Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 2)

I'm happy to help keep tabs on the timeline going forward (tbh anything that has a overlap like the pre Disney + shows with the main MCU I'm still not sure on, so that's a WIP for me personally, I'm 3 quarters of the way through nailing down a definitive viewing order for phase 2, and anything post endgame including other connected universes is a bit of a headache viewing order wise)

I'm just not going to be 100% certain of my findings.

I'll watch something, where it falls roughly, how much time takes place in it (roughly) and then narrow it down with you guys.

So if you want to take charge on another thread "Dego Strange" that's fine with me. I'm happy to help when I can.

(BTW please don't delete this thread "Lebnyx" because we'd hate to lose all our work so far)
 
FruityWho50 said:
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)
Click to expand...
I don't think they copied Disney +, I think they've been involved with it since the beginning and the book is just a reflection of that.
selfishmisery said:
I should remind you all that Iron Man 3 began and book ended with a Tony Stark narration at least a month after most of the events in the film.

So I take that as his therapy session with Bruce being very early 2013; and the rest of it obviously being December 2012 in memory.
Click to expand...
I always just went with the therapy session being around the movie's release date of May 2013. Disney + placing it after The Dark World made me consider it could potentially be late 2013 or early 2014, but now it's clear they see Iron Man 3 as 2013. I think the problem is that during production they have an idea in mind like Iron Man 3 in 2012, but later on move from it. Like Eternals. I believe 100% the original intent was for it to be Fall 2023 since it was originally going to be the first "Present Day" movie coming out after Endgame. However, with the Covid delays causing Shang-Chi to release first, they pushed it to Fall 2024. So far, Iron Man 3 is the only placement I have issues with, and even then I get why they see it like they do.
 
I've been thinking about it and I'm starting to not hate Iron Man 3 in 2013. Killian making reference to it being 13 years ago may just be an approximation since it was New Years and he's thinking more of it being around 2000 over it being closer to 14 years. Maya also mentions her and Tony's potential kid would actually be 13 (conceived December 31st 1999/January 1st 2000 and born around September 2000). Also when Tony learns about Chad Davis there are more 2013 dates. The only thing that really had me leaning more to 2012 was AoS, but it's clear it's being ignored and it's easy to say Extremis was known by SHIELD before the events of Iron Man 3 anyway.
 
I would really hope that someone who was around for the DirishB era and keep the way he ran the thread into account could take over
 
For now it seems that this will be the timeline in the book:

The Distant Past: (pg. 10-27)
-Eternals (13-21)
-Thor: The Dark World (17)
-Thor (24)
-Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (25)

1940s, 50s, and 60s: (pg. 28-43)
-Captain America: The First Avenger (30-37)
-Agent Carter (38-39)

1970s-1980s: (pg. 44-51)
-Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (48)
-Ant-Man (49, 51)
-Guardians of the Galaxy (50)
-Black Panther (53)

1990s: (pg. 52-65)
-Black Widow (54)
-Captain Marvel (55-62)
-Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (64)
-Iron Man 3 (65)

2000s: (pg. 66-69)
-The Incredible Hulk (68)
-Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (68)

2008: (pg. 70-76)
-Iron Man (74-76)
-Iron Man 2 (76)

2010: (pg. 77-91)
-Iron Man 2 (77-81)
-Thor (77-84)
-A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor's Hammer (82)
-The Incredible Hulk (78-88)
-The Consultant (89)
-Captain America: The First Avenger (89)
-Fury's Big Week (77-91)

2012: (pg. 92-99)
-The Avengers (92-97)
-Item 47 (97)

2013: (pg. 100-108)
-Thor: The Dark World (100-105)
-Iron Man 3 (106-108)

2014: (pg. 109-137)
-Iron Man 3 (109-113)
-All Hail the King (114)
-Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (114)
-Captain America: The Winter Soldier (114-124)
-Guardians of the Galaxy (125-131)
-Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (132-137)

2015: (pg. 138-149)
-Avengers: Age of Ultron (138-145)
-Ant-Man (146-149)

2016: (pg. 150-177)
-Captain America: Civil War (150-158)
-Black Widow (159-166)
-Black Panther (166-172)
-Spider-Man: Homecoming (172-176)]
-Doctor Strange (150, 176-177)

2017: (pg. 178-186)
-Doctor Strange (178-181)
-Thor: Ragnarok (181-186)

2018: (pg. 187-205)
-Ant-Man and The Wasp (187-191)
-Avengers: Infinity War (192-203)

2018-2023: (pg. 206-243)
-Avengers: Endgame (204-231)
-Loki (232-237)
-WandaVision (237-243)

2024: (pg. 244-293)
-Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (244-247)
-The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (248-257)
-Spider-Man: Far From Home (258-267)
-Eternals (268-272)
-Spider-Man: No Way Home (273-278)
-Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (278-286)
-Hawkeye (287-291)

2025: (pg. 294-325)
-Moon Knight (296-301)
-Black Panther (301-309)
-She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (267-268, 294-295, 310-312)
-Ms. Marvel (313-318)
-Thor: Love and Thunder (301, 318-323)
-Werewolf by Night (324)
-The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special (325)

What If? (pg. 326-)
 
FruityWho50 said:
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)
Click to expand...
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
 
Lebnyx said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm so confused. You want to stop working on the timeline, but you want to start a new one?
 
Basilisk said:
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
Click to expand...

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 shit 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 shit 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
 
Starvel said:
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 shit 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 shit 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
Click to expand...
"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.
 
Dallas Kinard said:
"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.
Click to expand...
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
 
Starvel said:
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
Click to expand...
I agree. My point is logic trumps everything. The best arguments + evidence should be our standard. Not a book written by fallible humans!
 
Dallas Kinard said:
I agree. My point is logic trumps everything. The best arguments + evidence should be our standard. Not a book written by fallible humans!
Click to expand...
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.
 
Starvel said:
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.
Click to expand...
I can't agree with that last statement because it makes Marvel Studios appear to be infallible when they aren't'!
 
Dallas Kinard said:
I can't agree with that last statement because it makes Marvel Studios appear to be infallible when they aren't'!
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top