Last week it was fire hyrdants, this week it was Chipotle. One of these weeks I will get all of my facts straight! Thanks for pointing that out.
One thing I forgot to mention was the fact that the opening of the show used the new Marvel logo that the Thor movie introduced. If SHIELD had used it already, I didn’t notice it. I don’t especially like it. The old one was powerful in it’s simplicity.
I’m kind of wary about next week’s episode. I’ve seen the new Thor, so it won’t bother me, but I hope they haven’t written an episode that assumes you have already seen the movie. A stand alone episode that references the movie would be fine. An episode where major plot points don’t make sense because they are referencing the film would be annoying, as would an episode that feels like an hour long commercial for the movie. Hopefully, they deliver!
I was thinking. Of all the major movie characters who haven’t appeared already the one that makes the most sense to be featured in a cameo is Captain America. His day job is at SHIELD, so his presence at a hub like facility would not be especially jarring. I guess the best option would for Coulson to be elsewhere when any meeting occurs to avoid any awkward Coulson death question or answers.
My guess is the Thor connection will actually be pretty minor. I can’t imagine the writing staff of the movie and the TV series ever sat down and worked on a real crossover story. The TV writers probably just wrote a regular story for the series and then somebody added a line or two to reference some event from the movie.
I had the sense that Shield’s objection was more against the means than the end. They’d have no problem with the Ossetians fighting for their independence but they object to any group that’s using destabilizing technology.
I would say in this continuity, SHIELD would be like a UN meets NATO. With a clear extra terrestrial threat, the nations of the world are using SHIELD to…well protect the earth. So certain compromises have to be made. If getting Ossetian independence means pissing off Russia, well SHIELD is against it, because Russia is the world’s premier space faring nation and rather necessary.
And Pricciar, can we please not have Thor spoilers at all. Even seemingly minor details (like your example) can spoil.
Since, AK84 raised concerns about movie spoilers, I’ll spoiler tag this- referencing both Iron Man 3 and Thor 2.
[SPOILER]O.K., this detail just struck me as I rewatched Iron Man 3. Iron Man 3 was released in the summer, but it takes place during December. Which December?
Thor 2 tells us that the movies take place roughly in real time with our own calendar: the first Thor movie was two years ago, Jane says she hasn’t seen Thor in two years.
Iron Man 3 was released before the debut of Agents of SHIELD, but in what December does it take place? Does it take place in the December immediately following the attack on New York (i.e. the movie was released 6 months “late”) or does it take place the following December (i.e. the movie was released 6 months “early”?)
We find Extremis in both Iron Man 3 and Agents of SHIELD. Coulson says that it’s “new”. Does he know about it because SHIELD knows all about Stark’s battle with AIM? Or, in the T.V. show, are we seeing Extremis before Killian approaches Pepper about backing the project?
Killian’s Extremis serum seemed more advanced than what we’ve seen on the T.V. show. Is that because the T.V. show is showing us AIM building up to an improved version of the serum? Or was Killian’s Extremis more advanced but his research was lost after defeat at the hands of Stark . . . and the Extremis we’ve seen on the T.V. show is the work of a less talented organization trying to piece it back together after Killian’s project was shut down?
He’s not the only one, and I’m not so sure. If they’re going to all this trouble to have the universe hang together in general, it seems sloppy to let the details flap in the breeze.
It is a good point though that I, personally, did not consider. I wonder if they will make a tie in episode for that as well. Also, having Thor 2 take place before IM3 could also explain…[Spoilers for IM3 and Thor 2]
Why Iron Man did not show up in London to help. Having that story take place first would put Tony Stark at the height of his PTSD which could explain why he didn’t do anything.
I don’t get this pesto aioli thing. I know this will probably come across as really conservative, and I’m not sure I can quite justify it. But pesto is a sauce. Aioli is a sauce. There is no need to have “pesto aioli”. If I want relish and mayonnaise in a sandwich, I don’t use relish mayonnaise, I use relish and mayonnaise. I’m not even convinced pesto aioli is a “real” thing (even if a Google search tells me a few people have made something they call “pesto aioli”).
Does anyone else get what I mean, or am I talking crap?
The latter, I think :). Sriracha mayonnaise is a thing as well: you just mix the two sauces together before spreading them. I don’t see why it’d be a problem.
More spoilers for Iron Man 3:I’d say the opposite. It makes more sense if we assume Iron Man 3 took place before Thor 2. The ending of Iron Man 3 had Stark quitting as Iron Man and demolishing all his suits. Obviously he wasn’t going to be much help as an unarmored civilian.
Arrrgh, this show is just so aggressively freaking dumb. I don’t know why we keep watching it - we might quit after the Thor tie-in. Nobody’s motivations make any sense and nobody acts like a motherfucking adult up in this joint. Ugh. So frustrating.
