i’m pretty certain that it wouldn’t be unpopular. natalie dormer is pretty awesome and brie larson’s performance was incredibly wooden. idk if it’s the writing of the character or if it was Larson herself, because she is excellent in most of her other roles, but there she was just meh. Dormer is an adaptive and expressive actress and i think would have been a better fit.
I’m largely inclined to agree with your assessment of Larsons work here and elsewhere. It could be her “take” on the role of a block buster super hero, or it could be direction or cues since the character in the MCU is supposed to have a certain presence and they wanted her to “give less” to preserve a sort of distance or such. That said- I personally don’t agree that Natalie Dormer would fit the tile better. Not that some or many people may not have enjoyed her in the role better of course- but that the fit, in my opinion, is off. My first challenge is that Dormer has done well elsewhere- but so has Larson. So we can’t necessarily use past performance as a decider beyond to say these two, and many more, actresses at least posses the background to be theoretically qualified for the role and handle filming vs. an unknown. So I’m calling that a wash as neither actress is to date held to be the top or bottom of their craft or associated with any particularly legendary performances.
So going in asides personal taste I’ll call them even in regards to acting, though both have all sorts of fans and potential.
So the role- Dormer has much softer features. To some degree one can gain muscle mass etc, but facial shape and other factors are more difficult to deal with and you end up with a different person if you change those significantly. While neither actress is particularly stout in build, Larson does have stronger facial features and isn’t as soft in the eyes. To some degrees these things are subjective, but mathematically they are not so subjective. (Good) Artists who specialize in character work are well aware that the tiniest change in the proportions and layout etc. can completely give a different visual impression. I won’t go on, one can debate if they like, but my stance is that Dormer generally appears “softer.”
She fits the archetype visually of the “protected” and not the “protector.” Much of that is a choice and either for juxtaposition or “meta” reasons like marketability etc. a “softer” look is chosen. This is very often true with female characters. They tend to be smaller and intentionally more feminine than male counter parts in areas like war or hero fiction. Even She Hulk- a character defined by muscularity, tends to be portrayed as a green fitness model or at most not so unrealistic for a power lifter etc. when put next to a character like the punisher or Captain America in many portrayals, her muscles almost look average. Part of that is that the mass audience wouldn’t find the bill with long hair sexy. Part is to tailor to cultural ideas and norms on gender and create a mental impression of the character by their looks.
Larson is herself a bit of a conceit to the idea of softening. Of course there are “softer looking” or “attractive” women in the military, the “average” female in the Air Force shouldn’t be envisioned to be “mannish” and “homely,” but films generally don’t “stick to real.” Real tends to be too boring or complex for films, especially of this type. More over, real is actually often less believable to an audience. While it’s common to change “based on true story films” to add theatrics, it’s also common to remove actual events because audiences wouldn’t believe it. Most people go in to a film with their guards up. You know it’s fiction and so what COULD or actually has happened, it can seem like “bad writing.” There are formulas and patterns etc. that people respond to in fiction. It’s why a game about a mundane task like cooking or farming can be fun- the game changes some things and adds a loop, a formula, to make it enjoyable.
So I won’t say that you wouldn’t see a woman like Dormer flying keys or doing any other task on a U.S. Airforce base- but I can say that her overall look has a higher hurdle to pass the audiences expectation of what a “pilot should look like.” American films especially have tended to condition audiences to the image of a “youthful, attractive, strong, confident” sort of image.
Dormer could certainly ACT those things, but does she fit the role..? I think not so much. She’s done “sexy,” which is related to attractive, but not the same. It’s nuanced. Monroe and Hepburn were both considered attractive and people liked their acting- but they weren’t generally up for the same roles. Their looks tended to fit different stereotypes. Picturing Monroe in Breakfast at Tiffany’s- even if the performance was identical- the image is wrong.
Dormer could have played a very different captain marvel. The same way that Tom Holland and Andrew Garfield couldn’t play the same Spider-Man. You would t be likely to believe Garfield as a “gee shucks Mr. Stark” kid. Norton got a lot of praise for his Bruce Banner- but could you see Ed Norton filling the version of Banner in the MCU? Ed Norton is a great example of an actor who most people look at and see something a little “sinister” or “dangerous” about. Some actors just have a “look” that gets them cast as villains or turn coats etc. Many “type cast” actors manage to blow peoples minds or even change their image by showing they can do a great job in another type of role- but again there is a basic math and some psychology and cultural context that can help us predict what sorts of ideas people will infer about a person by how they look.
So yeah. I just don’t see Dormer as THIS captain marvel. In another version of the film written more to portray captain marvel differently, I wouldn’t fight it. Thomas Jane was not Punisher fans first pick for the film but he made alot of die hard fans of the punisher happy with how he pulled off the role. John Bernthal had a look and presence a lot of fans and even those not familiar with the character looked at and said: “yeah. That’s what a guy called the punisher looks like and how he carries himself…” I don’t think either of them would have done very well cast in the version the other did. James punisher had a quiet reserved caution while Bernthal was very primal and aggressive. Thomas Jane just doesn’t scream “primal and aggressive” or vice versa. So as far as the actress that best fits the character in the actual movie- there may have been a better choice but between the two I’d say Larson.
So the role- Dormer has much softer features. To some degree one can gain muscle mass etc, but facial shape and other factors are more difficult to deal with and you end up with a different person if you change those significantly. While neither actress is particularly stout in build, Larson does have stronger facial features and isn’t as soft in the eyes. To some degrees these things are subjective, but mathematically they are not so subjective. (Good) Artists who specialize in character work are well aware that the tiniest change in the proportions and layout etc. can completely give a different visual impression. I won’t go on, one can debate if they like, but my stance is that Dormer generally appears “softer.”
Dormer could certainly ACT those things, but does she fit the role..? I think not so much. She’s done “sexy,” which is related to attractive, but not the same. It’s nuanced. Monroe and Hepburn were both considered attractive and people liked their acting- but they weren’t generally up for the same roles. Their looks tended to fit different stereotypes. Picturing Monroe in Breakfast at Tiffany’s- even if the performance was identical- the image is wrong.
It isn't an unpopular opinion.