Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 2)

[Rman]

Hopefully this means we get more specific years for some of the Shang-Chi flashbacks. I'm glad they've seemed to fix Shang-Chi's overall placement.

 

[Basilisk]

Yeah just watched A bit of Everything's video on the index and I am strongly against this book now (even though they could be early draft pages of the book it's highly likely that they aren't and are in fact the finished product)
I was ok with the non Disney + shows not making an appearance as I'm focused on getting concrete evidence for the phase 4 stuff like the order of Eternals/Wandavision or Wandavision/Eternals or the actual placement of Thor 4 because I'm beyond stumped with that one but now you're telling me that they put the Disney+ timeline (which was already on wobbly ground in terms of some of its placements) and just copied and pasted it in a book I'm sorry buts that's just absurd. Unless we find any small details in the book that works with our understanding of events then I'll consider it money well spent but for the rest of the book hard pass (Star Wars team did such a great job with theirs and this just confirms that whoever is Marvel's Timeline keeper,whether they are real or imaginary, needs to be sacked)

I remember a bit of everything did a video where he reconstructed a timeline from scratch without using any hints from Disney plus, and came up with something very similar, just by focusing on particular pieces of evidence.

(maybe that's not what happened in the video, it's a while ago that I watched it and I didn't watch the whole thing)

But my point being, I don't think the writers of the book would've just copied the Disney+ timeline, I think they would've come to similar conclusions to Disney+ based on certain pieces of evidence

 

[Basilisk]

Sorry guys, as I mentioned, I didn't consider myself a fan of the MCU as a whole even before the pandemic since I don't care for a number of movies in the first three phases. I decided to give Phases Four and Five a shot, but since the movies were generally not improving on what came before, I am deciding to call it quits.
Even if it wasn't for the quality declining, I still want to stop working on this since it has been very boring for me.

Once again, if anyone is interested in continuing the timeline in a new thread, please let me know.

I'm so confused. You want to stop working on the timeline, but you want to start a new one?

 

[Starvel]

I remember a bit of everything did a video where he reconstructed a timeline from scratch without using any hints from Disney plus, and came up with something very similar, just by focusing on particular pieces of evidence.

(maybe that's not what happened in the video, it's a while ago that I watched it and I didn't watch the whole thing)

But my point being, I don't think the writers of the book would've just copied the Disney+ timeline, I think they would've come to similar conclusions to Disney+ based on certain pieces of evidence

I kinda feel this way. Like I think the Timeline book, if it is set up the way we think, is different but there are reasons as to why most of those things could be placed there. The fact is with most projects there is conflicting evidence with what years they happen and while we focus on what we think is "better" based on all evidence doesn't mean that it's what Disney is going with. When people here say "we're better than Disney" they arent wrong, but that doesn't mean are placements are right, it just means we catch **** maybe they didn't intend to be caught. I think the Timeline book shouldn't be dismissed under the notion we're more correct. We're more thorough but at the end of the day we aren't the ones that decide where **** is placed and how the MCU will build off those placements. If this book says that's where they're placed then sooner or later stuff will likely connect back to them being in those places. I'm not a fan of some (specifically Fall 2025 for Love and Thunder) but I'm open to seeing what the book says. And saying that they're just copying the Disney+ timeline is kinda ridiculous when A. It already has slight differences like Shang-Chi and FatWS placement and B. Maybe it's less that they copied the Disney+ timeline but that the Disney+ timeline has some thought put into it more than we think. I always thought IM3 being after TDW was a mistake, but turns out it might be what it is.

TL;DR this place isn't about rewriting the MCU Timeline as we see fit, it's about making it the most accurate to what it is. This book shouldn't be dismissed when there are arguments behind many of the changes. I'm not saying we hold it as scripture but it should definitely warrant a conversation about why they put the projects where they did and what it means going forward

 

[Dallas Kinard]

I kinda feel this way. Like I think the Timeline book, if it is set up the way we think, is different but there are reasons as to why most of those things could be placed there. The fact is with most projects there is conflicting evidence with what years they happen and while we focus on what we think is "better" based on all evidence doesn't mean that it's what Disney is going with. When people here say "we're better than Disney" they arent wrong, but that doesn't mean are placements are right, it just means we catch **** maybe they didn't intend to be caught. I think the Timeline book shouldn't be dismissed under the notion we're more correct. We're more thorough but at the end of the day we aren't the ones that decide where **** is placed and how the MCU will build off those placements. If this book says that's where they're placed then sooner or later stuff will likely connect back to them being in those places. I'm not a fan of some (specifically Fall 2025 for Love and Thunder) but I'm open to seeing what the book says. And saying that they're just copying the Disney+ timeline is kinda ridiculous when A. It already has slight differences like Shang-Chi and FatWS placement and B. Maybe it's less that they copied the Disney+ timeline but that the Disney+ timeline has some thought put into it more than we think. I always thought IM3 being after TDW was a mistake, but turns out it might be what it is.

TL;DR this place isn't about rewriting the MCU Timeline as we see fit, it's about making it the most accurate to what it is. This book shouldn't be dismissed when there are arguments behind many of the changes. I'm not saying we hold it as scripture but it should definitely warrant a conversation about why they put the projects where they did and what it means going forward

"this place isn't about rewriting the MCU Timeline as we see fit, it's about making it the most accurate to what it is."

Yes, this is exactly what we should be doing. Logic should always trump everything else. If logic lines up with the book, cool. If the book contradicts logic, then it's wrong.

 

[Starvel]

"this place isn't about rewriting the MCU Timeline as we see fit, it's about making it the most accurate to what it is."

Yes, this is exactly what we should be doing. Logic should always trump everything else. If logic lines up with the book, cool. If the book contradicts logic, then it's wrong.

But there's logic behind choices made for this book, just because there's more logic behind one argument doesn't mean the other argument isn't logical. And again at the end of the day were aren't the ones that get to choose which of the two is going to be used when moving the MCU forward, Marvel Studios is and this is their official placement. If one is truly unlogical absolutely I say we don't hold to the book. But if there is reasonable placement behind one of the porjects, like how some have pointed out IM3 or Eternals could be moved without breaking the films logic. Obviously we should wait for the book to release but dismissing it this early is a very egotistical thing to do

 

[Dallas Kinard]

But there's logic behind choices made for this book, just because there's more logic behind one argument doesn't mean the other argument isn't logical. And again at the end of the day were aren't the ones that get to choose which of the two is going to be used when moving the MCU forward, Marvel Studios is and this is their official placement. If one is truly unlogical absolutely I say we don't hold to the book. But if there is reasonable placement behind one of the porjects, like how some have pointed out IM3 or Eternals could be moved without breaking the films logic. Obviously we should wait for the book to release but dismissing it this early is a very egotistical thing to do

I agree. My point is logic trumps everything. The best arguments + evidence should be our standard. Not a book written by fallible humans!

 

[Starvel]

I agree. My point is logic trumps everything. The best arguments + evidence should be our standard. Not a book written by fallible humans!

We are also fallible humans, and unfortunately the best argument is "because Marvel Studios says so" and as long as there is evidence behind it as to why that argument is made in the first place it should be at the very least considered. This fictional universe is also made by fallible humans, not every single detail will line up with every single project, especially one as large as the MCU. Logically there will be contradictions and continuity errors and if we try to force the MCU around something we see as logical but Marvel Studios does not see as logical we're the wrong ones.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

We are also fallible humans, and unfortunately the best argument is "because Marvel Studios says so" and as long as there is evidence behind it as to why that argument is made in the first place it should be at the very least considered. This fictional universe is also made by fallible humans, not every single detail will line up with every single project, especially one as large as the MCU. Logically there will be contradictions and continuity errors and if we try to force the MCU around something we see as logical but Marvel Studios does not see as logical we're the wrong ones.

I can't agree with that last statement because it makes Marvel Studios appear to be infallible when they aren't'!

 

[Rman]

I can't agree with that last statement because it makes Marvel Studios appear to be infallible when they aren't'!

The thing is we're infallible too. As someone who's leaned toward placements Marvel Studios seems to be confirming (Moon Knight and Love & Thunder being 2025) there's logic behind what they've come up with. Like I mentioned even with stuff like Iron Man 3 you can see where they're coming from. The thing is some projects have conflicting information and either way there's contradiction. To me this book just shows which information Marvel Studios themselves chooses to go with.

 

[Basilisk]

Is it possible there's a large gap between the Guardians scene in Love and Thunder and the rest of the movie?

 

[marioxb]

I'm so confused. You want to stop working on the timeline, but you want to start a new one?

He wants someone else to start a new thread and continue, not himself.

 

[Rman]

Is it possible there's a large gap between the Guardians scene in Love and Thunder and the rest of the movie?

I've always believe Groot's growth patterns are sporadic and there doesn't necessarily need to be an explanation on his look being different by the time of the Holiday Special. Vol 3. shows him go full "Kaiju" on the High Evolutionary's planet in no time.

 

[Starvel]

I can't agree with that last statement because it makes Marvel Studios appear to be infallible when they aren't'!

Are you saying we are infallible? Cause we aren't. This isnt a debate about who's more fallible because at the end of the day it will always be us. We aren't the creators, we are not the final say, we work with what we have to deliver the best timelines. We're just better at catching small **** but small details don't mean we're right, it just means they missed it. But when two placements work and we think one thing and Marvel Studios says the other, they're correct. As Rman says, we can largely see where they're coming from with these placements and as long as there's more than one possible answer and we can see where they're coming from then they're the right ones

 

[Starvel]

Is it possible there's a large gap between the Guardians scene in Love and Thunder and the rest of the movie?

I don't think so, but it is more likely Love and Thunder went off of Groot's last seen appearance and not what he was gonna look like the next year. With so many projects releasing at this pace **** gets overlooked and missed. Again these are films, not real life, inconsistencies happen and trying to force every inconsistency into working will lead to more complications later on. If Marvel Studios says it's Fall 2025 there's probably a reason and it's definitely what they'll be using for Thor's next appearance or whatever film references the events of the movie. I gotta be honest LaT placement is absolutely the one I have the most issues with changing, but trying to base our timeline off the growing logic of an alien creature with no reference for how he grows vs. What the actual film studio says may work for us now but not in the long run. Tbf tho if there's any placement I think makes the least sense it's definitely this one

 

[PKMonsa]

Is it possible there's a large gap between the Guardians scene in Love and Thunder and the rest of the movie?

I mean, the book references the Guardians after the Ms. Marvel pages, so it probably will put all of the film (except a bit with Jane and Darcy) after Ms. Marvel

 

[Rojinn]

Quick question, will those things be included?

Captain Marvel: StarForce Mission Log
Shang-Chi: Who Guards My Sleep?
Black Panther: The Courage to Dream
Classified S.H.I.E.L.D. Files (Link)
Jessica Jones: Phone Etiquette (Link)
Iron Fist Season 2 - Date Announcement (Link)
Memories (Link)
Leaving It All in the Past (Link)
Sequoia's Instagram Story (Link)
Jennifer Walters' Phone Call Recording (Link)

And that might be a bit too much, but what about:
New York Bulletin Website
Other Promo Newspapers
The Twitter/Google+/Instagram Posts (WHiH World News, Darren Cross, Pym Technologies, Titania, AvengerCon, DailyBugle)
Daily Bugle Articles

 

[Lebnyx]

I could take the role. I respect your work and DIRISHB's work so much, and I want it continued to the best of my ability. My only problem with this is breaking things down minute by minute and so I will need some help. Otherwise I want to be as helpful as possible.

Thank you! I'll PM you when I can.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

This makes me feel better:

 

[Rman]

This makes me feel better:

View attachment 1246

"I was obsessively taking notes and pausing constantly to hunt for obscure dates on computer screens and newspapers"

This hit a little close to home lol.

 

[Raylauncher]

"I was obsessively taking notes and pausing constantly to hunt for obscure dates on computer screens and newspapers"

This hit a little close to home lol.

but we don't get paid for it

 

[woodlark_289]

i also would be open to continuing the timeline in a new thread if Dego is unable or changes their mind, not a competition or anything lol just wanting to give you a couple open options, i had been following dirishb's work since 2014 and that really is what drew me into the mcu fandom as a whole in the first place so i would love to continue the integrity of the work done by him and you as well here lebnyx, in fact the timeline and this thread in particular is a massive part of why i am still watching new mcu releases so thank you for everything and much luck in your future

 

[selfishmisery]

Apparently this is where Kang went at the end of Ant-Man 3:
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Underspace
Shrunk down to the point where he would be in suspended animation until eventually ceasing to exist.
I think we were supposed to look at "Kang" as a group threat rather than an individual one. The fact it took everything Ant-Man's team had to stop one, sets up the threat of how the Avengers would fair against 10s of 1000s of Kangs.

 

[selfishmisery]

What is the complete list of tie-in books btw?

 

[Starvel]

What is the complete list of tie-in books btw?

https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe#Inspired_Content
Under "Inspired Content" there's a fairly complete list of books and comics, idk if there's a more thorough place to look but this is a solid start

 

[Zeitschiene]

https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe#Inspired_Content
Under "Inspired Content" there's a fairly complete list of books and comics, idk if there's a more thorough place to look but this is a solid start

It's not complete though. The Wiki has posts discussing which books are canon, These are good (Thry are acbit older, so just add The Courage to Dream and Who Guards My Sleep, they are 100% canon)

 

[Dallas Kinard]

i also would be open to continuing the timeline in a new thread if Dego is unable or changes their mind, not a competition or anything lol just wanting to give you a couple open options, i had been following dirishb's work since 2014 and that really is what drew me into the mcu fandom as a whole in the first place so i would love to continue the integrity of the work done by him and you as well here lebnyx, in fact the timeline and this thread in particular is a massive part of why i am still watching new mcu releases so thank you for everything and much luck in your future

Must we start a new thread? Can't edit permissions be granted to others?

 

[marioxb]

Must we start a new thread? Can't edit permissions be granted to others?

I would think so. It was a bit different situation with DirishB, sadly.

 

[Rman]

With the timeline book seeming to confirm Love & Thunder in October 2025, I'm curious what the consensus around here is now. The two main issues people have with this placement are Groot's age and the 8 years since the breakup line, but I think both can still work.

1). Groot is a fictional being with sporadic growth (we see him go Kaiju in no time on Counter-Earth in Vol 3. ). So, the growth he would do in the 2 months between Love & Thunder and the Holiday Special doesn't really bother me much.

2). I've always felt as long as the breakup was pre-Ragnarok, the 8 Years 7 Months, and 6 days was fine in 2025. October 2025 would place the breakup around March 2017 and given the movie shows the montage of Thor going on and off-world during the relationship, I think it's feasible for him and Jane to keep up a long-distance relationship while he was searching for Infinity Stones and it took until then for it to come to a head. Plus it kinda makes sense why the woman in New York in Ragnarok would bring it up in November 2017, as it's fresher if it happened in March 2017 than it would be in 2015. I think the 8-year line may have come from them looking at Ragnarok being 8 years ago in Universe and deciding to place it closer to it than Age of Ultron.

Apparently, there's a cut montage of Jane showing her between when she gets her powers and the main events of the film. She also mentions that she first found out she had cancer 6 months prior. If the main events of the movie were in October, this would mean she found out in April, fitting with the 4/30 blood test. If the consensus here isn't open to October 2025, I still feel like October 2024 is a good middle ground for the movie's main events. Keeping the 6 months that Marvel Studios believes is between Jane's blood test and the main events of the movie and placing it closer to what the timeline book shows.

Not saying any changes should be made, just curious about what people's thoughts are.

 

[woodlark_289]

if everyone decides to ignore proper reasoning and follow the book lol