Walking the Earth
It's a personal YMMV trope, but a character getting lots of screentime should disqualify them. I haven't seen Civil War, but going by the trailers it looks like Bucky is pretty important to the plot.
I guess it could count if a character had distinct personality traits or abilities in a source that are ignored or widely changed in an adaptation (like with Deadpool in that Wolverine movie), but I'm not sure that Bucky is missing anything (though again, I haven't seen the film).
For we shall slay evil with logic...
Basically, any character that is not utilized to their full potential.
No, the other one.
I think the trope definition seems to exclude main characters. My interpretation would be on the same level as Ensemble Dark Horse, or a little stricter.
Check out my fanfiction!
The amount of potential a character has and uses in my opinion is subjective even beyond YMMV territory.
Also, sometimes a They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character entry is just a repeat of Ensemble Dark Horse, regardless of so called "character potential".
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Hence why it's a YMMV trope.
You didn't read what I said. I said "even beyond YMMV territory". I recognize that it's YMMV, but I think that measuring potential is too subjective even for that.
I suppose, but subjectivity is pretty much the whole point of YMMV. I don't really think there's a such thing as too subjective in this case.
edited 16th May '16 1:59:10 PM by Zoroark69
Actually, there is. The existence of Flame Bait proves it. It doesn't even have to be that. Even the mods agree that there are things that are simply too subjective.
The Unknown
Just because it's YMMV doesn't mean there isn't a definition you have to follow, that the entire subpage is a free-for-all, or that some "examples" aren't stupid and need to stay because "it's YMMV and subjective". (Bucky, seriously?)
I fail to see why wanting to tighten the definition would be a bad thing if it invites better write-ups. I'd be down for it.
edited 16th May '16 4:07:57 PM by Karxrida
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
Asshat
I'm no authority but I think a good way to define it would be if you saw someone who you think looks very interesting or well acted with potential, but they're either killed off, Chuck'd or just barely used after that. A good example IMO being Karsi and the Thenn leader in Game of Thrones S5, who get a bunch of interactions with Jon, and show a lot of the internal politics of Wildlings... and then proceed to die in that episode, leaving precisely 2 recognisable wildlings still breathing.
Raven Wilder
A character can still be wasted even if they're in the story a lot and are important to the plot. Such tends to be the fate of Living MacGuffins.
"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko
They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot has its examples cut for a reason.
Why not this one?
We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.
I see They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character being used for a multitude of reasons. It can be because of a small role, or it could be because of characterization that someone wanted to be different. It can even relate to the actor and not the character.
Bucky from Captain America: Civil War is listed as this despite having a major role and great characterization. I tried to delete it, but then it was added back on by Alley Oop because "You can be a plot-important character and still fall under They Wasted A Perfectly Good Character depending on audiences feel you are utilized." This makes me wonder where the line is that a character can be considered "wasted".