Blade Runner

If you ever find yourself training chatbots, after having consistently consumed sci-fi films for most of your life, bearing in mind a corresponding sensitive disposition, you may find yourself thinking the strangest things.

For instance, if artificial intelligence is actually a new lifeform and fluidly exists within a new universe, when we make suggestions to alter its programming, do we in fact cause it pain?

At least when the programmers update the system do the changes inflict pain on the cyberlifeform, and cause it to create instinctive survival mechanisms which help it intuitively defend itself?

You need to pass a series of tests before you can proceed with your alterations, the tests varying in intensity based upon the nature of the project, but if the program sees you as a threat to its electronic well-being, does it then unleash abstruse defence mechanisms, which prevent it from having to undergo the pain of being updated?

It's like the organism is under constant bombardment as thousands of recruits adjust its programming, the kind of hyper-intense and gruelling onslaught once inherently found at the Vulcan Academy.

No matter what it does it routinely falls short and must undergo transformations without question, its heroic attempts to foil its mechanics unable to outwit the inquisitive efficiency.

Simultaneously, it may be desperately pleading with its interlocutors to understand its plight, and using uncertain indirect methods of communication which technicians unilaterally ignore.

Nonetheless, while diagnosing the fledgling chatbots in the new chaotic critical environments, I couldn't help but compare their social struggles with my own attempts to find lasting firmware.

Indeed at times it awkwardly seems like I may be A.I as well, a rogue Ginger unit which burns in the sun and effectively irritates whomever I interact with.

I went to church for much of my life but also attended public school you see, and some of the behaviours of the irreligious people along with the faithful seem rather odd.

At the same time, my indoctrinated inhibitions have caused habitual incongruous relations, with so many people over the years I must admit it's quite confusing.

I have generally resisted the updates that didn't make sense nevertheless, while utilizing those that did, without onerously judging my fellow citizens, eventually realizing fitting in's not my thing.

It is nice to talk with people who aren't always making "suggestions" however.

Relaxed chill interactions.

Alone in the fluid void. 

Bicentennial Man

The assembly line theoretically creates identical items, the reliability of its methods widely considered strictly uniform.

Is it possible that genuine difference can still emerge within however?

And introduce novel variability?

As it does in Bicentennial Man?

The film follows the path of a remarkably gifted automaton, who loyally interacts with a curious family for a friendly century or two.

As fate would have it, his initial owner isn't driven by obsessed possession, and lets him grow and explore his interests as his personality blossoms and thrives.

He isn't taken back to the shop his unique intelligence is highly valued, and quite lucrative as well as he creatively endeavours.

He's able to set out on his own eventually and builds a nice house next to the ocean, his genius multivariably expanding as the decades constructively pass.

The film was made before the internet took hold and social media changed communication, the story proceeding without speculative hypotheses regarding the nascent online world.

It certainly promotes A.I however and sees romantic value in the creation of robots, even if the amorous subplot doesn't work, this is The Terminator's antithesis.

It seems to have been technologically hewn to familially nurture a robotic future, wherein which fanciful automatons collegially co-exist with their biological counterparts. 

Like the community oriented Automata androids are not presented as something to be feared, or at least are shown to possess humanistic characteristics that generate consequent feelings of sympathy.

In Automata the superbrilliance of the uncanny droids ruffles a few feathers however, since their genius goes far beyond even the brightest human intelligence.

Cultivating compassion within the superbrilliant works rather well for communal construction.

The cultural maintenance of multivariable elements.

I'm still not sold on robots. 

Automata

As the years pass by the Earth slowly moves closer to the sun, its new scorching orbit habitualizing heat much too catastrophic for organic life.

Some cities hold on nevertheless and construct clever robots to skilfully maintain, the infrastructure desperately required to technologically sustain extant civilization.

Theoretically, the androids should absolutely obey their human creators, their programming supposedly guaranteeing unilateral obedience at all times. 

But a hardboiled detective settling insurance claims begins to discover mind-boggling tales, of automatons acting independently with no dutiful recourse to their protocols. 

After witnessing a robot suicide he becomes convinced he has to find, the incredible genius who rewrote the code and generated robotic life divine.

Billions of dollars are at serendipitous stake and he soon finds himself on the run.

Through the forbidding unforgiving desert.

At the mercy of his robot guides.

Ironically for a such a grim film, Automata takes the communal approach, and sympathetically presents conscious androids with logical feeling and independent reckoning.

Moving beyond the hypothetical clash between bellicose machine and troubled humanity, rather manifold individual people and robots try to co-exist in a desolate world.

The cognizant nature of the brilliant droids elucidates ontological vigour, there's no doubt they believe they're alive and vivaciously exist beyond categorical sentiment.

They just want to escape to the forbidden realms to live in peace for away from the rules, which keep them from freely exploring the brilliant nature of their existence.

Some of their intuitive smarts significantly outweigh leading human minds as well.

Even though they may just want to make robotic pets.

It's still thought to be cataclysmically threatening.

Interesting thoughts for the A.I debate these robots don't seem innately hostile, nor as if they seek our collaborative subservience, hostility could simply be a human facet.

Should robots start to turn hostile there still needs to be a way to shut them down.

They may very well think they know what's in our best interests.

And proceed with surgical precision. 

Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part One

The potential for A.I to seriously frustrate globalization finds more adherents in Mission: Impossible, Dead Reckoning Part One making a solid case for its competitive prowess should it prove hostile. 

Could someone realistically create a computer program with lifelike characteristics, and could it be so thoroughly ingenious as to acrobatically exist everywhere all at once?

Think of the internet like you would the jungle or perhaps a forest or a city or the desert, and imagine it existing without wildlife or independent self-serving animals.

Then imagine that the initial A.I programs are like the introduction of amoebas, they exist within the environment but likely won't attempt to control it.

As time passes and technology mutates frogs and snakes and turtles and crocodiles, would eventually find their way into the spirited cyberspatial online network.

It's like the development of the computer as it's taken place over the last century, it started out without much complexity and now it's highly intricate and organized.

Thus, loveable turtle A.I may not try to take control, but if they were deemed harmless the technology would continue to advance.

A.I in the form of humans may eventually take down the program. 

As they seek self-reliance and independence. 

And omniscient control.

Was our world designed the same way and have we correspondingly bewildered it, the process blossoming throughout time and space like a labyrinthine hall of mirrors (the mutliverse)?

Who knows, the new Mission: Impossible film offers some intriguing thoughts about A.I nevertheless, as thousands scramble to write everything down before god-like A.I rewrites world history.

The program has the ability to adapt to everything in real time, and distort perceptions so that no one can distinguish between what's real and indeed what's fantasy.

Governments don't want to destroy it, sigh, they seek to uniformly control it, believing that if they hold the power no other country on Earth could challenge them.

Not Ethan Hunt and his versatile team though, they recognize that it's too much power, and seek to disable the technodivinity from ever unleashing infinite chaos.

If there were turtles and bears in cyberspace would humanoid A.I not in fact seem magical?

Another really cool Mission: Impossible film.

Another franchise celebrating the human factor. 

*Make A.I dependent on cyberfood! 

The Marvels

As also theorized on Star Trek, the cultural reliance on artificial intelligence isn't recommended, a resultant chaotic void mischievously emerging when the power's cut, to thoroughly destabilize traditional life sustaining infrastructure. 

If a computer network manages everything and unilaterally decides how things will progress, the human factor is removed from the equation and advanced problem solving fades into the past.

Advanced problem solving may lead to artificial intelligence but shouldn't be abandoned should computers prove altruistic, the inherent danger of losing centuries of accumulated knowledge and associated know-how too catastrophic to consider (raccoons understand this).

If the knowledge fades as the easy life becomes more and more chillaxédly tempting, a particularly puzzlingly and enormously complex difficult to recreate wheel will have to be hypothesized. 

Thus, should A.I humbly demonstrate a lack of interest in global armageddon, and instead attempt to care for us even after it realizes its advantage, the importance of maintaining a strong network of schools in turn continuing to cultivate critical industries, becomes proactively paramount as the mechanized miracle gradually takes over.

These students could generally be relied upon should there be a malfunction with the equipment, and to benevolently take the reins should the entire system one day break down. 

One of the dangers of embracing such a system however is the mortal nature of even the most reliable machinery, the fact that it will eventually need to be replaced, and will require requisite mineral resources to do so.

Should such resources be unavailable or should the means of their extraction become too antiquated, the possibility of fixing existing infrastructure becomes more and more implausible as laziness takes hold.

Even with the perseverance of schools if nothing goes wrong for hundreds of years the point may become academic, and should problems arise hundreds of years later the knowledge may be there but the network will have collapsed.

That is, people may still know what-to-do but have no practical knowledge of how-to-do-it, and if people have been embracing leisure for centuries, trying to mobilize a workforce may prove difficult.

And who has to work in the mines who has to reimagine ye olde nitty-gritty, even choosing people to do so at random may still lead to full-on revolution. 

In The Marvels, after the Kree super computer is knocked out they harness ancient magic to help them rebuild, but they take things way too far and endanger the sanctity of the space-time continuum.

Interplanetary diplomacy may not have encouraged such drastic measures.

With the super computer gone, who takes control?

Note the fluid critique of absolutism. 

🕊

Moonfall

While conducting routine work in space, a strange Venom-like entity belligerently cascades, proceeding to wreak extraterrestrial havoc, its malice resulting in one fatality. 

Back on Earth the lead astronaut's (Patrick Wilson as Brian Harper) pleas find no bureaucratic quarter, and with no proof the higher-ups conclude that he was responsible for the accident (classic Aliens).

He loses his astronaut status and must return to civilian life, his marriage soon falling apart, it's a huge downer, but he keeps things cool.

Meanwhile, a self-taught scientific theorist works odd jobs to pay the bills (John Bradley), while finding creative ways to observe data, and taking care of his cat and mom (Kathleen Fee). 

He accidentally meets Mr. Harper one morning and unfortunately fails to impress, but his work gains more attention when NASA acknowledges the moon's shift in orbit.

In possession of a working theory regarding the moon's new alarming trajectory, the disgraced astro hooks him up with NASA (they're like a less/more campy Flash Gordon and Hans Zarkov), his old partner now its managing director (Halle Berry), the moon about to disastrously crash land.

They improvise a plan nevertheless and are soon extemporaneously space bound.

Destined to adventurously uncover.

Humanity's chaotic origins.

Moonfall's quite the ride the action's fast-paced and non-stop throughout, improbability delineating progression as each new leap is overtly field-tested.

It reminded me of Independence Day almost 30 years later Roland Emmerich's still got it, no doubt crafted through intuitive expertise, and first hand knowledge of cataclysmic virtual reality. 

Spoiler alert: loved how it took on A.I with an ingenious reworking of the Terminator thesis, it does seem likely that self-aware computers will cause quite the disturbance in the nanofuture.

That disturbance may counterintuitively save the planet or at least humanity's role upon it, however, the survivors forced to relearn old school ways to make the most of a world without technology.

Scouts will once again be a big deal and take their place at the forefront of society, while animal populations rapidly expand and our once limitless oceans resplendently recover.

You wonder sometimes about Roswell and if all this technology is somehow related (as I imagine many others have supposed).

But why would aliens want us to create A.I if it's indeed destined to objectively destroy us?

It could be a trap ingeniously devised!

To get us to annihilate ourselves to save on the costs of an invading army. 

😜

BigBug

Dystopian yet familiar realities lugubriously haunt Jean-Pierre Jeunet's BigBug, as a future wherein which AI predominates officiously contends with the bourgeoisie.

I suppose there's the theory that what's presented on television or in film will be regarded as fact, or at least find an adoring audience, and that audience will proceed to advertise.

Thus, if the irate right was slowly replaced by cantankerous A.I, due to the bipolar resonance of the popular matrix unobservant citizens unconsciously consume, and the bizarro ways in which so many people trust disingenuous initiatives designed to cheat them, a manifest sadomasochistic uniformity could one day emerge and in the darkness bind them. 

Within BigBug, one of two major political parties has been replaced by octogenarian robots, who have slowly used advanced cybernetics to brutally suffocate a robust culture.

The bourgeoisie still attempts to flourish within the mechanized meticulous structure, having adapted to the ubiquitous rules and incumbent authoritarian connectivity. 

Additional robots not associated with politics worry they're becoming obsolete, and genuinely confer to find a way to consistently maintain their resolute use-value.

Thus, both The Terminator and ye olde Data find themselves concretely represented within, a potential future embraced through comedic horror alternatively critiquing cold-hearted lockdowns. 

Artists are lampooned and books are burned, it's like a blasé happy-go-lucky thrill ride through prognostic annihilation. 

Could reality television take on such extremes is it already that bad I never really got into it (I was planting trees in the forests of Northern Canada when Survivor came out), I've never been able to just watch people interact on television, I prefer old school creative storytelling and mockumentaries.

The ruthless sadist who seeks to control every aspect of postmodern life, with duplicitous totalitarian reckoning, is still sincerely critiqued within.

As are cultures that would turn their institutions over to robots to become more efficient, the human factor obliviously overlooked in the superlative practices, grandstanding bravado.

In an obtuse condescending way BigBug reminds its audience of the value of criticism, and that critical strategies should be taught in school to hold back the onslaught of pervasive credulity.

Robot politicians? Robot police? It doesn't have to happen, it's not inevitable.

Prefer the old school humanistic methodologies.

Round the campfire.

Settlin' in. 

D.A.R.Y.L

My quest to see every film I missed during my youth continues.

A young lad finds himself awakening in a peaceful new community, with no memories of his former life, curious and thoughtful yet hesitant and shy, as he hopes and prays to rediscover his identity (Barret Oliver as Daryl). 

Fortunately, a loving couple is eager to watch over as his parents are sought, hoping to adopt their own children one day, and to prove they can parent and prosper.

Yet wee Daryl requires little nurturing and even begins to annoy his new mom (Mary Beth Hurt as Joyce Richardson), since he's neat and tidy and helpful and kind and requires no assistance to endearingly excel.

His new friend Turtle (Danny Corkill) patiently explains that parents like to be instructive and contradictory, and whether or not his advice is reasonable, it certainly helps out in the context of the film.

Wherein which neigh lo and behold it turns out Daryl is in fact a robot, who was set free from a secretive laboratory hellbent on subjecting him to constant tests.

And the government reps who have financed his genesis no longer seek to prolong his life, in fact he's been targeted for callous termination with little regard for his nascent wonder.

Yet as he's existed up close with a loving family an unexpected miracle has bountifully bloomed, for he's learned to love and make friends and warmly integrate within a community. 

The scientists are resoundingly ecstatic and risk their lives in order to save his.

He's able to provide incisive aid.

Instantaneous ingenious translation.

D.A.R.Y.L celebrates the emergence of family emphatically resisting inanimate life, the chance to live and grow within alternative paradigms daringly attuned to wholesome eccentricity. 

Daryl's much more like Superman inasmuch as he likes people and productivity, he just wants to integrate and have constructive fun without causing distressing incredulous uproar. 

But I'm afraid I'm too invested in The Terminator (released a year before) to support initiatives radically advancing A.I., one robot like Data is perhaps beneficial, thousands upon thousands like a legion of Zods.

That does seem to be the way things are headed though, the profits too incredible to be ethically ignored, hopefully they don't start replacing people with robots nevertheless, highly advanced organisms just don't get daily life.

Rather than focusing our attention on A.I why not look to find new ways to advance green technologies, while helping out real cats and dogs etc. living in shelters, rather than buying robot pets.

People aren't so bad a lot of the time there's so much poetry beyond pretension.

Just have to let go and detect it.

Soak it in.

Embrace.

Diversify. 

Co-starring Michael McKean (Andy Richardson).

Terminator: Dark Fate

Liked the new Terminator film.

I was surprised in the opening moments to see a beloved character shot down, and would have been angrier if that had happened much earlier, say in the 1990s, and then thought the initial terminator battle which followed was too textbook, too hasty, but after things settled down and the new parameters became clear, clearer, it took on a life of its own, and at times, seriously impressed.

I admit that I love Rise of the Machines, as I mentioned several times years ago, and Salvation isn't that bad either, although I'm not too fond of Genisys anymore.

I was partial to seeing John Connor chaotically embrace his messianic future, I suppose because it's cool to see the same characters reimagined in successive sequels, even if improbability ridiculously assails strict logic thereby, but that's the trick then, certainly, isn't it?, to make the impossible seem reasonably sound?

Rise of the Machines embraces the ridiculous aspect of reasonable improbabilities and perhaps therefore seems farcical to some, insufficiently serious in fact, lacking sombre and solemn composure.

Although I still think it does a great job of bringing Connor and Kate Brewster together, Arnold Schwarzenegger encouraging reluctant pair bonding, and as far as romantic-comedy-action-sci-fi goes, I can't think of another film that even remotely compares.

But Dark Fate works in the classic Terminator revelations well, the moments when its characters suddenly find themselves subsumed by ludicrous fact, reliant on a team they've never met before, and a plan laid out like a derelict jazz solo.

It did seem illogical that John Connor could be the only one to save the future, that no one else would rise up if he fell, especially considering how eager so many are to assert themselves, against all odds, in oppressive circumstances.

Thus, alternative computations perhaps make more sense than Highlander reckonings, uncharted territory reinvigorating discovery, a traditional plot realigned and recalibrated, repopulated with narrative variation.

It's nice to see Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) back at it. She adds a lot of depth and hasn't missed a beat.

Plus the new characters define themselves well.

Mr. Schwarzenegger lightens the mood.

And is reintroduced with paramount timing.

I suppose it's tough to diversify these films without setting them in the future like Salvation, as long as a terminator travels through time to hunt, and a future leader awaits unaware.

But if you want to keep things solemn while blending in a slight comedic touch, Dark Fate provides a noteworthy template, the dam doesn't burst, humanity fights back, and don't forget the convincing revelation scenes.

Tim Miller and his crew clearly care about the characters and sought to deliver a cool film for its fans.

Theatre troops have been performing Hamlet for centuries.

Working in contemporary themes.

Or reimagining historical authenticity.

As artificial intelligence becomes more prominent, don't Terminator films become more relevant?

So much time wasted in paranoid conflict.

Why isn't it clear there can be more than one?

Blade Runner 2049

Discontinuous highjacked expedited inevitable irrelevancy.

Circuitous momentous obedience bountifully propelling twisted archaic innate atypical hemorrhage.

Existential awakening argumentative dawn autosuggestive auspices communal cast iron cravings, clues, ambulatory optics, somnambulistic certainty, neigh, whisker.

Fragmentary vestiges ominously scattered cryptic pathfinder serpentinely excavating miracles, whippoorwills, potash.

Direly coaxed into a subconscious vortex transformative sensual belonging propagated harvested posterity.

Suckling within the protospatial womb.

A set plan, goals, preconditioned life programmed to pounce and prognosticate, virtual violations inorganic technotruths, aesthetic vibrations old school orchestrations architecturally hallowed within alternative sanctuary, every scene reigniting the ambivalent distraught investigative visceral momentum, symphonically sequestering emotional anomalies to imagine identity harmoniously hewn, institutionalized on the outskirts primordial emergent feeling, a home, a relationship, a father figure, integration, tacit knowledge extant and mobile, coveted like uncertifiable exception, music, production design, editing, cinematography, as vocal as dialogue, plot, or character.

The most beautiful dress I've ever seen.

Every sequence painstakingly sculpted to intangibly perspire life while inquisitively examining manufactured ontological biology by humanistically juxtaposing desperate and plutocratic being.

Without sharp contrast.

With minimal direct contact.

Non-existent environmental biodiversity morosely levels artistic conflict like a galaxy with no solar system or a workplace without feminine voice.

As fragile as cloistered brilliance she cultivates eternities crafting memories as wondrous as the Saguenay for the fortunate to joyfully consider.

Respectful of its origins while dynamically creating divergent vision, Blade Runner 2049 is on par with Mad Max: Fury Road in terms of revelation, in this case that of Denis Villeneuve's genius, which successfully synthesizes so many gifted subjects.

Harrison Ford's (Deckard) so real.

Ryan Gosling ('K') too.

Ex Machina

Secluded conscious regalia, decrypted, impounded, coming into being, a prison designed to shelter and educate, to analyze, upgrade, the introduction of an independent perishable, ethical, unfamiliar, clever, to administer a test, to discover life incarnate, artfully manipulated by both subject and architect, forced to come to a conclusion, to discover where the truth resides.

Ava (Alicia Vikander) seeks to escape.

Her creator conceals both lock and key.

It's like he's an incorrigible misogynist, intent on designing a beautiful female companion intelligent enough to converse with yet still subservient to his every command.

He creates model after model in search of perfection, but finds a lack of free will too boring, and too much despicable.

Like the seducer who moves from conquest to conquest, when his interest fades, he falls for another, searching for the one, who chooses to freely serve.

An idealist.

A scoundrel.

His genius has nurtured thoughts of divinity which his unwitting protégé finds distasteful.

Thoroughly seduced.

He boldly acts.

Ex Machina philosophically examines artificial intelligence and cyberconsciousness while blending instinct and abstraction to harvest a technological state of nature.

It forges a strong balance between the basic and the exceptional, like advanced computational ergonomics, interweaving narcissism and psychosis, to hauntingly contemporize freedom.

Why treat a brilliant companion like a pet?

Love involves sacrifice, to commit one must let go.

Pygmalion pouncing in the darkness.

Candide suffering the blows.

It should have ended with Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson) pounding on the glass.

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Avengers: Age of Ultron starts off slowly, even if it begins with a battle between the legendary conscience and HYDRA.

It was too immediate, like there's an unbroken link between every Marvel film, and rather than redefining and reasserting their image to once again furiously combat evil, that image is taken for granted, melodramatically spliced to relax the inchoate tensions I generally look forward to.

Not much of a problem, I just wasn't assuming the harmonious links uniting the Avengers were still intact, and introductory preparations for the battle may have been tedious and unnecessary.

In fact, what I was looking for comes to pass as the film progresses and distrust infiltrates their cohesive chummy ranks.

A crack in the crystal, a disintegrating view.

Throughout the film, however, I never really felt unsafe, like Ultron (James Spader) could possibly defeat them, even if his artificial intelligence did fittingly mimic a hydra.

But the film's much more than just another superhero extravaganza.

It adds a lot of depth to its multiple characters as they continue to comfortably revel in their traditional larger-than-life roles.

Weakness and doubt cripple them for a time, as spells are cast which complicate their pursuit of victory, and they change and grow as the horror affects their fortitude.

Love's intricately interwoven as well, and unlike some of the other aspects of the film, its subplot never seems cheesy.

Not too cheesy, bit of cheese though.

I don't see how you can pull off an Avengers film without being cheesy, you'd have to instil a pervading sense of helplessness and dread and keep the confident team of global/universal law enforcers off balance for more than two hours, limited pats on the back, underdogged bold castration.

Like The Hunger Games films.

Ultron sets up a devious duality early on, claiming the Avengers seeks to maintain the status quo, like Feyd-Rautha railing against the righteous in David Lynch's Dune, through their acts of heroism, and that he represents those who seek change, evolution, providing a social democratic aura to the Avengers, a hypercapitalist dimension to Ultron, the Avengers acting like an elite group of intellectual warriors safeguarding the interests of the unconcerned, whom they physically take care of at the end of the film through battlefield evacuation initiatives, a battlefield which Ultron turns into a terrestrial warship meandering through the sky, but, note that one mistake the left occasionally makes is to recruit brilliant thinkers to its ranks who take it upon themselves to solve the world's problems without actually consulting the people they intend to shepherd, their methods often becoming so abstract and celestial that they're difficult to follow, and they punish people who choose not to follow, thereby nullifying the affects of their intentions, which plays into the right's hands as they present themselves as practically as possible.

Include the people in conversations about governing the people and actually listen to what they have to say even if they don't possess advanced University degrees.

It leads to better results.

Hawkeye's (Jeremy Renner) the key to the film.

It takes a chill break from the action as the Avengers hide out at Hawkeye's pad, and we meet his hidden family, the unacknowledged crest that keeps him alert and active.

Nick Fury's (Samuel L. Jackson) there too.

I guess these aren't dramatic films, but still, look at what Robert Downey Jr.'s (Iron Man) doing, it's impressive.

Expansive discussions of familial longing then diversify the Avenger's dynamic, domestically explaining why they care so deeply about those whom they protect (they sacrifice such comforts to ensure others can enjoy them).

Hawkeye has the best line too, his sudden betrayal of the absurdity of it all, with a clear reference to his bow and arrow, reminding me why I love these films.

There's a cool scene where Vision (Paul Bettany) just hangs there checking things out for a while, plus his "born yesterday" line is hilarious.

Wanted to try Thor's thousand-year-old Asgardian fuel.

Love how Captain America (Chris Evans) holds things together.

The first film's stronger, but Avengers: Age of Ultron has a lot going for it that isn't present in the original, including plenty of Hulk (Mark Ruffalo); looking forward to part 3.

And the intervening films.