Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 2)

I just finished the book. The Hawkeye mention is really the only that places it somewhere (Sam is mentioned as being the current Captain America, but Hawkeye is more recent).
There's a reference to Bruce staying in Mexico with Tony during the blip, so out of universe it 'requires' the reader to be familiar with that plot point from She-Hulk.

Unfortunately, there's no other timeline indications or things we didn't know. The only thing that comes close (at least for me) is that Scott stayed with Cassie for a couple of days after he returned from the Quantum Realm at the beginning of Endgame, instead of going straight to the Avengers Compound.
Also no references to the pre-D+ tv shows.

I liked The Wakanda Files better as a in-universe book. At least that one moved the story a bit forward. This one is honestly just a summary of the events Ant-man's been in with some life lessons sprinkled through. There's only a litte more information about what conversations happened off screen, but none of them are relevant to the future of the MCU.

There's also some pretty stupid mistakes, like Scott describing the Gauntlet during the Battle of Earth being golden (which should of course be red) and 'snap' and 'blip' being used like they're one and the same (for example, Thanos' Snap is referred to as the snap, but the 5 year period is called "post-blip" multiple times")

If there's any questions, let me know!
 
Slyonic said:
I just finished the book. The Hawkeye mention is really the only that places it somewhere (Sam is mentioned as being the current Captain America, but Hawkeye is more recent).
There's a reference to Bruce staying in Mexico with Tony during the blip, so out of universe it 'requires' the reader to be familiar with that plot point from She-Hulk.

Unfortunately, there's no other timeline indications or things we didn't know. The only thing that comes close (at least for me) is that Scott stayed with Cassie for a couple of days after he returned from the Quantum Realm at the beginning of Endgame, instead of going straight to the Avengers Compound.
Also no references to the pre-D+ tv shows.

I liked The Wakanda Files better as a in-universe book. At least that one moved the story a bit forward. This one is honestly just a summary of the events Ant-man's been in with some life lessons sprinkled through. There's only a litte more information about what conversations happened off screen, but none of them are relevant to the future of the MCU.

There's also some pretty stupid mistakes, like Scott describing the Gauntlet during the Battle of Earth being golden (which should of course be red) and 'snap' and 'blip' being used like they're one and the same (for example, Thanos' Snap is referred to as the snap, but the 5 year period is called "post-blip" multiple times")

If there's any questions, let me know!
Click to expand...
So basically even they're unsure of where to objectively place Ant-Man 3 or they want it intentionally vague until they have a clear timeline set out by the time Secret Wars comes out.
 
Imagine if "The Mutants" film is a sequel to "The Eternals"; since the Celestial created the X-gene in the comics.

And what use are the Eternals now that Tiamut is dead?
 
selfishmisery said:
See, this is what kinda ruins comic book stuff for me in some ways.
Unseen "destiny" essentially allows some timelines to co-exist and at other times not to with the same method.

My personal head canon has been the methods differentiate the effect rather than the writer flubbing lore for the sake of story.
They're allowed to tell that story, it's just when getting so deep into the mythology as we have with Marvel/DC - the more you kinda have to fill in the blanks yourself, I feel like.

That's why "No Prizes" existed in the Stan Lee letter pages. ha
Click to expand...
If you want this summed up in a single word answer here it goes...Kang.

In universe, HWR stitched the timeline together so that everything would end up the way it is until his death allowing all sorts of shenanigans to occur (which will be compounded by Loki season 2 now considering its a time hopping show that takes place AFTER his death). So technically in universe all versions of time travel logic work because they have to as that is how HWR stitched it all together up to that point.

To me that ultimately solved the Steve in Endgame issue that so many people had too because regardless of how you see the time travel logic working, it was always ALL meant to be because of HWR.

Outside, yes writers, different offices, etc, everything everyone else mentioned. Deke in season 7 of AOS explained time travel in some sort of small change vs big change metaphor (forgive me its been...since the last season aired that I've watched AOS), like a single stick won't change the river but a bunch of sticks will cause a dam. So I guess given what we know, it ultimately comes down to a case by case basis of what can be considered grounds for erasure vs branching. Like stealing the stones is apparently grounds for branching even though it should technically be erasure given the magnitude of the thefts.
 
Starvel said:
Theres a Disney Showcase about their theatrical slate in a couple weeks if I'm not mistaken. We'll likely get some rescheduling there.

As for the new Agatha title it seems this is incorrect. Various logos for the series were leaked a while back each seemingly being an episode of the series parodying other films and shows. The Darkhold Diaries logo was in the style Princess Diaries, another was Agnes of Westview in the style of Mare of Easttown. Its possible that the series has been renamed Darkhold Diaries but I'm fairly certain this was a mixup
Click to expand...
I'm a little skeptical of us getting a reschedule. I went over the showcase schedule a couple of times and the only time it would even happen is a 15 minute 'upcoming movies/shows' segment Iger is doing. The only hour+ long segment with Marvel's name on it is a comic segment with the EIC Cebulski hosting it.
 
fuzzyfoot said:
If you want this summed up in a single word answer here it goes...Kang.

In universe, HWR stitched the timeline together so that everything would end up the way it is until his death allowing all sorts of shenanigans to occur (which will be compounded by Loki season 2 now considering its a time hopping show that takes place AFTER his death). So technically in universe all versions of time travel logic work because they have to as that is how HWR stitched it all together up to that point.

To me that ultimately solved the Steve in Endgame issue that so many people had too because regardless of how you see the time travel logic working, it was always ALL meant to be because of HWR.

Outside, yes writers, different offices, etc, everything everyone else mentioned. Deke in season 7 of AOS explained time travel in some sort of small change vs big change metaphor (forgive me its been...since the last season aired that I've watched AOS), like a single stick won't change the river but a bunch of sticks will cause a dam. So I guess given what we know, it ultimately comes down to a case by case basis of what can be considered grounds for erasure vs branching. Like stealing the stones is apparently grounds for branching even though it should technically be erasure given the magnitude of the thefts.
Click to expand...
By the time Nathaniel Malick started giving Hydra agents Inhuman powers and Daisy's mom died, that pretty much cemented the timeline change as a new universe. (EDIT: And Mac's parents being killed/replaced by the Chronicroms too, I forgot that.)

I guess like with 2014 Thanos, the TVA just allowed that to happen for the sake of SHIELD saving the main universe?

I think the difference with HWR is that he'll prune a timeline before it fully develops; essentially reversing it some before it creates dopplegangers.
Kang and the other Kangs will just destroy a whole alternate timeline that's already cemented itself. Wasp essentially said that in Ant-Man 3, Kang destroys whole universes.
 
Last edited:
Lebnyx said:
Updated with Season 2 of I Am Groot.
Click to expand...
Does Daredevil S01 and I am Groot S01 or S02 overlap because I always thought Daredevil happened during winter 2014 (Nov/Dec 2014) (2 years since avengers and someone says early on in the season that it's cold) but I am groot has to happen after GotG 2 which is in October 2014
So is there anyway we can narrow down a more concrete answer (I don't trust most of what the guys on the MCU wiki anymore)
 
FruityWho50 said:
Does Daredevil S01 and I am Groot S01 or S02 overlap because I always thought Daredevil happened during winter 2014 (Nov/Dec 2014) (2 years since avengers and someone says early on in the season that it's cold) but I am groot has to happen after GotG 2 which is in October 2014
So is there anyway we can narrow down a more concrete answer (I don't trust most of what the guys on the MCU wiki anymore)
Click to expand...
Considering that I Am Groot is so completely standalone, I think setting it entirely before Daredevil S01 is reasonable.
 
Am I the only one who genuinely does not care about them not including these shows that they did not make in the book? You know how absurd it would be to ask them to write about when each episode of a show they had little involvement with takes place?

We didn't lose, we just weren't really promised anything. I can't imagine Marvel Studios employees adding Cloak & Dagger, Inhumans or The Punisher to their book regardless of the fact that they're canon. They're just too rich with lore, too obscure and too isolated behind-the-scenes for it to matter.
 
Yeah we're not getting Punisher's backstory of his family shredded by gunfire or the fact that Daredevil beat the tar out of a r*pist father on his first day as a vigilante in a book for all ages.

Even if they included just the ABC stuff or Hulu, well, then Netflix history missing would raise eyebrows. I saw this coming a mile away. Don't overthink it.
 
Last edited:
A timeline book is a timeline book. Either give us everything or just leave it. It's not for the sake of our own celebration, but for new fans who are genuenly curious. I don't find it absurd at all to ask them to not leave stuff out. I don't feel like we "lost" either that they are not in, as I agree that they are background shows, but ignoring them completely is not the way. Agents of Shield, the first two seasons for example are mildly important anyway. I'd appreciate some homage at least if not complete entries.
 
Raylauncher said:
A timeline book is a timeline book. Either give us everything or just leave it. It's not for the sake of our own celebration, but for new fans who are genuenly curious. I don't find it absurd at all to ask them to not leave stuff out. I don't feel like we "lost" either that they are not in, as I agree that they are background shows, but ignoring them completely is not the way. Agents of Shield, the first two seasons for example are mildly important anyway. I'd appreciate some homage at least if not complete entries.
Click to expand...
Just because it's not in the book doesn't mean it's non-canon.
Literally the Netflix stuff or even Cloak & Dagger in some places gets so mature and dark that you CAN'T describe it in simple terms in a book for mass audiences. That's just a fact. Maybe we'll get an adult "expanded" edition, who knows. But these DK books are always sold in kids sections.
 
selfishmisery said:
Just because it's not in the book doesn't mean it's non-canon.
Literally the Netflix stuff or even Cloak & Dagger in some places gets so mature and dark that you CAN'T describe it in simple terms in a book for mass audiences. That's just a fact. Maybe we'll get an adult "expanded" edition, who knows. But these DK books are always sold in kids sections.
Click to expand...
I did not say anything about canon status. I don't feel like it makes much of a difference in terms of canon whether they are in or not. Until they outright confirm they are not canon or somehow retcon it so hard they just can't fit anymore I will be on the everything is canon ship.

I agree with the the other half. In that aspect I could see why, though some slight mentions would not hurt a soul, I recon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top