The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[SimoneS]

The reason that Spider-Man was my favorite superhero was became one by accident (bitten by a radioactive spider) was that he had real world problems. He spent most issues fighting the villain while being worried about how he was going to pay the rent, help support Aunt May, and afford take Mary Jane out on a date. It didn't help that Jonah Jameson was always stiffing and low balling him for his Spider-Man photos. I would buy the comics when I could afford them, but mostly I rushed to get the newspaper everyday to read Spider-Man and The Hulk comic strips. I loved reading them so much. I couldn't wait to see what happened next.

[Silver Raven]

The town of Metropolis, Illinois has put a black arm band around their statue of Superman in honor of Stan Lee.

[HunterHunted]

We have an official timeline for the events in the MCU films.

https://screenrant.com/mcu-timeline-official/

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Interesting:

While many of the changes to the movie timeline make sense for story purposes, they do ignore a number of explicit references from the films themselves - for example, dialogue in Avengers: Infinity War specifically states that it is set two years after the events of Captain America: Civil War. The most problematic is the moving of Black Panther, which dates itself just a week after Civil War; it hardly makes sense for T'Challa to leave his people without a king for a year. Kevin Feige had suggested the official timeline would fix continuity issues, but while this one solves some, it also raises a lot of new ones thanks to specific dialogue.

Because Tony informs Bruce that he and Steve hadn't spoken in two years, that the Avengers 'broke up' after the events of Civil War and while Banner was off being the Hulk in the Grandmaster's arena. So do Black Panther and Ragnarok take place simultaneously in the 'new' timeline? The refugee ship from Asgard gets attacked by Thanos right at the end, and then Thor hopscotches from floating through space to Starlord's gang of morons to the forge and then to Wakanda, getting there in the middle of the battle. Killmonger had been dealt with and W'Kabi was still in prison along with whoever else, but M'Baku had become more of an ally. Do I have it right that those things must have happened at the same time?

[Raja]

To head canon this Black Panther takes place both right after the civil was and just before Thanos. While narratively we see ABC right on top of each action what could have happened was T'Challa coming home and nothing of cinematic worthy consequence happened for the years it took Eric Killmonger to plan and execute his takeover. 

[Morrigan2575]

Didn't they say I BP that the King had just died? I thought it took place right after Civil War like within 2 weeks?

[anna0852]

Yeah, Black Panther was right after Civil War. Like within a week or two because we saw T'Challa watching a news report on the plane about his father's recent death. And he was going home for the coronation. 

Ragnarok was two years after Ultron. Thor specifically told Bruce he'd been Hulk for two years, which abou broke Banner's brain. And Ragnarok ended with the kickoff to Infinity War.

Plus Ant-man and the Wasp indicated Scott was finishing his house arrest for Civil War and ended with snapture fallout. Time definitely passed from Civil War to Thanos.

[Kel Varnsen]

7 minutes ago, anna0852 said:

Ragnarok was two years after Ultron. Thor specifically told Bruce he'd been Hulk for two years, which abou broke Banner's brain. And Ragnarok ended with the kickoff to Infinity War.

 

I wonder how much time passed for Bruce in those two years. Because it seems that time moves differently in Sakaar. Because when Thor arrives and meets Loki, Loki says he had been there for 2 weeks. But they fell out of the Bifrost like seconds apart. Or is that weird time thing just a result of an emergency exit from the Rainbow Bridge?

[Morrigan2575]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Or is that weird time thing just a result of an emergency exit from the Rainbow Bridge?

Good question. When I first watched I thought the time difference was because of Loki getting knocked out of the Rainbow Bridge early. However, now that I'm thinking about it I think GameMaster mentioned something about Time being different on Sakaar.

[Wynterwolf]

That timeline isn't official.  It wasn't put out by Marvel, it was apparently in a licensed book put out by Titan and there are multiple obvious mistakes in it.  Feige said he would put out the official timeline after A4.  

(also just fyi, screenrant is not a reliable source for... anything)

Edited November 19, 2018 by Wynterwolf

[HunterHunted]

Oops. Thanks for the clarification @Wynterwolf.

On 11/18/2018 at 10:51 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

I wonder how much time passed for Bruce in those two years. Because it seems that time moves differently in Sakaar. Because when Thor arrives and meets Loki, Loki says he had been there for 2 weeks. But they fell out of the Bifrost like seconds apart. Or is that weird time thing just a result of an emergency exit from the Rainbow Bridge?

On 11/18/2018 at 11:59 AM, Morrigan2575 said:

Good question. When I first watched I thought the time difference was because of Loki getting knocked out of the Rainbow Bridge early. However, now that I'm thinking about it I think GameMaster mentioned something about Time being different on Sakaar.

 

So it might actually be both. So the Rainbow Bridge is supposed to be an Einstein-Rosen Bridge/wormhole. There are supposed to be some time dilation distortions that occur with traveling through one. So it is possible that they may have arrived at different times just because of that. However, Sakaar is surrounded by tons of wormholes that go everywhere in the universe. Theoretically all of those should be causing massive gravimetric and time distortion issues on each of the wormholes and Sakaar.

Granted I'm not a physicist or mathematician, but based on my rudimentary understanding both issues might have been part of the explanation.

[Wynterwolf]

34 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

Oops. Thanks for the clarification @Wynterwolf.

Seriously!  It's crazy out there right now... there are so many rumors and weird things flying around, it's impossible to keep track.  Seems like 'something' might happen on the 23rd, especially since a bunch of stuff just released their trailers (the speculation is that they want their trailers out before the A4 trailer hits...).  But the Russos are also monumental teases.  I'm mostly curious if the two things that felt legit to me are, in fact, legit (title and trailer summary).  

[Dee]

3 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

So it might actually be both. So the Rainbow Bridge is supposed to be an Einstein-Rosen Bridge/wormhole. There are supposed to be some time dilation distortions that occur with traveling through one.

That whole sequence is weird because Loki had to be on Sakaar long enough to court the Grandmaster's favor by the time Thor arrives there, yet when the Revengers are planning to leave Sakaar, Valkyrie says it will take 18 months to travel from there to Asgard (before Thor chooses to pass through the Devil's Anus; thereby shortening their trip).

[HunterHunted]

15 minutes ago, Dee said:

That whole sequence is weird because Loki had to be on Sakaar long enough to court the Grandmaster's favor by the time Thor arrives there, yet when the Revengers are planning to leave Sakaar, Valkyrie says it will take 18 months to travel from there to Asgard (before Thor chooses to pass through the Devil's Anus; thereby shortening their trip).

It makes sense to me, but as I said my understanding of the physics is rudimentary at best. The time dilation distortion is actually thought to be different in different sections of an Einstein-Rosen bridge. Loki and Thor exit the bridge at close to the same place, but possibly different enough that it forces one of them to arrive either earlier or later than the other. This could explain why Thor arrives on Sakaar later than Loki. Valkyrie says that it will take 18 months to get to Asgard traveling the normal way. Thor chooses to go through the Devil's Anus, which is also an Einstein-Rosen bridge/a wormhole.

They did have a physicist who consulted with them. I'm fairly confident that the science is at least decently solid even if I don't really understand it.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3061811/this-is-where-hollywood-goes-when-it-needs-science

https://popsciencebookclub.com/2018/06/30/how-to-build-a-time-machine/

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Nama-frigging-ste:

[Wynterwolf]

[xaxat]

Apparently Green Bay QB Aaron Rodgers is more ruthless than Thanos.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

"I beg you not to encourage him."

"I told you, I need the footage for my records."

 

Edited November 23, 2018 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Bruinsfan]

15 hours ago, xaxat said:

Apparently Green Bay QB Aaron Rodgers is more ruthless than Thanos.

Just ask Kevin Lanflisi!

[SimoneS]

So more news about Infinity War 4?

Edited November 25, 2018 by SimoneS

[xaxat]

Genius

[Cobalt Stargazer]

15 hours ago, SimoneS said:

So more news about Infinity War 4?

There's a ton of speculation on the MCU Facebook group I belong to, but most of it's nonsense and not based on real information. Though somebody did say they wouldn't even have to release a trailer because everyone who saw IW is holding out their wallets for the next movie already even without that.

[Dee]

Disney is gonna break the bank next year

Aladdin, Dumbo, Toy Story 4, A4, Lion King & Captain Marvel are all being released in a SINGLE year.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Dee

[Kel Varnsen]

20 minutes ago, Dee said:

Disney is gonna break the bank next year

Aladdin, Dumbo, Toy Story 4, A4, Lion King & Captain Marvel are all being released in a SINGLE year.

 

Frozen 2 is also planned for 2019.  Anything else really big coming out next year? Because Disney could easily have the top 5 biggest movies that come out next year. I am curious to see if Avengers, Toy Story or Frozen takes the #1box office spot.

Edited because I just looked and Star Wars episode IX is due next year too. I am kind of surprised that every other studio doesn't just take the year off.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Kel Varnsen

[Which Tyler]

So what you guys are saying, is that between Easter and Christmas 2019, Disney will... They'll basically own everything.

They'll have enough money in the bank to buy America.

Not just the USA, but 2 continents

[benteen]

18 hours ago, Dee said:

Disney is gonna break the bank next year

Aladdin, Dumbo, Toy Story 4, A4, Lion King & Captain Marvel are all being released in a SINGLE year.

Don't forget about Star Wars Episode 9 as well.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Oops.

[xaxat]

I've lost track. Did Marvel get the movie rights to the X Men back?

[Morrigan2575]

44 minutes ago, xaxat said:

I've lost track. Did Marvel get the movie rights to the X Men back?

Not official yet. Still going through the approval process. Probably won't be finalized until early 2019.

[Dee]

How successful will the Spider-verse be without Tom Holland's Peter?

[anna0852]

Not very.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Dee said:

How successful will the Spider-verse be without Tom Holland's Peter?

....wait, what?

[Morrigan2575]

11 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

....wait, what?

For now Sony can't include Spider-Man in their movies. However there is only a 5 MCU movie deal (Civil War, Homecoming, Far From Home and Avengers 3 & 4). Tom Holland has a 6 movie contract.

Midnights Edge believes Sony will let the MCU contract run out and then bring Tom Holland back to Sony for one final Spider-Man movie. Thus, using MCU to jump start the Sony Spider-Man Movie-Verse and, confusing average views who wouldn't know MCU vs Sony.

[Wynterwolf]

The Russo Q&A after the Collider showing of IW is tonight. There might be some interesting tidbits from that... or there might not.  

eta: I strongly suspect Disney and Sony will be able to come to some sort of agreement for TH's (probable) last film.  And the Spider-verse has a ton of characters, so there is a ton of material to mine, and it might be a good thing for the franchise if Sony is forced to move beyond just Peter Parker.  I mean Venom has done pretty well without Spider-Man's presence....

Edited November 29, 2018 by Wynterwolf

[Cobalt Stargazer]

8 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Midnights Edge believes Sony will let the MCU contract run out and then bring Tom Holland back to Sony for one final Spider-Man movie. Thus, using MCU to jump start the Sony Spider-Man Movie-Verse and, confusing average views who wouldn't know MCU vs Sony.

I admit to not knowing anything about the legal side of things, but I'm proactively annoyed at the idea that they'd recast Spiderman again. I get that another studio would likely want to make the character over in a different image, but Tom Holland is only twenty-two years old. If they keep de-aging, Spidey's going to be twelve next time around.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Cobalt Stargazer

[AimingforYoko]

23 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I admit to not knowing anything about the legal side of things, but I'm proactively annoyed at the idea that they'd recast Spiderman again. I get that another studio would likely want to make the character over in a different image, but Tom Holland is only twenty-two years old. If they keep de-aging, Spidey's going to be twelve next time around.

They already laid the breadcrumbs in Homecoming. Donald Glover played Aaron Davis, Miles Morales' uncle.

[Morrigan2575]

23 minutes ago, AimingforYoko said:

They already laid the breadcrumbs in Homecoming. Donald Glover played Aaron Davis, Miles Morales' uncle.

I wonder. Do Sony have the rights to Miles Morales or MCU? Would we have a situation where Peter Parker Spider-Man (Tom Holland or someone else) in the Sony Spider-Verse and Miles Morales Spider-Man in the MCU?

ETA: Thinking about it Into the Spider-Verse is a Sony movie and that features Peter, Miles and Gwen so I'm guessing Sony owns the movie rights to all of them.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Morrigan2575

[Wynterwolf]

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Thinking about it Into the Spider-Verse is a Sony movie and that features Peter, Miles and Gwen so I'm guessing Sony owns the movie rights to all of them.

Sony's plans (including the Spider-verse sequel with Miles, and the 3 generation Spider-women feature) with those characters are all animated though, so maybe there is some clause about animated vs live action?  

 

eta: Russos say they're done until Disney is ready to make Secret Wars.  Also, there are no A4 questions being allowed at the Q&A.

etaa:  Here's a good Q&A thread.

etaaa:

Quote

Thanos is on “Titan 2” at the end of of IW, not the original Titan (so he’s not in the past and didn’t fix the planet).

Quote

Half of the Asgardians died again after the Snap (after already being cut in half in the opening)

Quote

Mjolnir is not as powerful as Stormbreaker -Joe

Quote

Thanos used the Soul Stone to speak to his dead daughter. Yep, dead. Thanos also pulled Strange’s soul out of his body on Titan (Strange had to pull his soul back in) - Joe

 

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by Wynterwolf

[Raja]

9 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I admit to not knowing anything about the legal side of things, but I'm proactively annoyed at the idea that they'd recast Spiderman again. I get that another studio would likely want to make the character over in a different image, but Tom Holland is only twenty-two years old. If they keep de-aging, Spidey's going to be twelve next time around.

 

There is the ongoing question of whether the MCU will be rebooted eventually. Is Iron-Man the draw like Batman or is it RDJ and the MCU rolls on with new heroes. 

If Spider-Man is a Batman then recasting Tom Holland could be a signal of recasting all the aging stars in a reboot., They are all going towards their second decade in their roles and only Thor, and maybe Captain America should be ageless 

Edited November 29, 2018 by Raja

[Cobalt Stargazer]

38 minutes ago, Raja said:

There is the ongoing question of whether the MCU will be rebooted eventually. Is Iron-Man the draw like Batman or is it RDJ and the MCU rolls on with new heroes. 

If Spider-Man is a Batman then recasting Tom Holland could be a signal of recasting all the aging stars in a reboot., They are all going towards their second decade in their roles and only Thor, and maybe Captain America should be ageless 

But this just underlines my point. Tobey Maguire is now forty-three, and Andrew Garfield turned thirty-five in August. Holland's eight years younger than even Emma Stone, and the character is in high school. If they recast with an even younger actor, will they make him a junior high school student instead? That just seems weird. Not to mention unfeasible, especially when you consider how much flak there was over Tony saying, "Hey, forget doing your homework, I need you to pack a bag and come to Germany with me."

[Morrigan2575]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

But this just underlines my point. Tobey Maguire is now forty-three, and Andrew Garfield turned thirty-five in August. Holland's eight years younger than even Emma Stone, and the character is in high school. If they recast with an even younger actor, will they make him a junior high school student instead? That just seems weird. Not to mention unfeasible, especially when you consider how much flak there was over Tony saying, "Hey, forget doing your homework, I need you to pack a bag and come to Germany with me."

The question is what does Sony do with Spider-Man? If they pull him from MCU after Far From Home they have Tom Holland under contract for 1 more movie. Beyond that would require a new contract, which would be up to both Holland and Sony.  Holland could sign on for 3 or 4 more Sony Spider-Man movies or just walk away after his 6 movie deal is up. I suspect his decision would be based on working directly with Sony for that final movie after dealing with MCU for 5 films.

In either case Spider-Man no longer belongs in the MCU.

I think with the success of Venom Sony will want Spidey back and finally launch their Spider-Verse. Of course I also suspect they'll fail miserably and be forced to once again reboot Spider-Man.

[Wynterwolf]

43 minutes ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I think with the success of Venom Sony will want Spidey back and finally launch their Spider-Verse. Of course I also suspect they'll fail miserably and be forced to once again reboot Spider-Man.

Yeah, with this ad, I think Sony does understand why Venom was successful, but I highly doubt they will decide to capitalize on that so it will end up being more of a fluke than a foundation. 

But I wonder if the Spider-Verse might actually be more successful without Spider-Man.  The Verse is huge, but that character has so much theatrical baggage at this point.  They have an opportunity to do something fresh without him.  

eta:

Heh.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Wynterwolf

[Morrigan2575]

I don't want my Cap to die 🙏🏻

[ChromaKelly]

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

The question is what does Sony do with Spider-Man? If they pull him from MCU after Far From Home they have Tom Holland under contract for 1 more movie. Beyond that would require a new contract, which would be up to both Holland and Sony.  Holland could sign on for 3 or 4 more Sony Spider-Man movies or just walk away after his 6 movie deal is up. I suspect his decision would be based on working directly with Sony for that final movie after dealing with MCU for 5 films.

In either case Spider-Man no longer belongs in the MCU.

I think with the success of Venom Sony will want Spidey back and finally launch their Spider-Verse. Of course I also suspect they'll fail miserably and be forced to once again reboot Spider-Man.

Fucking hell, NO! Do not send Tom Holland to Sony. MCU finally got Spider-Man right. Where is all this coming from? Is it just speculation? I'm fine if Spider-Man is an MCU trilogy and then they recast Spidey, Peter passes on the mantle, whatever. But I do not want to see Tom Holland in the Sony Spiderverse. Just have it be a different 'verse. Tom Holland Spidey needs to stay in the MCU.
Ugh, now I'm all angry at my desk trying to eat lunch.

[Morrigan2575]

1 hour ago, ChromaKelly said:

Fucking hell, NO! Do not send Tom Holland to Sony. MCU finally got Spider-Man right. Where is all this coming from? Is it just speculation? I'm fine if Spider-Man is an MCU trilogy and then they recast Spidey, Peter passes on the mantle, whatever. But I do not want to see Tom Holland in the Sony Spiderverse. Just have it be a different 'verse. Tom Holland Spidey needs to stay in the MCU.
Ugh, now I'm all angry at my desk trying to eat lunch.

It's based on the contracts that were negotiated and discussed publicly. MCU doesn't own Spider-Man, Sony still owns the movie rights.  MCU gets to use Spider-Man for 5 movies (Civil War + 2 Avengers  and, 2 Spider-Man stand alones). Sony foots the bill and takes the profits for the Spider-Man stand alones but, Marvel has creative Contol. Marvel foots the bill and takes in the $ for the Avengers/Civil War and get to use Spidey in the MCU.

Tom Holland signed a 6 movie contract. That leaves 1 movie which could be solely produced by Sony with no MCU involvement or MCU characters.

The basic question is what happens after Far From Home (the final movie in the 5 movie deal)? Does Sony negotiate a new deal with MCU? Does Sony take Spidey (and Tom Holland) back and, no longer let MCU use Spider-Man?  

That part is all speculation we don't know what will happen but, Sony has been trying to launch it's own Spider-Verse (Venom, Black & Silver). it would be a smart move on their part to take Holland and the built in MCU Audience and produce a Spider-Man movie in their Spider-Verse.

[JessePinkman]

The women of Black Panther are some of EW's Entertainers of the Year:

[Morrigan2575]

Angela Basset hasn't aged at all. 

[Kel Varnsen]

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

It's based on the contracts that were negotiated and discussed publicly. MCU doesn't own Spider-Man, Sony still owns the movie rights.  MCU gets to use Spider-Man for 5 movies (Civil War + 2 Avengers  and, 2 Spider-Man stand alones). Sony foots the bill and takes the profits for the Spider-Man stand alones but, Marvel has creative Contol. Marvel foots the bill and takes in the $ for the Avengers/Civil War and get to use Spidey in the MCU.

Tom Holland signed a 6 movie contract. That leaves 1 movie which could be solely produced by Sony with no MCU involvement or MCU characters.

The basic question is what happens after Far From Home (the final movie in the 5 movie deal)? Does Sony negotiate a new deal with MCU? Does Sony take Spidey (and Tom Holland) back and, no longer let MCU use Spider-Man?  

That part is all speculation we don't know what will happen but, Sony has been trying to launch it's own Spider-Verse (Venom, Black & Silver). it would be a smart move on their part to take Holland and the built in MCU Audience and produce a Spider-Man movie in their Spider-Verse.

 

Not sure if this is still the case, but I remember reading years ago that Disney/Marvel still  has the tv rights to Spider-Man. But out of a professional  courtesy thing and not to mess up the brand they only do animated tv stuff. But if Sony walks away from the MCU I would kind of love it if they said forget that and launched a Spidey show. If they could get Holland to sign on that would be amazing.

[Matt K]

I believe that's true that Disney has the tv rights to Spider-Man.  They also have the merchandising rights which is why ASM2 did so poorly.  Each Sony Spider-man movie has to be a hit in and of itself as they get no cut of the related toys, clothing, etc. 

[Wynterwolf]

Welp, the purge continues at Netflix... Daredevil is done.