Thread:Marvelous 345678/@comment-27496405-20180723185324/@comment-26838855-20190116065921

Simmons' Pregnancy Theory (Protego Maxima)
Protego Maxima wrote: Hey guys. I shared some of my thoughts last year, mostly about Iron Fist Season 1. I am not contributing but I have been reading your work since then. I see you are having hard time with the second half of AoS Season 5 and you are right. It's timeline is a headache :) So if you allow me, I would like to add some thoughts of mine. Warn me if I missed any of you guys mentioned of it but I looked over this and previous page and I couldn't find any of you guys mentioning Simmons' preganancy. Let me explain in details:

During the first half of Season 5, there was this theory going on that Deke was Fitz and Simmons' grandson. (And later he revealed to be). After hearing that theory, I was especially careful on Fitz-Simmons moments. In episode 5x08 - The Last Day, Voss talks with Fitz and Simmons in the room which time machine in. He says "Owen put it together." (At that time I was thinking Deke's father, Owen, was Fitz-Simmons' son). After Voss leaves, Fitz and Simmons have some "alone time". I thought it would be ironic to concieve the baby in that room. Now, I know Owen is not their son but still it was heavily implied that they were... doing things :)

Then at the end of the episode 5x14 - The Devil Complex, Deke and Simmons talk and Simmons learns that Deke is their grandson. Right after their talk, Simmons throws up. My experience of watching movies and TV series tells me if a woman character vomits (without being ill) she is probably preganant :) It would again be ironic for Simmons to react like that right after she learns she will have a grandson, therefore a child.

So maybe if we look up when averagely a woman throws up after getting pregnant, maybe it would be helpful too.

EDIT: Quick Google research tells: "It usually begins around the 6th week of pregnancy, peaks around week 9, and disappears by weeks 16 to 18". So at least 6 weeks passed since they returned, but I think we already knew that :) This hasn't come up before because it's only a theory, and also because we wouldn't know when their daughter was conceived anyway.

When women throw up randomly in films and TV, yes, that is usually the screenwriters' way of hinting that they're pregnant - and I wouldn't be surprised if they reveal in Season 6 that she's expecting - but there is an actual plot-related reason in The Devil Complex for her throwing up, and that's just the overwhelming nature of everything that's just happened and she's just discovered.

But if she is pregnant, then sure, I guess it works anyway. Although considering the fact that they've been back for about 3 months, it's more likely that the baby was conceived after the wedding some time rather than when they were in 2091, otherwise her baby bump would start to show.

Captain Marvel Continuity Errors (Deadpooled123)
Deadpooled123 wrote: Out of concern, there's growing doubt that Captain Marvel will not address that 1982 mention of Coulson meeting Nick Fury (if the year l have on mind is correct).

Maybe we've looked at it the wrong way. Like - you know of someone through mutual connections and briefly talk with them but never get to fully know them very well which is why they properly meet each other with the Kree-Skrull war in Captain Marvel.

Any thoughts on this possible continuity error? Asides that, Phil Coulson hardly looks younger in Captain Marvel. Just take a look at the film 'One Hour Photo' from 2002, he looks older in Captain Marvel than a film seven years on in supposedly real time. I was going to mention this. The set visits have specifically said Coulson and Fury meet for the first time, which is problematic. I'm hoping that maybe when we actually see it, there's a way to brush it off.

We've still only seen the one shot of Coulson in Captain Marvel, but Clark Gregg hasn't changed that much in the last 24 years - this is him in 1996. His face was just slightly softer, his hairline was already quite high. I think with Fury and Coulson though they've partly based it on what the actors looked like, but also partly just imagined "Say we had no reference point, what would you imagine they looked like?" Fury doesn't look massively like Samuel L. Jackson did in 1995, but nonetheless he looks like a young Nick Fury, and I think they've chosen the approach more of giving Coulson more hair than softening his face. But we'll see, when we get more shots of him. I was so happy to hear his voice in a film again in that new "special look".

CirUmeUela's Runaways: Season 2 Notes (CirUmeUela, Edward Zachary Sunrose, Mrmichaelt)
CirUmeUela wrote: Here are my Runaways Season 2 notes.

Runaways 2.05 Rock Bottom Topher tells his story, but these are false flashbacks because it’s revealed he was lying Runaways 2.05 Rock Bottom 28:00-28:22 2007 Topher finds the glowing rock that gave Molly powers the night of the explosion that killed her parents

Runaways 2.07 Last Rites 1:52-4:46 1998? David Ellerh dies, Leslie devotes herself to Jonah, "20 years ago”

Runaways 2.08 Past Life 0:00-3:08 1932 “Jonah” aka the Magistrate in another body preaches to a crowd of people and heals a boy Runaways 2.08 Past Life 3:08-5:08 1957 The Magistrate transfers his essence to a body of a doctor, the body where he will be known as Jonah Runaways 2.08 Past Life 5:08-7:06 1979 Jonah meets a younger David Ellerh and tells him that all he has been teaching about light is true

Runaways 2.12 Earth Angel 0:00-1:32 1988? David Ellerh sends Leslie’s mother away to the Pride reconditioning facility

Runaways 2.13 Split Up 0:00-3:10 10,000 BC? Xavin tells her story about the Stowaway aboard the Gibborim ship, I estimate it to take place about the time the Gibborim crashed on Earth, which must have been ancient times, so just as a guess, 10,000 BC. In the comics, the Gibborim were around on Earth before the rise of mankind, so this is my best guess with the very little info given in the show. All sounds good to me, though yeah, I don't know when the Gibborim history stuff is supposed to happen.

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: Wait, 10,000 BC? Doesn't Jonah mention 3 million years in one of his scenes with Karolina? I might be misremembering that, though. CirUmeUela wrote: Could be yeah. That was just a random guess. I may be way off. Mrmichaelt wrote: I remember specifically Jonah said he was stuck on Earth 'since before recorded time' which would be around 3200 BC at the earliest. I should have jotted down what episode... I had a "find in page" search of the episodes' transcripts and could find no reference to "millions", but Mrmichaelt is correct, Jonah says in Episode 5, "My arrival predates recorded history," so as he says, before around 3200 B.C.. Nice catch, Mrmichaelt.

I would appreciate some input on the days-of-the-week problem in Runaways: Season 2, here. If you look at Day H2/Episode 10, you'll see the problem, then if you scroll back up to Day C4/Episode 4, you'll see the other important point. If you have a look then down the notes between Day C4/Episode 4 and Day H2/Episode 10, you'll see what I'm talking about. If anyone has any opinions, I'd like to know.

2018 (CirUmeUela)
CirUmeUela wrote: Also sorry if this has been answered already, but is most of 2018 now set in stone, except for some Netflix stuff and Runaways? Well so far there's only two Netflix scenes set in 2018, the two A Duel of Iron epilogue scenes, which are "months" after October 27, 2017 but before the end of Avengers: Infinity War, so around ([December 1, 2017]*1+[December 27, 2017]*2+[January 1, 2018]*4)/(1+2+4) = December 26.14286, 2017 and ([March 29, 2018]*4+[March 29, 2018]*2+[December 31, 2018]*1)/(4+2+1+)= May 7.57143, 2018, ([December 26.14286, 2017]+[May 7.57143, 2018])/2 = March 2, 2018.

Runaways is pretty set, just with a range of only one week that is yet to be decided (see above).

It's the March 2018 Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Ant-Man and the Wasp, and Avengers: Infinity War stuff that isn't set in stone. They're set in terms of how they relate to each other, but the March 2018 placement isn't set.

Spider-Man: Far from Home Trailer (Assassin1and2, Ben 1,00,911, Deadpooled123, Edward Zachary Sunrose, Mrmichaelt)
Assassin1and2 wrote: The new trailer confirms that Peter is born on 10th of August. *Sigh* Yes it does. All the comments added up to give a date of birth between January 1, 2001 and June 23, 2001, but I guess not. They did the same thing that fake "Civil War prop" passport that did the rounds in August did, and chose the August 10th Amazing Fantasy #15 reference, which is a nice touch, but it doesn't work with Peter being supposedly 15 in Civil War. That was technically only said out-of-universe, by Markus and McFeely, but it became common knowledge and a well-known statement, and it's now retroactively wrong, with him being 14 in Civil War. But also, there's the line in Homecoming that very much implies he was 15:
 * Tony: "Everyone else said I was crazy to recruit a 14-year-old kid."
 * Peter: "I'm 15."

Tony is referring to June, when he recruited Peter, but Peter replies by saying he is 15. The fact that his reply is a response to Tony talking about June but is also him talking about his age right now, in September, strongly implies that he was both 15 then and is 15 now, that his age hasn't changed since. He is correcting Tony, therefore meaning he is saying, "I was (and still am) 15", treating the time since June as negligible in terms of his age - because his age hasn't changed.

But I guess now this just means that Tony was right, and Peter was 14, and Peter is now 15, and is either misunderstanding Tony or is just trying to say "It's OK now though, I'm 15 now." It's not the intention of the line.

Also, Peter being 14 in Civil War just doesn't sit well with me. I can believe Tom Holland playing a 15-year-old in that film (he was just-turned-19 at the time), but 14 is really pushing it. I know that it's technically only about 5 months' difference from when we had his age pegged down to, but it just feels wrong for him to be 14 - and makes Tony's decision to take him even weirder. As well as this, it makes his relationship with Liz weirder. Liz was born in 1999 (she's 2 school years above Peter, whose school year is the 2001-born kids), so she's maximum 17y8m old (and considering Laura Harrier was 26 at the time of filming, Liz has surely got to be an older student in her year) going out with a guy who's 15y1m old. Let's just assume that, despite Laura Harrier's age, Liz is a younger student, 16y9m old. Makes it less weird. Finally, we did already know that just with the way Peter's age worked, he would have to have been bitten aged 14 rather than the traditional 15, but he was nearly 15 previously - now, he's only 14y4m old when he gets bitten, which is very much not the traditional 15.

Plus I got annoyed at the fake prop back in August with an August 10, 2001 date of birth because a) people were claiming it was real, when it's not (it mysteriously only showed up on August 10th, in time for all the "Fun fact: Today is Peter Parker's birthday" Instagram post, its source could only be traced back to fan sites and Instagram posts, and now in Far from Home we see that Peter is only just getting a passport when that prop suggested he had one issued in 2016 and expiring in 2021), and b) the date of birth was wrong, only for Marvel to just do exactly the same wrong thing that fake passport did. And I think it also just made me go, "Oh no, there's a mistake even just in this trailer, this doesn't bode well for the actual film."

I wonder if, if the wiki allowed to put the specifics of the range of the date of birth like on the Harry Potter wiki, so his date of birth said "January 1, 2001-June 23, 2001" rather than just "2001" (which implies that any date between January 1st and December 31st is feasible) - something I've campaigned for but had rejected - some of these types of error would be avoided. I don't think that this one necessarily would have been, since Marvel care more about having that nice Amazing Fantasy #15 reference than the exact specifics of the timeline, but I do get the impression that Marvel Television (not so much the films), at least Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., do actually look at the wiki timeline for guidance, such as Coulson's obituary in Hot Potato Soup saying "May 4, 2012". I know that could just be them using the release date of The Avengers, but there's been other times where I've gone, "I think they checked that off the wiki". I think Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. sometimes basically uses the wiki to check their own continuity, and if things like saying "January 1, 2001-June 23, 2001" were on the pages, it would help in a few cases (again, I don't think this one, but in general) for people to keep track of what has been established in continuity.

Oh well, it's not a big deal and doesn't make a hard contradiction with canon. It's just a silly mistake. But hey, it is a nice reference.

Also, it's funny because Marvel have clearly gone out of their way to avoid a timeline mistake on this passport - they have removed all years from the passport, which makes no sense, how can you have an expiry date without a year or a date of birth without the year... - and yet still made a mistake. I'm not bothered about the years being missing, I'd much rather that than Marvel inevitably getting it wrong, it's just a bit silly. But at least they seem to be making some effort to avoid errors. The passport gives us another detail...

Here's some other details from the trailer/poster that I noticed that are relevant to the timeline:
 * The issue date on the passport is "19 JUL", meaning that this is most likely July 19-26ish, 2018.
 * The poster for Far from Home shows, if you look closely, that he gets the Berlin stamp on "JUL 19". So he must pick up his passport and fly to Berlin on July 19, which matches what we see in the international trailer, where it appears that Berlin is the first stop. So that's great, we have a hard date for the film already! Picking up the passport and flying to Berlin on July 19, 2018.
 * You can see Grand Central Station when Peter is swinging through New York. Behind Grand Central Station is where Avengers Tower is situated, and if you look, you can see that behind Grand Central Station, there is scaffolding. So that'll be Avengers Tower being redone by the new buyer (almost 2 years after they bought it), which is a nice touch. Also, since the tower is still Avengers Tower in Infinity War, that would suggest that this is at least a little bit of time after Infinity War (it's also further proof for all the people who don't realise Feige and Pascal explicitly confirmed this is post-Endgame that this is not a prequel).
 * Obviously there's the line about the trip being 2 weeks.

And some other details I noticed that aren't timeline-related but I liked:
 * Peter's suitcase says "BFP", so presumably it was Uncle Ben's.
 * Pepper signed that big cheque, so I guess she survives Endgame.
 * You can see the back of Maria Hill's head in the scene with the sandy/earthy Elemental.
 * Mr. Delmar is very proud of the Robbery at Queens Community Bank incident. He's got articles framed in his new shop about his bodega being destroyed.

Ben 1,000,911 wrote: nice catch! Well, unfortunately, they show it very clearly😂. I guess not really "unfortunately" though because if it was blurry, we'd have to make a tough decision about whether it overrules what we've been told, whereas at least it being clear means it just has to overrule the Markus and McFeely comment and the Homecoming implication.

Assassin1and2 wrote: I've noticed BEJT is displeased with Aug 10 birth date. I don't think it breaks the timeline.

"Previously on Peter's Screws The Pooch, I tell you to stay away from this. Instead, you hacked a multi-million dollar suit so you could sneak around behind my back doing the one thing I told you not to do." "Is everyone okay?" "No thanks to you." "No thanks to me? Those weapons were out there, and I tried to tell you about it, but you didn't listen. None of this would've happened if you had just listened to me! If you even cared, you'd actually be here." "I did listen, kid. Who do you think called the FBI, huh? Do you know I was the only one who believed in you? Everyone else said I was crazy to recruit a 14-year-old kid." "I'm 15."

- Iron Man and Spider-Man

I might be overlooking some stuff but could this mean he was 14 when Tony Stark recruited him but he has turned 15 by the Ambush at the Staten Island Ferry which happens in September. Feel free to correct me if I overlooked something. I don't think it breaks the timeline or anything, it just annoyed me/made me groan for all the reasons above. I just wanted to really enjoy the trailer but couldn't fully enjoy it the first time because of that annoying detail.

I've addressed my thoughts on that Homecoming line above, because as I say, I actually think it strongly implies he was 15 in Civil War, so is part of the problem. But yeah, like I said above, I guess Tony wasn't wrong, now.

Deadpooled123 wrote: As Peter is PICKING up his passport, the issue date is July 19 which means the film takes place around that date.

Based on what we know that Avengers: Endgame is going to entail some deep plot point by how everything that's been revealed will play out, it's safe to say that Far From Home will take place in 2017. Yup, the 19 JUL date was helpful, and as I've mentioned above, the poster confirms he arrives in Berlin on July 19th.

But it's not safe to say 2017 - Far from Home takes place in July 2018. Can't wait for the film to have some detail which places it erroneously in 2019👍.
 * Amy Pascal and Kevin Feige both confirmed it's set after Endgame.
 * It's been said that it's set at the end of Peter's junior year/the summer vacation following his junior year, so since he was a sophomore September 2016-June 2017, that means he's a junior September 2017-June 2018, so this is Summer 2018.
 * As I've mentioned, the Avengers Tower reconstruction also shows that it's after Infinity War.

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: We've known since before Homecoming came out that Far From Home will pick up after Endgame, like Homecoming did with Civil War. So this movie is definitely 2018. Exactly!

Mrmichaelt wrote: I think it's fine that Peter was born on August 10. For one, it being a cool Amazing Fantasy nod, but also it's close enough by a few months to his birthday in Civil War, Peter rounded up. Kids (and even adults) do that. Bizarre that they erased out the years on the passport but I guess that also eliminates the chance they screw up on what year it is in-universe. Well I don't think we really need to assume that he rounded up because the line can just be taken at face value, with him saying "I'm 15" referring purely to "right now". But I guess that's another explanation. Doesn't account for Markus and McFeely saying he was 15, but oh well.

And I agree it's a nice nod rather than just having a random date. Still, I found it a bit annoying - I just feel that with the comment from the writers, the line in Homecoming, and the other reasons I've mentioned above, he just really should have been 15 in Civil War.

It is bizarre that they erased the years because in-universe, there would be no reason for that/it makes no sense. Imagine having a passport that just has your birthday rather than your date of birth, and moreover, an expiry date that doesn't have a year on it... it's completely redundant. But out-of-universe, it makes sense in terms of trying to avoid making a mistake (even if they did manage to anyway), so I don't mind it. I'd much rather have a weird passport without years than for it to say "10 AUG 2002" and "19 JUL 2019".