In the aftermath of Brave New World, let's explore what went wrong with Sam from a character perspective. To do this, I'll contast his implementation vs. his predecessor, Steve Rogers.
Steve Rogers evolves across his trilogy—from a patriotic soldier who follows orders (The First Avenger), to someone who questions authority and forms his own moral compass (Winter Soldier), to someone who actively rebels against institutions for the greater good (Civil War). His arc is about growing into his own person, while maintaining his inherit principles of right and wrong.
We can see examples of this when Steve not only challenges Pierce, but Nick Fury himself on the use of fear as a mitigation tactic. Even small things, like Steve being embarrassed to curse in Age of Ultron, evolve into a more hardened version of himself. He never loses his principles, but in Endgame, he clearly shows this growth and contrast when he fights his 2012 self. Steve even uses the scepter against his 2012 version when 2012 Steve gets the upper hand. Steve has grown while maintaining a moral compass.
Sam Wilson, in contrast, starts off in Endgame accepting the shield, promising Steve he’ll "do his best." But in FAWS’s early episodes, he gives it up—seemingly without a rational justification tied to his prior history in the MCU. The show does try to rationalize this in terms of internal conflict later, but they cheat the character because he doesn’t even try. They frame this as internal conflict using identity and race through people he encounters in the show, even though Sam has experienced none of this onscreen himself.
Steve implicitly trusts him. He's a proper Avenger at the end of Age of Ultron. He helps save half the universe, and he is passed the shield based on merit. Inexplicably, his first act as Captain America is to do exactly the opposite of what he promised Steve. Unlike Steve, who progresses, Sam regresses.
The showrunners clearly want to explore race, patriotism, and legacy—important and timely themes. But instead of letting those themes emerge organically from Sam’s emotional journey, the show front-loads the message and lets Sam’s character play catch-up. This is not because Sam confronts hard truths, but because he’s reacting to external pressures (government, media, Isaiah Bradley, Zemo) rather than building on the faith Steve placed in him.
The result is that Sam's character is stunted. The writers turn him into a sympathizer for blatant terrorist actions. He never learns from this position, and even Zemo calls him out for it: “You are seeing something in her that isn’t there.”
Zemo isn't wrong.
Sam:
-
Sympathizes with Karli’s cause ("These people have a valid reason to be angry")
-
Fails to fully condemn her actions
-
Tries to "talk her down" even after multiple violent incidents
-
In the end, continues to lecture people on referring to them as terrorists
In fact, Sam doesn’t actually stop Karli—Sharon does. This is a clear example of narrative shielding:
-
It removes moral weight from Sam’s hands.
-
It preserves his "virtue" by not forcing him to confront Karli’s end directly.
-
It dodges the difficult question: Would Sam stop Karli if he had to?
That last point is important. What if Sam stops Karli only to be wrong? Or if he’s right, how does the weight of the mantle affect him? This is internal conflict at its finest. Can Sam, like Steve, still maintain his principles when he’s forced to do something he doesn’t want to do? Will he regret and learn from his decisions?
The Super Soldier Serum Debate:
In FAWS, we get sparse dialog to understand Sam’s position. These take place in two conversations with Bucky, and/or Zemo.
Zemo argues that the desire to become superhuman is inherently tied to supremacist thinking—the belief that one deserves to rise above others. He sees the Super Soldier Serum as a corrupting force that inevitably leads to escalation and violence, as in Karli's case.
Sam pushes back, pointing out that Steve Rogers took the serum and never became corrupt.
Zemo agrees, but with a caveat: Steve was the exception, not the rule—"There has never been another Steve Rogers."
Later, Zemo asks Sam if he would take the serum if offered. Sam instantly replies—"No."
This is a missed opportunity to develop Sam. Why have him essentially—at least in spirit—agree with Zemo? By not taking the serum, Sam is enforcing Zemo’s position that no one can live up to Steve.
From a character perspective, this conflicts with what we know about Sam. He respected—even idolized—Steve. He followed and helped him just on faith in Winter Soldier. He agreed with Steve’s position on the Accords, to a degree that made him a fugitive. Why would he not feel that he could have the moral compass that Steve had? Why not take the serum—to prove Zemo wrong?
Steve’s vs. Sam’s Evolution: Earned Through Internal Conflict vs. A Mantle Without Struggle
Steve Rogers:
-
Fails, questions himself, progresses
-
Experiences loss, betrayal, self-doubt
-
Earns moral authority through hardship
-
Evolves from idealism to wisdom
Sam Wilson:
-
Rarely fails, rarely challenged
-
Shielded from consequences or hard choices
-
Given moral authority through virtue
-
Begins and ends as the "already right" guy
These problems continue in Brave New World, which is why there are no stakes. Sam is never changed by the journey. He’s portrayed as headstrong and confident. At the end of FAWS, he still has the same beliefs. He still sides with the Flag Smashers' plight. In Brave New World, he doesn’t hesitate backing Ross. Even with their history, his perspective never changes.
It doesn’t help that no matter what the situation is, the plot provides him with an out. In both cases, Wakanda provides him a suit. He’s more Iron Man than Captain America in Brave New World.
Sadly, Sam never makes a bad decision—or at least, is never made to pay for a decision he’s made. Even fighting a Hulk, he talks Red Hulk down. Well, ...that was lucky. He walks away without a scratch. The Leader just hands himself over and everything is wrapped up. Even Joaquin winds up fine compared to Bucky in First Avenger.
This is why he falls flat as a character. Marvel’s assumption of the Captain America title feels more like a symbolic gesture than the outcome of a forged identity, so it isn’t believable. They failed to give Sam the same kind of effort as they gave Steve.
Can Sam Be Fixed?
Anything is possible—but the odds are against him. You want to get the launch of a new character direction right at the start. The studio would need to greenlight a new film and give him the same kind of conflict Steve had when he had to fight Bucky.
Sam NEEDS personal stakes. He needs to fail. He needs engaging antagonists that challenge his beliefs. This builds tension—and without it, you have no story.
Being a hero is sometimes making choices you don’t want to make for the greater good.
Take the serum, Sam. Prove Zemo wrong.
You can catch my review of Captain America: Brave New World HERE.