Amph "You think you're the only superhero in the world?" - The Marvel Cinematic Universe

Then there is no way Ben and May could be 60-70 in the 1960s. They should be around 40-50 at most.

 

As usual, Pokester, you haven't been paying attention...

 

I know, I was yelling at the screen and foaming at the mouth because Ben and May were too old.

 

If you guys really want to see younger Ben and May, check out the Marvel comic mini-series "Trouble" where you get teen pregnancy and Aunt May in a bikini!

Really, though, don't. It's effing horrible. Almost as offensive as the story arc where we find out Norman Osborn knocked up Gwen Stacy (yes, that's a real thing).

 

Pretty much Marvel's method was to push the timeline forward and changing the war scenario to reflect modern times. Reed and Ben went from WWII to Korea to Vietnam to Iraq. Tony went from being in Southeast Asia to the Middle East, when he was injured. In Spectacular Spider-Man Annual #4, there was a story that showed the courtship between Ben and May, and was set during the 1930's and May is depicted in a photo that is dated in the 20's, but not a specific year.

https://scans-daily.dreamwidth.org/805213.html?thread=22539101

Now, in the years since then, this story hasn't been mentioned, but still applies as part of the backstory in 616.

 

My god, I forgot how much I loved Sal Buscema's art! This is the Aunt May my mind conjures, from the classic Spidey eras! When most comics artists took the time to DRAW the city rather than use that one art program that basically mocks up city backgrounds that's used prolifically today.

 

from http://waitingforthet.tumblr.com/

 

It seems like I've heard that a recent Marvel comic actually explained in-universe that reality is constantly rewriting itself, and constantly moves important events forward.

 

That's almost as nerdy and terrible as those Enterprise episodes that had to explain away the difference in appearance of Klingons from TOS vs what came later. Ugh, lol.

 

As Worf said, "We do not discuss it with outsiders."

 

I so wish they'd left it at that. Because that was funny and a nice wink to the fans, because we ALL know the reason they look different is art department budgets.

 

That wasn't even the best part of that episode humor wise. Odo gets a pretty great jab in at Worf, "Tell me, do they still sing songs of the great Tribble hunt?"

 

That line in DS9 was them handwaving it. They successfully handwaved it for 40 years! There was absolutely no need to address the internal continuity of it, and I say this as one of the biggest Trek nerds you will ever find, even one that thinks Trek is better and more important than Wars but glad he doesn't have to choose one or the other! Some things are simply better left a mystery. And it was definitely production budget. There's been enough quotes from the people that worked on it to that effect for it to be fact and not simply guesswork. And honestly, franchises with that many screen hours logged are going to end up with internal inconsistencies, such as Warp 10 and any other number of issues. Heck, even the Prequels end up contradicting some elements from the original trilogy!

I'm honestly shocked that there haven't been any major contradictions in the MCU thus far considering how many hours deep the franchise already is! (Oh FSM, there are ones, aren't there?)

 

Oh, come on, those were great episodes! On top of that, since we never saw non-ridged Klingons outside of TOS/TAS, it did raise quite the logistics question. IMHO, the explanation they gave was the best possible one given the circumstances (it even incorporated the theories from the DS9 episode).

I do agree that I think the Marvel's explanation seems a little too clever by half. Personally, I think it'd just be easier to ignore the outdated elements in the comics and leave it at that.

The former (from "Miri" [TOS]) was never explained. The latter (from "Bread and Circuses" [TOS]) was explained as an example of "Hodgkin's Law of Parallel Planetary Development."

The latter actually has a possible accidental second example: In "The Omega Glory" (TOS), we learn that Omega IV's society developed the United States of America (complete with the flag, Constitution, and flag Pledge) prior to 1200 AD, well before we did (the existence of the Kohms suggests some parallel form of an Asian Communist country was also present). Hodgekins' Law is the simplest explanation for both Omega IV and Earth developing the same nation and trappings in a vacuum.

I agree they're kind of silly, but I've never had a big problem with either personally.

 

from http://drakefenwick.deviantart.com/

 

Snipes wants to "Make America Blade Again"

http://www.cbr.com/snipes-continues...Distribution&utm_campaign=CBR-FB-P&view=lista

I'd be down, I really dig Snipes as Blade in the first two flicks (bailed on the third movie). Honestly, turnovers from the old flicks to the MCU I'd put JK Simmons as JJJ as my #1 and Snipes as Blade as #2.

 

He deserves another film since Blade 3 kicked him to the curb for Reynolds and Biel. I still think the first Blade is one of the best comic book movies ever made and would like to see Wesley daywalking again.

 

More likely that Goyer on his own just had a lot of bad ideas and needs someone to filter those ideas. But yeah, I think Blade coming back with Snipes would be great. I know Marvel would want to start fresh, but I think in this instance, they should go with the established version. It'd especially be interesting to see this version on AOS.

 

Marvel Announces New Blade Series Starring His Daughter

The Next Blade Film Will Be Based On Marvel’s New Female Blade

 

Shrugs. I have no interest in reading or seeing that Blade. Now Iron Man (Girl) maybe...but Blade's daughter, I will politely pass.

 

I'm interested. It will be Marvel's answer to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and it could be directed by Joss Wheaton.