Marvel News

I've mentioned previously that I try to avoid Sony's marketing for the Spider-Man films because they are too spoilery. However, I checked out the latest trailer due to its Endgame connection. I was not expecting Mysterio to be from another reality, but if that's true it makes me wonder if a new Disney-Sony deal will have the Sonyverse as an alternative Earth--such that, while Venom et al aren't part of the MCU in the traditional way, it means that Spider-Man can go back and forth in the multiverse. Alternatively, if there is no deal, he can simply remain in the alternative Earth. It reminds me of how Iron Man 3 ended in such a way that if Robert Downey Jr. didn't resign with Marvel his story would have reached a conclusion. I don't think this arrangement is necessarily likely, just that it opens the door for it.

This could allow the new X-Men films to exist in a different reality as well--I dislike the idea, but it could preserve things like Magneto's origin in World War II or whatever element of Wolverine's increasingly ridiculous origin they want to use (I'm hoping for his early. simpler origin). It's also possibly we get a Witcher-style Convergence, where an alternative reality including mutants gets combined with the main MCU (very unlikely, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there).

Going back to Far From Home, there's a theory floating around (eg) that Michelle is Nick Fury's daughter. The evidence is based on the Homecoming end credits where she's depicted with an eye patch--take that for what it's worth. Do I think this is true? It's possible--the character was controversial (some fans didn't like the MCU trying to reinvent Mary Jane Watson as Michelle--I went over my theory that the push for a new MJ came from Amy Pascal, but that's just my speculation). What attaching her to Fury does is connect her to a popular character, possibly making her more palatable for those who are unhappy--if that's the intent I don't think it actually helps, since the objection is primarily how hamfisted it's being handled (even fans of the character don't find her worth mentioning when discussing the latest trailer). I never understood the point of having her be MJ but also Michelle. Regardless, good writing is the way to ameliorate the situation.

One thing I've been wondering about, since Sony wants its Sinister Six movie, is how Michael Keaton's Vulture will fit into that (given the events of Homecoming). He owes Peter Parker a debt, such that something has to change for him to become a villain again (assuming he's not simply blackmailed into joining). I wonder if Liz Toomes (er, Allen), his daughter, will get Gwen Stacey'd and die with Spider-Man blamed for it. This idea, if it has any merit at all, will have to wait for a third film, as it's been confirmed that neither Vulture nor his daughter will be in Far From Home.

THR is reporting that Guardians of the Galaxy 3 is expected to film in 2020, earlier than previous speculation and meaning it will appear no later than 2022 (it debunks Karthik Prasad's claim last fall of a 2021 production date, although in fairness to him this was presumably before James Gunn was re-hired).

The now famous Roger Wardell has made some claims about the upcoming film on his second account:
1) Rocket's creator is the High Evolutionary
2) Drax's daughter is alive
3) Rocket gains a love interest in Lylla
4) Nebula and Star Lord become friends

The last element makes a lot of sense--there aren't any other relationships for Peter Quill to explore among the Guardians; the first and third seem highly plausible; Kamaria (presumably Moondragon) would be a good development for Drax, who has no motivation left now that his revenge has been satisfied by the death of Thanos. Charles Murphy confirms the idea of the High Evolutionary being present, saying he heard about it two years ago (presumably via the massive leak that went to his buddy Charles Villanueva, see below--he says his information is from an early draft of the film).

Variety reports that Richard Madden is in negotiations to play Ikaris in the film. In addition, Jim Starlin dropped that Kronos is supposed to be in The Eternals (which reminds me of a debunked Conrad theory I forgot in my Endgame reaction post, as he claimed back in July that Kronos would appear in Endgame).

Wardell also has claims about the Doctor Strange sequel:
1) It will include time travel to the 1980s (I'm assuming that's what he means by "1980's Boogaloo" and the point below)

2) Tilda Swinton is in negotiations to return as the Ancient One

3) Jericho Drumm (Doctor Voodoo) and an Asian-Clea will appear

If Mordo's threat of consequences for using the Time Stone from Doctor Strange are true, a trip to the past makes sense; I'd welcome a return of the Ancient One (Swinton is fantastic); Clea is the usual love interest for Strange and it makes sense to have her there--the race-swap to Asian could be intended to mollify those upset by Swinton's casting in the first Doctor Strange.

We have a bunch of MCU dates officially announced, so let's quickly go through them with my guesses as to what films they represent:

• May, 2020 - This is Black Widow given that production has either started or is about to start
• November, 2020 - The Eternals, because it's the only other MCU film currently casting
• February, 2021 - This is probably Shang-Chi, although Ryan Coogler has had as much time to work on Black Panther 2, so it could be here as well (the arguments for the former is that it would hit during the Chinese New Year, but it's also Black History month, so take your pick)
• May, 2021 - Either Black Panther 2 or Shang-Chi
• November, 2021 - Doctor Strange 2 (it could be the May date as well, but I'm guessing it will echo the slot it had in 2016)
• February, 2022 - unknown (possibly Captain Marvel 2, although it might be something brand new)
• May, 2022 - Guardians of the Galaxy 3 (we know it's a 2020 production date, which could actually see it out earlier, but I think it will be a summer release and I don't think can make the 2021 date)
• July, 2022 - unknown (possibly Thor 4 or something new)

I last went through the hypothetical Marvel slate back in January, which hasn't really changed here, but there are a number of interesting things to note in regards to it:

• Spider-Man films won't appear in this sequence because they are Sony's dates; if the deal is renewed expect it to be in 2021 (as Sony wants the films every two years)
• No third 2020 film has been added - I and many others had been speculating that the MCU would not want to simply lose an expected release date next year, with most speculating that the fast-tracked Shang-Chi would be that third film, but there's no sign of that date here (that could still change, however)
• We don't expect a Deadpool or X-Force film to show up on this slate as part of the MCU, but it was puzzling that Disney gave New Mutants a new date--I'll expand on that below

Myself and others had been expecting Marvel to expand to four films a year--with Fox's added production capabilities it's logistically possible (and if Marvel continues making Spider-Man films, we'll get that in 2021 regardless), but there isn't a clear sign of it now and I wonder if that's because Disney wants to leave space for it's other blockbuster properties (Star Wars, the inherited Avatar, etc). I'll be interested to see if this arrangement (three films a year, which began in 2017) will remain static.

I'm rethinking what the MCU is going to do with the X-Men. For a long time I (and a few others) thought Dark Phoenix and New Mutants (or at least the latter) would be cancelled to protect the IP. This opposed the conventional wisdom which was: the Fox films cost a lot of money, so to recoup as much of that as possible the completed films will be released. That, certainly, is the case of Dark Phoenix, which comes out shortly, but what about New Mutants? A film described repeatedly as a mess and one Fox thought needed reshoots back in January, 2018, which have never occurred. Will Disney simply fund those predetermined changes and roll out the film as-is (this is it's fourth release date, incidentally)? It may very well be that simple--New Mutants isn't being added to the MCU slate, so it doesn't seem like Feige will change the film to suit him, but it's very odd for such a late, dead-on-arrival Marvel-related release. Could it be hitched to the Deadpool franchise? That seems unlikely given the very different tones of those films. It's difficult to parse their intention (is that world going to be another alternative reality?).

Going back to the MCU X-Men, we've heard it could be five years before we see the X-Men on film (even if X-characters could appear sooner). I thought this might simply be a bluff on Feige's part to avoid distractions before Endgame, but if not then it's certainly long enough for people to have purged their memories of the wildly uneven second stage of the Fox X-films (meaning some of the characters I was excising from the MCU due to their use by Fox might remain in play).

THR reports that Hulu is getting Ghostrider and Helstrom shows. I'm unfamiliar with the latter, but it's the Robbie Reyes' Ghostrider from Agents of SHIELD, with Gabriel Luna reprising the role. The Ghostrider move is no surprise, as Kevin Feige has dumped every minor IP previously on film to Marvel Entertainment--ie, outside the MCU. I frankly have no interest in either show--I like my MCU interconnected, not marooned on Jeph Loeb island.

We've learned that virtually all of Endgame leaked May, 2018, via a phone call to Charles Villanueva of MCU Exchange--he in turn informed a small group of people (including the oft-referenced Charles Murphy and presumably Roger Wardell among others). Whoever the source was is very connected, as other MCU scoops were dropped at that time. Whether Villanueva retains that connection I have no idea, but I do respect the fact that he didn't simply dump all the info and spoil the film.

It turns out the Umberto Gonzalez scoop back in October (claimed by Conrad as his own) about Katherine Langford appearing in Endgame has some basis after all. The Russo's divulged there's a cut scene where Langford appeared as an older Morgan Stark and forgives her father for not being there for her because of his sacrifice (this mirrors the Thanos and Gamora scene from Infinity War). The scene didn't test well--it was too confusing--so it was cut (undoubtedly it's from these test screenings that the scoop is derived). The screenings are also undoubtedly the source of the rumour Conrad reported that her role was as Tony's adult daughter (although Conrad's interpretation, that she'd have to be sacrificed, remains erroneous).

I was thinking about where Endgame leaves the Phase One characters--mostly thinking about how it will reflect forward to the new era (Kevin Feige doesn't want to call it Phase Four, but it's going to be hard to break that terminology).

Iron Man - Dead; leaves behind Pepper (who, according to Paltrow, is basically retired out of the MCU), and his very young (4) daughter Morgan (it's difficult to parse how Langford's older version could be used without time travel)
War Machine - Alive and with rumours of a Disney+ show; as a very undeveloped character I'm not sure what they'll do with him, especially given Don Cheadle's age (55)--perhaps he passes the torch? Could he be the avenue to Ironheart?
Hulk - Crippled (making space for the Amadeus Cho Hulk, if they want to go that way); now that he's Professor Hulk they can keep Mark Ruffalo and the character around for as long as they want (the CGI means Ruffalo's age is largely mitigated)--I would expect him, however, to revert to a background role

Black Widow - Dead, but with a forthcoming prequel film--I have no interest in that unless there's a definitive link to the present (I've seen other people wonder if it's an alternate reality version of the character, but I don't think the MCU will want to void the stakes of her sacrifice in Endgame)

Thor - Gave up his his royal position (to Valkyrie), which brings his character full circle into being a more humble version of the character he was in the first Thor; tied in with the Guardians of the Galaxy and it's clear there are more films to come for him
Hawkeye - We know his Disney+ show will have him train his replacement in Kate Bishop, which will sunset the character outside of cameos

Captain America - Retired (his role taken over by Falcon), but not dead; if Chris Evans didn't want to come back he surely would have died in Endgame, so I suspect he'll serve as an adviser/friend in the future

All of these changes leave room for a completely new set of Avengers. It seems like the new team will consist of Captain Marvel, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Spider-Man (if the deal is renewed), and possibly Ant-Man and the Wasp (I remain unsure what Marvel wants to do with the latter pair given that the solo films have not done well in MCU-terms).

Amy Pascal is leaving Sony for Universal. No one seems to know whether this impacts a renewal of the deal with Marvel or not, but what it does mean is that the projects Pascal were spearheading (like Silk and separate Silver Sable and Black Cat films) are likely dead, because unlike the MCU, Sony's properties were divided into three advocates (with Palak Patel's getting the most attention thus far; Avi Arad is the other). Will the move help Marvel's situation with Universal? That remains to be seen, as Comcast (which owns Universal) is not fond of Disney (thus their competing bids for Fox).

I mentioned back in December that one of the reasons Jeremy Conrad faces a lot of criticism is because of how he behaves on social media. I'd heard, although I'd never researched it, that he proactively blocks people who criticize him. Apparently this is true, as he has me blocked despite not interacting with him (he probably found the site through my talking to Kinda Culty on Twitter)--it's a funny thing, because I don't really check his feed (most of which is devoted to fighting with people who dislike The Last Jedi). I don't know if his much more popular buddy Danile Richtman does the same thing, but unlike Conrad (who I considered very reliable initially), I looked into Richtman first and knew he was very hit and miss (much like Umberto Gonzalez).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News

SPOILERS for ENDGAME below

I've posted my initial thoughts on Avengers: Endgame (along with checklists for scoops/predictions), but I have a few other bits and pieces before we get into the usual news.

Two supposed easter eggs have been making the rounds:

• The earthquake off the coast of Africa that Black Widow and Okoye reference is a nod to Namor

While this is possible, it's not as blatant an easter egg as Iron Man 2 (where Atlantis is seemingly shown on the map).

• Peggy Carter references Captain Britain by mentioning "Braddock"

This is during the 1970 time travel sequence, so if it is an easter egg it must be referencing his father (what would be the point of marooning the character in a time period where, canonically, he can't actually fulfill his hero role?).

We also have a couple of theories about how two deceased characters may appear in forthcoming properties if they aren't simply prequels.

Loki (Disney+): during the 2012 time travel sequence Loki is able to steal the Tesseract and escape (this is what requires the trip to 1970); narratively this means there's a timeline where that happens which does not effect the prime MCU timeline. What it does is create latitude if they want to use him again while still preserving his death (much as we have the 2014 Gamora set-up for Guardians 3)--Forbes believes the show will be his adventures in the alternate timeline, which is plausible, but that would not meet the expectation Kevin Feige set that these shows will impact the movies.

Black Widow (film): the theory above has a lot of proponents, while this one does not. Regardless, there are two ways we could get Widow in the MCU's present: 1) Banner says he tried very hard to bring her back when he performed the Snap, but couldn't--he might simply be wrong, 2) When Cap goes back in time, it affords him the opportunity to rescue Nat. I don't believe either of these is correct (the writers of Endgame are pretty explicit that she's dead, although their reasoning wouldn't apply to a past Widow who is rescued). I remain at a loss what a prequel to a dead character can hope to accomplish (if that's all it is).

A final observation: genuine spoilers for Endgame appeared broadly April 15th (via Twitter), the exact same timeframe that they did with Infinity War last year (back then Frank Palmer at Screen Geek indirectly spoiled Loki's death for me by discussing the spoiler). I steered clear of the usual places this time around and was able to avoid the problem. I don't think this will be an issue for the MCU for a long time, since culmination films like this are only going to reach a fever pitch after long intervals (a reality the comicbook industry has failed to learn, ie, Marvel's yearly events). As for how long that will be, the Thanos-narrative took seven or eight years (depending on when you believe Marvel decided to go with the Infinity Gauntlet story), so while that doesn't dictate how things will be in the future (especially since when it started Marvel was making two films a year and soon they will be doing four along with Disney+), but I'd think no sooner than five.

Two pieces of casting news for The Eternals have come out:

• 1) Umberto Gonzalez is reporting Korean star Ma Dong-seok has landed an undisclosed role--given how badly Umberto bungled the Katherine Langford scoop, we have to take this with a grain of salt
• 2) THS is adding details to its story from March about the film looking to cast a gay role with a gay actor: at the time they guessed this would be Hercules, but THS' own Charles Murphy says that's not the case and that Hercules may not even be in the film (an ironic pronouncement since he started that rumour). The role is for a character named "James" who is "intellectual, emotional, and has a strong sense of family." They are looking to cast an Asian actor and THS says that the lead option is Conrad Ricamora. It's difficult to match this character description to anyone on the cast list (meaning he could be in a supporting role, which would also contradict the initial THS report that said he was a lead)

Murphy continues to insist that Shang-Chi is going to be filming in Australia this summer rather than The Eternals, but I'm not clear on why. If it is Marvel has done a much better job hiding the casting for the film, because it would be the only one among the three in production (including Black Widow) that has had no leaks whatsoever.

In an interview with the LA Times Tessa Thompson said she'd heard rumours there was a pitch for a fourth Thor film--this matches hints from both Chris Hemsworth (in 2018 and then after Endgame's release) and Taika Waititi (2017) about it (their quotes via the link). Where there's smoke, there's fire, and I've been assuming we'll get another film with Thor ever since Ragnarok. Endgame also implies Thor will be in Guardians 3, which I hope is true since the change in his character suits that franchise extremely well.

A dead Twitter account (lasting all of a few days in December) from Roger Wardell had credible scoops for Endgame, such that I think the rest of his speculation is worth addressing:

• Black Knight in film

This was echoed by a 4chan post a month later, but as a potential Disney+ show (which was then presented as a scoop by Jeremy Conrad without referencing either source).

• Power Pack/Ms Marvel likely as shows

Feige has mentioned being fond of the former for years; he's also confirmed Kamala Khan appearing (the time jump in Endgame speeds up her arriving), but beyond that there have been no specifics (although both could easily work as shows, even if I have negligible interest in the former).

• A Thunderbolts film featuring: Zemo (Civil War), Ghost (Ant-Man and the Wasp), Justin Hammer (Iron Man 2), General Ross (Hulk), Abomination (Hulk), and the Leader (Hulk)

Rumours about this kind of film have been floating around for a very long time, spiced up by James Gunn admitting an interest back in 2014 (undoubtedly this transitioned into Suicide Squad nicely for him). There are contracts in place for many of the actors, but as yet there's nothing firm about it. I'm hesitant to accept the lineup here, but the general idea is plausible. I'm not sure if having Ross at Tony's funeral in Endgame is a nod to his future use or simply one to The Incredible Hulk (ala Harley Keener appearing in that scene for Iron Man 3).

In all these instances Wardell says that they are being discussed, not that they are specifically going to happen--this is an important distinction to keep in mind.

iHorror is reporting New Mutants has been delayed again, their source saying:

They want to wait until the merger is completed before they make decisions about the release of certain films, including The New Mutants.  The new release date will be far away from August.  Nothing else is known at this point. This makes perfect sense and, if true, is probably the end of the film as a theatrical release.

I have no idea how reliable iHorror is, but a delay (if not outright shelving) of the film would not be surprising.

With a 40% drop in viewership The Gifted has been cancelled. I believe that while Marvel Entertainment (which runs the TV shows that aren't on Disney+) will continue to have shows on Hulu, the number will be small and (once Agents of SHIELD ends) that will be the only network it's involved with. Personally, I don't see the point of disconnected elements of Marvel.

I've been mentioning Shazam's box office for awhile (346 million currently), due to the endless stream of articles and videos proclaiming it a great success. Where does the film fit on the scale of major comicbook movies since Iron Man? I have the MCU in green, DC in red, Fox in blue, and Sony remains black:
1. Infinity War 2.04
2. Avengers 1.51
3. Age of Ultron 1.4
4. Black Panther 1.34
5. Iron Man 3 1.21
6. Civil War 1.15
7. Aquaman 1.14
8. Captain Marvel 1.1
9. The Dark Knight Rises 1.08
10. The Dark Knight 1.0
11. Spider-Man: Homecoming 880
12. Batman v Superman 873
13. Guardians of the Galaxy 2 863
14. Venom 855
15. Thor: Ragnarok 853
16. Wonder Woman 821
17. Deadpool 2 785 (this includes Once Upon a Deadpool)
18. Deadpool 783
19. Guardians of the Galaxy 773
20. The Amazing Spider-Man 757
21. Days of Future Past 747
22. Suicide Squad 746
23. Winter Soldier 714
24. Amazing Spider-Man 2 708
25. Doctor Strange 677
26. Man of Steel 668
27. Justice League 657
28. Thor: The Dark World 644
29. Iron Man 2 623
30. Ant-Man and the Wasp 622
31. Logan 619
32. Iron Man 585
33. Apocalypse 543
34. Ant-Man 519
35. Thor 449
36. The Wolverine 414
37. Captain America 370
38. First Class 353
39. Shazam 346
40. The Incredible Hulk 263
41. Green Lantern 219
42. The Fantastic Four 168

It will finish as one of the poorest performing comicbook films in years and the lowest in the DCEU by a considerable margin. I remain baffled that no one seems to want to discuss why it only worked in North America (I can find exactly one video looking at its performance). I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here and I will be letting it go, but that lack of reflection is puzzling--I'm genuinely curious why industry people think something so safe and critically praised tanked like this (my theory is the target audience was wrong--making it a straight-up kids movie killed it).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Avengers: Endgame Thoughts and Reviewing Predictions

Endgame: Initial Thoughts

SPOILERS ahead

Prior to seeing Endgame I watched through the entire MCU catalogue (something I've never done before); it was the first time I'd seen The Incredible Hulk (which wasn't as bad as I'd imagined, but it's not a good film). I've seen Endgame once and I'm still processing it. Right now I'd call it a great film--it didn't hit me quite the way Infinity War did, perhaps because I've been covering it so intensely. As a send off for the three phases of the MCU it made some bold choices and, with one exception, I think they were good choices. The film was much funnier than expected, but that didn't detract from its emotional beats. Did we feel the impact of Infinity War? I think we did. Was there character progression for the main characters? Absolutely--of the OG Avengers only Black Widow doesn't get an arc in the film. Were the deaths dramatically effective? I think so, even if (again) there was one that leaves me baffled. Has the film successfully concluded Marvel's opening phase while also setting up its future? The former absolutely, while with the latter is more of a mixed bag. Speaking of characters, the Russo's have a gift at making underwhelming or underused characters shine, and in this we get the best version of Frigga in this film (alas we didn't get the same treatment for Valkyrie, who remains bland, although burying her on the throne is one way to deep-six her as a major ingredient in the MCU-films).

That said, any film that's three hours long is going to be called slow (just like any Netflix series with 13-episodes is going to be called too long), but the pacing was fine. Like any conclusion it attracts criticism (64-years later and people still make jokes about the eagles in The Lord of the Rings). What's it's not is a disappointing or underwhelming end of an era--it's not the Matrix sequels, it's not The Dark Knight Rises, it's not Spider-Man 3, X-Men: The Last Stand, etc.

A more general thought: this earns the right to not simply be Infinity War 2--it does so because the film isn't really about Thanos, it's about undoing what he does with the Gauntlet--about saving those who were lost. In that sense past-Thanos is simply another obstacle (a formidable one), but not the main antagonist--the problem of the film is bringing the Snapped back.

A few other random observations: I enjoyed the Russo's making use of one of the comics bigger boondoggles of having Cap be a secret Hydra agent--that little nod, so perfect for the context of the film, is the only positive way to use that idea. Speaking of Steve Rogers, the assumption is that he's done as Cap--he's old, Evans wants a break, etc--is overblown. If the MCU ever wants to, bringing him back isn't that hard--he's been de-aged in the comics before (or we could see time travel), so while it's more likely Evans won't return, he still could since he wasn't killed off.

Uncertainties/Disappointments

There's no such thing as a perfect film and Endgame has a few elements that stand out to me as either problems or disappointments (some of which may be resolved in the future):

• 1) Black Widow's death: it struck me as a poor end for the character--yes, she pays back her debt to Clint in a way, but how does that move her character forward? She'd already repaid him by becoming a better person
• 2) How can a Black Widow movie happen if she's dead? We've had endless rumours it's a prequel (originating with former THSer Charles Murphy, who has a good track record), but how trivial is that going to be if we never see the impact of whatever that film is trying to do? If this is as straightforward as it seems it will be the first MCU film I have no interest in since Ed Norton's Incredible Hulk (keeping in mind there might have been foreshadowing via Banner's comment at the end of Endgame about really trying to bring her back)
• 3) Cap's time travel feels a bit wonky--the theory is he lives with Peggy in a separate timeline until she dies of natural causes and then travels back to his own timeline as old man Cap to give up the shield to Falcon--it's an odd approach, although it does give him his happy ending
• 4) The five-year jump--how will that work exactly? Those who survived the Snap have aged and those who haven't, haven't, which is a little odd (not necessarily the biggest of deals, just one I wonder if the future films will deal with at all)
• 5) Lack of mid/post-credit scene: I understand the logic of leaving them out, but they are such a hallmark of the MCU that I was disappointed to not see one

Reflections on My Predictions

There were three notable things that I got right:
1) The death of Tony Stark (which I predicted all the way back in March of last year); I was by myself predicting this up until December (other than a 4chan Far From Home scoop in May)
2) Cap wouldn't die (I suggested retirement, although I did not imagine how he'd give up the shield)--this went against an avalanche of popular opinion that was sure Steve Rogers would die heroically in the film.
3) There would be no use of B.A.R.F. tech (something I long suspected was a plant by the Russo's to spread disinformation); the biggest advocate of this was Charlie Schneider, who, given the size of his audience, is significant.

There are plenty of things I got wrong, with the biggest being the Stark Gauntlet--a very popular theory (including a toy leak which was real, despite my doubts), but one I thought in-universe was unlikely (it was hard to figure out who could handle the Power Stone or who could wield the Gauntlet--the film's solution was that no one directly handles the former except Thanos, and that using the Gauntlet nearly kills Hulk and does kill Tony). Another, and I'll gladly eat humble pie here, was rejecting the legendary five-year gap (most prominently pushed by Jeremy Conrad & his buddy Daniel). I thought Jeremy's evidence for it was weak, but within the film's narrative it makes sense, making room for: Kamala Khan, Stature (Cassie Lang), Kate Bishop, etc (it's good for successor/inheritor characters). Going back to Jeremy, the evidence prior to the film was weak (it was never clear to me that the universe would stay five years in the future). I wonder if he or (more probably) Daniel had some fragment of insider knowledge; regardless, we can remove that as an error from Conrad's track record (as well as the strike against him believing Frank Grillo's walked-back claim that there would be a new (black) Captain America).

Reflections on Leaks/Predictions from Others

We'll colour code this to break up the wall of text; those coded red are completely wrong, those coded orange are partially correct, and those in green are completely correct:

Jeremy Conrad
The five-year jump

Tony Stark's child would be sacrificed (initially saying it would be a young child and then suggesting that role would be Katherine Langford's--see below)

THS (That Hashtag Show - posts lost via a hack)
Emma Fuhrmann was in the film playing an aged-up Cassie Lang
Howard Stark would appear
The Wrap (Umberto Gonzalez)
Katherine Langford would appear in the film
Nerdist (post deleted afterwards)
Rocket and Hulk would form a bond/friendship--other than their brief mission to New Asgard, this isn't emphasized in the film (indeed, Thor is more his buddy)
News-catching Reddit Posts
Hela would appear (this included claims that people saw her on set)

The film would draw inspiration from Return of the King with Thor playing the role of Aragorn

News-catching 4chan Posts

January plot summary of the film was complete bunk
The most famous (infamous?) 4channer gets his own breakdown below (it's a mixed bag)
Actors
Frank Grillo: there would be a new, black, Captain America; Grillo also confirmed his own appearance
Tom Holland: Doctor Strange talks a lot about the Quantum Realm

Mark Ruffalo: the Ancient One would return

Ty Simpkins: Harley Keener would appear

Hayley Atwell denied being in the film
Aaron-Taylor Johnson denied being in the film

Popular Theories

The Soul Realm would appear/be involved
A link/hint of the X-Men/mutants*
Doctor Strange would help Tony & Cap's relationship
Ant-Man would appear far in the future and/or past before arriving at Avengers HQ (the infamous door cam video)
Quicksilver would return
Yondu would return

*I do wonder if the Snap, which generates a tremendous amount of energy, are what causes mutations

The Famous 4chan Post

This is the one Jeremy Conrad was promoting and I went over it a month ago:

• Iron Man reassembles the Avengers and decides to build his own Infinity Gauntlet to undo what Thanos did. They recruit Ant-Man to help them travel through time and space using the Quantum Realm to retrieve the Infinity Stones from different time periods. Thanos finds out about their plans and becomes hellbent on stopping them

It's actually Captain America who assembles the Avengers, but Tony does build his own Infinity Gauntlet with nanotech; the idea of undoing the Snap is Scott Lang's, who simply arrives rather than being recruited, but the plan and Thanos' pursuit is correct

• The movie revolves around the relationship between Captain America and Iron Man

This is incredibly generic and echoes frequent comments by the Russo's beforehand, so it's not really a prediction

• At one point, Captain America and Thor fight Thanos. Timeline alterations have restored Mjolnir, and Cap wields it against Thanos to allow the others to escape, and is killed holding Thanos off

The first part of this is true, the latter is not

• At one point, Hawkeye must protect the unfinished Stark Gauntlet from Thanos' minions. He plays an "instrumental" role in Thanos' defeat

The first part is true, the second is more ambiguous (what does Clint do directly to defeat him other than be part of a long chain of heroes who try, unsuccessfully, to prevent Thanos from grabbing the Gauntlet?)

• Thor's subplot centers on him assembling an army to challenge Thanos. Captain Marvel joins him

This is wrong on all points, as Doctor Strange gathers the army off screen at the end

• Hulk's subplot centers on Banner and Hulk finally merging to become Professor Hulk. He is the one that ultimately wields the Stark Gauntlet against Thanos, losing his arm in the process

The first part of this is wrong (Banner achieves harmony off-screen), the second is partially correct (he doesn't use it against Thanos, he simply uses it, nor does he lose his arm, it's simply badly injured)

• Nebula's subplot centers on her efforts to redeem herself. At one point, she fights her murderous past self

The first part is wrong (she's already redeemed), but the second is correct

• Several MCU movies are revisited and retconned (probably not permanently), such as the Avengers retrieving the Power Stone creating a timeline where the Guardians of the Galaxy never came together

This is completely wrong, as there are no ripples in time at all (we now have a Gamora from the past, but that has no impact on the existence of the Guardians at any point in the film)

• There's a pivotal scene between Doctor Strange and a fully CGI character being shot on a secret location, with a skeleton crew, and takes up a relatively sizeable portion of the budget.

This is also completely wrong; Strange barely appears and spends most of his time holding a water break

• Only two of the original Avengers [are] meant to survive the movie. Cap dies.

Completely wrong; only two die and Cap retires

• The title was Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet at one point, but it might be changed after Zoe Saldana accidentally leaked it

Kevin Feige has debunked this one--it was always Endgame

In total the poster got five things right, three partially right, and ten completely wrong. What the poster seems to have known is a rough outline of the plot with a selection of specifics that are hit and miss (mostly miss)--whether that's due to changes to the outline or the poster's own speculation we'll likely never know.

One final addendum, a guy called Roger Wardell (who I've never heard of), known via two apparently dead Twitter accounts (this seems to be the main and first one, but this has Reddit excited) seems like he knew some of Endgame's elements if it's accurate. I don't know how easy it is to fake Twitter dates, so I have to assume it's real for now--oddly this information did not circulate much despite containing a couple of juicy spoilers.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)