I was hoping that Homecoming would be more like One Crazy Summer or Better Off Dead.
Spider-Man: Homecoming' anticipation thread
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
No, that's the Han Solo movie
According to the reviews, this movie throws a bit ol' fat turd into the timeline of the MCU.
The movie takes place simultaneously a couple months after Civil War, and 8 years after the Chitauri invasion, which means there are 3 years unaccounted for since Vision specifically says Tony has been Iron Man for 8 years in Civil War.
The actual big 'ol fat turd was...
The timeliners at the MCU wiki had multiple aneurysms at that point. I imagine this will cause genuine catatonic shock.
...Vision's line about eight years itself and the compressed timeline of Phase One. (Four years of real world time. 18 months story time.)
The timeliners at the MCU wiki had multiple aneurysms at that point. I imagine this will cause genuine catatonic shock.
I got to be honest with you all: for me, the continuity of the MCU's timeline as addressed in this movie is probably the least interesting element I could possibly be concerned with.
Right now, I just want it to be fun and if *that's* considered a the most pressing concern, then this movie is shaping up to be awesome.
Right now, I just want it to be fun and if *that's* considered a the most pressing concern, then this movie is shaping up to be awesome.
Timeline issues? In a movie based on a character who spent 13 years earning his bachelor's degree in the comics? Shocking.
It's not lazy to not do something 99.99% of the audience is going to neither notice nor care about. That's just called an efficient use of effort.
It's no different than the sliding timescale that the comics have been using for decades. Did the caption stating that Iron Man 2 (2010) took place "Six Months Later" from Iron Man (2008) annoy you equally?
Google "marvel movie timeline" and tell me how much effort it takes.
That doesn't conflict with anything previously established. This does. It also doesn't make any sense. Now Avengers takes place months at most from the first Iron Man, and there are 3-4 years between Avengers and Civil War that can't be accounted for.
You shouldn't punish your audience for paying attention. I'm not even a hardcore fan, I've only seen most of these movies once or twice. If you're going to get specific on dates, be correct about them.
This isn't a history class, it's fiction. Timeline consistency is nice when you can have it, but it's not the sole purpose for telling a story. The first priority is what works dramatically for the character arcs. Sometimes that requires fudging other details. Yes, people who pay attention will notice those fudges, but one presumes they understand the difference between fiction and reality and recognize that sometimes dramatic license is needed.
I once saw a production of a Dracula stage musical where, when Jonathan Harker stabbed Dracula in the climax, the tip of his stake broke off and fell to the stage. They didn't suddenly bring the whole production to a halt and redo the scene. They just kept going and ignored the blooper, and trusted the audience to forgive it and continue to suspend disbelief. Because the narrative matters more than the tiny details. You want to get the details right as much as feasible, sure, but they're not more important than the big picture. That's why the phrase is willing suspension of disbelief. An audience chooses to play along with the unreality of a story, and sometimes that means noticing a flaw and forgiving it.
I once saw a production of a Dracula stage musical where, when Jonathan Harker stabbed Dracula in the climax, the tip of his stake broke off and fell to the stage. They didn't suddenly bring the whole production to a halt and redo the scene. They just kept going and ignored the blooper, and trusted the audience to forgive it and continue to suspend disbelief. Because the narrative matters more than the tiny details. You want to get the details right as much as feasible, sure, but they're not more important than the big picture. That's why the phrase is willing suspension of disbelief. An audience chooses to play along with the unreality of a story, and sometimes that means noticing a flaw and forgiving it.
There is a difference between unavoidable mistakes and avoidable ones, as well as a difference between creating alternate rules for your reality (People can travel through space, aliens are real, for some reason we have to drill a hole in a planet for this black hole weapon to work) and breaking the rules of established and implied reality (You can see other other planets implode from said weapon by looking out your kitchen window). The latter is sloppy storytelling and entirely avoidable.
It is very easy to be an armchair quarterback and pass judgment on how others do a job you don't have to do yourself.
A spurious objection having nothing whatsoever to do with the point. A single factoid doesn't exist in isolation, it has to be made to fit within the whole story. And character arcs and plot structure are more important than niggling continuity details that most viewers won't even notice. The goal of fiction is not to create an absolutely perfect simulation of reality; it's to fake it as effectively as you can. And sometimes compromises are made, not out of ignorance or sloppiness, but out of a conscious choice to prioritize the needs of the overall story over the consistency of incidental details. That's why the word "retcon" even exists -- because it is a routine fact of the creative process that adjustments to fine details are sometimes necessary for the benefit of the overall story.
I just tried to do exactly that and I don't think it's as easy and simple as you suggest.
If it was a stage production of Dark Shadows you'd almost be obligated to have such moments intentionally written into the script.
Effort required is not a factor. It's simply that nobody* cares, so why bother?
*Except about 70 obsessive wiki editors and reddit posters, which may as well be nobody.
In an interesting bit of timing, Jon Watts revealed today that there is a "timeline scroll" that he used as a resource in crafting the movie's events in relation to the rest of the MCU.
Even so, there shouldn't be such a high expectation that the timeline is rigorously followed. As Christopher said, the story should always take precedence.
Similar threads
