Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (continued)

  • Help support The Comic Board :

Agamotto

Active Member
I placed the August 28 - September 5 episodes on those dates, and gave the other episodes (which you said were estimations) non-specific August and September placements, as DIrishB did whenever specific dates weren't set in stone.
Right OK. I just thought it was in-keeping with the system, where dates are given if we're pretty sure of the exact date, but otherwise if there's some leniency, we just give the month. It also solves the problem of Mariah's "a few weeks ago" line.



Does anyone have any info on Ant-Man and the Wasp: The Heroes' Journey?
Nice. Updated with AMATW: THJ
I should probably try buying these books at some point.



Avengers - Infinity War Chapter 19: "Aftermath" (2:14:17 - 2:17:30)
Ant-Man and the Wasp Chapter 18: "End Credits" (1:57:29 - 1:57:53)

^ I don't think there is a way to know for sure which film chronologically ends before the other.
I'll address this properly in my message responding to the topic of the Infinity War and Ant-Man and the Wasp timings, but Thanos is seemingly coming right from Wakanda. It would take a few minutes at least to send out the emergency broadcast, and the final Ant-Man and the Wasp credits scene is some time after that (could be seconds after it's sent, could be a very long time).

Overall, it's likely that Infinity War finishes before the last Ant-Man and the Wasp credits scene.



I couldn’t pick up on anything from the DD3 trailer today. Anyone else have better luck?
When Foggy looks at the news, there's the headlines, "Russia's Economic Outlook Upgraded After Oil Discovery" and "Eastern Conference Eyes Anderson First in" and then the next words seem to be "Multi-Player".

Neither of these are specific one-date-only news stories that give an exact timeframe for the season, but judging from these three articles I found (1, 2,3), some stuff seemed to be happening with Russian oil and the economy around March-May 2018, so it would work with March. As for the Eastern Conference one, I couldn't really work out who "Anderson" is - maybe it would be clearer to someone from New York who follows sports, because I'm not familiar with famous American sportspeople or what the "Eastern conference" is (it seems to be a thing in several sports, not just one). But the players I seemed to find who it might be about are the NBA's Anderson Varejão, the NHL's Craig Anderson, or the NHL's Joey Anderson, though I couldn't find any articles resembling this kind of headline in the last year or so. Mrmichaelt at the wiki also suggested NBA player Justin Anderson, saying he thought he might have been in a multi-player deal from the Philadelphia 76ers to the Atlanta Hawks in the NBA Eastern Conference.
 
Last edited:

Agamotto

Active Member
Spider-Man is in kraven the Hunter movie?!?

https://youtu.be/MQAkjL--gD8

https://youtu.be/0Bnn7CLJLF0

I guess it doesnt mean anything yet but its something... right?
Not unless Venom is canon...It's still Sony.

But who knows? The audience score is super positive and box office is doing great for Venom, so maybe the Sony spinoffs, if they keep up the momentum, will become MCU canon.
I hope not. I was dreading Tom Holland potentially being in Venom and was very glad to hear he isn't (I have no interest in actually seeing the film). I am very against this "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters". I feel like they're trying to exploit the success Marvel have given them with the Spider-Man character to ride their coattails and make their own film successful. Amy Pascal has also been confusing people by hinting it's part of the MCU despite it not being, confusing people into seeing it. And if they had put Tom Holland in the film (which they might have the rights to do - they technically own the character) they would essentially be barging their way into the MCU without Marvel's permission. Using the deal with Marvel Studios to then also make their own films that they essentially canonise into the MCU without Feige's permission (he clearly doesn't want it). Unless Feige came out and said something like, "Nope, it's actually just another universe where Spider-Man looks like Tom Holland."
They're very much liking the fact that the general public have been confused into thinking this is a Marvel film, I'm sure, because it benefits them, with the brand Marvel Studios have built. It doesn't benefit Marvel Studios. It tarnishes their brand. And Venom just looks awful anyway, in my opinion. Sony also haven't learned their lesson from The Amazing Spider-Man about forcing a cinematic universe when there isn't one to be made. I was really hoping Venom would bomb honestly, so Sony get their comeuppance, as few people as possible see the brand-tarnishing film, and Sony cancel their universe so no more films come out to continue potentially exploiting/tarnishing Marvel. Plus then, Marvel might actually get access to more characters they would almost certainly do better.

And timeline-wise, it would likely be problematic as well, there's already a lack of timeline coordination at Marvel on their own, imagine also having Sony make their own decisions that don't line up with Marvel's.

Who knows how far this universe will go. It looks like Morbius and Venom 2 might still happen, but maybe (hopefully in my opinion) it'll end there. I don't think Tom Holland will show up if Feige has any control over that. Unfortunately, I don't know if he does.



Right, once I have some time in the next couple of days, I'll post my next big response to the last few months, about Cloak & Dagger evidence.
 
Last edited:

Pro Bot

Well-Known Member
To each their own. I personally liked venom. I feel that it doesnt need to be in the mcu but a entire universe of side-line marvel characters seems ridiculous. If it ends though you wont see me crying.
 

Zpdedoda

Well-Known Member
I hope not. I was dreading Tom Holland potentially being in Venom and was very glad to hear he isn't (I have no interest in actually seeing the film). I am very against this "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters". I feel like they're trying to exploit the success Marvel have given them with the Spider-Man character to ride their coattails and make their own film successful. Amy Pascal has also been confusing people by hinting it's part of the MCU despite it not being, confusing people into seeing it. And if they had put Tom Holland in the film (which they might have the rights to do - they technically own the character) they would essentially be barging their way into the MCU without Marvel's permission.
It might be similar to the situation with QuickSilver. They'd own the rights to the character but not the actor so they'd have to get their own guy in to play him. They've got Miles Morales in an animated feature so they might bring him into the live action ones as well.
 

Pro Bot

Well-Known Member
That would be good. They should attempt to separate themselves from the mcu instead of throwing around false information.
 

Craig

Well-Known Member
Mrmichaelt at the wiki
Ha! I know that dude from the Ghostbusters fandom. Haven’t interacted with him since the IDW publishing boards shut down. I had no idea he was an MCU dude, but it’s good to have him. Wicked smart and crazy attention to detail.
 

selfishmisery

Well-Known Member
It's not MCU canon at this point, but in case something spontaneously happens to totally suggest it is in the next few months, I'll just say in Venom I saw the dates "10-27" and "2018" on the emails towards the beginning. (Since those were from two days ago, it would mean the first 15 minutes take place on October 29-30, 2018 - before the 6 month time jump (April 2019).)
 

Lebnyx

Well-Known Member
Something that came to mind in regards to Civil War's mid-credits scene:

According to Infinity War Prelude #1, Bucky is frozen weeks after the breakout from the Raft. However, this scene is placed before the beginning of Black Panther since Steve still has bruises (presumably from his fight with Iron Man), and because Shuri mentions Ross is another white boy for her to fix.

However, Infinity War Prelude #1 came out a few weeks before Black Panther, so the writers of the Prelude most likely already knew Black Panther would take place a week after Civil War, and probably wrote the "Weeks later" caption with this knowledge. And Shuri might be saying Ross is another white boy for her to fix, because T'Challa had already told her beforehand that she might need to help fix Bucky (even before Bucky arrived).

I believe Infinity War Prelude #1's caption isn't necessarily retconned by Black Panther for this reason:

Both the date on the FedEx package and Scott's line about sleeping for three days after becoming Giant-Man at the airport, seem to imply the breakout from the Raft takes place 3-4 days after Siberia. However, Steve doesn't have any bruises in this scene, but he does in Wakanda. If he has accelerated healing, then his bruises in Wakanda would not be from Siberia, since they would have already healed by the time he is in the Raft.

Infinity War Prelude #1 already has continuity errors from Civil War (Steve wears the Captain America suit in the Raft in the comic, but not in the movie), so him not having bruises in the comic could be because the artist didn't pay attention, so whether Civil War mid-credits is before or after Black Panther is irrelevant.

However, the biggest reason I believe Civil War mid-credits could still be after Black Panther, is because Steve and Bucky drop off Wanda with Vision. It wouldn't have taken them long to drop off Scott and Clint, but logically it would have taken a while for them to find a way to contact Vision without being intercepted, and for Vision to find a way to make himself look human. So perhaps their injuries in Civil War's mid-credits could be from evading authorities...?

Here's what I'm thinking:

-April 10: Siberia.

-April 11-13: Steve's bruises from Siberia heal.

-April 14: Raft. Steve doesn't have bruises.

-April 15: Scott and Clint are taken home.

-April 16-24: Black Panther events. During this time, Steve and Wanda contact Vision, who learns to make himself look human.

-late April: Civil War mid-credits.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:

selfishmisery

Well-Known Member
Daredevil S3 E1 starts several weeks after The Defenders.

I'm still watching for any further info.
 
Last edited:

selfishmisery

Well-Known Member
Daredevil Season 3 definitely takes place several weeks to a few months after Defenders.

I'm looking for any hard dates, but it looks like January-March 2017. There's also snow in S3 E2.

EDIT: Towards the end of S3 E3, Matt says he's been gone for a couple of months. So it starts out in January 2017, and as of S3 E3 it's February 2017.
 
Last edited:

Lebnyx

Well-Known Member
I've started to watch season 3. How many flashbacks are there in the season?
 
Last edited:

Craig

Well-Known Member
So while I agree that February 2017 makes the most sense, the fact that Tower is campaigning hard suggests closer to November.
 

Pro Bot

Well-Known Member
Nice! Though cap: first avenger is necessary to watch agent carter in my opinion. I need to check out those in-universe videos to add to my personal viewing timeline.
 

Dallas Kinard

Well-Known Member
I try to keep it as objective as possible. Everyone has an order they subjectively prefer so you can't please everyone in that aspect. That's why I try to keep it as logical as possible vs. how people feel it should be watched.
 

Pro Bot

Well-Known Member
Meh. Agent carter is the fallout of cap: tfa. This is fact. Its simply when you (the viewer) would like to watch it. You'd be least confused watching it first in my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Dallas Kinard

Well-Known Member
1. Yes, it is the fallout of the primary flashback sequence of TFA, which just so happens to be a majority of that film's runtime. So that would be fact.

2. The bookends, however, take place in the "present day", and since the film ends in 2012, it logically falls into that year on the timeline. So no, it's not "when I'd like to watch it", it actually takes place in 2012.

3. Insulting the audience now are we? That is your opinion. Most of us are pretty good at putting context clues together and the pilot even recaps the ending of the film so a first time viewer isn't completely lost.

I think you need to understand the difference between objective and subjective.
 

Dallas Kinard

Well-Known Member
1. Yes, it is the fallout of the primary flashback sequence of TFA, which just so happens to be a majority of that film's runtime. So that would be fact.

2. The bookends, however, take place in the "present day", and since the film ends in 2012, it logically falls into that year on the timeline. So no, it's not "when I'd like to watch it", it actually takes place in 2012.

3. Insulting the audience now are we? That is your opinion. Most of us are pretty good at putting context clues together and the pilot even recaps the ending of the film so a first time viewer isn't completely lost.

I think you need to understand the difference between objective and subjective.
 
Top