• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

What grade would you give the Marvel Cinematic Universe? (Ever-Changing Question)


  • Total voters
    185
The directors shot down my theory that an infinity stone is needed to split the timeline. Oh well, time travel rules are a bit cleaner this way. Still, I did like the elegance of not having to have Old Cap make another jump, and give "our" Peggy a happy ending.
 
Found this just now. Would have posted in Endgame thread but it looks like it's closed

Thanx for that. I'm interested in the strange script in your signature (veritcal)

I seem to remember hearing hammering towards the very end of the movie. The new Cap with Iron Man armor--that'd be a nice look.

At least I can now say I have Thor's physique...

Iron Man didn't need a snap to defeat Thanos and should have survived. The gauntlet seems less powerful.

I really like the comics, what with Mephisto---guess Red Skull was as close as we got to that character.
 
Deadpool seems like they’re bringing it in unchanged, he’ll just be in the MCU now. Iger is convinced that can’t change it without ruining it.
D2BqSKoXcAAyvMO.jpg

He's coming...
Also notice the bus numbers 20...19...
Wouldn't it be something..
 
So are they finally abandoning the pretense that the shows and films are in the same continuity? I was afraid the Disney+ shows might do that, since they're produced by the movie division of Marvel Studios instead of the TV division. But if so, it's odd that they're keeping the same lead actor. Maybe they just mean that the particular storyline they're telling won't directly connect to the AoS version?

They are in the same continuity though, otherwise there'd have been no point in showing Human Jarvis in Endgame.
 
Whether this is the end of AoS being 'MCU' did cross my mind, but I also wonder if Marvel's tv division isn't deliberately leaning into the possibility of alternate realities. It would allow them to keep the 'it's all connected' idea alive without having to actually connect every single thing, and it would even let them bring fox shows like Gifted into the 'MCU' umbrella, just as a different universe. A spinoff character without the backstory baggage of his parent show (assuming they want his show to have a different tone/style) wouldn't be an illogical place to start.
The simpler explanation would be that this new series is in a separate continuity rather than Agents of SHIELD. That being said, I think I'll wait until I see more information.
 
In my mind I've played with the idea that by breaking the time loop in season 5, season 6 and 7 will play out in a newly established alternate reality.
 
The simpler explanation would be that this new series is in a separate continuity rather than Agents of SHIELD. That being said, I think I'll wait until I see more information.

Given the schism between Marvel Studios' TV and movie divisions, and given that the Disney+ shows are being made by the movie division, I suspect we might be heading for a situation where the previous MCU TV shows are relegated to "Legends" status, as it were.


In my mind I've played with the idea that by breaking the time loop in season 5, season 6 and 7 will play out in a newly established alternate reality.

That would actually be consistent with the temporal theory used by Endgame (which is actually the scientifically plausible model of time travel, and I loved seeing the movie trash the wrongness of previous time-travel movies' approach). It doesn't resolve why they were stuck in a self-consistent loop before they managed to break it, but then, that was always inconsistent.

My question is, if Dr. Strange could only see one timeline where Thanos was defeated, does that mean every alternate timeline resulting from Endgame has Thanos winning? Or do those timelines count as part of the one successful timeline because they branched off as a result of the actions that stopped Thanos? Which wouldn't encompass any new AoS timeline, because it would've branched off just before the Snap.
 
The simpler explanation would be that this new series is in a separate continuity rather than Agents of SHIELD. That being said, I think I'll wait until I see more information.

Like I said, an indication that they may be leaning into alternate realities as the basis for their tv series. Otherwise it would be odd to launch a brand new show in it's own separate continuity yet on the basis of a spin-off character from an already in-continuity show.
 
Given the schism between Marvel Studios' TV and movie divisions, and given that the Disney+ shows are being made by the movie division, I suspect we might be heading for a situation where the previous MCU TV shows are relegated to "Legends" status, as it were.
I still don't know how people can say this after Endgame.
 
I still don't know how people can say this after Endgame.

Endgame makes it feel more likely to me, especially combined with the ghost rider announcement. 'Alternate timelines' are basically the perfect excuse for saying all of it is connected but completely ignoring all established continuity when writing any particular show that you don't actually want connected.

But I doubt it will be as simple as 'all previous mcu shows don't count' and 'all new ones do'. Agent Carter seems pretty safe in that it always lined up well with the movies without ever getting in their way and the Loki series at least will probably be an alternate timeline (unless it's just alternate loki in the MCU timeline). The general rule of thumb, I suspect, will be 'MCU Prime' shows on Disney+ and 'MCU Alternate' shows on other platforms, but even that certainly won't be perfect.
 
Like I said, an indication that they may be leaning into alternate realities as the basis for their tv series. Otherwise it would be odd to launch a brand new show in it's own separate continuity yet on the basis of a spin-off character from an already in-continuity show.

It's not that odd, because it's how fiction often works. It wouldn't be the first time in TV history that a spinoff built around a certain character has been in a different continuity from the work that introduced that character. For instance, The Andy Griffith Show was based on a character from an episode of The Danny Thomas Show, but the Andy Taylor character and elements of Mayberry were retooled for the series, so it was out of continuity with the original episode. And Robin Williams's Mork from Ork character was introduced in a Happy Days episode that turned out to be just a dream, but then they spun him off as a real character (and reshot the ending of that Happy Days episode to fit).

In fact, we've already seen this done once in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The Agent Carter TV series was inspired by the short film of the same name, but it completely contradicted and decanonized that short film, replacing it in the continuity.


I still don't know how people can say this after Endgame.

If you're referring to the use of Edwin Jarvis, that was a character created for television by the film's own screenwriters, so I don't think it proves anything about how different TV characters might be used. (And as I just mentioned, those same screenwriters already overwrote their own first-draft version of Agent Carter.) The fact is that there's long been a schism between the Marvel Studios movie and TV divisions, and it's the movie division making the Disney+ shows.

And it's also a fact that, as the fate of the Agent Carter short proves, continuity is NOT the singular overriding goal of storytelling that some fans imagine it to be, but merely a means to an end, a secondary consideration that can be suspended if it gets in the way of telling the stories you want to tell. The Agent Carter TV series could not have existed if the short-film version had stayed in continuity, so it had to go. By the same token, if the plans they've developed for the Ghost Rider series require them to give the character a brand-new origin story and overwrite the AoS version, then that's what they'll do, because continuity exists to serve story, not the other way around.
 
If you want to be technical the MCU already is an alternate universe. Agents of Shield had to create who knows how many alternate timelines before they finally kept the earth from being destroyed (so Thanos could then show up a little later and have a snapture on it)
 
It's not that odd, because it's how fiction often works. It wouldn't be the first time in TV history that a spinoff built around a certain character has been in a different continuity from the work that introduced that character. For instance, The Andy Griffith Show was based on a character from an episode of The Danny Thomas Show, but the Andy Taylor character and elements of Mayberry were retooled for the series, so it was out of continuity with the original episode. And Robin Williams's Mork from Ork character was introduced in a Happy Days episode that turned out to be just a dream, but then they spun him off as a real character (and reshot the ending of that Happy Days episode to fit).

In fact, we've already seen this done once in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The Agent Carter TV series was inspired by the short film of the same name, but it completely contradicted and decanonized that short film, replacing it in the continuity.

There's retooling and there's 'this is a whole new version'. TNG never lined up perfectly with TOS (and - I wasn't old enough to notice - but may not have even been sold as in the same continuity) but it was always close enough. The quotes so far make it sound like something a bit more drastic than that. But only time will tell for certain, of course.
 
There's retooling and there's 'this is a whole new version'.

Yes, and both have been done many times in the history of fiction, because there is no rule book saying that everyone has to create the same way.

TNG never lined up perfectly with TOS (and - I wasn't old enough to notice - but may not have even been sold as in the same continuity) but it was always close enough. The quotes so far make it sound like something a bit more drastic than that.

Yes, it is obviously more drastic, and I never claimed it wasn't. As I said, the MCU has already decanonized one version of Agent Carter's SHIELD origins (the short film) in favor of a different one (the TV series). Other franchises over the decades have done similarly major reinterpretations, even if Star Trek hasn't (yet). Fiction is not about things springing into existence in perfect, immutable form. It's about draft ideas that get refined and reworked over time. Sometimes the introduction of a character in one show is just treated as a rough draft for the version that gets spun off into their own show. Marvel was willing to do that with Agent Carter, despite its generally strong continuity, so they're capable of doing it again.
 
IIf you're referring to the use of Edwin Jarvis, that was a character created for television by the film's own screenwriters, so I don't think it proves anything about how different TV characters might be used.
The issue isn't whether they'll be used, the issue is whether they're intended to be in the same universe.
 
You said the TV shows would be relegated to Legends status.

Again, you're substituting words and distorting my meaning. I did not say "would." It would be insanely stupid and dishonest to say "would," because I have no actual knowledge and it would be totally wrong to state it as though it were a fact. I merely said it was conceivable that they might do that. Please read every word of my posts before you accuse me of saying something so totally idiotic.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top