Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 3)

In QuANTuMANia, Kang says that he saw the Multiverse dying. Is this because of the TVA Time Loom being down? Like is it similiar what happened Last Episode?
 
Well...It's been a while since I've posted but dang 30 pages on Part 3 already? Ok then. Question about what happened between Part 2 and 3 where a lot of things shifted in years on Page 1? Can anyone sum up the changes made post endgame here and why they are where they are now?
 
fuzzyfoot said:
Well...It's been a while since I've posted but dang 30 pages on Part 3 already? Ok then. Question about what happened between Part 2 and 3 where a lot of things shifted in years on Page 1? Can anyone sum up the changes made post endgame here and why they are where they are now?
Click to expand...
The timeline book happened
 
fuzzyfoot said:
I guess it's time to check out then. I don't agree with a lot of the post endgame book, and it's likely going to be a butterfly effect going forward for me.
Click to expand...
as someone who was vehemently against the book since its announcement ive come to terms with a lot of its placements and have reluctantly come around to agree with the newer placements (the only thing on my personal timeline i still have placed differently than the book is love and thunder)
 
eloesch289 said:
as someone who was vehemently against the book since its announcement ive come to terms with a lot of its placements and have reluctantly come around to agree with the newer placements (the only thing on my personal timeline i still have placed differently than the book is love and thunder)
Click to expand...
In your own words, why is IM3 in 2013 now? Why is Eternals in 2024 now? Why is LAT and MK in 2025 now?
 
jan 2000 + 13 = 2013

i admit eternals was the hardest to agree with changing but a lot of things have to happen like the deviants melting from the ice and the grc being established, along with the population growing enough from where it was pre-infinity war to justify the emergence starting, i do believe the original intent was for the film the be placed in 2023 but because it was kept vague enough in the film itself it allowed them to be flexible later and ajak's "five years later" is the biggest thing contradicting the move to 2024 as a byproduct of this, same thing with moon knight which was almost certainly intended to be in 2024 at some point in production but as indicated by the director these plans were thrown away before the final show came out, thats why ive always placed moon knight in april-may 2025 and like i said i still disagree with the book, placing love and thunder in may 2024 on my own timeline
 
fuzzyfoot said:
In your own words, why is IM3 in 2013 now? Why is Eternals in 2024 now? Why is LAT and MK in 2025 now?
Click to expand...
Iron Man 3- Besides the book, any date shown in the movie is 2013. Whether it be the newspaper or when Tony is looking up info about Mandarin attacks. There's nothing that says Tony wouldn't still have PTSD a year and a half after The Avengers, Maya corrects Tony that their kid would actually be 13 (hypothetically conceived January 2000-December 2013), and no point in the movie is it said to be 2012 or 6 months after The Avengers.

Eternals- Besides the book, we're shown that life has returned to normalcy and honestly it being a year since Endgame over 1-2 weeks makes more sense. We can assume Ajak was rounding when she said "5 Years Ago". I'm sure Tiamut is also going to be treated as a more recent event in the rumored projects it's said to be a part of.

Love & Thunder- Besides the book, Thor and Jane's breakup could easily happen in 2017 as the book says. Thor could have been off-world during the events of Civil War while he and Jane kept a long-distance relationship. The movie even shows him going back and forth with Bifrost and the distance probably played a role in their breakup. Plus it makes sense that in November 2017 (Ragnarok) the girl would mention the breakup since it would be more recent. I know Groot's size is another reason people have issue with 2025, but he's a fictional character with a sporadic growth pattern. And Vol 3. even showed him go "Kaiju" size in no time. Jane's blood test shows 4/30 and she tells Thor later in the movie that she's had cancer for 6 months, fitting with the movie's October placement of the main portion of the movie and confirming her first scene receiving treatment is very shortly after she was diagnosed. Also, She-Hulk (in August 2025) mentions Jane and the implication is that she's still active, and while not seen clearly in the show, the DODC board in Ms. Marvel has a picture of her on their board of different enhanced individuals. I doubt that would still be up there if she had been dead for over a year at that point.

Moon Knight- Besides the book, the wiki has plenty of evidence as to why April-May 2025 fits with Moon Knight and as you know, I've brought it up before.
 
Last edited:
Rman said:
Iron Man 3- Besides the book, any date shown in the movie is 2013. Whether it be the newspaper or when Tony is looking up info about Mandarin attacks. There's nothing that says Tony wouldn't still have PTSD a year and a half after The Avengers, Maya corrects Tony that their kid would actually be 13 (hypothetically conceived January 2000-December 2013), and no point is the movie is it said to be 2012 or 6 months after The Avengers.
Click to expand...
Then this forum should remove AOS and put it in the Multiverse thread instead because while AOS doesn't directly reference IM3, I find it hard to believe that Extremis was basically in the public eye for a year before Killian decided, you know what I need a buyer for this project. Hell...SHIELD was aware of it and did nothing about it, leaving it for Stark to discover and handle all on his own a year and several bombings later.
Rman said:
Eternals- Besides the book, we're shown that life has returned to normalcy and honestly it being a year since Endgame over 1-2 weeks makes more sense. We can assume Ajak was rounding when she said "5 Years Ago". I'm sure Tiamut is also going to be treated as a more recent event in the rumored projects it's said to be a part of.
Click to expand...
How does it make more sense when WV also shows life returned to normalcy just 3 weeks later when Monica was wandering around the office or other scientists were getting called in for the Westview incident? As I have said before, Civil War states the years past several times for several different films and yet Ajak was off by a year. Tiamut, you're possibly correct here, however, having just rewatched AOU again this past weekend, it occurred to me that while the Accords were put in place, no one brings up the giant hole in the earth after that movie...like ever again. It's no different than a head/hand sticking out of the ocean for years as well.
Rman said:
Love & Thunder- Besides the book, Thor and Jane's breakup could easily happen in 2017 as the book says. Thor could have been off-world during the events of Civil War while he and Jane kept a long-distance relationship. The movie even shows him going back and forth with Bifrost and the distance probably played a role in their breakup. Plus it makes sense that in November 2017 (Ragnarok) the girl would mention the breakup since it would be more recent. I know Groot's size is another reason people have issue with 2025, but he's a fictional character with a sporadic growth pattern. And Vol 3. even showed him go "Kaiju" size in no time.
Click to expand...
I mean...he also goes from a stick to a baby in like 3 months flat. That kinda proves LAT, at least the opening happens closer to Endgame than GOTG 3.
Rman said:
Jane's blood test shows 4/30 and she tells Thor later in the movie that she's had cancer for 6 months, fitting with the movie's October placement of the main portion of the movie and confirming her first scene receiving treatment is very shortly after she was diagnosed. Also, She-Hulk (in August 2025) mentions Jane and the implication is that she's still active, and while not seen clearly in the show, the DODC board in Ms. Marvel has a picture of her on their board of different enhanced individuals. I doubt that would still be up there if she had been dead for over a year at that point.
Click to expand...
Interesting...I may have to go back and find that in Ms Marvel, because honestly, I never spotted that.
Rman said:
Moon Knight- Besides the book, the wiki has plenty of evidence as to why April-May 2025 fits with Moon Knight and as you know, I've brought it up before.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I've argued the opposite, so this point is kinda moot.
 
The presskit for The Marvels reveals themes from X2: X-Men United and X-Men: Days of Future Past are used at the end of the movie. In a trailer or teaser, the letter X was the last to fade away.

This fits with a leak about Beast (TLS actor) appearing in the post-credits scene. I imagine that it would be set in Earth-17315 (Revised Timeline/Logan future). Logically anyway, I doubt it'll be set in Earth-10005, Earth-18315, Earth-41633, or Earth-66250. Maybe Earth-838.
Okay okay, that's better. Right thread this time.
 
fuzzyfoot said:
Then this forum should remove AOS and put it in the Multiverse thread instead because while AOS doesn't directly reference IM3, I find it hard to believe that Extremis was basically in the public eye for a year before Killian decided, you know what I need a buyer for this project. Hell...SHIELD was aware of it and did nothing about it, leaving it for Stark to discover and handle all on his own a year and several bombings later.
Click to expand...
I think you're exaggerating how big of a deal this is. Extremis was around since... what? 2009 in the timeline book? It can be around a few months before Iron Man 3 no problem.
 
fuzzyfoot said:
Then this forum should remove AOS and put it in the Multiverse thread instead because while AOS doesn't directly reference IM3, I find it hard to believe that Extremis was basically in the public eye for a year before Killian decided, you know what I need a buyer for this project. Hell...SHIELD was aware of it and did nothing about it, leaving it for Stark to discover and handle all on his own a year and several bombings later.

How does it make more sense when WV also shows life returned to normalcy just 3 weeks later when Monica was wandering around the office or other scientists were getting called in for the Westview incident? As I have said before, Civil War states the years past several times for several different films and yet Ajak was off by a year. Tiamut, you're possibly correct here, however, having just rewatched AOU again this past weekend, it occurred to me that while the Accords were put in place, no one brings up the giant hole in the earth after that movie...like ever again. It's no different than a head/hand sticking out of the ocean for years as well.

I mean...he also goes from a stick to a baby in like 3 months flat. That kinda proves LAT, at least the opening happens closer to Endgame than GOTG 3.

Interesting...I may have to go back and find that in Ms Marvel, because honestly, I never spotted that.

Yes, and I've argued the opposite, so this point is kinda moot.
Click to expand...
As it's been brought up, there's nothing that contradicts AoS and Iron Man 3. Even if the movie were in 2012, Extremis would have been out there a few years and your arguments would still be valid.

I still feel like Eternals was produced to be in 2023, however, COVID delays changed it to 2024. Either way, the book is the closest we have to Marvel Studios' belief, so 2024 it is.

I wouldn't say Groot's size proves anything. Like I said he's a fictional character and it would be ridiculous to try and determine how exactly his growth pattern works. Especially, since like I said he goes full "kaiju" in seconds when provoked in Vol 3. I see no reason to ignore what the book is telling us with Love & Thunder, when as I've argued there isn't specifically anything that says it can't be 2025.

The board in Ms. Marvel isn't too clear in the actual show, but here you can see it better.

As for Moon Knight, you brought up asking why it's in 2025 when I've given evidence before. So, I just redirected you to the wiki to show why there's evidence beyond my own beliefs. The fact the book goes with it as well is just more proof of what I already believed.
 
Pro Bot said:
I don't know. Does it matter, though?
Click to expand...
Yeah, to me it actually does. That's why I'm tapping out. This sub basically went full on admission that the official marvel book is gospel therefore, there is no further discussion to be had. No matter what we discuss here going forward, the book backed up by the D+ timeline will forever be the thing we point to and say 'well marvel said...'. I mean seriously...look at the first response to my question. Or R-Man's. The book is gospel. Even later down the road, the updated book (now including secret wars) will trump anything we attempt to lock here. And let's say that book is done by a new group and they change their mind and IM3 is 2012 again. Will the sub pivot again to accommodate it?

The D+ timeline nor the book are Feige's own words, but a group of people either guessing or 'researching' the information. To me, that is no different than what we used to do here or even on the wiki. The difference is now that it has Marvel's name on it, it's higher tier information and even if it goes against what was established before, it seems to hold more weight here. Take that Miss Minutes Bucky train thing...they didn't even bother to answer it...they simply acknowledged that yeah its an issue, much like Joe Russo did in that Q&A because they honestly can't reconcile it.

I always looked at this project as a way to help me logic out where things go in a timeline or a way to watch the movies/shows so that it makes sense to say, my father who has ADHD and cannot understand why Iron Man 1 and 2 happen before Avengers 1 before watching Iron Man 3 and then Guardians of the Galaxy 1 etc etc etc. What always mattered to me was what was seen and heard IN THE FILMS/SHOWS first before ever consulting directors or writers or whatever. This sub used to be all about that, but it's slowly just given in to the TPTB and altered course. This guide took YEARS to figure out and discuss. That won't matter anymore because the dam has been broken and all anyone has to do is wait for the D+ timeline to update then whatever evidence fits it, will be the evidence that matters more for this timeline.

I'm not trying to flip this board off or anything as I do appreciate the discussion and hard work that went into this...I mean it's on a Part 3 thread already which is amazing. I simply feel like the conversation will stop being productive and my voice in it will get further and further away from the finger pointed directly at the book as a way of saying 'you're wrong.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top