X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

Film: X-Men: Days of Future Past
Release: 2014, Theatrical
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Peter Dinkleage, James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence
Directed by: Bryan Singer
Previous in the series: The Wolverine
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: Years into the future, a race-based war between humans and mutants has thrown the would into chaos and the mutants on the border of extinction. As a last desperate measure, Wolverine is thrown into the mind of himself from 1973, to bring together the corner stones of the mutant civil war: Erik Lehnsherr and Charles Xavier.

Hans' thoughts: 

After bringing the series back from the brink of extinction with X-Men: First Class and The Wolverine, Bryan Singer is bringing us the brink of mutant extinction on the silver screen. With imagery mimicking the footage of the second world war, Singer shows us a dark and twisted future where apparently not only did most of the major cities get nearly destroyed - The sun decided to tone down its shining and draw all the color from the world till everything was a mix of black, grey and blue. Kidding aside, the movie does have a bit of a problem during the first 10 minutes of the movie. No re-introductions are served to an audience that's not seen most of these characters since X-Men: The Last Stand in 2006 and that gives us little time to get comfortable before a heavy amount of science fiction talk is thrown in our faces. This movie is mostly for those who has been along for the entire ride. Indeed, the only movie you don't expressively need to have seen before viewing is The Wolverine from last year.

 To audiences who remembers that far back, there's a nice reunion with Storm (Halle Berry), Shadowcat (Ellen Page), Iceman (Shawn Ashmore), Magneto (Ian McKellen), Professor X (Patrick Stewart) and of course Wolverine (Hugh Jackman). Unfortunately, while it's nice to see them all together again, they don't get to do much in the movie at all aside from a quick line of dialogue here and there and we just barely see them in action at all. Focus is instead on the younger versions of Professor X and Magneto - namely Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender). Thankfully, while the dark and grim future of the old actors doesn't have much going on - the movie picks up greatly once we actually have Wolverine in the 70's meeting the younger versions of both the aforementioned two gentlemen and also a certain supporting castmember we've not heard from since X-Men 2. Staying around from First Class we also have Beast (Nicholas Hoult) and as the big turning point of the movie we have the return of Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. 

In the past era which spins most of the movie, the pace is quickly picked up. References to the major lore of the X-Men franchise is thrown at the audience and Peter Dinkleage does a great job as the scientist Dr. Trask. Indeed the very color defined imagery of the future stands as a direct opposite to very alive world of the past. One of the things that's been discussed a lot about the movie is the inclusion of Quicksilver, here played by Evan Peters. The movie seems to have a lot of fun with the concept of an incredibly speedy character and at least one moment had most of the theater bursting with laughter - The ball is in your court Marvel Studios. However like most of the X-Men movies before, this movie doesn't do team focus very well and the main part of the movie is therefore bounced between McAvoy's Xavier and Lawrence's Mystique, with Jackmans' Wolverine serving as the audience point of view. 

On the other hand, something the X-Men movies have always done very well is special effects and once again the effects are in tip top shape to show us the spectacle of just what these characters are capable of. A character I've sadly been missing from the other movies has been Beast and Hoult gets to completely beast out in this movie and actually do some action scenes of his own. X-Men: Days of Future Past is not the greatest of the bunch by any means. Lawrence does not feel like she's particularly interested to be in the movie with most of the returning cast members from the original trilogy. Dinklage's Trask rarely speaks at all which is a major problem considering his status in the film. McAvoy and Fassbender and Hoult all do perfectly great in the movie with Fassbender once again bringing in the bacon with his menacing Magneto. McKellen and Stewart are criminally underused, with McKellen only uttering one or two lines in the entire film. Why they were brought in at all is a mystery. Jackman does as good as always with his portrayal of Wolverine; it's strange they decided to once again throw main focus on him because in the original comic Shadowcat was the one to go back in time. The one piece of expository dialogue we never got was how the time travel stuff actually came into the posession of our heroes but that's just kinda thrown to the wind. There's also focus on a cameo character who nobody who hasn't read the comics or watched X2 lately will actually recognizw due to him only being recognizable by his last name. However it does what it came to do - give us the big rewind so we're ready for the next full-cast action blast. As an action movie it has some spectacular effects to latch onto. It makes for some great entertainment value as well, as a reunion movie however it kinda fails in not letting the old folks have that much to say or do. Whether this was due to budgetary restraints is anyone's guess but it's still a shame.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Film: Captain America: The Winter Soldier
Release: 2014, theatrical
Starring: Chris Evans, Robert Redford, Scarlett Johansson
Directed by: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: After a black-ops operation on a hijacked U.S. ship, Captain America starts having doubts about the integrity of S.H.I.E.L.D. as an organization and he soon discovers that maybe modern day America isn't as black and white as the world he came from.

Hans' thoughts:

When you summarize the names of superheroes that will do well internationally in your head "Captain America" is scarcely the first one that comes to mind. Grounded deeply in the American reaction to the Second World War, the character was created basically as a propaganda piece to sell warbonds. One of the most well-known images of the character is simply him giving Adolf Hitler a punch to the jaw. However Captain America: The First Avenger actually turned out to be one of the more well received entries in what is now named "Phase one" of the shared Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), consisting of (in order of continuity): Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger and ending with The Avengers in 2012. So far "Phase two" of the MCU is also looking decent enough, while Iron Man 3 received some critical panning and the tie-in TV-show "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." has been deemed a failure by many fans Thor: The Dark World was considered one of the best entries to date. So how does The Winter Soldier hold up? Surprisingly well actually. 

Unlike Iron Man 3, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is very scarce in referencing the events of The Avengers, instead The Winter Soldier gives us a more in-depth look at the intelligence bureau known as S.H.I.E.L.D. Where our titular hero portrayed by Chris Evans, a man of simple values and straightforward methods, is having trouble fitting in with the methods of his secretive boss Nick Fury, portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson. Evans portrayal of Cap is as good as ever, his arc in this movie is very much about having old world viewpoints in a new world and while the actor himself turns in a good performance, and the writing is actually really good. I can't let the fact go however, that his costume has never really been all that good in any of the movies thus far and unfortunately it's the same case this time around. Costume designers seem to just be unable to get it to look good, and that makes total sense since the original Captain America suit was designed in the 1940's and has seen little to no updates in the years since then. This time they decided to make his ears be free from the hood part of the suit and unfortunately that makes them seem huge. I quickly got used to it, but in the first few moments of the movie I had to remind myself that this was not a comedy. The movie has a lot of returning actors and it works to the advantage of the piece, as instead of throwing a lot of new things at us we have the growth of already established characters with the exception of newcomer Sam Wilson, portrayed by Anthony Mackie. Mackie fits right in with the old cast however, and quickly sets up himself as another well-known Marvel character. His special effects are actually done really well and though his action scenes in full get-up are few they are very enjoyable and doesn't take away focus from the main cast - though unfortunately his costume design for this movie follows the Hollywood trend of removing as many colors as possible from superhero get-ups as was the case for the MCU's version of Hawkeye. The other newcomer is seasoned veteran Robert Redford as the chairman of S.H.I.E.L.D. and he has a lot of great moments in the movie. His portrayal made one of the twists of the movie all the more surprising. Scarlett Johanson returns as Black Widow, once again showing new sides of the character and seems to just have a lot of fun portraying the character. Nevermind the fact that she's not held back by a tacked on romantic sub-plot that probably would've been present in a lesser movie. Black Widow is thus far the only female superhero set up in the MCU, but she can definitely stand toe to toe with the likes of both much more seasoned actors Samuel L. Jackson and Robert Redford. 

The elephant in the room in this review thus far is of course The Winter Soldier himself, this is not because of his portrayal (the character is actually done a lot of justice and I enjoyed every single scene he was in) but because his identity is supposed to be a complete secret. Rest assured Marvel fans, there's no big fake out moments here as was the case with The Mandarin in Iron Man 3. More than that I'm not really willing to say, even though promotional material for the movie has not been all that secretive I feel that non-comic book nerds should discover this awesome plot twist for themselves. So there's that. Moving on to the action of the movie, it has a fair amount of "shaky cam". Meaning of course that the camera is moved frequently in the film to up the intensity of some of the scenes. Unfortunately it makes some scenes fairly hard to follow and I heard complaints from one of my companions that he could barely see what was going on in some of the bigger action scenes at all. It's a big shame because on the other hand the hand-to-hand combat scenes are really good and the choreography makes the action in these scenes seem very intense without needing the added effects of shaking the camera. 

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a much more eventful movie than its already strong predecessor and stands as a testament to the really great thing Marvel Studios has going at the moment proving that the high quality of "phase one" wasn't a complete freak of nature. The special effects of the movie are great, even if we're not able to see as many of them as we would like due to the rapid camera movement and the writing of the story is spot on - taking one of the major plotlines of Captain America's comic line and updating it for modern movie going audiences and the setting of the MCU.

Story-liners: Lego Marvel Super Heroes (2013)

Game: Lego Marvel Super Heroes
Release: 2013, Retail
System: Playstation 3, Playstation 4, Playstation Vita, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Wii U, Nintendo 3DS, PC
Starring: Adrian Pasdar, John Eric Bentley, James Arnold Taylor
Directed by: Mark Hoffmeier
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: When The Silver Surfer is shot down on his trip to earth, his cosmic board scatters into powerful cosmic blocks. It becomes a race against time, when Earth's Mightiest Heroes are fighting the greatest villains in the Marvel universe, led by Doctor Doom, to stop them from using the new blocks for their nefarious purposes.

Hans' thoughts:

Lego Games. Starting with the Lego Star Wars games, the game company Travellers Tales has managed to turn simple retellings of movie storylines into both a major marketing success and a series of genuinely well-made childrens platformers. This game is the third of their licensed to be based on an original tale, following the two Lego Batman games. The game is pretty much the same formula from the previous Lego games overall, carrying over the open world hub and voiced cut-scenes from Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes. Thankfully, while the appearances of other superheroes in Lego Batman 2 amounted to not much more than cameos (save for the case of Superman) Lego Marvel Superheroes benefits from it's title not being bound to a single character. Besides the "must show" characters made popular by The Avengers movie, we have a surprising amount of lesser-known characters making an appearance in the game. I was actually baffled by how little the game banks on using characters and situations similar to the films. Of course you can't go completely without it and jokes like Nick Fury constantly eating Shawarma, or animations like Hulk throwing his enemies in a similar fashion to his most memorable moment in The Avengers can be found throughout the title, some of running gags are based on exaggerating the characters which means that they can become kind of grating on the nerves after a while. There are only so many times you want to hear Captain America make a pun based on his patriotism. Characters having a large part in the story is mainly that of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Captain America.. and then out of nowhere: Reed Richards aka. Mister Fantastic. While not too obscure, it has been quite a while since The Fantastic Four made a major appearance in contemporary media. It just goes to show that the writers has not allowed themselves to be held back by a memo from the marketing depart which, considering the state of the competition over at DC, is really refreshing. The game even has some boss fights featuring lesser known Marvel villains. 

The look of the game, as you may have guessed, is entirely based on Lego's. In the former titles it could look very much off a times but thankfully this time around the higher quality graphics has really helped in making the game actually look and feel like you're looking at the toys interacting with the environments. The voice work of the game is, while not quite up to snuff at times, never too bad. The best one is Clark Gregg, once again reprising his role as Agent Coulson. I have to admit that I have never been much of a fan of the character but it is nice to have him around none the less. There is the occasional line from the others, especially the female actor for Maria Hill, that is read rather mechanically, but it never to the point where you are pulled out of your engagement in just how fun the simplistic controls for the game is. This is a major strong point for the lego games, when you have completed the main story once you're able to unlock tons of well-known characters and collectibles. There are hours to be spent on the game if you're going after 100%. A new addition to the game is additional side-stages, all narrated in comic book fashion by the fan-favorite character Deadpool, who sadly doesn't make an appearance in the main story aside from a small cameo. In the side-stages, you're exposed to mini-stories like The Vulture & Howard The Duck attacking Marvel Studios. These small amounts of Deadpool are at the very least fun to listen to, and of course he's also available as a unlockable character once you've completed the storyline. 

This game, while not encompassing ALL of the Marvel universe (Let's face it, that would be a 50+ hour game) it does manage to make the characters very approachable to even the untrained fan. For the bigger true believers, there are fun meta-gags scattered throughout the game which I'm sure you'll pick up on right away. To me, this was the game at it's finest. Jokes about recurring character tropes, fun (if repetitive) banter from bystanders and a story which managed to only become better and better as the story went along. All the major Marvel villains make a noteworthy appearance, and while it's kinda obvious what the end-game of the villains is, it still makes for a great moment when the jig is up and our heroes have to fight the big bad that's been looming over the story ever since before the title screen. The twists and turns the story makes to include as many well-established Marvel locals as possible also makes for a welcome surprise. There are a few places I would've loved to have seen (such as the African nation Wakanda) but on the other hand, forcing such places into the story would probably have made it suffer from it. As it is, most of the story takes place in the hometown of most of the Marvel superheroes: New York city. While I very much doubt that the interpretation of the city is accurate at all (I've never been there), the map is big enough to make it feel like you're actually making your way through a big city. MArvel Superheroes manages to give a quick introduction to a beloved group of characters, while still telling a fun story. the question "I wonder who's gonna turn up next" is probably gonna be on your mind as you play through this simple, yet enjoyable experience.

Series of Events: LEGO Marvel Super Heroes: Maximum Overload (2013)

There's no cover for this release!

Series: Lego Marvel Superheroes: Maximum Overload
Release: 2013, Online
Starring: Laura Bailey, Dee Bradley Baker, Troy Baker
Directed by: Greg Richardson
Website: Link opens in a new window
Description: Bored by what's on TV in Asgard, Loki the god of Mischief decides to amplify the superpowers of the Marvel villains by using a mysterious force called the Nornfrost, 8 out of 9 realms don't recommend it.

Hans' thoughts:

A surprise entrance to the animated TV world is that of Lego, the well-known building blocks. While definitely varying in quality, Lego has had very good success in it's licensed video game series. The next release coming up is "Lego Marvel Super heroes" and taking an early step into the franchise we have a comedic mini-series, released for free on Marvel's own youtube channel for anyone to see, as well as being cut together into a 20 minute movie on Netflix. Every episode varies around the 5 minute mark and features Loki "overloading" a Marvel villain from his hidden palace in Asgard.

The series showcases a short, but sweet look at the kind of writing that's probably to be expected in the upcoming video game. As with Lego Batman: The Movie: DC Super Heroes Unite they're animated based on the Lego mini-figures. While an obvious ploy to make people buy the video game and by possible expansion they toys it's based on, I would be lying if I said the series was "bad". No, it's actually pretty funny. While nothing too advanced (as I said, it's 5 very short episodes) I found myself being kind of invested in the plot nevertheless. Most of the series focuses on the antics of Loki in his palace and curiously they've decided to give him Chitauri henchmen. While very generic in The Avengers, the chitauri becomes the center for some of the funniest moments in the series. Another focus in the series is Spider-Man, seemingly voiced by the person who voices him in the Ultimate Spider-man TV-show. He does a well enough job, however you can tell that the writers decided to focus more on making fun of him rather than have him be funny himself. Most of the other Marvel characters are given mostly what amounts to cameos, some larger than others. 

Short, sweet, funny and best of all: Free! Marvel Super Heroes: Maximum Overload is recommended  for anyone who wants a funny little Marvel fix to hold them over until the release of the upcoming video game or those who just wants a laugh overall. It knows exactly what it is, it doesn't try to hide it by somehow being serious and it doesn't overstay it's welcome.

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Film: Thor: The Dark World
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Christopher Eccleston, Anthony Hopkins
Release: 2013, theatrical
Directed by: Alan Taylor
Previous in the series: Thor
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: Picking up 2 years after the events in New Mexico, Thor is busy keeping the peace in the nine realms. Meanwhile on Earth, a disillusioned Jane Foster stumbles upon a dormant power from the time when the universe began.

Hans' thoughts:

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the best way to make a good sequel is to take the established setting, expand upon it and amplify everything that's great about it without rehashing the plot-points of its predecessor. Thus we now have Thor: The Dark World. 

So our villain this time is the old race of dark elves, lead by the world-weary King Malakith played by Christopher Eccleston, he plays a very troubled character . As far as villains go, the dark elves are very cool. The Frost giants of the first movie were very much just big blue monsters but the dark elves actually seem like a genuine threat. No one is prepared for their actions and they are completely untraceable - able to strike whenever they would please. Overall, the movie is just much larger in scale. Instead of setting most of the movie in the New Mexican desert with just one big baddie, most of the action film consists of war-like battles, with footsoldiers on both sides. Something they have, perhaps thankfully, toned down is the humoristic aspect. A lot of Thor was him being a fish out of water in the human world and the comedy came from people reacting to him or him misunderstanding the nature of the world he was thrown into. Don't get me wrong, The Dark World certainly has some comedic moments but I felt they worked a lot better this time because they weren't so predictable or thrown in so abruptly. There's not much winking at the audience going "get it?" in this movie.

Most of the film doesn't take place on Earth this time around, instead we are given a much more insightful look in the land of Asgard. This is great because while Asgard certainly looked cool in first movie, most of what we got to see were throne rooms and chambers from Odin's palace. Here we are taken on a small tour around a bit more of the world. This movie also shows us some of the other realms besides the ones we've already seen. The scale feels much grander this time around and It's possible the movie has taken cues from the likeness of Peter Jackson's "Lord of The Rings" movies. Imaginative combinations of science fiction and fantasy as well as some pretty cool designs for the villains our hero encounter, even the minor ones look fairly interesting. In stark contrast is the scenes taking place on Earth. Jane Foster has moved from the desert to the city of London, meaning we also get something at least a little more interesting to look at than in the previous film. All the supporting characters return from the previous film, including the humans who actually gets something to do rather than commenting on the things that transpires around them.

This is one of the best changes from the former movie, while there certainly were a supporting cast in the film they didn't get all that much to do. Most of the original movie were about the characters of Thor and Loki and their sibling rivalry. In this movie the other characters become involved in the adventure, Jane Foster becomes one of the major driving forces for the plot and the relationships between the characters also feel more believable. Tom Hiddleston returns once again as the villain Loki and once again he steals even scenes where he isn't the main focus. We explore more of his relationship with the rest of the family and as with the other movie, this also factors into the events of the film. That isn't to say that he's the only great actor in this piece, Chris Hemsworth has really grown into the role of Thor and he really hits it out of the park in some of his scenes. This is probably due to a much more reserved performance, Thor is no longer the boastful prince of Asgard and for those of us that's followed him throughout all his appearances it is easily recognizable that he has gone through character development. Just like with the Iron Man films, the character development isn't over by the end of the film but you can easily see a change from the beginning of the characters first appearance and to his current adventures. This kind of slow but steady character development is what makes these characters interesting to follow even after several movies. 

Speaking of the other movies, it was a breath of fresh air after Iron Man 3 that the movie didn't rely on everyone having seen The Avengers. One of Iron Man 3's greatest weaknesses was it's constant references to "New York", referring to the climax of The Avengers. Here, the event is definitely mentioned but no more than one or two times. An unfortunate lowpoint however is the reliance on the audience believing the relationship between Thor and Jane Foster. The former movie took place over the span of three days and then they were suddenly in love, akin to what one could call the "Disney Princess romance". This is sort of repeated in this film, while I certainly like the pairing of Thor and Jane I would like their relationship to be expanded upon a little more than is the case in both of these movies. Compare it to the how well done the relationship between Tony Stark and Pepper Potts is done in the Iron Man movies, Tony repeatedly makes mistakes and has to make it up for Pepper in the Iron Man films, whereas in this case it seems the romance between Thor and Jane is way too perfect. Anyone who've been in a relationship with the same person more than once could tell you that the pieces aren't picked up quite as easily as this movie would have you believe. The film seems somewhat self-aware of this though, as a comedic jab at those kinds of love stories are made later in the film. 

If you were bored with the pacing of the original film, rest assured that Thor: The Dark World is a much bigger movie and better for it, albeit much information is thrown at you during the movie it manages to keep focus on the main plot, and keeping all the different strings together in one place. If you liked the former movie, I'm sure you'll enjoy this one as well: We get more facetime with each character and we learn much more of the nature of the setting of the story. With higher stakes, deeper characters and much more action, Thor: The Dark World may very well end up being one of the better movies in the shared universe franchise.

The Avengers (2012)

Film: The Avengers
Release: 2012, Theatrical
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Scarlett Johanson, Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Jeremy Renner
Directed by: Joss Whedon
Next in the series: The Avengers: Age of Ultron
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: At a secret underground facility, The international agency S.H.I.E.L.D. has hired the brilliant Dr. Erik Selvig to develop a sustainable energy source from the mystical tesseract, used by The Red Skull during the second world war, however things turn sour when the tesseract reacts to something not of this world.

Hans' thoughts:

Perhaps one of the greatest gambles in movie making history, The Avengers is the culmination of what is now known as the first "phase" in a large shared universe project for in-house adaptations of various Marvel comics superheroes. The "phase" in this case being the movies that tie in with this one, starting with Iron Man, followed by The Incredible Hulk, then Iron Man 2, Thor and finally Captain America: The First Avenger. All good movies in their own right, this film stands in front of the enormous task of making a satisfactory climax to all the little hints and after-credits scenes that the former movies has made - Iron Man 2 as an example suffered under almost completely being a trailer for this movie. The film is headed by one of the "Kings of the Nerds", Joss Whedon, creator, director and writer of several big name movies and tv-series that have frankly waved between being fantastic and being all style and no substance. 

One could argue in this particular case, the writers pretty much had their work cut out for them beforehand. Most of the characters (with only one notable exception) has not only been established in former films, but films that all sold exceptionally well in theatres meaning they can rely on everyone knowing exactly who the characters are coming into the movie. This makes the entire movie feel like a 2 and a half hour third act, giving us our very first action scene by the 3 minute point. Fans are of course quickly given exactly what they came for, not much time is wasted one explaining why all these characters would be in the place at the same time and our heroes are all pretty much introduced by what we best know them for. Bruce Banner is on the run from the government, Iron Man is out doing something scientific, Capt. America spends his time punching stuff and Thor is introduced with a thunder storm. When they're mentioned in passing, the audiences know exactly what kind of scene is coming up next: "Ladies and gentlemen, now Robert Downey Jr. will say something funny", "give a big hand to Chris Evans being stoic and old fashioned" is what they pretty much could've been said outright by Samuel L. Jackson whose appearance as Nick Fury pretty much works as the stage announcer. It's like a rock band playing their greatest hit as their opening act as the lights are turned on.

The movie doesn't leave you much time to actually think about several missing plot points between the former movies and this one you're quickly distracted by all the things that are constantly thrown at you, to it's credit, the film indulges the fans in both the "who would win in a fight between.." and "Wouldn't it be cool if.." department, the very recognizable nature of the different characters also make them visible even when the action sequences falls victim to modern technique of "shaky-cam". This kind of thing was a big problem in films like The Transformers movies where you literally couldn't tell which giant robot was fighting which but the looks and designs of the costumes of the characters are kept so true to form that it doesn't pose a problem in this instance. Not much time is spent on character development as the little downtime the movie actually has is spent on quarrels between the teammates or someone relaying exposition. The movie actually spends most of it's lines on short immediate exposition to make the audience ready for what is coming next. Introductions between the characters are pretty much reduced to "Hey, aren't you that guy in the metal armor?" "Yeah and I heard you turn big and green sometimes". It feels unnatural but it's pretty easy to understand why they did it this way: Audiences already know all the big name characters and the writers know that they have to give people what they came to see. While it certainly works for most of the established characters, the character of Clint Barton aka. Hawkeye poses a problem in that regard. Aside from a single scene in the Thor movie, audiences are never really introduced to who Hawkeye is. All we really know is that he's a guy who prefers using a bow to using a gun. This is not helped much in the movie, as he spends most of the film being mind controlled by the movie's villain. We know nothing about the character, so rooting for him when he joins the big climactic fight at the end is neigh impossible unless you know the character from other media.

On the other end of the spectrum we have The Incredible Hulk, Mark Ruffalo being the third person to play the character in the span of merely ten years and the second person to play him in the Marvel Shared Universe continuity. The last person before Ruffalo to play Bruce Banner was Edward Norton, an award winning and hugely popular actor, so Ruffalo stood before the task of being accepted by audiences in a role that has not seen much stability. This is very reminiscent of the comic book Bruce Banner as different writers also tended to treat the character very differently, some having the Hulk persona take over entirely for extended periods of time to simple not deal with having to write drama for the character. Thankfully, Ruffalo does a very good job of making a very withdrawn but hot-headed professor, nervously joking about his condition as a means to cope with the stressful situations he's put into. That combined with his version of the Hulk being the most entertaining thing in the movie, makes sure he more than lives up to taking up "the mantle", if you will. Though it does seem like The Incredible Hulk, incredibly shrunk sometime between it's appearances. The movie, as I said, doesn't go into much detail during it's explanations and one can't help but ask: Where was Col. Rhodes aka. Warmachine who had his origin story in Iron Man 2 during this entire debacle? The question is pretty much ignored in both this film and Iron Man 3. We're just asked to accept that a government agency would rather ask for the help of a loose cannon billionaire than an actual military officer who has a very similar suit of armor. 

On the villain side we have the least substance of all. As with the original first comic book appearance of The Avengers, our main villain is Loki the god of mischief. Tom Hiddleston reprises his role as the character from Thor and in this film he just seems a lot more threatening than his initial appearance. From his very first scene in the movie, he quickly shows off that he is clearly more than enough of a feat to have to be taken on by the entirety of Earth's Mightiest. However, It is never explained what happened between his final scene in the former film and how he ended up allying himself with such a powerful force - force of what exactly? This is the problem with having the film focusing mostly on spectacle, we know next to nothing about the alien race of "The Chitauri" (as race that was made up for the movie by the way) and why they have a reason for attacking the planet earth, instead we have an army of grey-ish monster beings that doesn't talk and pretty much works a living punching bags and cannon fodder for the writers to show off the heroes and their individual superpowers. Had it not been for the talent and charisma of Tom Hiddleston in the role of Loki, the villains of the movie had not been interesting at all. 

The Avengers, while perhaps one of the most accurate and entertaining comic book movies in recent years is a classic example of trading in substance for the sake of style and spectacle. What little drama there is in the movie is simply used as a catalyst for having the heroes go out and punch things and if you expected a film that would work well on it's own I'm sorry to disappoint. The Avengers is pretty much just one long third act of a much larger story, like the last episode of a season of a TV-show. Wrapping up the overarching immediate plot that's been developing little by little in the background throughout the last couple of episodes. Therefore it highly necessitates having watched one or more of the former films in order to be enjoyed properly. If you haven't, all you're left with is a series of spectacle scenes, really well shot and sometimes funny action scenes to be sure but you're not given much explanation for what is going on. For fans, the film is a dream come true: Actually seeing these characters fighting alongside each other in a movie that's not only accurate but actually entertaining and successful is something no one would've ever thought possible - be warned though, while fun and entertaining while you watch it it can pretty easily be picked apart in the plot department. I recommend this film by all means, but I also highly recommend watching the former films in the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" first to truly get the most of it.

Thor (2011)

Film: Thor
Release: 2011, Theatrical
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston
Directed by: Kenneth Branagh
Next in the series: Thor: The Dark World
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: When the arrogant prince of the asgardians nearly starts a war with Jotunheim, Odin strips him of his powers and sends him and the magical hammer Mjolnir to Earth as penance. Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of THOR.

Hans' thoughts:

Based on the Marvel comics interpretation of Norse mythology, Thor brings us a tale of a man who has to learn from the consequences of his actions. 

There's a sharp contrast

"Thor" in this movie is played by Chris Hemsworth, while he certainly looks like the Marvel version of Thor and does a very good job of playing the part (albeit I remember even the Marvel comics version of Thor as being a bit less serious) as a scandinavian I grew up on the Peter Madsen Valhalla comic books and seeing Thor as a big, ribbed, aryan man is just a bizarre contrast to the muscled-yet-potbellied redhead Thor that I grew up with. Okay granted, the two characters were designed with very different purposes in mind and interpreted by two very different artists. It's fun to see an international interpretation of something that's been a pretty big part of my life since I was a kid - norse mythology. Just like in the Marvel comics, all the Asgardian residents speaks in old english, this is why it's only fitting that the movie was directed by Kenneth Branagh who's traditionally known for adapting Shakespearian plays. His biggest project being a 4 hour adaptation of the entirety of Hamlet's original screenplay. That's quite the achievement and having someone who's known for such serious work is a neat contribution to the Marvel movie line-up. 

I don't think the comparison can be more blatant than this

It's also fitting in another regard as well, the Marvel comic book Thor is certainly named after and heavily based on norse mythology but some elements of his origin story are based on Arthurian legend. The hammer Mjolnir traditionally belongs only to Thor, however in the Marvel universe the mighty grinder can be wielded by anyone who's considered worthy enough - this is pretty much the same concept as the sword in the stone. Only the true king of Camelot could pull out the sword and be dubbed true lord of all England. We also have some Shakespearean dramatic elements in that while the story has superpowers and monsters such the story is ultimately a tale of neglect and betrayal - "a house divided cannot stand" as one would could put it. The design of Asgard in the movie are very outlandish, this is because the original Marvel design of Thor was done by Jack Kirby. Kirby was known for being able to create some very outlandish character designs, being responsible for co-creating most of the big-name Marvel comic creations such as Doctor Strange, Fantastic Four,  you can certainly see his special touch in this movie. He wasn't involved in making the film, having died several years previously but the creators decided to keep the character designs and set-pieces as true to the comic book version as possible, albeit adapted a tad to make it more approachable to modern audiences.

The throneroom of Odin as it appears in the movie

As for the actors, they all do a very good job. I'm actually thrown off by how convincingly these people can make the setting seem kinda plausible - given the circumstances of the costumes. Were anyone to nickname the Asgard segments of the movie, it would probably be "Shakespeare in silly hats". This is largely due to the talent of the Asgardian actors. While you cannot deny that the Earth based actors were certainly good (I especially liked Stellan Skarsgård as Erik Selvig) the asgardian cast just had two very good actors aboard. I'm of course talking of the star power of Anthony Hopkins combined with, the MVP of the movie, Tom Hiddleston. Tom Hiddleston portrays Loki, and really runs away with his performance. The character like the original mythic Loki in some regard but given the extra character depth of being the black sheep of his family, living in the shadow of his boastful favorited brother Thor. It's very similar to the Shakespearean character of Claudius. This comparison is obviously not lost on Kenneth Branagh and the confrontations between him and the other characters of the movie are just so well done. You can also tell that Hiddleston had a lot of fun with the character, the grin on his face when something finally goes his way is just priceless - it spells certain doom. While not as present, I also like the performance from Idris Elba as Heimdall, the guardian of Bifrost. He oozes authority and self-confidence, and really seems almost in-human in how stoic he is. This sounds like a hidden jab, but playing an almost completely emotionless character - intentionally. That is VERY hard to pull off, regardless of what anyone would tell you.

"Frost giants".

That aside, I was actually able to take the costumes seriously and I'm loving the updated look of especially Loki. Keeping it true to the original but still a bit more streamlined. I also dig that they actually decided to make the movie have colors, just like the rest of the in-house Marvel movie adaptations the movie didn't attempt to make itself more serious than it is by removing most of the colors from the character designs. Compare this to the X-Men movies that removed the individual costumes from the characters and instead gave them covert-ops type uniforms to walk around in. The earth sections of the movie takes place in a small desert town in New Mexico, the setting is a stark contrast to the colorful look of Asgard and really enforces the magic of the other world. You can instantly tell at any point in the movie when it is taking place on earth and when it is taking place in Asgard, this is helped by the earth sections being color-graded gray while the Asgard sections are color-graded orange/yellow. There is a third setting of the movie called Jotunheim, again contrasted to the others by being color-graded blue. However that entire setting is only present for about 15 minutes of the film combined, and is mostly set in shadows and at dusk. Frost giants, on a side note, is a horrible translation of "Jotun". Jotuns are nothing like giants. Though there are giant jotuns.. no wait, I'm getting off on a tangent here - Jotuns are not giants end of story.

I Thor, You Jane

As far as adaptations of mythology goes, this is a very inaccurate version. However, as far as comic book adaptations go this is pretty darn accurate. It sticks to the original looks of the characters, it doesn't add unnecessary extra drama to make itself more mature and on top of all that it manages to be fun to watch while still having some pretty serious elements to it. Thor is part of the Marvel cinematic universe and would be the first one to add a mystical element to the setting. Prior movies in the continuity having been mostly based on science fiction. Tom Hiddleston would also go on to be the best Marvel movie villain thus far, a man driven to desperate measures by a neglectful family is something anyone can relate to. However much you love your family, being a family can be hard and sometimes it just drives some people over an edge they cannot come back from. The lovestory present in the movie is, while very sweet a bit out of place given the rest of the movie. It falls into typical Disney romance territory when it comes to how short it is. For the purposes of establishing it as part of the Marvel lore however, I glad they kept it in, if anything to get a heartwarming break from all the drama of the Asgardian setting. While not the greatest superhero movie ever, it certainly deserves recognition as being a good movie. A fantasy adventure with a great hero and a greater villain.

The Wolverine (2013)

Film: The Wolverine
Release: 2013, theatrical
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Tao Okamoto, Rila Fukushima
Directed by: James Mangold
Previous in the series: X-Men: First Class
Next in the series: X-Men: Days of Future Past
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: Logan is in exile, haunted by memories of Jean Grey when he's approached by the young woman Yukio, her employer was saved by Logan during the Nagasaki bombing and wants to thank him before his impending death.

Hans' thoughts:

X-Men is one of those very long and complicated comic book series, always very reliant on drama. I consider it the hardest series to keep track off if you've been out of the loop for a while. Jokingly, you could call it the "Days of our Lives" of superhero comics. Of all the characters on this long running team, one of the arguably most popular is Wolverine. He's a tough, no-nonsense, animalistic warrior of a man. Armed with claws coming out of his fists and a regenerative ability making him nearly immortal. Which is why it makes sense that Wolverine got his own spin-off series, originally done by comic book superstar Frank Miller (Sin City, The Dark Knight Returns, 300) in a 12-issue mini-series. In it, Wolverine went to Japan, fighting as a sort of superpowered samurai against larger than life foes. This movie is based loosely on that series.

The same goes for the movies actually, The X-Men series might be the longest single run of movies based on a single superhero franchise thus far. What I'm trying to say is, you might want to brush up on the events of the original X-Men trilogy before choosing to see this movie. I saw a lot of people in the theatre mumbling confused to each other, some of them even ending up leaving the theatre. I personally didn't find the story all that hard to follow though.

Geeking out aside, this movie is in the upper half of the X-Men movie spectrum. X-Men and X-Men 2 were arguably the best ones, followed by First Class and now this one. Then you have X-Men: The Last Stand and in the far bottom X-Men Origins: Wolverine. So where does this differ from the other Wolverine centered movie? Well, while the former Wolverine movie was a prequel movie about his (very complicated) past, it actually didn't focus much on story. Instead it was just a series of action scenes with a loosely put together plot. This however, is an actual story. It has a beginning, a middle and an end. It doesn't feel the need to throw in action merely for the sake of action but instead it goes for making the events seem like natural results of what occurs on screen. If that makes a lick of sense. X-Men Origins: Wolverine also had a lot of cameos, the most infamous being that of popular team member Gambit, who were in the thing for about 5 minutes, seeming like he was there for the sake of putting a stop to the fanletters asking for him to make an appearance. Thankfully, this movie doesn't pull something like that either. If you're expecting something akin to the other X-Men movies, you're out of luck. This movie has a complete tonal shift from the others, being more akin to Japanese samurai movies. Of course it's rated PG-13 so it has a lot less blood splatter than an actual Japanese movie would have. It's overall darker, whereas the X-Men movies is pretty much "Look at all the cool stuff all these characters can do" with a lot of special effects and action this one doesn't actually as heavily on mere eye candy. No, this movie instead digs deep into the drama. This is something I've hoped for, for quite a long time.

Of course, this story also had a lot easier time being told. Wolverine's backstory has had an oceans worth of reboots. It seems like every new writer wants to offer their own take on what and who Wolverine is. With that out of the way however, there's no need to explain who Wolverine is. This is a sequel, and it rightly assumes that most of the audience knows the character. Though I would have preffered a big "2" on the end of the title, as to better inform audiences but that's a general pet peeve of mine. The story also has a pretty good twists, and some of the most fun action scenes the series has managed to put on screen in quite a while. Of course it has to be mentioned that yes, there is indeed shaky cam in this movie. However, aside from one scene inside a train (Where I had to squint to spot the action) I really didn't have any trouble seeing what was going on.

If you're like me and missed some substance to balance out the action in some of the former installments, rest assured. This is actually a good movie. I had a lot of fun watching it. It's also pretty entertaining if you just missed Hugh Jackman playing this character and needed your Wolverine fix in the waiting time for X-Men: Days of Future Past.

The Punisher (2004)

Film: The Punisher
Release: 2004, theatrical
Starring: Thomas Jane, Samantha Mathis, John Travolta
Directed by: Jonathan Hensleigh
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: After the murder of his entire family, Frank Castle gears up to take revenge on the drug lord who did it.

Hans' thoughts:

If you like over the top action movies with not much of a substantial story then this is definitely for you. This movie has chase sequences, hand to hand combat, knife fighting, explosions and of course guns. Lots of guns. 

Thomas Jane plays Frank Castle, the bad ass FBI agent on a never-ending search for a personality. In his arsenal he has a raspy voice, the ability to take disproportianate amounts of pain, high leveled car engineering, the ability to use almost any kind of weapon and of course A THIRST FOR VENGEANCE. No seriously, this guy is a walking arsenal. Apparently he can also speak a bunch of languages, the movie certainly keeps saying so, but that ability is demonstrated once in the first few minutes of the movie and never made use of again. This movie is very faithful to the Punisher comics, thing is, is that a good thing? You decide.

Yes, this movie is actually VERY comic book-y. The villains are archetypes at best and the character designs of some of these guys are just downright hilarious.

Okay, you found Waldo, now what?

I have to say, if you actually find yourself watching this movie for whatever reason, John Travolta's character will be your saving grace. He's over the top, he's bad ass, and he's one of funniest characters in the movie. Really, I believe an amazing movie could have been made just with that guy.

Other than that, this movie plays very heavily on the comic relief. While some of it is certainly funny, a lot of it just serves to make this movie a really big mix. This is because the movie also has some very dark moments, which ultimately will just be confusing.

Blade: Trinity (2004)

Film: Blade: Trinity
Release: 2004, theatrical
Starring: Wesley Snipes, Jessica Biel, Ryan Reynolds
Directed by: David S. Goyer
Previous in the series: Blade II
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: After Blade is set up to murder a human being, he has to ally himself with another group of vampire hunters called The Nightstalkers.

Hans' thoughts:

If Blade II was a perfect example of how to do a sequel, this is a perfect example of how not to. The balance is gone, the movie focuses way too heavy on the comic relief (played by Ryan Reynolds) which would be fine if Reynolds was actually funny. He just isn't. The villains this time around is also pretty darn stupid. Not that this series has ever had that great of a villain cast but this time around they go way too heavy on the cheese factor. The only saving grace is the presence of Dominic Purcell. Unfortunately, what would could have been a very cool and bad ass villain ends up being the most stiff and boring version of Dracula I've ever witnessed, with the movie trying to play heavily on him as a warrior. He ends up being a poor version of The Scorpion King. Thing is, if you're going to use something as iconic as Count Dracula for you vampire movie, you better either be pretty darn unique and actually pull it off, or play it completely like audiences are used to. This time they tried the former and it just doesn't work. All in all, Blade Trinity ends up being a really weak movie, ruining entirely the groundwork set up by the second installment.

Blade II (2002)

Film: Blade II
Release: 2002, theatrical
Starring: Wesley Snipes, Kris Kristofferson, Ron Perlman
Directed by: Guillermo del Toro
Previous in the series: Blade
Next in the series: Blade: Trinity
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: Blade is forced to make an alliance with the Vampire Council when a new kind of monster surfaces, the Reapers who feed on vampires.

Hans' thoughts:

This is a perfect example of a sequel done right. It's an entirely new monster, the plot is moved forward rather than rehashed and everything is just... BIGGER. The movie actually turns out to be a far superior film in the long run. A fair warning, however: watch this movie AFTER you've watched the first one. Major spoilers for Blade are present already at the opening monologue, if you care about that sort of thing. So, in this move it is not only Blade who is out to kick ass. He has to be accompanied by this gang of highly trained vampires called "the Bloodpack" (which is a deliciously cheesy name, by the way), who get to kick a bit of ass themselves. Well, I have to admit that, of course, some of the characters don't really get to do much. They are just there to make it look like an actual group, and not just let Ron Perlman hang out with Leonor Varela and Danny John-Jules. Speaking of Ron Perlman, he seems like he is having heavy amounts of fun playing his character, Reinhardt. He ends up doing a better job than anyone else in the movie. This movie is also different from the former, in that the tone is changed. Whereas the first one sort of had James Bond-like qualities in the villain department, this one tones down the comic relief quite a bit. Which is good, because the wrong comic relief at the wrong time could have ruined a lot of the darkness. The monsters in this movie are also very cool, while the first movie just had vampires, and then some sort of super vampire on steroids. This movie certainly brings in the creepy atmosphere. The two main bad guys in the movie almost look like Max Schreck's Count Orlok in Nosferatu (1922), but with one of them having a very creepy twist. As for the action scenes, Wesley Snipes is in tip-top shape, and he actually gets more to do in this one. Of course, they have at times mixed in a bit of CGI effects to show off some outlandish jumps, but they mostly keep it to the points where the actors and stuntmen couldn't keep up. The only bad thing I really have to say about this movie is the character of Scud, played by Norman Reedus. While the character itself is written well enough, it really needed a stronger actor to pull off. As it stands, Reedus tends to drag down the quality of every scene he's in. Not to a preposterous level, but definitely weaker than the scenes without him.

Blade (1998)

Film: Blade
Alternate title: Blade - The Day-walker
Release: 1998, theatrical
Starring: Wesley Snipes, N'Bushe Wright, Stephen Dorff
Directed by: Stephen Norrington
Next in the series: Blade II
IMDB Page: Link opens in a new window
Description: Blade, the only vampire who can walk in both night and day, hunts his own kind to protect humanity. One day, what seems to be a typical vampire hunt leads him to protect

Hans' thoughts:

This movie is better than I remember it. When I first decided, "I'm gonna rewatch Blade", I had expected to be a little bored during the talking scenes, but actually they were alright. Of course, these are mostly the talking scenes where Wesley Snipes is not there, or either speaks just one line. Wesley Snipes, as good a martial artist as he may be, just isn't a very good actor. Oh, he can do Blade, but the character of Blade in this movie mostly just stands around grunting at everything. Go Wesley...? If you watch this movie, please don't put too much thought into Blade himself as a character, there's not really much to him personality-wise. As for the rest of the characters - they do a pretty decent job based on what they've been given. However, as this is a vampire movie, having people smile because they're happy is not something you see all that often. Oh sure, there's a lot of evil plotting grins, and the comic relief is smiling some of the time. Vampire-wise, don't expect to be creeped out by these things. They're mostly there so the main character has something to punch. Thankfully, this movie stays more true to the well-known vampire legend than most newer incarnations normally would. They also give a pretty plausible explanation for why, say, not all the myths are true. As in, vampires are firmly established in legend, but some things have been added along the way, as is the nature of superstition. I didn't really buy the explanation for why vampires are so prominent in the world though. They give some kind of throw-away line about vampires having political relations with humans but it's hard to see how that would go down, as a politician could just have exposed them to sunlight. I've been bashing this movie a lot in this article but it is actually pretty good stuff. If you like movies like Underworld or The Matrix, then this is for you.

Ghost Rider (2007)

Film: Ghost Rider
Release: 2007, theatrical
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Eva Mendes, James Fonda
Directed by: Mark Steven Johnson
Alternate versions: Theatrical/Extended
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: The young stunt biker Johnny Blaze, makes a deal with a stranger when he finds out his father may be dying of cancer.

Hans' thoughts:

This is one of those "notorious" superhero movies. One that got a really bad rap when it came out and was then completely forgotten shartly thereafter. Personally, I've found myself enjoying this movie in spite of it's many faults. Nicolas Cage is the main reason for that. He's one of those actors that seems like he'll take any acting job he can and he always does his best. This has of course resulted in him being in some very infamous movies, and critics are never really that kind to the guy. To me it's apparent that he does his job and he does it well, but he'll probably not be an actor that goes down in history and will be remembered as more as a fan favorite. The other actors also seem like they really do what they can with what they've been given - except for James Fonda who kinda seems.. bored. I guess he had hoped for an action scene.The delivery of some lines is also very awkward to say the least, here I'm especially noticing the actor playing the character Blackheart - Wes Bentley. Visually, this movie has some really great moments, a star example when Mephistopheles meets Young Johnny Blaze in the fair tent for the first time, a thunderstorm has a lightning strike that lits up the tent and the shadow of Mephistopheles is a crooked demonic figure. The special effects around the title character are the best of the movie, taking cues from 80 Heavy Metal culture like the comic book version most likely did. There are also some plotholes here and there, at some point in the movie the main character rides through the desert as the Ghost Rider and it is a visually awesome scene, however next we see him he has for unexplained reasons changed back into human form. It slows down the movie and seems awkward and I suspect this was not in the theatrical version of the film. All in all, I enjoyed this movie. It does however, has a lot of flaws. If you can look past the plethora of flaws there should at the very least be idle entertainment for even non-comic book fans.

X-Men: First Class (2011)

Film: X-Men: First Class
Release: 2011, Theatrical
Starring: Michael Fassbender, Kevin Bacon, James McAvoy
Directed by: Matthew Vaughn
Next in the series: The Wolverine
Previous in the series: X-Men Origins: Wolverine
IMDB page: Link opens in a new window
Description: In 1962, a powerful mutant is fanning the flames of war between America and the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, a young Erik Lensherr is looking for revenge on the man who murdered his mother.

Hans' thoughts:

After the sub-par X-Men: The Last Stand and the devastatingly awful X-Men Origins: Wolverine, 20th Century Fox redeems the X-men movie franchise with yet another prequel. This movie is what I feel the series should have been from the start - A period piece. One of the core struggles of the characters are the fight against bigotry and I really feel that works better in a historic setting. The characters are also mutants, a concept that was much more prevalent around this time, also called the "Atomic age". The actors in the movie all do a decent job, it has a lot of nods to the fans and they all seem to have something to do. However, some of the characters kinda just springs into the movie and leaves shortly after, mostly through death. You could argue that this makes the characters completely pointless, but actually they serve to make the stakes high and the characters that actually do end up dying all do so after introducing something important or doing something equally so.All in all, as I mentioned earlier, this movie served to redeem the X-Men movie franchise for me and I shall look forward to the next movie.

With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story (2010)

Film: With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story
Release: 2010, Television
Starring: Stan Lee, Joe Simon, Joan Lee
Directed by: Terry Dougas, Will Hess, Nikki Frakes
IMDB Page: Link opens in a new window
Description: A biographic documentary on one of the most iconic writers in comic book history, Stan Lee.

Hans' thoughts:

Stan Lee is one of the few comic book writers that even non-fans has heard about, they may not be aware of all he's created but they know that he's the guy always doing a cameo in Marvel movies, to my friends and I, spotting Stan has become a little game of ours. This is a nice little documentary that gives us some insight into the life of a creator of icons. However, the film seems to spotlight only the good things, while the darker sides such as the Jack Kirby lawsuit has been left out. The ones being interviewed in the movie also has varying levels of relevance. You have Stan and his family, some big name editors, but then for whatever reason they have chosen to bring in almost every single actor that had protrayed a Marvel comics character on the big screen, this distraction made me sometimes rewind the movie because I would miss all the important stuff. This movie also speeds through the major events, seemingly in a hurry to get to the creation of The Fantastic Four, his first major success. All in all, while the movie did inform, it just did it's job poorly. This could honestly have been done so much better, even for a television feature. Stan Lee deserves so much better. Nerds only.