relationship in the third Cap movie which you're deliberately ignoring. Yep, DOUBLE STANDARDS.

Yeah, you clearly don't understand it. So, last time.
The point is that the Russos being the Russos would have otherwise developed Staron before the kiss a little more. Just like they are doing with Wanda and Vision. Because they said, that one of the reasons, why they didn't do Cap+Nat in TWS is that there was too little time for a romance. Also, they said before CW, when asked about the kiss, that they bet, people wouldn't be able to guess, between whom it is. So, they are perfectly aware, how out of nowhere the kiss was. But did it anyway, not waiting IW. Most likely, it's because Marvel PANICKED.
More proof. Initially Evans said, that Steve is open and ONLY looking, VanCamp said, that they are only getting to know each other, ScarJo said, that there is a little room for a romance in CW, M&M said the same thing. That's the evidence, that the kiss was added only at the reshoots as a NOHOMO flag, after all the media went nuts about Stucky after the first trailer.

You're really comparing their generous treatment of BW where they blatantly gave her Sharon's role from the comics to Sharon? Paltry excuse.

No, I'm saying, that if the scene is already in the final script, it means, that they cut it not because they like or dislike the character, but because it doesn't fit in the movie, the pacing, the timing, etc. They are professionals, so even if they like BW very much, they still cut her scenes, because THE MOVIE required to do so. No matter, how big or small the role was.

I bet Russos always intended for Sharon to have a small role which is why they hired for cheap EVC to save money.

NO. Totally not. Wasn't you the one, who claimed, that M&M intended Sharon to have a big role in Cap 3 after TWS? You brought up all the evidence. And no, doesn't matter, that it's M&M, who said it, because they work with the Russos VERY closely. They definitely know, what's going on.
Also, WE HAVE many proofs, that Sharon initially had a decent role in CIVIL WAR being CIVIL WAR ALREADY. Not only she was in the airport battle, she also had more scenes in Berlin center and so on. I've posted it here already, but once again:

Also, it's interesting, that at first VanCamp's name was pretty high in the billing. But later they dropped her name to the end, while all the other actors' names have remained on the same positions. Why would they even put her so high at first, if she has always had the role smaller, than almost all the others? I think her role has been scaled down significantly, considering that she's also present in the airport battle in the early arts.

HOW could her agent even negotiate ONCE to be so high in the billing, if she has always had a small role? With all these other famous names? NO WAY. It's just another proof, that her role was very decent at first.

And now let's remember, how small Freeman's role is in CW. Freeman is a A class actor, who is pretty expensive. But still they hired him, because they kept in mind, that his role will get bigger after CW. So, what did prevent them to do the same with Sharon's actress?

The show would have been far, far from being considered for cancellation at that time. Nevermind Disney intervening to force them hiring EVC is some bid to save the show.

It's not necessary, that they were trying to save the show from cancellation. It could be simply to get it even more popular.

Didn't the Russos also say that they saw Revenge as almost like an audition tape for EVC for the role of Sharon, which showed what she could do, and that she even looked like the character?

Do you really expect the Russos to be so dumb, that when asked about why have they casted her, to confess that it wasn't their choice?

I'm still waiting for anyone to explain, why do the Russos praise every single actor after TWS, even with cameo-like roles like Alfre Woodard, which is not playing an Avenger or any kind of headliner at all, but still can't find at least one good word for the VanCamp's work?
And, as I've said already. It could have been even the Russos indeed, who hired her, but it's possible, that they've made a mistake. I'm not saying, that VanCamp is THAT horrible. Just not on par with other MCU actors. Not good for a big role.