All this news raises so many questions - especially for us timeline nerds. Does this mean all TASM stuff is now canon?? Is Garfield still in? Or are we getting our third spiderman in 10 years?? Is Black Panther out of Civil War?
To be honest - just cos there have been so many Spiderman films over the years and that Sony still seem to have creative control - I am a bit underwhelmed by this story. God, I'm a moody bugger!
Nope, The Amazing Spider-Man films with Garfield are their own continuity. Sony and Marvel Studios will reboot the character for his MCU appearances (with a new actor) and restart a new Spider-Man film series with a new actor (same one as the one in the MCU films).
So yeah, it'll be the third iteration of Spidey on film, but with Feige playing a role producing the films, I'm secure that quality wise the films will be much better than TASM series. While Sony will get final say, they'd be idiots not to listen to Feige, the guy who is the main reason the MCU has been such a success. Black Panther will still be in Civil War, as far as I know.
Aha! Just seen this!! A quick answer to this quick question - The newpaper running the story is dated the 17th so I assumed the car 'accident' occurred the previous day (the 16th). Simples!
)
That's my take as well. While in today's world of Internet news, the old school newspaper approach generally reported stories that arose the previous day.
OK, so I'm not really changing much, other than "filling in the blanks". The two Hulk dates, I think should be moved, simply because a few seconds after you have it being March 8th, the date March 7th appears on sceen.
Yes but those are reports showing a date of something AFTER it happened. This is chronologizing the actual films, not acting as a timeline that includes every instance mentioned in the films (hence no date for Howard and Maria Stark's death).
It's an after action report, if you will, hence while it describes an event that occurred, it's not reflective of the action happening on that date at that moment. Simply, it's the newspaper effect. As Orphix said, if something is shown to happen in a newspaper, for example, the actual date would reflect the following day.
I can't remember off the top of my head what that particular instance was, and I don't have time to check right now. But from my recollection, the reports shown at the beginning of IH don't reflect the present time, only the various reports that have been issued surrounding the Hulk. The only real live action instances of previous dates were the quick montages showing Banner doing the experiment, turning into the Hulk, and then visiting Betty in the hospital the next day.
The various reports don't indicate those reports were just typed, this don't require dating them.
It's sort of like if you read a newspaper from 1980. Your present time is still 2015, not 1980. That's the approach taken with those reports.
I know that all dates shown like this should be taken with a grain of salt, but moving this date and the previous date ahead one day won't cause the universe to explode, and it just makes sense. The 2006 date, also is shown on screen, where in the timeline you have ????, but it also makes sense there, due to it seems like the Hulk is being chased for a few years, and I believe later in the film, someone mentions not seeing Banner/Hulk for five years. (2006-2011).
That's exactly why I placed it as I did, to reflect the time span of Banner on the run.
Also, there's no need to be snippy and make comments like the "universe to explode" line.
The point is, the timeline is meant to be accurate as possible, and sometimes that means admitting exact dates can't be applied.
The Iron Man stuff, you yourself said it should take Ivan a few years to build his suit, due to not being as smart as Tony. The dates I chose, not only fit in with the "6 months later" tag (well if you only count Iron Man 2 by itself, the scene where Tony jumps from the plane, then we can say the welding scene is in September of 2010), but also make sense in other ways. When Ivan's father dies, he screams. The next scene is him looking at the arc reactor blueprints. It would make sense that he didn't start doing this immediatly after his father's dead body is in the other room. A year later gives him time to grieve, have a funeral, obsess over killing Iron Man and hang all of those newspaper clippings and magazine covers dealing with Iron Man/ Tony. During that time, he finds the blueprints and begins planning Whiplash. Then it makes sense that about a year and a half later, he's almost done bulding the suit (which is where the welding scene starts), and again, allows the "six months later" tag to work.
The assumption about Ivan is a requirement to rectify the six months later tag in IM2 and the retconning by Fury's Big Week to have Iron Man 2 occurring around the same time as Thor and IH. Also, given Ivan's character and mindset portrayed in the film, I don't see him as spending a year hanging newspaper clippings and grieving. I'd argue his outcry of anguish seen at the beginning was about the only period of grief Ivan had.
To me, it seems more in character for him to become obsessed with vengeance pretty much immediately, especially given what his father told him before he died.
The idea is he finds the blueprints (which wouldn't take long to find, given the size of the place he lived in), and immediately begins poring over the research and planning his Whiplash suit (version 1). It's partly that Ivan isn't as smart as Tony that caused his construction of the suit to take so long, but also due to the fact he didn't have access to the materials and instruments that Tony had. Major difference between building the Iron Man MK 1 in a cave using parts stripped from state of the art weapons, and having essentially NO tech on hand to accomplish the same, thus I figure much of Ivan's time in the interim was spent tracking down the parts and equipment he'd need.
Oh and Spider-Man, I'm pretty sure the MCU version of him hasn't been bitten yet, meaning reboot # 3, or whatever.
Yup. Definite reboot. I have a feeling they won't bother with an Origin story this time. I'm sure they'll have a flashback in the new Spidey film that covers it, but doubt it'll occupy the tenure first 1/4 of the film like the last two versions did.
