Thread:Marvelous 345678/@comment-27496405-20180723185324/@comment-26838855-20181006184429

Hi guys,

I hope you'll understand, I had to take the last 2 weeks off from all of this to fully focus on settling in here at university. And things are overall going pretty well.

As such, I've basically done no work on here in the last 2 weeks. But I'm back now.

The Netflix shows have had unfortunate release timing with my personal life recently, with Luke Cage: Season 2 coming out during exams and the World Cup, and Iron Fist: Season 2 coming out as I went on holiday, followed by starting university. So I apologise for taking a while with the notes for both. With Iron Fist, I had hoped to get them up before university, but there was no great point in the chat to do it because there was constant discussion in which they would've gotten lost, and the lull in discussion only came once I was then at university and unable to post.

There's a bit of discussion happening again now so at this point, another few days shouldn't matter too much. I'll finish off the notes in the coming days and post them. I'll be back on track for Daredevil, which is releasing at a reasonable time for me (albeit a bit stressful in how fast it's coming out).

My fresh start at university gives me hope that I'll have more regular time to work. I'm stressed about being so far behind on write-ups as well as all the work I want to do otherwise, but confident that I can find a rhythm here, and will continue to catch up well. Thankfully, after Daredevil: Season 3, the only content releasing between now and Captain Marvel in 5 months' time will be Runaways: Season 2 and probably The Punisher: Season 2. Things will slow down a bit.

Here's my responses:

Is Ant-Man and the Wasp Set in Stone? (Webprodigi)
Webprodigi wrote: Hey everyone. This is my first time posting here so I just wanted to start by saying thanks for all the hard work you guys do! I'm on the timeline page all the time and love reading your posts here. Would you guys say the Ant-Man and the Wasp dates are pretty set in stone at least until a future movie contradicts them? Or should I wait a few weeks after the home media release? Welcome! And thank you!

Ant-Man and the Wasp is pretty set in stone in relation to Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Avengers: Infinity War, so in terms of the actual order of events, yes. But the actual dates are not set in stone, because that block as a whole could shift.

G. W. Bridge (Mrmichaelt)
Mrmichaelt wrote: Yeah, the only reason I mentioned Bridge was he was referenced in one of those memos about Howard Stark's death in Winter Soldier when Zola was stalling Steve and Natasha in the old bunker. I figured Bridge might be one of those 'shared characters' between studios. I totally down for a list of directors. I'm still curious about the hierarchy - since Hill was referred to as Commander once or twice, Pierce was a Secretary, Mitchell Carson was Head of Defense.. etc. We need like a SHIELD Handbook, lol. As for Talos, I've been speculating he's Deputy Chief, that title Fury had before Pierce appointed him Director, or middle management. But yeah, who knows, since Talos is impersonating whoever this person is. I did a Google search about a reference to him in The Winter Soldier and couldn't find anything, but that's interesting if he is referenced. His first comics appearance was in X-Force so I would imagine he is more likely a Fox character.

Yeah, I too would be interested in a list of directors and a S.H.I.E.L.D. hierarchy.

Talos being director is probably a bit too high-up, yeah, but he could be a high-ranking member of S.H.I.E.L.D..

Captain Marvel (Mrmichaelt, Maurice.136)
Mrmichaelt wrote: It's a fluid process, so when Feige commented 90s, they were probably still cementing the time frame of the movie. And now in 2018, they must have thinned it to mid '90s. Yeah, it's just that when he announced the setting at SDCC 2017, he didn't only say "'90s", he specifically said "early '90s". But like I said before, I remember thinking it was odd in a Black Panther featurette when he said the character was created in the "early '60s", despite it being 1966. Maybe his idea of "early" is just slightly off.

Maurice.136 wrote: Nah for really no reason i tend to like the year '1990'. OK then😂.

Daredevil: Season 3 (Marvelous 345678, Mrmichaelt, Edward Zachary Sunrose)
Marvelous 345678 wrote: Daredevil Season 3 is "months" after the Defenders. (Source) If we move Defenders to October 2016, Matt would have been missing for 17 months until he comes back in February-March 2018.

However, this might not be a scandal, as Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. First Season says it has been several months since The Avengers but the Season begins more than a year after. This might be the case.

Plus, Slingshot is said to be shortly before Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Season 4, but it is like 6-7 months before. Yeah I saw this. As I was saying before, I can just see the Netflix timeline all falling apart again with Daredevil: Season 3. It's essentially the last hurdle to clear to once and for all basically have Netflix "Phase One" (if you will) set firmly in stone, because it's the last season that realistically will be referencing events from "Phase One". So of course, knowing our luck, it will all go wrong at the last hurdle...

I just can't see them not talking about the amount of time Matt has been gone and referring to it as "months". I feel like I can already see a scene where Matt returns to Foggy and Foggy says, "You let me believe you were dead. You let Karen believe you were dead. For months, Matt. Do you have any idea what you've put us through?"

The problem is, 1 year and 9 months/2 calendar years is in that problematic area that doesn't fit any part of the venn diagram, when it comes to giving it a vague time span. "Months"? No, that implies less than a year, and it's significantly more. "A year"? No, it's a lot more. "Years"? No, it's not even 2 full years.

It's something I think about a lot, when it comes to vague time spans. There are problematic time spans when it comes to making them vague. 10-11 days, for example - it's not really "days" because that implies less than a week, it's not "a week" because it's a week-and-a-half, but it's not "weeks" because it's not even 2 full weeks. 6 weeks/2 calendar months - it's not really "weeks" because that implies less than a month, it's not "a month" because it's a month-and-a-half and 2 calendar months, but it's not "months" because it's nowhere near 2 full months. About 18 months (21 in this case) is another problem, as I've said. It applies right up to massive time periods - is 1500 years ago "centuries"/"hundreds of years" ago? Well, no, it's more than a millennium. Is it "a millennium"/"a thousand years" ago? No, it's way over. Is it "millennia"/"thousands of years" ago? No, it's not even 2 millennia ago. Heck, that was the problem with Thor saying he was 1500 years old in Infinity War. The space between like 1¼ and 2 of a given time span is in the problematic zone.

It's because people colloquially, when being vague about a time span, don't say "and-a-half". Something happened a year-and-a-half ago? Someone might say "a year or two ago" (too vague for scripted dialogue), or "last year" (if it is last year) or "about 18 months ago" (not literally meaning exactly 18 months, but as shorthand for "a year-and-a-half"). It's just something in human nature to say things in as general/rounded a way as possible. Like how if someone asks you the time, and it's 12:29, you would say "half past 12".

So without being specific (which these shows often try to avoid being), they have to be vague, but speak like a normal human (as mentioned, normal humans don't say things like "over a year-and-a-half" in day-to-day conversation, and the writers won't compromise the dialogue's realism for the sake of the timeline). And the result? They will most likely say "months". Which is worrisome.

I guess I'm getting ahead of myself, because I'm anticipating dialogue in the show, and this is just a synopsis. And like you say Marvelous, a synopsis isn't too important. But I am worried about the use of the word "months" in the actual show.

I really don't feel like The Defenders works in October for the reasons I mentioned before, such as the fact that there's no evidence pertaining just to The Defenders placing it there, it's too long after Daredevil: Season 2 and Luke Cage: Season 1 when it comes to the character arcs (Matt and Karen are still discussing the aftermath of Christmas 2015, Luke appears to have only been arrested for a few months), it's really awkward for how to deal with Iron Fist: Season 1, and it's weirdly close to The Punisher for Karen's mourning.

Mrmichaelt wrote: That's relief. "Months" is vague enough for you guys to work with but I'm sure more data will come about from the actual episodes. I'm not relieved about it honestly, because as mentioned, it feels like an indication of "months" being used in the show despite it being 21 months.

Mrmichaelt wrote: The Collider set visit for Daredevil season 3 revealed it starts right after Defenders season 1 then there's a 'significant time jump'. OK that's interesting. I wonder if they'll have a title card for the jump, because if they do, they can't just say "some time later", it's too vague. They would have to say something like "months later", which would be frustrating.

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: Significant time jump? I hope they don't specify the time jump, just in case it contradicts something. It would be good, but realistically, the only way to not specify would be to just not denote the time jump and let the audience work out that time has passed, rather than specifically saying "months later" or whatever. And I don't know if they'd do that.

Mrmichaelt wrote: Good point, but I have a feeling they might say something like "2 Years Later". "2 years later" would be nice, but I'm sadly sure it won't happen.

The Netflix shows often fall into the trope I've talked about before, the "This new instalment is set shortly after the last one except it's coming out a year/years later and that one was set in present day when it came out and this one is also set in present day." It happens all the time in films and TV and causes timeline problems so often, because they're essentially constantly retconning, whether intentional or not, the last instalment to actually be set in the future. Iron Man 2 is an example of this in the MCU. At the time of its release, the only evidence for when Iron Man took place all pointed to 2008, the time of release. But then Iron Man 2 came out 2 years later and set itself in May 2010, also the time of release... but also set itself 6 months after Iron Man. Another example is Spider-Man: Homecoming. Comes out over a year after Captain America: Civil War, which had set itself around the time of release in May-June 2016. Sets itself a couple of months after Civil war... but also (not talking about "8 years later", just the evidence from Aaron Davis' rap sheet and Ned's computer software) sets itself in present day, 2017.

The biggest example of this in Marvel Netflix is The Punisher: Season 1. Set itself a year after Daredevil: Season 2, which was late 2015, but then when it comes to Lewis' ID, it says he was born in May 1991 and Micro says he's "26", because The Punisher, despite its relation to Daredevil, seems to think it's just set in present day - late 2017.

Often it happens with Marvel Netflix without being present day but still, the evidence implies a bigger gap since the last season than the show tries to convince us there has been. My point is, the writers of the Netflix shows just generally seem to always set everything a lesser amount of time since the last instalment than has actually passed in real time, because they're not concerned with the bigger picture of how that affects the timeline. There's this compression of time in their mind without actually taking into account how that causes problems in the long run. It's a problem with having a narrow field of vision, where the writers treat each season individually as just "Oh it's months since the last instalment", and don't consider how that adds up if you do that every time. Just like the films with Phase One, where sure, devoid of dates, it would seem that Fury's Big Week is 6 months after Iron Man and The Avengers is a year after that, but when you actually apply dates, the evidence implies a few years between Iron Man and The Avengers.

So I can't see Daredevil: Season 3 treating it like any more than 14 months has passed since The Defenders (the real world time span). Because they never seem to stretch time intentionally - only ever compress it. The times that the gap between seasons have been stretched longer than the real world gap have been a fortunate result of them not explicitly referencing how long it has been since the last instalment, because I'm sure in the writers' minds (they just happened to not say it), Luke Cage: Season 2 for example is only a few months after The Defenders: Season 1.

So yeah, can't see it saying "2 years later" sadly.

Marvelous 345678 wrote: It sounds more like "18 months" to me. Well, I guess it would be better than just "months".

Some stuff I noticed from the trailer - when Foggy looks at the news, there's the headlines, "Russia's Economic Outlook Upgraded After Oil Discovery" and "Eastern Conference Eyes Anderson First in" and then the next words seem to be "Multi-Player".

Neither of these are specific one-date-only news stories that give an exact timeframe for the season, but judging from these three articles I found (1, 2, 3), some stuff seemed to be happening with Russian oil and the economy around March-May 2018, so it would work with March. As for the Eastern Conference one, I couldn't really work out who "Anderson" is - maybe it would be clearer to someone from New York who follows sports, because I'm not familiar with famous American sportspeople or what the "Eastern conference" is (it seems to be a thing in several sports, not just one). But the players I seemed to find who it might be about are the NBA's Anderson Varejão, the NHL's Craig Anderson, or the NHL's Joey Anderson.

The NYCC panel is happening now I think (depending when exactly I post this reply), so we should look out for articles. I'll watch the panel once it's up on YouTube. Can't wait for Marvelous' nightmare to become reality, as Charlie Cox goes ahead and says, "It's about 6 months since The Defenders"😫...

"4/30/2018" (MrRLopez, Bussterj, Marvelous 345678, Edward Zachary Sunrose)
MrRLopez wrote: Ant-Man and the Wasp is out in digital ¿can anyone spot the date on Scott's laptop when he's learning magic in his house? (timestamp 00:10:29) I think it says 04/30/2018

Plus here they are a couple of deleted scenes don´t think they add anything to the timeline but it's interesting specially the second one. Bussterj wrote: I was just coming to post the same!

OK, this is interesting. The fact that it's a date that actually makes some sense and not just like a 2017 date of filming - it's intriguing. I wonder if the screen was green and "4/30/2018" is the date that they did the visual effect, or maybe they made that the date because they thought, "This film is set shortly before Avengers: Infinity War and that comes out in early May" (the original release date) "so, you know, Marvel films are usually set about when they come out, so let's say this is like late April, April 30th or something."

I have mixed feelings about this date. Going by legal terms, logically, Ant-Man and the Wasp can only take place in mid-to-late March or mid-to-late June, and not really any date in between. Because you either assume he went through the legal process to get 3 months off, or he didn't. There's no legal reason why he could have had his sentence finish in early May.

But it does provide a backup date. Because the problem currently is that basically there's only two options: March or June. So basically, March is the best placement until the evidence piles up to instead mean June. It's sort of hanging on to March until it's weighed down so much that it has to drop to June. But there's no logical reason why it can possibly be in between. But there is now. While there's still no logical in-universe reason for them to be April-May, having a date that places them then means there is actually evidence to justify it being placed there. So we have an excuse basically, that while it's the only evidence putting it there, it's not arbitrary - there is a date behind it.

The date does sort of work. The scene should really be on a Sunday, but with a little bit of fudging and assuming that Scott just stays in the same clothes the next day and gets up from bed after reading, you can say that Sunday night passes between the bowling scene and the laptop scene and that it's now Monday (which is what April 30th is). It's not like it's a Thursday or whatever, which would discredit it more.

I wouldn't move anything yet, but if, for example, Daredevil: Season 3 places itself as going right into late March 2018 and therefore crosses Infinity War, then it is worth moving things. Because like I said before, I think one TV season slipping through is acceptable, but two is not, and if Daredevil: Season 3 is placing itself after Infinity War, that means both itself and The Punisher: Season 2 would be after, and that's not really acceptable/compatible with Loeb's comments. So it would add evidence to Infinity War being a bit later. And April-May is now our next potential spot to place Ant-Man and the Wasp and Infinity War, not June, so that's good, because it's better than June, even if it logically doesn't make sense.

Marvelous 345678 wrote: And yes, the date is April 30th 2018. Which puts Infinity War around late May 2018. It works for me. And would put Lang's sentence ending about 23 months after his capture on June 2016.

Yes. March has to go. And hello Infinity War on May. Wow OK Marvelous is very eager to move it😂. Like I've said, personally, I would wait a bit and see. I do think that Ant-Man and the Wasp and Infinity War will have to move later at some point, I just don't think there's quite enough to force our hand yet.

Also it would be early May, not late May. Ant-Man and the Wasp would be Sunday, April 29, 2018 to Wednesday, May 2, 2018 (not including the epilogue), and then Infinity War would be Wednesday, May 9, 2018 to Thursday, May 10, 2018.

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: How does this impact Agents of SHIELD, though? Does this mean that Yo-Yo had a longer recovery time than we'd previously thought? Yeah exactly, it's difficult. Because Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. really suggests it's been no more than like a month since Yo-Yo had her arm cut off, and that's reasonably firmly in December. And on top of that, there's the line Coulson has, "Listen, my team wasn't hiding all these months. We travelled to the future." Firstly, it suggests it's been less than a year since May 12, 2017 (this new suggested placement would place the scene in late April, so that is better than June because it's not quite a year), and secondly, he's describing all the time since May 2017 as the time they were in the future, suggesting that the time since they got back is kind of negligible - again, no more than like a month.

March is hard to swallow, but April is really pushing it... but I guess it's necessary. To be honest, I think one day we'll have to move it to June. And for some reason, that in a way sits somewhat comfortably with me. I think because it means we're not having to jump through any hoops with the films, which at the end of the day, are more important. And it's really annoying for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., but at the end of the day, it's not a disaster because the only explicit contradiction is that Coulson line. The rest of it, the feel of the show, is technically just implication.

Agh, I don't know. It's a really annoying problem.

Bussterj wrote: Am I ok to move AMATW on the 2018 page now we have that date confirmed? Marvelous 345678 wrote: @Edward Zachary Sunrose, well, for me I think we might have to definitely ignore the December 6th 2017 date. It never went well with me. We can still use December or Early January 2018, as in episode 13 next to Yo-yo I can see a 2018 date, for me is a January 2nd. But I still have to check that out.

But it would affect Thor: Ragnarok as well. Now that we have a confirmation that Infinity War is set on May 2018, that will hel a lot. It is curious you know? BEJT placed the film initially on May 2018, but then we moved it earlier. We have to trust this man more blindly.

But the team's return may have to move.

@Bussterj. Yes you can, but I would prefer to wait for BEJT to answer this as we have a big reference supporting a possible March placement and we have to rewrite it. As well. April 30th is a Monday. So we have two things:


 * Paxton and Maggie picked up Cassie on Monday morning after an entire full weekend and took her immediately to school.


 * Or Scott Lang spent the Sunday and Monday wearing the same clothes.

Thank you for not rushing the move.
 * Or we assume that April 30th was a Sunday in the MCU... I don't know xD

I've said before, the 12-6-2017 isn't worth dropping for the sake of gaining a few days. As well as this, Episode 13 can't move more than a few days later because of the Christmas reference, so all you'd be losing is a few days between Episode 12 and Episode 13, which isn't necessary - they're fine being a couple of weeks apart. The problem is the gap between Episode 13 and 14 being too long. And yeah, with that as well, it's a few months too long, what difference does dropping a few days make? It's not worth it.

It would indeed affect Rangarok again, probably moving it like another week later.

I only placed it in May originally purely based on the film's evidence. It was before we knew Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was tying in and before we knew about Scott's 2-year sentence. It was based on much less information than we have now, it's not really relevant.

As for it being Monday, yeah, either we assume that Sunday night just happens between the bowling shot and him at the laptop, or there's the option of her being picked up on Monday morning. I hadn't thought of that, that's an interesting idea. I'll have to watch the film again.

Runaways: Season 2 (Marvelous 345678, Mrmichaelt)
Marvelous 345678 wrote: Picture here: Runaways Season 2 - NYCC Poster.jpg

For Runaways Season 2 we have confirmation that all the Runaways are 16 years old and Molly is 14. I didn't realise you had sent this when I was skimming to keep up with the chat a bit over the last 2 weeks, so I'd saved the link to the Instagram post to tell you guys about it. But you have mentioned it.

It's not as easy as you've made it sound. I gave up on the Runaways stuff a while ago, when the Hulu website stuff came out that caused problems, and I decided I didn't have the energy to deal with the mess at the moment and it should go lower down on my priority list. And then as I came to realise I wasn't going to get to it any time soon, I just decided, "I'll wait until after Season 2 to deal with their dates of birth."

Because the problem is, Season 1 told us implicitly that they were seniors, which means they're 17 or 18. Geoffrey Wilder said 17 was "the same age as our children", but sure, that has leniency, he could just mean generally within a year or two. But Chase said he'd be off to college in "a year", and it's December, so he'd be 9-10 months/1 calendar year away from college if he's a senior, but 21-22 months/2 calendar years away from college if he's only a junior. Molly said she was 3 years younger than them, and her actress said Molly is 14. Also, this isn't evidence but just... come on. None of them look 16.

But if they're juniors, that removes some evidence for December 2017. Because if they're juniors, that means Chase is massively understating how long it is until he leaves for college, and would suggest it's more like May or June, late in junior year, rather than September-December, early in senior year. It would also mean that the evidence placing it earlier in the year from the mention of college applications is no longer relevant, because previously it meant the season should be taking place before college application deadlines, again placing it no later than December in the school year, but it doesn't have to be now just based on this piece of evidence because their college applications aren't until next year.

Now, there's still definitely enough evidence for the December 2017 placement (Battlefront, Leslie's calendar, open house, "25 years ago" was just after Reservoir Dogs came out, Geoffrey has an unused 2018 diary in a miscellaneous drawer, winter ball). But it just means that now there's even more contradiction in the Runaways timeline placement than there was before.

It happened a while back, not just now. The Hulu website posted some character bios with ages and some were 16 and some 17. People have sourced them on the Runaways characters' wiki pages. It was then that I had all these thoughts about how this causes problems, and decided I didn't have the energy to sort it out to work out when the characters were born. But now this just adds to that problem.

And also, these two pieces of evidence making them juniors are not even mutually consistent. Because the Hulu website said some of them were 16 and some were 17, and this is saying they're all 16.

There is one positive, and that's that it makes the "15 years ago" Nico flashback easier.

But yeah, I'm just going to wait until after Season 2 to deal with this mess.

Mrmichaelt wrote: Minor note for pre-Snap talk, but at the NYCC Runaways panel, Loeb confirmed Avengers 4 has no affect on Runaways season 2. Thanks. Not surprising.

Personal Life (Marvelous 345678)
Marvelous 345678 wrote: Btw BEJT, I haven't got the time to answer properly to your message weeks ago but I hope you are doing well and having a great experience in college!! That's alright. Thanks, it's going OK.

Loeb's Knowledge of Avengers 4 (Marvelous 345678)
Marvelous 345678 wrote: Great. This might indicate that Loeb knows a few things about Avengers 4 I wouldn't say that him saying Runaways has nothing to do with Avengers 4 means he knows something about Avengers 4 - it could just as much mean that he knows nothing. They just haven't tied it in, doesn't mean he knows what he would be tying in to if they were.

But aside from that, I do think he knows some stuff. Of anyone at Marvel Television, he is the most likely to have the most information. I don't think he knows the whole plot, but I think he is likely to have been told a reasonable amount and then told something like, "Try to keep the amount of information you dole out to a minimum, enough so that your writers know what to do but minimal so nothing leaks." And I don't think he knows anywhere near everything, anyway.

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: Well, although they're doing reshoots right now, the movie was almost completely filmed last year. And if SHIELD 6 is going to tie into Avengers 4 like Loeb's been subtly teasing us that it might, then I imagine he would know the plot so they can tie into the movie (even if it's later on in the season). Yeah again, I think he knows a decent amount, but far from everything.