3 Simple Rules for understanding the MCU timeline retcon (or ANY retcon)

[NealKenneth]

If the reference is pre-powers then wouldn't him becoming Doctor Strange just be very good proof that Zola's algorithm really works? I mean it predicted the next Sorcerer Supreme!

 

[Murdock103]

If the reference is pre-powers then wouldn't him becoming Doctor Strange just be very good proof that Zola's algorithm really works? I mean it predicted the next Sorcerer Supreme!

I considered this, but I'm not sure an algorithm, no matter how good, could predict someone randomly becoming a sorcerer, when they have had no contact with that world in the slightest.
I think it's just because he's a smart, capable man, who would probably cause issues for a totalitarian Hydra state.

The fact that, what, 1000s of people are shown to be targeted in New York alone in TWS would indicate that Hydra aren't taking any chances with anyone with any sort of clout.

 

[NealKenneth]

Hmm.

Actually, the more I think about it...I have to agree that this being a pre-powers reference is a bit peculiar. Sure, he's highly capable and individualistic...that alone would get him targeted but would it get him mentioned by name?

That being said, I have absolutely no problem with Doctor Strange taking place before The Winter Soldier. Sure, maybe there is an award on the shelf from 2016 but I've watched the film like ten times and never noticed it so why should I care? Also, I put Doctor Strange right after TWS in my view order partly because of this line anyway. It flows smooth as butter.

 

[metaphysician]

How does that not make sense. He's a brillant person, highly intellectual and smart. For totalitarian regimes that's extremely dangerous. Google Red Com Khmer and tell me how that doesn't make sense

It makes zero sense, because Sitwell didn't talk about "a troublesome surgeon in New York". He named Stephen Strange, by name, right next to Bruce Banner, as if these were both names that he and his audience would immediately know. It was entirely framed as "Here are some superheroes we want dead, and now here are a bunch of vague descriptors of people to show how broadly we want people dead".

Again, its not the Algorithm that's the issue, its Sitwell. Sitwell had no reason to specifically know or care about Strange the theoretically-troublesome-surgeon, and no reason to believe that Steve or Natasha would know about him, either. And yet, he talked like its a name everyone in the room would immediately know and recognize the implications of.

 

[Eggyman]

I agree that the 8 years later isn't a mistake/oversight. The amount of bad boys that would be signing off on this mother trucker, there's no way it's a typo.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

It makes zero sense, because Sitwell didn't talk about "a troublesome surgeon in New York". He named Stephen Strange, by name, right next to Bruce Banner, as if these were both names that he and his audience would immediately know. [...] And yet, he talked like its a name everyone in the room would immediately know and recognize the implications of.

okay, substitute Stephen Strange with Christiaan Neethling Barnard. Would it make sense then? A briliant surgeon, the first who performed the world's first human-to-human heart transplant. Everybody knew his name back then. I grew up decades later and knew his name. Let's say Sitwell said:

You! A TV anchor in Cairo, the Under Secretary of Defense, a high school valedictorian in Iowa City, Elon Musk, Malala Yousafzai, anyone who's a threat to HYDRA. Now, or in the future.

Would that make sense? Neither Malala nor Musk are super heroes with special powers, but they are people who can be seen as a threat to a totalitarian system. would Sitwell call them by name, since they are both known people, famous enough that others would recognize them by name? Or would he say "a Southafrican business magnate, a Pakistani activist"?
If we keep in mind that Strange is as skilled as neurosurgeon as Barnard was as cardiosurgeon, wouldn't a little fame come with that? Wouldn't his name be known for him being the best in his field?
Is it, in other words, totally unlikely for Sitwell to call out Strange by name, just as he would call out Musk, Malala or Banner or Usain Bolt or Spielberg or Barnard or anyone really who is known for their work by anyone who consumes media?

Sorry, I really don't buy the 'he had powers or why els would he be called by name' BS

 

[AlluAllu]

All the way back in 2014 I assumed that Sitwell was talking about a famous surgeon. It makes more sense for Strange to be famous for his profession instead of superheroics. Existance of a world famous magician superhero is a bit too major thing to happen off-screen.

 

[Capsfan]

Until confirmed by someone official as a retcon, I'm not buying it as such. Too many contradictions. Even without IM3.

In Civil War, Falcon also states that they looked
for Bucky for “two years” before giving up.
Although not explicitly stated, it does appear that
they had stopped looking for Bucky by the
events of Age of Ultron, placing it somewhere in
2015 or later. Therefore, I have tentatively
placed it in 2015 on the timeline.

It goes against Steve's character. Steve never gives up. He would have never stopped searching for Bucky. In AoU Sam indicates they are looking for him NOW. The Russos said that if not stated otherwise, then the movie happens the year it comes to the theaters. This is why in Civil War Sam says they've been looking for Bucky for two years. Because CW was intended to happen in 2016, while TWS happened in 2014.

Also, tie-in comic-book for Civil War states that Steve and Sam were looking for Bucky, but found Rumlow instead. This is how they ended up in Lagos.

 

[dw4000]

At the end of the film they also specifically reference 2008 for iron man. It would be interesting if they change things for the blu ray, or if some clarification comes out during press interviews for the release. Im sure it will be a hot topic for outlets

 

[dax]

Recent information matters more than old information. The most recent material reflects the studio’s current plans. Therefore, for example, if there is a conflict between Homecoming and Thor 2, Homecoming wins. If there is a conflict between Civil War and The Avengers, Civil War wins.

The big audience matters more than the small audience. The big audience is watching the films. A smaller audience is watching the television shows. An even smaller audience is buying special editions box sets containing detailed timelines. When there is a conflict between a new movie and an older television series, the new movie wins.

If you need to squint or pause to see the conflict...nobody cares. A lot of people bring up quick flashes of newspapers or blurry calendars in the background as evidence. Although these can cause continuity errors in a technical sense, they do not constitute anything that would bother you unless you were looking for trouble.

With that in mind, here is the new timeline, to the best of my knowledge. It is important to understand that Homecoming is a retcon, and NOT an error. There are three separate references to a span of eight years in the film. If this was an error, it is likely that only one of the three would be inaccurate instead of all three. Additionally, the junior novelization for Homecoming refers to this same timespan being five years. Because novelizations reference early versions of the script, this indicates that the timespan was intentionally changed from five years to eight years later in production. Additionally, five years is accurate to the former timeline. It is extremely unlikely that the studio would alter accurate information in three separate instances accidentally, especially since the three are self-consistent.

Early 2009 - The Incredible Hulk
Spring 2009 - Iron Man
Fall 2009 - Iron Man 2, Thor
Spring 2010 - The Avengers
Winter 2010 - Iron Man 3
2011 - Thor: The Dark World
2013 - The Winter Soldier
2015 - Age of Ultron
Summer 2017 - Civil War
Fall 2017 - Homecoming

I know I brought this up in another thread so I will repeat the following issues:

-Iron Man 2 has the Stark Expo taking place in 2010.
-In the Incredible Hulk, General Ross said that Bruce Banner was on the run for 5 years. This would put the opening credit scenes in 2005 (before Iron Man 1) and the majority of the film in 2010 (alongside Iron Man 2 and Thor).
-In Fury's Big Week novelization, Fury said that it took 2 years for his team to find Captain America's frozen body. They started looking on the same day Tony Stark announced himself as Iron Man in 2009 which will place the ending of CA: The First Avenger in 2011.
-Both Agents of SHIELD and Daredevil TV series established that the battle of New York took place in May 4, 2012 (precisely when the Avengers took place).
-Iron Man 3 begins on New Year's eve 1999 and later, Aldrich Killian said that Tony ditched him 13 years ago. 1999 + 13= December 2012.
-Thor: The Dark World begins immediately following the ending of the Avengers with Loki in chains and answering to Odin for his war crimes on earth. Plus, Darcy said that it's been 2 years since Jane Foster had seen Thor which was in 2010 so this puts the sequel in 2012.
-In Civil War, Zemo said that he spent 1 year plotting his revenge against the Avengers. This tells us how much time had passed since the Sokovia disaster occurred in Age of Ultron thus putting Civil War in 2016.
-WHih News has the bombing in Lagos occurring in May 6, 2016. The U.N. bombing was 1 month later.
-When General Ross stated that the Avengers were operating without oversight for 4 years, he showed footage of all the disasters that happened in the Avengers films, Winter Soldier, and Civil War to prove his point. This would mean that the Avengers first became a group in 2012 and again, placing Civil War in 2016.
AND
-Spider-Man: Homecoming is set 3 months after Civil War.

 

[Loki882]

SHIELD is a big one for me. In IM, they heavily imply that it's a newish organization (it doesn't even have an acronym yet) set up to deal with the emergence of super-powered/weird crap around the world (Coulson even mentions it having a "specific" function). But moving forward, it gets retconned to having been around in one form or another since at least WWII and is a more standard intelligence/paramilitary/counter-intelligence/peacekeeping agency. And it makes the "we don't have an acronym" gag from IM make far less sense in the process.

 

[Best]

The rationalisation for Ross explicitly stating "for the past 4 years"-- which so conveniently lines up with the difference in release between The Avengers and Civil War, AND Falcon's line of "looking for the guy for 2 years" with THAT separation of release also conveniently lining up...

Its always going to be there to argue. Because they are so aligned, no matter your sound analysis, I still have to side with the idea of errors, misconceptions or whatever of the timeline internally. Again, its just too convenient and though your ideas can line up timeline-wise (there is a lot of room between 2011-2015), it still looks more like a theory in comparison to an actual script/piece of dialogue.

*Yes, your idea of Ross referring to Winter Soldier than Avengers can still be argued against, and definitely Sam referring to AoU

 

[wampa1]

All the way back in 2014 I assumed that Sitwell was talking about a famous surgeon. It makes more sense for Strange to be famous for his profession instead of superheroics. Existance of a world famous magician superhero is a bit too major thing to happen off-screen.

I'll bet you any money you like they do a one-shot or a comic of Doctor Strange going back in time and that's how he ends up on Hydra's radar.

 

[NealKenneth]

I know I brought this up in another thread so I will repeat the following issues

Not sure what you are trying to do here dax, but yes, you brought these issues up in a different thread a few weeks ago and me and another user went through and "debunked" every single one. Our responses are still in the other thread if you forgot.

I'll bet you any money you like they do a one-shot or a comic of Doctor Strange going back in time and that's how he ends up on Hydra's radar.

This would be neat.