I'm just saying don't be surprised when he doesn't adhere to the shows. The Darkhold would have been the perfect opportunity by allowing it to match the design seen in the shows.
Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 2)
- Thread starter Lebnyx
- Start date
Source from net (agent of shield group):
www.imdb.com
""""""The production company is now listed as "Marvel Studios" instead of "Marvel Television" for Agent's of S.H.I.E.L.D. I just happened to be looking up something and this caught my eye. Has anyone seen this prior to now?
At first I thought it might be a bulk move, but it only seems to be select titles. Looking at it from the Marvel Studios angle, I can also see specific episodes on Jessica Jones, Daredevil, and Luke Cage listed. The Inhumans is still firmly as Marvel Television. I figured if it wasn't selective, that would have switched as well..
It could be someone who has permissions goofing around, but production company is a protected field. Not just anyone with an IMDB Pro account can edit that information (I checked). You really have to be the company to edit certain details.
There are some discrepancies, which means they could be updating and indexing isn't complete yet - and there are other oddities of things that are now listed as Marvel Studios. All of those things could be in the process of being pulled over or integrated with other properties and maybe I just did not notice before. Movies like the original X-Men, or the TV series "Mutant X".
As for AoS - It looks like on an episode level everything from S3 forward has been moved to being "Marvel Studios", while S1 and S2 have more complex IMDB production credits and are still listed as Marvel Television. Very interesting.""""""
Advanced search
www.imdb.com
""""""The production company is now listed as "Marvel Studios" instead of "Marvel Television" for Agent's of S.H.I.E.L.D. I just happened to be looking up something and this caught my eye. Has anyone seen this prior to now?
At first I thought it might be a bulk move, but it only seems to be select titles. Looking at it from the Marvel Studios angle, I can also see specific episodes on Jessica Jones, Daredevil, and Luke Cage listed. The Inhumans is still firmly as Marvel Television. I figured if it wasn't selective, that would have switched as well..
It could be someone who has permissions goofing around, but production company is a protected field. Not just anyone with an IMDB Pro account can edit that information (I checked). You really have to be the company to edit certain details.
There are some discrepancies, which means they could be updating and indexing isn't complete yet - and there are other oddities of things that are now listed as Marvel Studios. All of those things could be in the process of being pulled over or integrated with other properties and maybe I just did not notice before. Movies like the original X-Men, or the TV series "Mutant X".
As for AoS - It looks like on an episode level everything from S3 forward has been moved to being "Marvel Studios", while S1 and S2 have more complex IMDB production credits and are still listed as Marvel Television. Very interesting.""""""
On the flip side of that, JK Simmons was brought back as a totally different version of J. Jonah Jameson. And even more recently, Evan Peters was brought back to play a totally different version of Quicksilver that turned out to be the one from the Fox X-Men films, or even him at all. It seems pretty clear Marvel Studios is willing to play with fan expectations, and not necessarily adhere to what people expect.
Slyonic
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 456
The difference is both of those characters were never in the MCU to begin with. Daredevil, whether some people believe it's still canon or not, was intended to be MCU from the start.
Question, who from the Marvel Studios side was involved in Inhumans? Taking a quick look at the production, the only crossover between them seems to be Stan Lee, who seemed to get a credit for everything Marvel. Otherwise, the only people seemingly listed to be Marvel Television personnel. Same with Daredevil, which seemed to be Marvel Television personnel and the showrunners, but otherwise, Marvel Studios personnel or execs didn't seem to be involved.
Agent Carter at least had Feige, D'Espisito, Markus, and McFeely are involved in a producing capacity, while Agents of SHIELD had Sarah Halley Finn involved with casting.
But the post I quoted, was saying that if Cox appears in Spidey 3, then people will go back and watch Daredevil, like people did with Peters and the Fox movies, and that means Daredevil would have to be canon. But by that logic, if people went back and watched Peters' X-Men movies, wouldn't that mean they would be canon to the MCU, even though the finale just indicated that's not the case?
I honestly don't believe a lot of the general audience, the ones who these films are for first and foremost, think about the Netflix shows as being canon or related to the MCU. They likely see them no different from Sony's previous Spider-Man films, or Fox's X-Men films, or Fox's Fantastic Four films. Just other interpretations of the Marvel characters.
WandaVision since release has become one of the most talked about and most viewed shows in the world, something the Netflix shows unfortunately never managed to do. It would seem people know that WandaVision is connected to the movies, it will impact the world going forward, and matters. It would seem the general audience never thought/believed that about the Netflix shows, or really any of the Marvel TV shows.
With Simmons, Peters, and confirmation from the trades that Alfred Molina and Jamie Foxx will be returning, it would seem Marvel Studios is okay with reusing actors for a role, but doing their own take on them, rather than inheriting works they had little involvement with.
Slyonic
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 456
I was only replying to your statement about Marvel casting actors from legacy franchises as new incarnations meaning the same might happen to Daredevil.
I think what A13G10 was saying, is that people will watch the previous shows to get more knowledge of the characters they just saw. (Say Darcy in WandaVision, they will watch Thor to better understand her character if they hadn't yet.) So if Daredevil shows up, people will watch the Netflix show, and with the references in those shows to the rest of the MCU, will deduce it is part of the MCU. But if Feige decides to cast Cox as a different Daredevil, audiences will be confused if they watch the show, since the show sets itself in the MCU and it won't make sense to have the same actor as a different Daredevil.
The audience won't have this with JK Simmons, since not only does his JJ Simmons look different, the original Spider-Man trilogy doesn't set itself in the MCU, therefore the audience will realize this is not the same incarnation.
The reason WandaVision is as big as it is, besides being Marvel, is due to two other reasons: We're in the longest Marvel drought we've ever had. People are craving new Marvel content, so obviously they will jump onto anything new. Secondly, the marketing for WandaVision is a lot bigger than for the Netflix shows. Strictly speaking from personal experience, here in the Netherlands we have WandaVision commercials on tv. We've never had that for the Netflix shows.
Dude, with all respect, that is the flawed comparison ever, the Netflix show sets itself in the MCU. Slyonic already explained it perfectly.
Like I said, I am very aware the new content won't adhere to the shows, I am very, very, aware that will be the case. also, having a big name Darkhold in the cover just kind of ruins it, and since episode 7 didn't mean to reveal the Darkhold but Agatha Harkness, well, it makes sense.
It also has the benefit of featuring actors from the films continuing storylines from the films. The Netflix shows were also geared towards adults, whereas Wandavision is squarely in the PG-13 realm of the films, making it accessible for families with young kids.
I think if the Marvel Television MCU shows are ever referenced in a significant way in the newer, integrated Marvel Studios stuff we'll probably see more people who missed them the first time go back and watch them. AoS is sitting right there in Disney+ after all; if Coulson or Daisy shows up in the newer stuff with their backstories intact I'm sure people would go back and catch up between the weekly releases of the Studios shows.
I'm neutral about whether or not the Darkhold's altered appearance actually means anything in the larger scheme of things. The only reason it looked the same in AoS and Runways was because they still had access to the prop, which was not true of Wandavision. It's still not super clear if there's a singular Darkhold or multiple copies. As others have pointed out, the text of the Darkhold itself can change depending on who is reading it. And Wandavision's entire premise is based around the concept that magic can alter the physical properties and/or appearance of things; the change in appearance could just be the magical equivalent of a dust jacket.
But I would have preferred they'd recreated the design and I appreciate Luna's drawing the connection back to Ghost Rider and AoS.
Re: the DVDs, even for someone who lived in a first world country during the late 90s/early 2000s, that was a strange choice. Box DVD sets of entire seasons or shows was still a pretty new idea and very expensive. Most of the shows are old enough that a better choice would have been crappy Sokovian TV reruns or secondhand video cassette tapes. It's perfectly within the realm of possibility in the MCU that DVDs were more widespread earlier than in our own, or that Wanda's memory wasn't completely accurate, but given that the show tries pretty hard to capture the spirit of the times and the way TV was watched, the use of DVDs sticks out like a sore thumb.
I think if the Marvel Television MCU shows are ever referenced in a significant way in the newer, integrated Marvel Studios stuff we'll probably see more people who missed them the first time go back and watch them. AoS is sitting right there in Disney+ after all; if Coulson or Daisy shows up in the newer stuff with their backstories intact I'm sure people would go back and catch up between the weekly releases of the Studios shows.
I'm neutral about whether or not the Darkhold's altered appearance actually means anything in the larger scheme of things. The only reason it looked the same in AoS and Runways was because they still had access to the prop, which was not true of Wandavision. It's still not super clear if there's a singular Darkhold or multiple copies. As others have pointed out, the text of the Darkhold itself can change depending on who is reading it. And Wandavision's entire premise is based around the concept that magic can alter the physical properties and/or appearance of things; the change in appearance could just be the magical equivalent of a dust jacket.
But I would have preferred they'd recreated the design and I appreciate Luna's drawing the connection back to Ghost Rider and AoS.Re: the DVDs, even for someone who lived in a first world country during the late 90s/early 2000s, that was a strange choice. Box DVD sets of entire seasons or shows was still a pretty new idea and very expensive. Most of the shows are old enough that a better choice would have been crappy Sokovian TV reruns or secondhand video cassette tapes. It's perfectly within the realm of possibility in the MCU that DVDs were more widespread earlier than in our own, or that Wanda's memory wasn't completely accurate, but given that the show tries pretty hard to capture the spirit of the times and the way TV was watched, the use of DVDs sticks out like a sore thumb.
Lucid_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2020
- Messages
- 189
I prefer the theory that the appearance of DVDs in that scene is more Wanda's memory playing tricks on her, maybe replacing the bootleg VHS tapes her father had with her DVD collection from when she was an adult. Memory can be notoriously fickle and it would also explain why the TV is still showing a perfect image despite a bomb destroying half the house.
I prefer this theory because I dont like making the world of the MCU too different from ours, particularly pre-iron man as it is supposed to be very similar to our world
Slyonic
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 456
Lucid_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2020
- Messages
- 189
thats true, just a prototype though so its another one-off "marvel". If Stark mass produced flying cars for the public then that would be a significant change to the timelineHoward Stark had a flying car in the 1940's
We worked it out the best we could, without speculation and just noticing stuff.
marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com
Darkhold
The Darkhold.""You're familiar with the Darkhold?""I know it's the Book of the Damned, and that it corrupts everything and everyone that it touches.Stephen Strange and Wanda Maximoff The Darkhold, also known as the Book of Sins, the Book of Spells,[1] or the Book of the Damned,[2] was a book of...
Slyonic
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2019
- Messages
- 456
We worked it out the best we could, without speculation and just noticing stuff.
Darkhold
The Darkhold.""You're familiar with the Darkhold?""I know it's the Book of the Damned, and that it corrupts everything and everyone that it touches.Stephen Strange and Wanda Maximoff The Darkhold, also known as the Book of Sins, the Book of Spells,[1] or the Book of the Damned,[2] was a book of...
In a way we're lucky the Darkhold wasn't shown in the Salem flashback (I do think they were alluding to it), because that would open the can of worms having to explain how it went from Agatha to (presumably) Johnny Blaze and eventually ending back with Agatha.
Can I ask why you call it the Book of the Damned instead of the Darkhold in the Agatha paragraphs?
To notice that minor detail. In AoS and Runaways it is the Book of Spells, Book of the Sins. In WandaVision it is mentioned as the Book of the Damned. A remark.
And yes, that is why I am waiting for Assembled and the Art of WandaVision. The implication is that Agatha learned Dark Magic from the Darkhold but until not official information we can say she acquired it after when she wanted to learn more of the Dark Arts.
She also probably modified it or wrote stuff on it, it has happened in the comics that Magicians like Morgan le Fay added stuff on the Darkhold.
And yes, that is why I am waiting for Assembled and the Art of WandaVision. The implication is that Agatha learned Dark Magic from the Darkhold but until not official information we can say she acquired it after when she wanted to learn more of the Dark Arts.
She also probably modified it or wrote stuff on it, it has happened in the comics that Magicians like Morgan le Fay added stuff on the Darkhold.
TheAnimeSlayer
Well-Known Member
What are these detailed timelines for because they would be quite hard to watch wouldn't they
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
An easy way to understand each placement without massive reading and also fun.
TheAnimeSlayer
Well-Known Member
ok thanks
Lastritesx
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2021
- Messages
- 6
So on the timeline, the same portion of The Winter Soldier appears twice. It's the flashback to Bucky and Steve talking after his mothers funeral. One date says October 1936 and the other says June 1941. The timestamp is 1:32:30-1:33:19. Which is correct?
