The Avengers Continuity of the Movies Leading Up to The Avengers

[Iron_Stark]

No, of course it didn't. The doses of the serum to Blonsky did do numbers inside him as well as giving him speed, strength and agility and what only caused the full mutation was the gamma radiation and Banner's blood.

Plus, the shield we saw in the first IM shouldn't be brought up to this because what was found in Howard's stash. The shield we saw in IM could definitely be a plot hole, or just a tiny easter egg because we have nothing from that to show us that Tony knew about the shield.

Lol, now you're just confusing yourself. Here's what happened, not my theory but what actually happened.

ILM is working on Iron Man 1, as a joke they inserted the shield into a shot.

Favreau caught it late into post production, he (or Fiege, well someone) liked it so much they had to figure out a way to expand on it in part 2.

So yeah its the same shield. Besides wouldn't it be a huge coincidence that both of them were working on shields and both stopped at the same exact moment and both of their shields came out looking exactly the same? Really?

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Stark was building a version of the sheild, so I am certain he knew who Captain America was.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I feel like the movies leading up to the Avengers really throw off the continuity. My main problem was that Captain AMerica happened in the 40's and in the previous movies there have been no references that he existed. I remember in The Incredible Hulk they briefly mentioned about super soldier serum trials. And in Iron Man 2 they show the shield and Stark had new clue what it was (especially since Stark's father was responsible for his creation). If Captain America was supposed to be the greatest superhero of his time how come none of the other heroes knew who he was and why was he only briefly mentioned in the previous films. I figured Tony Stark would at least know who he was.

Also the beginning of Captain America Red Skull was looking for the cube and he end up finding it in Odin's "tomb" If Odin was essentially believed to be dead in 1942 doesnt that mean the events of Thor would have taken place at an earlier time? And if that was the case wouldnt the events of Iron Man 2 taken place around the same time as Thor?

The continuity and the tie ins of these movies really confuse the heck out of me.

Sorry if this has been posted before I'm just really confused

Somebody is overanalyzing in some respects and not paying enough attention in others.

 

[J.Howlett]

http://collider.com/avengers-assembly-criticism-iron-man-thor-captain-america/106632/

 

[Rock Sexton]

http://collider.com/avengers-assembly-criticism-iron-man-thor-captain-america/106632/

I'm sorry, did this complainer who wrote that article really not know the shield Tony held up in IM2 was a prototype?

.... and then here we go again with the Renner garbage. If it were any other actor playing a guy named Barton, people would not be b*tching.

He also b*tches that SHIELD doesn't exist in 1943. So what? They existed AFTER!!!! Why did they have to exist beforehand?

My favorite quote:

we can’t simply assume that Marvel is like some kind of grand deity that makes sure everything happens for a reason.

Apparently this guy hasn't watched Feige's reign over all of this.

 

[J.Howlett]

Hey, I just posted the thing. He does make some good arguments about how leading to the Avengers has sacrificed possible narratives for the individual characters in their sequels.

It's a legit argument.

Avengers has to be a single narrative that shows why they team up but it also has to set up each individual character on their respective path in their own films the following summer.

We'll see if Joss can pull it off.

 

[Iron_Stark]

http://collider.com/avengers-assembly-criticism-iron-man-thor-captain-america/106632/

I couldn't take that moron seriously as soon as he said Avengers was a sequel to 3 franchises (obviously leaving out the Hulk) in the second sentence.

 

[J.Howlett]

But, it is technically...there's not going to make another Hulk film. He's failed twice.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Hey, I just posted the thing. He does make some good arguments about how leading to the Avengers has sacrificed possible narratives for the individual characters in their sequels.

It's a legit argument.

Avengers has to be a single narrative that shows why they team up but it also has to set up each individual character on their respective path in their own films the following summer.

We'll see if Joss can pull it off.

Obviously having with having a big event like an Avengers film, there's going to be a certain approach to these single entities ...... but the whole plan was for the Avengers. These are just prequels. Judging by what I've seen of other CBM's these films were really no different in approach other than having the presence of SHIELD ..... who, is no surprise. You have super-powered heroes among your population and you think the Gov't is not gonna know about it?

 

[J.Howlett]

Technically, yeah, they're prequels but there were ways to make SHIELD a presence without disrupting the narrative of that particular character's story.

Iron Man and Captain America did it fine. The Incredible Hulk basically didn't have any. Thor and Iron Man 2 are the problem, with Iron Man 2 being worse.

All this comes down to is this; the Avengers has to be monstrous for this intrusion to be worth it. The Avengers has to pay off, for the audience, in a major, major way.

I get that this has never been done before but it hasn't been the smoothest ride. They could've avoided some of these potholes had Marvel not been in a rush to get to the Avengers.

Iron Man 2 had no business coming out in 2010.

 

[Iron_Stark]

But, it is technically...there's not going to make another Hulk film. He's failed twice.

Did you write the article? jeez you seem defensive about it.

This guy obviously just wants to complain just to complain.

Kinda like a lot o people around here.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Technically, yeah, they're prequels but there were ways to make SHIELD a presence without disrupting the narrative of that particular character's story.

Iron Man and Captain America did it fine. The Incredible Hulk basically didn't have any. Thor and Iron Man 2 are the problem, with Iron Man 2 being worse.

All this comes down to is this; the Avengers has to be monstrous for this intrusion to be worth it. The Avengers has to pay off, for the audience, in a major, major way.

I get that this has never been done before but it hasn't been the smoothest ride. They could've avoided some of these potholes had Marvel not been in a rush to get to the Avengers.

Iron Man 2 had no business coming out in 2010.

Here we go again, the same tired arguement from you.

If SHIELD had no business in Thor, then who should've been investigating the hammer? Some random govt agency? Local sheriff department? No one?

How was SHIELDs presence worse in IM2 than the first one if they had about the same amount of screen time?

 

[PWN3R]

I feel like the movies leading up to the Avengers really throw off the continuity. My main problem was that Captain AMerica happened in the 40's and in the previous movies there have been no references that he existed. I remember in The Incredible Hulk they briefly mentioned about super soldier serum trials. And in Iron Man 2 they show the shield and Stark had new clue what it was (especially since Stark's father was responsible for his creation). If Captain America was supposed to be the greatest superhero of his time how come none of the other heroes knew who he was and why was he only briefly mentioned in the previous films. I figured Tony Stark would at least know who he was.

Also the beginning of Captain America Red Skull was looking for the cube and he end up finding it in Odin's "tomb" If Odin was essentially believed to be dead in 1942 doesnt that mean the events of Thor would have taken place at an earlier time? And if that was the case wouldnt the events of Iron Man 2 taken place around the same time as Thor?

The continuity and the tie ins of these movies really confuse the heck out of me.

Sorry if this has been posted before I'm just really confused

This can be summed up by Spider-Fan83's avatar:

 

[Lord]

Did you write the article? jeez you seem defensive about it.

This guy obviously just wants to complain just to complain.

Kinda like a lot o people around here.

I liked both hulks, as a film i think Ang Lee's version is far superior but as a hulk movie The Incredible hulk rules, so i don't find any of them failures, but if they don't make a sequel i'm going to be very sad

 

[Rock Sexton]

Technically, yeah, they're prequels but there were ways to make SHIELD a presence without disrupting the narrative of that particular character's story.

Iron Man and Captain America did it fine. The Incredible Hulk basically didn't have any. Thor and Iron Man 2 are the problem, with Iron Man 2 being worse.

All this comes down to is this; the Avengers has to be monstrous for this intrusion to be worth it. The Avengers has to pay off, for the audience, in a major, major way.

I get that this has never been done before but it hasn't been the smoothest ride. They could've avoided some of these potholes had Marvel not been in a rush to get to the Avengers.

Iron Man 2 had no business coming out in 2010.

How is it a bother in Thor?

SHIELD takes Jane's stuff. Definitely didn't screw up the narrative there. They study the hammer. Nope, no narrative roadblock there. Thor raids their compound to get his hammer. Narrative issue? That seems like a perfectly acceptable situation given that something crazy broke through atmosphere that the government is surely going to notice. Not to mention made for one of the most heartfelt, emotional scenes in the MCU when Thor can't lift it. Imagine SHIELD had not been there. WTF was he gonna do once he hit Earth? Immediately start looking for the hammer? Then what? We'd be bored as crap watching him march through the New Mexico desert without a struggle of some sort.

I will give you that the ending where Coulson shows up in his car is lazy, but how does that effect the narrative? He gets his fun line of "I need to debrief you" which he says in all the films. Did Coulson need to sit him and down and talk about the Avenger initiative? No. Thor just says give Jane her stuff back and I got your back.

IM2 had much more of a SHIELD presence because of how much screen time Widow got. Not to mention she was actually fighting alongside of him with War Machine. So in effect you had three heroes .... it was already a lot to put War Machine in too. That's where it seems like they're crammed in. I still don't see how it disrupts the narrative though. IM needed SHIELD because they could help subdue the poisoning from arc reactor.

 

[Tvar10]

I didnt mean to get everyone upset. Im a big Cap fan so I was just was just a little confused as how no one knew who he was and how everything tied in. Guess we have to wait for next year.

 

[Tvar10]

Basically I was trying to piece how everything fit in. Iron man had a shield and hulk reference. Im2 had a captain and Thor reference. Thor had a hulk reference. Hulk had an cap reference. Just wondering the timeline of everything

 

[Rock Sexton]

I didnt mean to get everyone upset. Im a big Cap fan so I was just was just a little confused as how no one knew who he was and how everything tied in. Guess we have to wait for next year.

What do you mean nobody knew who he was? They make reference to the very serum he was infused with in TIH ..... but why is it necessary anyone in those other films explicitly make mention of Cap? The only person he's important to is Nick Fury. Now, what I don't understand is they left dialogue out from when he talked to Cap at the end of the film. He mentions something to the effect of the world needing a soldier like him. That being said we don't know yet how the Avengers opens up ..... which may continue to explain why Nick wants him.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Basically I was trying to piece how everything fit in. Iron man had a shield and hulk reference. Im2 had a captain and Thor reference. Thor had a hulk reference. Hulk had an cap reference. Just wondering the timeline of everything

IM2, TIH, and Thor all happen around the same time. IM was the first film. Cap technically happened way before all of them (obviously), but he was the last piece of the puzzle when they find him in present day.

 

[LostSon88]

Basically I was trying to piece how everything fit in. Iron man had a shield and hulk reference. Im2 had a captain and Thor reference. Thor had a hulk reference. Hulk had an cap reference. Just wondering the timeline of everything

I'm gonna make this really easy for you...

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/5395/A-Marvel-Cinematic-Universe-Timeline/

I'm sure it'll be updated with Cap info soon.

 

[gmanca]

I think the best way to look at it is if Captain America's present day scenes occur before Iron Man; Cap would have been in secret for the "year" that the rest of the film's take place in while he acclimates to the future.

 

[ETGuy]

What year did Cap crash the Hydra ship in? Was it still 1942 or did some more time pass during the Howling Commandos montage?

 

[Herolee10]

This is the way that I see things being all connected somehow:

1. When Odin arrived on Earth back in the mid 900 AD to battle the Frost Giants in Norway, he ended up leaving the Cosmic Cube, which landed in the care of one of its residents.

2. That same Cosmic Cube was discovered by the Red Skull about a 1000 years later; to which the Red Skull would use to advance his war against all of humanity.

3. When all of Dr. Erskine's Original Formulas for the Super Soldier Serum was destroyed, Steve's Blood was taken in order to be analyzed and tinkered with in hopes that they could reproduce it. With 70 years of development after that, General Ross stumbled across that project and designated Bruce Banner to work on it, before giving Blonksy a dosage of that new serum.

4. Howard Stark (father of Tony Stark), had kept all of his memorabilia of Captain America in a trunk, which we would see if looked closely in IM2. (Most notably, the comics that were distributed of Captain America when he was being used as a way of selling War Bonds). It's also mentioned in Iron Man 1 that he was responsible for helping America to defeat the Nazi's with his technology.


In any case, if I had to really think about it, I would say that Marvel Studios had a very ROUGH idea as to how they wanted their heroes franchises to connect somewhat back in 2008, and it wasn't until 2010 (when Iron Man 2 was slated for a release, and when CA and Thor were being filmed) that they were able to put the dots together as best they could in order to make it feel natural.

 

[Rock Sexton]

This is the way that I see things being all connected somehow:

1. When Odin arrived on Earth back in the mid 900 AD to battle the Frost Giants in Norway, he ended up leaving the Cosmic Cube, which landed in the care of one of its residents.

2. That same Cosmic Cube was discovered by the Red Skull about a 1000 years later; to which the Red Skull would use to advance his war against all of humanity.

Correct

3. When all of Dr. Erskine's Original Formulas for the Super Soldier Serum was destroyed, Steve's Blood was taken in order to be analyzed and tinkered with in hopes that they could reproduce it. With 70 years of development after that, General Ross stumbled across that project and designated Bruce Banner to work on it, before giving Blonksy a dosage of that new serum.

The gamma testing and the serum were two different projects under the Bio-Force Department. Banner never injected himself with the serum. He only had the gamma radiation. When Blonsky was given the serum, it was a risky effort to try and give him the ability to take down the Hulk.

4. Howard Stark (father of Tony Stark), had kept all of his memorabilia of Captain America in a trunk, which we would see if looked closely in IM2. (Most notably, the comics that were distributed of Captain America when he was being used as a way of selling War Bonds). It's also mentioned in Iron Man 1 that he was responsible for helping America to defeat the Nazi's with his technology.

In any case, if I had to really think about it, I would say that Marvel Studios had a very ROUGH idea as to how they wanted their heroes franchises to connect somewhat back in 2008, and it wasn't until 2010 (when Iron Man 2 was slated for a release, and when CA and Thor were being filmed) that they were able to put the dots together as best they could in order to make it feel natural.

Agreed.

 

[LostSon88]

The gamma testing and the serum were two different projects under the Bio-Force Department. Banner never injected himself with the serum. He only had the gamma radiation. When Blonsky was given the serum, it was a risky effort to try and give Blonsky the ability to take down the Hulk.

So Banner was brought into the "Super soldier program" but was given the task of focusing on gamma radiation resistance as opposed to the serum itself?