Zoe Saldaña has more screentime in “Emilia Perez” than Karla Sofia Gascon, fueling the lead or supporting acting debates
In the world of cinema, casting decisions often spark intense debate, particularly when it comes to determining who plays the lead role and who supports it. The release of the highly anticipated film *Emilia Perez* has once again ignited such discussions, as new reports reveal that Zoe Saldaña, despite the film’s title, has more screentime than Karla Sofia Gascon, who is officially billed as the lead. This discrepancy has led many to question the true dynamics of the movie’s narrative and fuel ongoing conversations about what defines a lead role in modern filmmaking.
*Emilia Perez* follows the titular character, Emilia, played by Karla Sofia Gascon, as she embarks on a transformative journey. The film, which explores themes of self-discovery, family, and identity, has been widely praised for its strong performances and impactful storytelling. However, as audiences and critics alike began analyzing the screen time of the two actresses, it became clear that Saldaña, who plays a pivotal supporting role, appears in more scenes and has a larger presence throughout the film.
The revelation has sparked a wave of debate over what truly defines a “lead” in a film. Traditionally, the lead role is considered to be the actor or actress who drives the plot forward and carries the majority of the film’s emotional weight. While Gascon’s portrayal of the title character is central to the story, Saldaña’s role is integral to the progression of the narrative, leading some to wonder if her more significant screen presence could place her in the running for the film’s lead acting honors.
Industry professionals have weighed in on the controversy. Some argue that Saldaña’s extended screentime is a result of the film’s narrative structure, where her character provides necessary support and guidance to the protagonist, thus allowing the story to unfold more naturally. “In films like *Emilia Perez*, the lines between lead and supporting roles can blur,” says film critic James Palmer. “The story isn’t always about the one person on whom the plot hinges, but rather how the entire ensemble weaves together to tell a larger narrative. That said, the question of screentime is a complex one. It’s a subjective measurement and doesn’t necessarily equate to the emotional weight or importance of a character.”
On the other hand, some fans and critics believe that the imbalance in screentime undermines Gascon’s performance as the title character. “If we’re calling it *Emilia Perez*, shouldn’t the focus be on Emilia?” asks cinema blogger Rachel Monroe. “The film’s title and marketing materials led us to believe that Gascon would be the central figure, but Zoe Saldaña’s role has taken up more of the screen. This raises the issue of whether the film has accurately represented Gascon’s character and whether she truly holds the lead.”
Both Gascon and Saldaña have garnered positive reviews for their performances, with Gascon receiving praise for her emotional depth and Saldaña’s portrayal being hailed for its nuance and complexity. However, the debate over their respective roles is unlikely to subside anytime soon, especially as award season approaches.
As *Emilia Perez* gains traction, it seems this conversation around the film’s lead and supporting roles will only grow. The ongoing debate about the true nature of a “lead” role in films, especially when it comes to measuring screentime and narrative importance, highlights how the industry’s traditional categories are evolving. For now, audiences will continue to weigh in on whether the distinction between lead and supporting performances is as clear-cut as it used to be—or if the blurred lines between the two offer more nuanced and compelling portrayals of characters.
