I mean, refresh my memory here, but did the scene in which he was offered a spot with the Avengers have any indicators of when that happened in accordance with the rest of the movie? Like, in terms of just speculating, could a few months have gone by?
Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 2)
- Thread starter Lebnyx
- Start date
It seems to be the Monday following the dance.
In case I missed anything, what about the scene indicates that?
We can see them taking down posters for the dance, I doubt Peter would wait that long to talk with Liz about the dance, the Decathalon team is celebrating their recent win. It may not be specifically Monday but either way, I think it's meant to be the week after the dance rather than months later.
Goooootcha. They probably either just made a mistake and went with its release date or they just figured that was a cleaner line than "Stark asked me to join the Avengers a year and a half ago."
I feel like they did the same thing with Vision's line in Civil War and that they either forgot Iron Man was retconned or said 8 years because it would be easier for audiences to understand since Iron Man came out 8 years prior. I know it's 2008 on here, but I personally still go with 2010.
I mean you and I disagree on that. The odds of them getting it wrong in Civil War AND Homecoming is very narrow. If anything Iron Man 2 was changed halfway through production to take place later than intended initially
Homecoming (which has its own issues) just has Happy referencing having the ring for 8 years, while a reference to the movie, it doesn't necessarily mean he's had it since the events of the movie. I 100% believe Iron Man was originally intended to be 2008. However, with Iron Man 2 being 2011, I just personally can't see it as being 2008. Not only is there the 6 months later title card, but Hammer mentions how Tony has created a weapon "in the last 6 months" and Pepper mentions Christine doing "quite the spread" on Tony last year. I feel like it's a huge stretch to have 3 years between them. Of course, there is evidence for 2008 and 2010, so until we get further evidence, it's up to the individual to decide what they want to go with.
It's pretty clear what the insinuation of the ring line is. I feel almost the exact opposite as your argument I believe Iron Man two was supposed to initially be Six months later but about halfway through production they decided on fury's big week, Hence the "three years ago" exchange between Coulson and Tony. Also in the Iron Man two comic adaptation that line by Justin Hammer is included but the six months is removed so I believe that whereas a minimum detail is still telling that there was a change in the process. But as you said there's a lot of evidence either way I personally choose to go with more recent evidence as it's more indicative of plans moving forward but until there is a concrete answer no one can really know for sure. Maybe we will get an answer in either the Marvel Studios book or the upcoming What If? episode with Tony and Killmonger
The "Three Years Ago" line was a joke. Not a reference to how much time had passed since Iron Man and I personally don't see anything about Happy's line being a specific reference to events in Iron Man. What If? has been helping confirm some time placements. For example, this week they mention the main events of Ant-Man & The Wasp being a couple of weeks before Infinity War. I'm hoping the Marvel Studios book clears stuff up since Iron Man's placement is really the only one questionable.
I'm sorry my friend but them saying three years and it being three years between the two movies is a hell of a coincidence plus if the three years doesn't mean anything then why say three years why not say five years why not say seven years it's obviously three years to indicate that he "broke the perimeter" when he became Iron Man I think that's very clear whether he's joking or not.
Happy is referencing the first time Tony and Pepper had romantic feelings for one another, he saw something in that, knew they would end up together based off of that, and bought a ring. I thought that was very apparent personally.
I did like the nod to AMatW'a Timeline placement it really helped clear some stuff up. Also I would like to apologize for any spelling or punctuation errors I'm using talk to text function and it's not the best at picking that stuff up.
Him breaking the perimeter was when he left his house and saw Pepper at Stark Industries not when he became Iron Man. The three years mean nothing. Especially with all the references in the movie saying Iron Man was 6 months prior and I don't think Iron Man 2 ever saw its events as being 3 years since the first.
And Happy could have seen Tony and Pepper have feelings before the events of Iron Man. Like I said there is nothing that says it's a specific reference to him realizing it during the movie.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. But, PERSONALLY, 2010 makes more sense to me.
But the joke is that Coulson is alluding to him breaking the perimeter and Tony is alluding to himself becoming Ironman. THAT is the joke.
I think you're being intentionally dismissive of the clear intention here in order to suit your argument.
Yeah, until there is another confirmation of its 2008 status we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just like having a place to talk about all this.
I've seen the movie a number of times and never took it in that context. If they wanted the movie to be 3 years later, they wouldn't have included everything referencing 6 months. You're saying clear intention but I don't think it's as clear as you're trying to make it out to be. Especially since I doubt Iron Man 2 (a movie coming out 2 years after) was ever intended to be 3 years after. Not only does it contradict dialogue in the movie but I feel like it's way too big a gap.
Just my opinion though. Hopefully, one day we get an actual answer.
ThoughtTie24110
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2021
- Messages
- 484
Why are the events of What If...? 1x05 set before IW in this timeline when Bruce arrives to the Sanctum Sanctorum at the beggining of the episode like in Infinity War?
They mention that it's two weeks after Ant-Man and the Wasp, but placing Infinity War on May 16-17 contradicts The Punisher Season 2. So either I overlook the dates or remove the precise dates of The Punisher S2 so that it doesn't conflict.
ThoughtTie24110
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2021
- Messages
- 484
I ever thought that every TV Show episode that chronologically ocurrs after IW is part from an alternate timeline, but nothing has been confirmed, so ok
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
My personal theory is that Cap signed the Sokovia Accords, which led to him still being an Avenger in this timeline. Due to the Avengers Civil War no longer happening, Peter is recruited in 2017. He also recieves a different suit.
Thor: Ragnarok plays out the same for the most part of course, because they're only affected by Earth business during the Doctor Strange cameo and Hela introduction. Thanos' assault on the Asguardians happened the same.
For whatever reason, Ant-Man and the Wasp happens slightly later in the timeline. It's fine.
I think Bruce ends up on Earth the same day, though.
Thor: Ragnarok plays out the same for the most part of course, because they're only affected by Earth business during the Doctor Strange cameo and Hela introduction. Thanos' assault on the Asguardians happened the same.
For whatever reason, Ant-Man and the Wasp happens slightly later in the timeline. It's fine.
I think Bruce ends up on Earth the same day, though.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Nope. They are in the main MCU timeline, Earth-199999. Even Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. S6.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Nah. Doesn't make sense.
The film is 5 years after Infinity War, and takes place within the seven days after the Blip seen in Endgame.
Probably a more general comment that they didn't think through.
