I don't think they said Fury recruited him specifically, just that he was his (and Garrett's) S.O. when training to be a field agent. If you do the math, Coulson would have been recruited some time in the late 70's and early 80's, which would have been back when Carter & Stark were still running things. I don't think it's ever been said when Fury joined, but he would have been older at the time since his having a notable military career prior to S.H.I.E.L.D. has always been part of the character. So it's possible they both joined around the same time or that Fury joined a few years *after* Coulson. It's also possible Coulson spent quite some time in S.H.I.E.L.D. through most of the 80's as something other than a field agent (analyst seems like a good fit, given his background) so maybe it wasn't until the 90's that he was trained by Fury. That said, I doubt the movie people will be paying too much attention to TV continuity, so I wouldn't be surprised if they create some kind of contradiction.
The article does say he's a S.H.I.E.L.D. rookie, so there's always the chance they'll just not address how he was recruited. I don't know if he'd have the kind of influence to change their minds, but I would like to think that Clark Gregg would at least try to keep them from blatantly contradicting the history that AoS has established for Coulson. It looks like there's a pretty good chance we'll be getting our first trailer on Good Morning America on Tuesday morning.
Math and I have never been on the best of terms, but as it's established that Coulson was born in 1964 (same as Clark Gregg), that would mean that he was only 16 when the '70s ended. If he was recruited in his early 20s, then that would be around '84-'88. After that, figure four years at the academy before becoming a field agent.
Y'Think after Watergate, Peggy just said "fuck this" and craftily installed her nephew or cousin into the White House to keep things less corrupt?
That all depends on how willing the directors are to listen to his input. Reality check though: he's a TV actor getting what may very well be a one scene cameo that we may only get to see in the deleted scenes section of the bluray. I honestly don't see him pushing his luck by asking for script revisions. Assuming IMDB & Wikipedia are accurate (dubious, I know), Gregg was born in '62. But yes, Coulson's DoB has been show to be '64. As for how old he was when he was recruited, it's a little vague. All we know is that it was while he was still in college. I don't know how it works in the states, but over here that could be anything from about 18 up until the mid-20's. So for Coulson that would be anytime in the early to mid-80s. At least half a decade out from the events of 'Captain Marvel', going by what we've heard so far...but maybe he was in college for a *really* long time before graduating. Who knows? Personally, I think the idea that he was an analyst who transferred into field work seems more in keeping with what we know about him. Indeed, for all we know it was because of Fury and the events of CM that prompted that shift. Garret remains a problem though since I can't really buy the idea that he was ever anything but a wetwork type, so the notion that he wasn't trained until he was in his mid-to-late 20's seems unlikely. Indeed I think they even specified the year he got blow-up on a S.H.I.E.L.D. mission was in 1990. So logically his training with Phil under Fury would have to have been prior to that date. I mean sure, that could have been his first mission, but that seems to be pushing it a little, no? I hear she also had her much smarter grandniece assigned to the Stargate Program.
Apologies on the mix-up on Gregg's bday, but I went into Netflix and re-watched "Pilot" to certain on Coulson's DoB. It's briefly shown on screen during the-- Ward: "Do the Avengers know that Fury played them?" Hill: "They're not Level 7" scene. College then 4 years at SHIELD academy? (I actually edited my above post to include this, but you had already quoted me.)
It took him a long time to write his thesis: Captain America: Great Hero or Greatest Hero of All Time?
Yeah, that happens to me all the damn time. Still, as I said the real sticking point from a continuity POV is Garrett training with Coulson under Fury. Not like advanced spy training either; basic tactical stuff like how to check corners and clear a room of hostiles. Which to me suggests they're both meant to be a lot younger than their late 20's. Honestly I doubt the movie people will sweat these kinds of details too much and the poor wiki editors are just going to have to cope with a direct contradiction. Not like it's the first time or anything. I seem to recall the Spider-Man movie fudging the timeline by several years, and IIRC even within AoS Coulson managed to drastically misremember how Ghost Rider took down his uncle just a handful of episodes later.
I agree with you about Garrett. He started the Deathlok program in 1990, which is hard to reconcile. However, I don't think it's anything that can't be addressed by a little bit of creative continuity spackle. Star Trek novels to do it all the time. They actually make Kirk's career before the Enterprise make sense. Anywho, the trailer on Good Morning America tomorrow has been confirmed. https://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/0...er-officially-teased-for-good-morning-americ/
So, they kept the stupid amnesia of the early Ms Marvel comics, but instead of forgetting being Ms. Marvel, she forgets being human? I get that its brainwashing, its still stupid (and something the Kree only did once, in a comic from a few years ago, and it was just a sound frequency that brainwashed carol and a Mar-Vell clone, I'm probably the only one that remembers that short arc in an Avengers book anyway so it doesn't help this movie). Well, this is certainly the second worst trailer for a 2019 superhero movie. If Marvel didn't have Avengers 4 next year, I'd loathe every film the MCU was releasing (Captain Marvel and Spider-Man are both movies I already hate, Spidey because I didn't like Homecoming and so didn't want a sequel, and CM for reasons stated over and over at this point). Also, brie Larson really doesn't have the presense (for lack of a better word) of Carol danvers or just a superhero in general. Also, Mar-Vell looks like a math teacher cosplaying on his day off. As it is, we have 8 superhero/comic book films (if you count Joker, and if Dark Phoenix and New Mutants actually release) coming out next year, and the only ones that are actually going to be good are Avengers 4 and Wonder Woman 1984. 2019 is going to be the worst year for superhero movies since the pre-Iron Man era. To be fair to Captain Marvel, it can't be the worst comic book movie of 2019 (since Shazam exists). Hell, with joker and New Mutants (supposedly, in NM case) coming out, Captain Marvel might only make it to fourth worse. But, in any other year this would easily be the worst superhero movie. This is the kind of female lead superhero movie we used to get pre-WW, except I think it will end up being worse then Elektra and maybe even worse then Supergirl . It will probably also piss me off more then Catwoman, but just being Marvel means it will at least be a better made film that that.
Interesting that it seems as though her memory of being human was wiped (presumably by the Kree.) Carol having her brain screwed with so she can fulfil someone else's purpose and her breaking away from that to find her own purpose is definitely in line with her comic book backstory, though they thankfully appear to have avoided the...ickyness. I also like how this movie seems to be a twist on the usual superhero origin story. As in it starts off with her already haven gotten powers and is apparently a veteran of sorts...but she's had the person she was before stripped away from her. So this is less about her getting power, but taking control of her life and finding out who she really is.
Loved it. Nice. I eagerly await Collider (four people discussing the same point for an hour) and Nerdist (five minute piece to camera) disecting this trailer.