Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 3)

ok guys, I think there has been some missunderstanding.

Dallas Knight's point wasn't "I'm right, you're wrong" or "You're right I'm wrong". What he did was make notice of the trees and also (maybe more important) Stange's behaivor after last scene.

Also Dallas never said that the book should be trown in the rubbish, he said multiple times that he agrees with the majority of the book. He just saw some contradictions in this scene for Strange and the trees.

His real point was discussing what made the most sense between the book and the movie, cos both of them are made by marvel studios and could be wrong. That's all.

and yes he said that he thinks he's right, and it's reflected on his timeline. But here he just wanted to make notice of this evidence to discuss which one made more sense.
 
Starvel said:
No it corrects a Continuity error. The trees being dead and then alive is the error that was corrected.
Click to expand...
How was it corrected? How did the book fix the very clear error of the trees being dead in all scenes prior and then suddenly green and lush by the end of the film? Unless the film itself intended the scene to be the following year! If that book didn't exist, I guarantee you'd all agree with me on this. "but the book says!" so now we just choose to appeal to the book because it came out later. That's it!
 
Megatron said:
ok guys, I think there has been some missunderstanding.

Dallas Knight's point wasn't "I'm right, you're wrong" or "You're right I'm wrong". What he did was make notice of the trees and also (maybe more important) Stange's behaivor after last scene.

Also Dallas never said that the book should be trown in the rubbish, he said multiple times that he agrees with the majority of the book. He just saw some contradictions in this scene for Strange and the trees.

His real point was discussing what made the most sense between the book and the movie, cos both of them are made by marvel studios and could be wrong. That's all.

and yes he said that he thinks he's right, and it's reflected on his timeline. But here he just wanted to make notice of this evidence to discuss which one made more sense.
Click to expand...
Yes we know. It was discussed, it didn't go in his favor and he hasn't wanted to stop discussing it for 26 hours. No misunderstanding, we know what his point was, it was disagreed on.
 
Megatron said:
ok guys, I think there has been some missunderstanding.

Dallas Knight's point wasn't "I'm right, you're wrong" or "You're right I'm wrong". What he did was make notice of the trees and also (maybe more important) Stange's behaivor after last scene.

Also Dallas never said that the book should be trown in the rubbish, he said multiple times that he agrees with the majority of the book. He just saw some contradictions in this scene for Strange and the trees.

His real point was discussing what made the most sense between the book and the movie, cos both of them are made by marvel studios and could be wrong. That's all.

and yes he said that he thinks he's right, and it's reflected on his timeline. But here he just wanted to make notice of this evidence to discuss which one made more sense.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU. I couldn't have said it better. Finally someone who gets it.
 
Dallas Kinard said:
How was it corrected? How did the book fix the very clear error of the trees being dead in all scenes prior and then suddenly green and lush by the end of the film? Unless the film itself intended the scene to be the following year! If that book didn't exist, I guarantee you'd all agree with me on this. "but the book says!" so now we just choose to appeal to the book because it came out later. That's it!
Click to expand...
Rman has pointed out multiple times the reasoning BTS of the change in tree color that caused a continuity error. The book corrects it by making clear the placement. That's all.
 
Starvel said:
Yes we know. It was discussed, it didn't go in his favor and he hasn't wanted to stop discussing it for 26 hours. No misunderstanding, we know what his point was, it was disagreed on.
Click to expand...
This is simply wrong. You are just as guilty as continuing this conversation, stop putting this all on me dude.
 
Starvel said:
Rman has pointed out multiple times the reasoning BTS of the change in tree color that caused a continuity error. The book corrects it by making clear the placement. That's all.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. It ignores the on-screen evidence. It's wrong IMO. 99% of the movie had late fall weather. The last scene has early fall weather. Perhaps the film isn't being dumb, but actually was intended to be set a year later (which makes Doc's attitude make more sense). But the book could have gotten this wrong.

Which one makes more sense to you? Answer that. Does it make more sense that the trees died and came back to life in a few days and now Doc is more confident with his new eye, or does it make more sense that the scene is set a year later?
 
Dallas Kinard said:
No it doesn't. It ignores the on-screen evidence. It's wrong IMO. 99% of the movie had late fall weather. The last scene has early fall weather. Perhaps the film isn't being dumb, but actually was intended to be set a year later (which makes Doc's attitude make more sense). But the book could have gotten this wrong.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but people disagreed so until you have something new nothing changes.
Dallas Kinard said:
Which one makes more sense to you? Answer that. Does it make more sense that the trees died and came back to life in a few days and now Doc is more confident with his new eye, or does it make more sense that the scene is set a year later?
Click to expand...
It makes more sense that they used a different set and caused a continuity error which the official placement of the scene makes clear isn't a year later. That's what's been decided here by multiple voices. Until you have new evidence, nothing changes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top