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

[Mike5575]

Cooking with Wanda and Vision.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

There is no double standard. An actor can only work with what they got.

Well what EVC got, what the Russos wrote for her, sucked.

You can fight Rote over it if you want.

There is no need to bend logic. Sharon was given the miniscule role because they clearly weren't as invested in the character as much as others. They made the film they wanted to make. You either liked it or you didn't. Doctor Strange comes out in a couple of days, which reminds me that you and the other guy have been complaining about this for 6+ months. The rest of the Civil War forum is pretty much dead. Don't you think it's time to move on?

But you're also here, for some reason. Taking issue with a post that wasn't directed at you. Protesting a thread no one is forcing you to enter.

 

[Mike5575]

Well what EVC got, what the Russos wrote for her, sucked.

You can fight Rote over it if you want.

Could it be that EVC didn't impress the Russos a all that much which is at least part of the reason she was given such a small role? Given the sheer number of characters in the film, it's not hard to see how she was given such a small role.

I don't visit this part of the board every day, unlike you, so I may be unaware of what other posters are saying at times. It's no big deal.

But you're also here, for some reason. Taking issue with a post that wasn't directed at you. Protesting a thread no one is forcing you to enter.

I'm just pointing out that it maybe time to move on. I would hardly call it protesting.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Could it be that EVC didn't impress the Russos a all that much which is at least part of the reason she was given such a small role? Given the sheer number of characters in the film, it's not hard to see how she was given such a small role.

This has been brought over and over and it's still asinine.

1- They picked her.
2- The number of characters are there because the Russos put them there, in large part as fan service.

I'm just pointing out that it maybe time to move on. I would hardly call it protesting.

When you repeatedly visit this thread to mock and effectively tell people to leave, and you have do so since forever, protesting is a nice word for it.

 

[ARA]

I think the Russos should have just refrained from having her in the movies at all if it ultimately came to this.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Agreed.

 

[Capsfan]

Read through these threads and was surprized that somebody thought that Sharon wasn't a female lead at first in TWS initially and no one brought it up before me. I even found this casting call specifically. This is a legit proof that VanCamp was cast from the start as a leading lady. They didn't cast her for a cameo:

“Captain America: The Winter Soldier” will center on Steve Rogers/Captain America’s relationship with sidekick Bucky, who fell to his apparent death in “Captain America: The First Avenger”. He returns as the brainwashed assassin Winter Soldier. This sequel will be a completely different genre in that it will be a political-thriller themed film, just as the first film was a 1940s World War II themed film. Sam Wilson/Falcon is introduced as a central character that is the first African American superhero. Steve Rogers finds himself with a new love interest in the beautiful and highly athletic Sharon Carter, who is also known as Agent 13 of the international security agency S.H.I.E.L.D.
Starring in “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is five-time Teen Choice Award nominee Chris Evans returning as Steve Rogers/Captain America; five-time Teen Choice Award nominee Emily VanCamp has been cast as Steve Rogers’ love interest and female lead role of Sharon Carter/Agent 13; Academy Award winner Robert Redford has joined the cast and will play the role of a S.H.I.E.L.D. Agency Leader; four-time Golden Globe Award nominee Scarlett Johansson is back as Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow; Academy Award nominee Samuel L. Jackson reprises his role as Nick Fury; the beautiful and talented Cobie Smulders returns as Agent Maria Hill; Sebastian Stan is back as James Buchanan “Bucky” Barnes, who becomes The Winter Soldier. Screen Actors Guild Awards nominee Anthony Mackie has been cast to play the role of Falcon; Frank Grillo will play the supervillain Brock Rumlow/Crossbones.

 

[Vartha]

Never thought she wasn't really. I wish they covered the partnership between Steve and Sharon more.

WELCOME Aboard Capsfan!!!

 

[Voltron]

Never thought she wasn't really. I wish they covered the partnership between Steve and Sharon more.

Me too obviously! MCU Sharon was severely & immensely cheated considering she played/plays an important role to Cap in the comics! F u Russos! F u ScarJo! My anger hides the pain of not seeing Sharon in an expansive role in the Cap movies. t:

 

[MbJ]

Scarjo wrote the script herself. You heard it here first.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

Scarjo wrote the script herself. You heard it here first.

I didn't see where Voltron claimed otherwise. But yeah, she didn't rewrite the script, that's giving her too much credit.

Interestingly, when you compare his relationship with Sharon and Wanda and Vision. The Russos did a great job with Wanda and Vision in CW. It didn't feel rushed, the scenes of them were beautiful. Lizzie has chemistry with Paul Bettany. I'm not a fan of Wanda and Vision together, but it was good in the film. People in my theater were all awwww
This is proof that they know how to build a good relationship.

If people are gonna keep blaming the relationship's portrayal on EVC, maybe they can at least keep who is responsible straight.

Neither Russo hired Lizzie. That was Joss Whedon.
Neither Russo hired Bettany. That was Whedon/Favreau.

 

[Capsfan]

Never thought she wasn't really. I wish they covered the partnership between Steve and Sharon more.

WELCOME Aboard Capsfan!!!

I wish, they played it differently. I didn't get any feeling, that Steve actually cares a bit about Sharon herself She was hurt by Bucky and he just shrugged it off. That's why it was a little bit creepy. Steve is not one of those guys, who only want to make out.

Aw, thank you!

If people are gonna keep blaming the relationship's portrayal on EVC, maybe they can at least keep who is responsible straight.

Neither Russo hired Lizzie. That was Joss Whedon.
Neither Russo hired Bettany. That was Whedon/Favreau.

I don't think the poster was blaming EVC. The point is, when the Russos actually want, they can show a good relationship, so in case of Sharon they just didn't care much unfortunately.
I think, they should've dropped it completely in that case, but, oh, well. Fanservice.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

I don't think the poster was blaming EVC. The point is, when the Russos actually want, they can show a good relationship, so in case of Sharon they just didn't care much unfortunately.
I think, they should've dropped it completely in that case, but, oh, well. Fanservice.

I agree with this, and I've expressed the same in the past. That angered several posters who repeatedly insist that the Russos aren't to blame.

 

[Capsfan]

I agree with this, and I've expressed the same in the past. That angered several posters who repeatedly insist that the Russos aren't to blame.

I've read this thread. And to be honest, we just don't know, who should be blamed. If the Russos didn't care, what was the reason? Well, for example, I think they don't care greatly about Falcon's character, but he still got a decent role, even though he was completely unnecessary to the plot.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

I've read this thread. And to be honest, we just don't know, who should be blamed. If the Russos didn't care, what was the reason? Well, for example, I think they don't care greatly about Falcon's character, but he still got a decent role, even though he was completely unnecessary to the plot.

Usually, the one to blame is the one in charge.

Anthony Mackie was hired before the Russos were, likely having read the script and with the expectation of a certain amount of involvement. And after TWS he was fairly popular.

I agree Falcon's character isn't treated with care. Wasn't he devoted to helping traumatized veterans or something?

 

[Capsfan]

Usually, the one to blame is the one in charge.

That's the point. We just don't know who exactly had the last word. The Russos are not the heads of the MCU and are not the only ones in charge.

And after TWS he was fairly popular.

I don't think that the Russos are so shallow, that they care only about popularity of actors. And I wouldn't call Mackie THAT popular, tbh. You can look this up in Google Trends. VanCamp has a pretty decent fanbase from Revenge.


I think Falcon was given a decent role because he is a Cap's supporting character.
And that's why something is off. Take Falcon out of the movie - nothing changes about the plot. But Sharon is one of the plot movers. But she's barely in the movie. And we have no idea why she does any of it.
Seriously. Why did Sharon risk her future, he career, and her freedom to help the wanted terrorist about whom even Cap himself doesn't have any actual proof of innocence? Even if Zemo is guilty, it still doesn't automatically mean that Bucky isn't to blame, Sharon HERSELF has seen, how he killed many innocent people. We know even about why Hawkeye does it – there's that line: "I owe a debt." It wouldn't have taken much time at all.
And then there is the bit, when it was hinted that Widow tracked Sharon and that's how she found out, where team Cap is. It definitely required at least one brief scene.
Something is really strange about all this, because we also have all those promo materials, from which it's evident, that initially she had a much bigger role, as she should have.

Well, even if there wasn't much time for development, there were still other options. I would almost have preferred to see the film start with their relationship already in full swing—after all, Natasha told Steve to ask Sharon out two years ago at the end of TWS. And as we know from Age of Ultron, Steve himself says he's learned his lesson about waiting. And this would have been a great motivation for Sharon to do what she did. It's almost more implausible that they haven't been on a date yet, we're not given any explanation for why they haven’t and it just shows Steve being completely disinterested in this relationship. This all just undermined the very base of SteveSharon and that's why they should've dropped it completely rather than doing what they have done in the movie.

 

[Capsfan]

I want to add, that Sharon was presented so poorly, that it seems like the most probable explanation is that she’s actually working for Zemo. I mean, Zemo’s ridiculously complex plan wouldn’t work without her constant help. There is even this theory, which fixes a lot of plot holes:
[YT]xU3InsThiXw[/YT]

 

[BullMcGiveny]

That's the point. We just don't know who exactly had the last word. The Russos are not the heads of the MCU and are not the only ones in charge.

They're the directors. I guess they answer to Feige, but Feige wasn't the one offering disinterested, uninformative answers when asked about Sharon.

I don't think that the Russos are so shallow, that they care only about popularity of actors. And I wouldn't call Mackie THAT popular, tbh.

I was referring to the character. Falcon was arguably the breakout character in TWS.

I think Falcon was given a decent role because he is a Cap's supporting character.

I think M&M wrote him in that way back in TWS. After that, he proved popular enough to bring back and even put on the Avengers.

Sharon, on the other hand, is a SHIELD agent, and you'd think someone remotely intending to do her justice would be doing more with her in a movie that featured a lot of SHIELD.

And we have no idea why she does any of it.
Seriously. Why did Sharon risk her future, he career, and her freedom to help the wanted terrorist about whom even Cap himself doesn't have any actual proof of innocence?

Exactly. Sharon basically committed treason, and people are bothered of why Steve would kiss her.

 

[BoredGuy]

I want to add, that Sharon was presented so poorly, that it seems like the most probable explanation is that she’s actually working for Zemo. I mean, Zemo’s ridiculously complex plan wouldn’t work without her constant help. There is even this theory, which fixes a lot of plot holes:

His plan wasn't that complex
he had to adjust on the fly a bit, but it doesn't require some huge logical leap like people seem to believe
the only thing convenient/coincidental about his plan was the timing of Tony Stark finding out about Zemo/the UN psychologist

 

[tamron]

I want to add, that Sharon was presented so poorly, that it seems like the most probable explanation is that she’s actually working for Zemo. I mean, Zemo’s ridiculously complex plan wouldn’t work without her constant help. There is even this theory, which fixes a lot of plot holes:
[YT]xU3InsThiXw[/YT]

I'd never seen this vid before; Quite interesting.

I wonder if its creator wasn't on to something in floating that the film initially was going with sleeper Sharon in a nod to the comics and then there was a change.

Production-wise, I could see Marvel filming that, viewing the final product and going maybe 'we don't want to make Sharon look bad' or 'do we really want another sleeper twist?' and opting to remove that thread or at least delay it until another production (Black Panther?).

This theory would explain some things, both in the plot and irl (like Van Camp being much higher on earlier posters, alluding to a role of significance). I mean Zemo's plan still works to me if this theory isn't legit, but it's plausible.

 

[Capsfan]

They're the directors. I guess they answer to Feige, but Feige wasn't the one offering disinterested, uninformative answers when asked about Sharon.

And what can they say about Sharon exactly? "We (MCU) treated her so badly, that we have nothing to say"? VanCamp tried to promote her character, but it looked pretty pathetic. Poor girl didn't have anything great to say about her character, so she tried things like: "She is much more, than a love interest" and "She wasn't in the airport, because she doesn't know the Avengers well, it wasn't her fight". Really? I suppose, BP, Ant-Man and Spidey were all best buddies with the gang.

I was referring to the character. Falcon was arguably the breakout character in TWS.

Do you have any proof? Maybe in fandom, but I haven't noticed it among the general audience. I suppose he became really popular later, after the appearances in AoU and Ant-Man.
I don't think that the Russos are so shallow, that they care only about popularity of their characters either. (They made Zemo one of the best villains from the start, for example, with decent amount of time. Nobody really cared about Bucky in TFA, it was the Russos, who have made him great and so popular.) If they are, then how do they manage to make new characters being so great? It's not only about a screentime. Ant-Man is basically a little more, than a cameo in CW, and they managed to make him even more amazing, than in his full solo-movie.
I would say that Vision or War Machine are not really popular so far, then why did they got more time than Cap's LI in Cap's film?

It's not only about the Russos and screentime, it's about the poor writing too. Wonder Woman, for that matter, has basically Sharon-sized role in BvS, but she became a breakout character. And we know that Snyder doesn't even understand these characters.

I think M&M wrote him in that way back in TWS. After that, he proved popular enough to bring back and even put on the Avengers.

Then why didn't they wrote Sharon as such too? Even if BW took her place, this movie was still about SHIELD and Sharon could have taken Maria Hill's role at least. I think, that the Russos care about Hill even less, at least Sharon is supposed to be a LI for Cap, so they have a responsibility to make her a decent character at least.
Screenwriters are responsible too, maybe even more, than the directors.

Sharon, on the other hand, is a SHIELD agent, and you'd think someone remotely intending to do her justice would be doing more with her in a movie that featured a lot of SHIELD.

Yes, this is what puzzles me too.

His plan wasn't that complex
he had to adjust on the fly a bit, but it doesn't require some huge logical leap like people seem to believe
the only thing convenient/coincidental about his plan was the timing of Tony Stark finding out about Zemo/the UN psychologist

The complexity of Zemo's plan wasn't my point at all.
I just thought that it's sad, that Sharon was written so poorly that this pretty crazy theory seems plausible.

I mean Zemo's plan still works to me if this theory isn't legit, but it's plausible.

Yeah, I think so toot:

 

[Capsfan]

Exactly. Sharon basically committed treason, and people are bothered of why Steve would kiss her.

This is THE WORST. They had a really good place for her to explain why she does it all, when Cap says: "They gonna come looking for you" and she responds: "I know." Here she could have added that it's worth it because she agrees with Steve that the Sokovia Accords are a bad idea or that she is helping him in the name of good memory of Peggy or that she knows that the Winter Soldier has been never really responsible for his actions (it seems like very few people know it seeing how TV news declared him being an "infamous HYDRA terrorist" without any mention whatsoever about his brainwhashing. Her boss doesn't know it either).

But no. Instead of so many options, the subtext of this scene is that she is in love or lust, and her personal feelings for Steve are so overpowering, so strong, that they override her professional ethics and her personal ambition and her desire to stay the hell out of jail.

After all Sharon has risked for Steve his chaste kiss is a poor "thank you". And then he even says: "That was late." Really? WHY on earth is it late? Is it a badly conveyed sarcasm?
And then Sharon disappears, proving that was her main purpose in the movie. We never see her again.

They made her look pathetic. I can't believe it's the same writers, who wrote Peggy, Natasha and Wanda. Horrible writing.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

And what can they say about Sharon exactly?

At the bare minimum they can compliment the actress, and they didn't.

Do you have any proof? Maybe in fandom, but I haven't noticed it among the general audience. I suppose he became really popular later, after the appearances in AoU and Ant-Man.

He didn't even do anything in AoU, and jobbed to Ant-Man. You can read up reviews to Winter Soldier if you like.

I don't think that the Russos are so shallow, that they care only about popularity of their characters either.

They put Spider-Man in the movie, even though he doesn't thematically fit or add anything. Even the travel time required makes his involvement unlikely.

And for a year before the movie, they kept claiming that he was important to the story, that the movie wouldn't be the same without him, that he was always in the script, that they lobbied hard to get him in time.

(They made Zemo one of the best villains from the start, for example, with decent amount of time. Nobody really cared about Bucky in TFA, it was the Russos, who have made him great and so popular.) If they are, then how do they manage to make new characters being so great? It's not only about a screentime. Ant-Man is basically a little more, than a cameo in CW, and they managed to make him even more amazing, than in his full solo-movie.
I would say that Vision or War Machine are not really popular so far, then why did they got more time than Cap's LI in Cap's film?

I think they could make a new character work. But I think they'd rather pay service to a character that is already popular.

I'm sure they could have made Sharon into a vital well developed character, but focusing their efforts on Natasha propelled them to pre-AoU Whedon levels of creator worship and prestige, and his Whedon's job.

As I said before, Mackie was hired before the Russos were, so he already had a good idea of what the role entailed. Same goes for Sebastian Stan, who wasn't really a huge character in TWS anyway.

Vision has, at the very least, splash popularity from being an Avenger, kind of like Hawkeye.

War Machine is much in the same boat as Sharon, in that they're used as tools. I've seen it argued that the Russos like Sharon because they put her in the movie. But no, they just needed someone to tell Steve where to find Bucky and then get him his stuff.

Similarly, Rhodey was there to back up Tony, and give him feels.

Maria Hill had to be set up for AoU, so she was guaranteed a role.

Screenwriters are responsible too, maybe even more, than the directors.

Screenwriters don't have that kind of power. M&M have at least spoken in support of Sharon, and have talked about wanting to tackle her since after TFA was released.

 

[Xeno]

I want to add, that Sharon was presented so poorly, that it seems like the most probable explanation is that she’s actually working for Zemo. I mean, Zemo’s ridiculously complex plan wouldn’t work without her constant help. There is even this theory, which fixes a lot of plot holes:
[YT]xU3InsThiXw[/YT]

That guy's thesis is an unnecessary over-explanation of what happened. Events went Zemo's way, but there were things he didn't plan for, like the HYDRA agent's refusal to tell him about Bucky's assassination of the Starks and the whereabouts of the video. He only went after Bucky himself when the agent took that information to his watery grave. Otherwise, Zemo would have been able to skip the UN bombing and headed straight for the base in Siberia, alone, to retrieve the videotape. Since Bucky is a Super Soldier knockoff with Captain America on his side, Zemo could reasonably expect that he would survive police attempts to kill him.

Presumably, Zemo meant to somehow spring the tape on Tony in order to break up the Avengers by proving that Bucky killed his parents. Tony might not have headed after Bucky immediately, but he certainly would have been at Steve's throat the second he found out. Many of the team would have been angered as well, once they figured out how selfish Steve's behavior had been. It would have caused a massive fracture that ended the Avengers, which was Zemo's ultimate goal.

As Zemo himself told both the HYDRA agent and T'Challa, he only started killing civilians when his attempt to get the assassination tape failed. He only lured Steve to Siberia (through Bucky) because it became necessary. Zemo had no idea that all of the Avengers would converge on the German airport to fight over the Quinjet that Steve's team needed for transport. For all he knew or cared, the entire team could have hugged it out and settled their grievances and his plan would still have been a success once he got the tape. Zemo could have posted it on YouTube or FaceBook, or leaked it to CNN, and still gotten the effect he desired. No Sharon needed.

 

[Capsfan]

At the bare minimum they can compliment the actress, and they didn't.

Do they compliment all their actors? I just don't know really. I don't remember them ever praising Lizzie Olsen or Mackie or even Boseman, for example.
And well, with such a small role they've given VanCamp and such poorly written scenes... Not much room for her to show anything interesting really.

They put Spider-Man in the movie, even though he doesn't thematically fit or add anything. Even the travel time required makes his involvement unlikely.

They or Marvel? It was Marvel and Sony's deal really.

And for a year before the movie, they kept claiming that he was important to the story, that the movie wouldn't be the same without him, that he was always in the script, that they lobbied hard to get him in time.

Well, huh, it's SPIDER-MAN! No surprise they were obligated to hype him as much as possible!
Really, it's Hollywood, they are in a huge business and can't always tell the truth if they want to keep their job.
But I think, the deal with Sony had been in plans for a long time, so it's plausible, that SM was always in the script indeed. Was he shoehorned? Yes. But Ant-Man was so as well. As Hawkeye too. It's just because for Civil War they needed a huge amount of characters, which were superfluous to the plot itself.

I think they could make a new character work. But I think they'd rather pay service to a character that is already popular.

I don't see what benefit would they get from such attitude. Marvel - yes. But it's not the way Marvel works though. They constantly introduce new characters to make them popular. They have no problem stealing time from already popular characters for that.

I'm sure they could have made Sharon into a vital well developed character, but focusing their efforts on Natasha propelled them to pre-AoU Whedon levels of creator worship and prestige, and his Whedon's job.

You reminded me, that it's not only on them. Whedon could have had Sharon in AoU too, just like Sam. Hell, he even brought back the tech guy, who refused to launch ships in the same scene with Sharon in TWS! And no one told Whedon that he shouldn't bring up Peggy again. I think it's on Marvel really.

War Machine is much in the same boat as Sharon, in that they're used as tools. I've seen it argued that the Russos like Sharon because they put her in the movie. But no, they just needed someone to tell Steve where to find Bucky and then get him his stuff.

But Sharon is supposed to be a love interest for the main hero. It's their job as good filmmakers, which they are, otherwise they wouldn't have made two decent films in a row. If they didn't want her or didn't want to spend time on a romance, then why did they bring her back and tried Steve/Sharon at all? They could have used Maria Hill instead.

And most importantly, we KNOW that initially Sharon had a bigger role, being a part of the airport fight. And was cut very late in production, when teams were already established. This is really strange. Something happened. It's not like the Russos didn't care about Sharon from the start, otherwise she would have never had a big role.

Similarly, Rhodey was there to back up Tony, and give him feels.

Maria Hill had to be set up for AoU, so she was guaranteed a role.

And still even Rhodey gets more time. And he is not a LI for Cap, they have no responsibility for him, he is already an established character.

Hill has already been in the Avengers, why would they need to set her up for AoU? Just mention her being on some mission in another country or something.

Screenwriters don't have that kind of power. M&M have at least spoken in support of Sharon, and have talked about wanting to tackle her since after TFA was released.

Words mean very little without proper action. M&M could have written at least better scenes for Sharon. I don't believe that the Russos would make her great scenes worse on purpose. Yes, they could have cut it for the sake of time (although I don't see a problem to just make movie 2-3 minutes longer), but I very much doubt they have any reason to make any of their characters look worse on purpose, much less Cap's LI.

My point is they are not very interested in Falcon's character either, but still it's not hard for them to just put him near Cap all the time. It evidently doesn't take much effort from them. It's not like "Oh, Falcon is popular, let's give him more scenes!". They didn't give him any scenes for his own sake. Sharon has got more dialog with Cap than him.

Presumably, Zemo meant to somehow spring the tape on Tony in order to break up the Avengers by proving that Bucky killed his parents. Tony might not have headed after Bucky immediately, but he certainly would have been at Steve's throat the second he found out. Many of the team would have been angered as well, once they figured out how selfish Steve's behavior had been. It would have caused a massive fracture that ended the Avengers, which was Zemo's ultimate goal.

I'm not saying that the theory is legit but I don't think that Tony and Cap would have fought to death without Bucky's presence either.

And I don't think that the other team members would have been angered at Steve, it was very personal between him and Tony. If anything they would have stopped the fight between them.