Blog

  • Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond

    Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond

    For some people, the summer months mean beaches and long days outdoors. For Den of Geek readers, the summer means staying inside air conditioned movie theaters and watching big budget spectacles! And boy, does summer 2025 have spectacles. But if superheroes and dinosaurs aren’t your bag, you don’t have to skip cinemas altogether this season. […]

    The post Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond appeared first on Den of Geek.

    For some people, the summer months mean beaches and long days outdoors. For Den of Geek readers, the summer means staying inside air conditioned movie theaters and watching big budget spectacles! And boy, does summer 2025 have spectacles. But if superheroes and dinosaurs aren’t your bag, you don’t have to skip cinemas altogether this season. Everything from comedy revivals to existential horrors will be hitting screens over the next couple of months, promising cool entertainment for all. And we got it all here for your viewing pleasure.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Another Simple Favor

    May 1

    Paul Feig continues to be one of the more mercurial figures in Hollywood. He’s directed or co-created some excellent stuff, including Freaks & Geeks, Spy, and the deeply underrated Last Christmas. But he’s also behind absolute stinkers such as The Heat and Jackpot!, making for a checkered filmography.

    This year, Feig returns to one of his more successful projects with the sequel Another Simple Favor. Blake Lively and Anna Kendrick reprise their roles as the stylish, suspicious rivals Emily Nelson and Stephanie Smothers. This time, the murder that binds them occurs in Capri, Italy, promising even more magazine-spread sophistication than the first movie.

    Thunderbolts*

    May 2

    Who can say what kind of movie Thunderbolts* will be? It follows Captain America: Brave New World, a movie that seemed to embarrass even Marvel, and precedes the highly-anticipated The Fantastic Four: First Steps. Throw in a delayed production process that lost Steven Yeun and Ayo Edebiri, replaced by Lewis Pullman and Geraldine Viswanathan, and the tea leaves might be ambiguous.

    But maybe that misfit status will work in the film’s favor. Thunderbolts* walks the same path as Suicide Squad and this year’s Star Trek: Section 31 as a story about people who don’t belong together forming a team. Unlike those dismal films, however, Thunderbolts* seems to understand its ragtag place, with marketing leaning heavily on the mountains of charisma that Florence Pugh and David Harbour bring, alongside Sebastian Stan’s beloved Winter Soldier.

    The Surfer

    May 2

    By this point, Nicolas Cage has completed his purgation from being ironically loved by the internet to actually loved by the internet, to finally recognized (again) as one of the most interesting working actors in cinema. So even the the ad campaign for The Surfer has been as spartan as its title, we can’t help but be intrigued.

    Directed by Irish filmmaker Lorcan Finnegan (Vivarium, Nocebo) and written by Thomas Martin, The Surfer features Cage as a man who brings his son to surf an Australian beach he loved in his youth only to be menaced by local roughs. That sounds a lot like Cage’s recent masterpiece Pig, and some reviewers have compared it to the Aussie New Wave classic Wake in Fright, making The Surfer one of the more compelling entries on this list.

    Friendship

    May 9

    Speaking of internet faves, Friendship stars Tim Robinson as a bored suburbanite who makes fast friends with a new neighbor played by Paul Rudd. Feeling that the bond has restored his lost youth, Robinson’s character soon becomes an obsessive and even destructive force in his neighbor’s life while alienating himself from his wife (Kate Mara).

    To anyone familiar with I Think You Should Leave, that description fills the mind with images of slicked back hair and sloppy steaks, which should both excite and worry us. Robinson’s humor works great in five-minute sketches, but will that translate to feature length? Fortunately, Robinson and Rudd have Our Flag Means Death and PEN15‘s Andrew DeYoung onboard to direct.

    Final Destination: Bloodlines

    May 16

    The Final Destination franchise has tried to close itself out twice, first with 2009’s awful The Final Destination and again in 2011’s excellent Final Destination 5. But Death’s work is never complete, so it’s fitting that a new entry would appear with Final Destination: Bloodlines.

    To be honest, Bloodlines has some stiff competition, not only because it comes more than a decade after the last and best entry, but also because Oz Perkins already gave us a glorious pseudo-Destination this year with The Monkey. Directors Zach Lipovsky and Adam Stein don’t exactly build the most confidence, as they won acclaim for their work on Disney XD shows. But Bloodlines does give us one last look at the late, great Tony Todd as mortician William Bludsworth, so we will be there on day one.

    Hurry Up Tomorrow

    May 14

    On the heels of Smile 2 and Opus comes another horror movie about the plight of being an internationally beloved pop star. Based on his own album, Hurry Up Tomorrow stars Abel Tesfaye, aka The Weeknd, as a fictionalized version of himself who suffers a paranoid breakdown.

    For those who only know The Weeknd from gifs, Hurry Up Tomorrow also stars Jenna Ortega as the pop star’s girlfriend and Barry Keoghan as a mysterious stranger. For cinephiles, the most compelling name on the poster is that of Trey Edward Shults, who broke out with the world’s scariest Thanksgiving movie Krisha and then followed it up with highly divisive movies It Comes at Night and Waves. Judging by Hurry Up Tomorrow‘s trailer, Shults has no intention of becoming predictable now.

    Lilo & Stitch

    May 23

    Having already desecrated its classic and renaissance era in order to mine for ugly remakes that can be shoved into theaters, Disney turns to its oddball post-renaissance period for its latest live-action rehash. Are they remaking Brother Bear or Home on the Range, bad movies that might be improved by a second draft? Of course not! They’re remaking the good ones because those have name recognition!

    Lilo & Stitch seems to repeat the exact same beats of the 2002 movie in which a fuzzy but dangerous alien (Chris Sanders) crash lands on Hawaii and befriends a lonely orphaned girl (Maia Kealoha) and her guardian big sister (Sydney Agudong). The one sliver of hope comes in the fact that Lilo & Stitch 2025 is directed by Dean Fleischer Camp, who made the delightful Marcel the Shell With Shoes On. Then again, if Camp is successful and Lilo & Stitch does well, then we’re bound to see live-action version of The Emperor’s New Groove, and no one wants that.

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning

    May 23

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning promises to do what Owen Davian, Solomon Lane, and Jim Phelps could never accomplish: It will bring a stop to Ethan Hunt. Maybe. Through sure force of will and madness, Tom Cruise has transformed the Mission: Impossible franchise from a TV series best known for its theme song into a big-budget stunt spectacular in which we flock to see him risk his life for our amusement. But time comes even for Cruise, so Final Reckoning is being marketed as Hunt’s last outing.

    At least he’s going out with a bang. Once again directed by Christopher McQuarrie, The Final Reckoning reveals the mastermind behind the rogue AI known as the Entity as someone with ties to the first film. Along the way, he’ll get help from his team, including mainstays played by Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, as well as newer additions played by Hayley Atwell, Vanessa Kirby, and Pom Klementieff. Also, Tom Cruise will hang off a plane, which is what we’re really here to see.

    Fear Street: Prom Queen

    May 23

    If you’re over the age of 25, you may only know Fear Street as the YA novels written by Goosebumps author R.L. Stein. However, the three Fear Street movies released by Netflix have been horror favorites of Gen Z, thanks to viral videos shared online. Fear Street: Prom Queen breaks from the trilogy format of the first three movies for a standalone story about scary things occurring at a 1988 prom queen race. Matt Palmer steps in for departing director Leigh Janiak, but as long as he can bring the gory thrills, Zoomers are sure to love it.

    Fountain of Youth

    May 23

    English director Guy Ritchie continues to broaden his offerings with the adventure tale Fountain of Youth. Penned by veteran screenwriter James Vanderbilt (Zodiac, The Amazing Spider-Man), Fountain of Youth stars John Krasinski and Natalie Portman as siblings searching for the titular water source. They’re joined by a gaggle of character actors like Domhnall Gleeson, Eiza Gonzalez, and Stanley Tucci. That all sounds like a throwback good time to at least the heyday of National Treasure and Tomb Raider if not Indiana Jones. But one has to wonder if Fountain of Youth will be hampered by the fact that it’s straight to Apple TV+, dulling the sense of scale that adventure tales usually need.

    Karate Kid: Legends

    May 30

    Karate Kid: Legends offers a rarity even in this age of IP-first filmmaking, a legacy sequel combined with a remake. Legends sees original Karate Kid Daniel LaRusso (Ralph Macchio) team with Kung Fu master Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) of the 2010 remake to train newcomer Li Fong (Ben Wang).

    It’s a strange maneuver on Sony’s part, pivoting away from the very popular Karate Kid legacy series Cobra Kai, which recently ended its six season run on Netflix, and toward the lesser-loved 2010 remake. Will Legends uncover a hidden trove of fans nostalgic for the 2010 movie? Or is it time to finally bring back Hilary Swank from The Next Karate Kid? We’ll find out this summer.

    The Phoenician Scheme

    May 30, June 6 (wide)

    Although initially panned upon its release in 2005, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou has been reclaimed as on of Wes Anderson‘s best movies (including by us!). So it’s good to see Anderson take another swing at the action genre with The Phoenician Scheme.

    That said, The Phoenician Scheme does feel slightly different from most of Anderson’s movies, mostly because he’s shaking up his usual stable of players. Benicio del Toro, who had only previously worked with Anderson on The French Dispatch, takes the lead as businessman Zsa-zsa Korda, alongside new additions Mia Threapleton, Michael Cera, and Riz Ahmed. Of course familiar faces Tom Hanks, Bill Murray, and Scarlett Johansson are on hand, as is Anderson’s impeccable aesthetic.

    Bring Her Back

    May 30

    Aussie twins Danny and Michael Philippou made the jump from YouTube to indie cult status with 2022’s Talk To Me. They’re ready to ride that momentum with their follow-up Bring Her Back, once again distributed by A24. Bring Her Back follows a recently orphaned brother and sister who come to the home of a foster mother played by Sally Hawkins, who already cares for a troubled boy who may have mystical powers. Judging by Bring Her Back‘s trailer, the Philippou brothers plan a movie just as troubling and intense as their debut.

    From the World of John Wick: Ballerina

    June 6

    John Wick: Chapter 4 seemed to bring an end to the Baba Yaga, but you can’t keep a financially successful franchise down. Thus comes Ana de Armas in From the World of John Wick: Ballerina, complete with an appropriately ostentatious title. Even if you don’t think the John Wick series needed a movie that isn’t about John Wick, Ballerina has a few things in its favor. First, the movie sees the return of not just Reeves’ titular killer (this film is a side-quel set simultaneously during the events of Chapter 3 and 4), but also Ian McShane as Winston and Lance Reddick in his final performance as Charon. The “directed by” credit for Len Wiseman doesn’t inspire much hope, but behind-the-scenes reports indicate that original series director Chad Stahelski shot some of the fight scenes and spearheaded the reshoots. So maybe Ballerina‘s worth checking out after all.

    The Life of Chuck

    June 6

    For the past few years, Mike Flanagan has established himself as one of the most interesting television creators working today. Although his last movie Doctor Sleep has its fans, supporters explicitly cite the Director’s Cut as the preferred version, arguing that the extended run time better suits the dazzling monologues Flanagan writes.

    So we greet Flanagan’s return to the big screen with a bit of trepidation. Yes, he’s adapting Stephen King once again, and yes, he has most of his familiar ensemble in tow, including Kate Siegel, Rahul Kohli, Mark Hamill, and Carl Lumbly, alongside Tom Hiddleston stepping out of the MCU for a minute. But The Life of Chuck clocks in at under two hours, which seems like far too little time for these brilliant actors to deliver Flanagan’s lines about fate, faith, and the meaning of life. However, the buzz the film has generated out of TIFF, where it won the audience award and threw Oscar prognosticators’ end-of-year predictions into chaos (since this is a June 2025 release) fills us with curiosity.

    How to Train Your Dragon (June 13)

    The live-action Disney remakes can at least claim that they’re reimagining beloved classics. Great as the original How to Train Your Dragon, it’s only 15 years old. Worse, the remake seems to be using the exact same plot, the exact same CG designs of the dragons, and even the exact same Gerard Butler to play grumpy father Stoick the Vast. Why so many similarities? Because the remake is directed by the same guy who dreamed up the original, Dean DeBlois.

    Still, maybe there’s some magic to be found in the new cast, which includes The Black Phone‘s Mason Thames as Hiccup and The Last of Us‘s Nico Parker as Astrid. If they can provide just enough energy, and if DeBlois can recapture some of the original’s magic he brought to the animated trilogy, then How to Train Your Dragon might stand on its own.

    Materialists

    June 13

    Materialists may not be getting the same push as the summer’s superhero and remake entries, but it’s easily one of the more exciting movies coming soon. First, there’s the buzzy cast, including Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal, and Chris Evans. Then there’s the director Celine Song, making her follow-up to 2023’s Past Lives. Finally, there’s the design of the poster, which finds the central trio doing catalogue poses in an image surrounded by a thick white border.

    Everything about Materialists recalls the adult romantic comedies of the ’80s and ’90s, especially its plot. Johnson plays a high-powered matchmaker who, against her better judgment, gets caught in a triangle. If it has even an ounce of the verve of Broadcast News and half the humanity of Past Lives, Materialists will be a favorite long after summer’s end.

    Echo Valley

    June 13

    Speaking of big names in a low-stakes picture, Mare of Eastown creator Brad Ingelsby returns to the features with Echo Valley for Apple TV+. Julianne Moore and Sydney Sweeney play a mother and daughter who reunite after a tragedy. Sweeney may have broken out with the flashy series Euphoria, but Echo Valley may be another chance to show off the acting chops witnessed in Reality. As seen in his scripts for Mare of Eastown, The Way Back, and Out of the Furnace, Ingelsby understands the nuances of small town life, giving Sweeney plenty of room to develop a complex character.

    28 Years Later

    June 20

    It’s only been 23 years since director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland un-nevered the world with their zombie thriller 28 Days Later, but we’re willing the fudge the math to get the pair together again. As its title suggests, 28 Years Later takes place more than a quarter century after a rage virus ravaged England. Despite the new status quo, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and his son Spike (Alfie Williams) must leave their island village to face the monsters.

    Back in 2002, before George Romero’s return to the genre and all of The Walking Dead, zombies felt fresh and digital photography seemed innovative. Both the technology and the genre have lost some of their bite today. but if there’s anyone who can reanimate the dead forms, it’s Boyle and Garland. We’ll see if 28 Years Later proves worth the wait.

    Elio

    June 20

    Even though Pixar isn’t the surefire studio it once was, a new release still deserves our attention, especially when the trio of directors includes Turning Red‘s Domee Shi and Coco‘s Adrian Molina. Both helmers of two of the best recent Pixar movies, Shi and Molina are joined by Madeline Sharafian, making her feature debut.

    Elio follows the titular outer-space nerd (Yonas Kibreab) as he’s somehow selected o represent humanity in an intergalactic council. If all goes well, Elio will learn about life while going through some wacky hijinks, and kids and adults alike will be moved to tears.

    M3GAN 2.0

    June 27

    You can’t keep a viral sensation down, so it’s no surprise to see Blumhouse‘s pre-teen murder-bot make her return for M3GAN 2.0. Taking a page out of the Terminator 2 handbook, M3GAN 2.0 sees the reconstituted robot (voiced by Jenna Davis and performed by Amie Donald) doing battle with an upgraded successor called Amelia (Ivanna Sakhno).

    Allison Williams is back as M3GAN’s inventor as is Violet McGraw as her charge/victim. James Wan produces again, as does original co-writer Akela Cooper and director Gerard Johnstone scripting. The question is whether this one will be as heavy on the meme-ready action?

    F1

    June 27

    Most movie fans point to baseball and boxing as the most cinematic of sports, but racing is a pretty close third. So the prospect of seeing Brad Pitt drive fast cars is enough to get butts in seats for F1, especially with direction by Joseph Kosinski of Tron: Legacy and Top Gun: Maverick.

    F1 has a well-worn sports plot, with Pitt playing a driver whose career ended with a crash decades ago but is now brought back to mentor a promising up-and-comer (Damson Idris). But racing’s all about improvisations within a set track, and if Kosinski can shoot cars like he shot fighter jets, then no one will care about familiar plot beats.

    Jurassic World: Rebirth

    July 2

    Perhaps the greatest testament to the power of the original Jurassic Park is how Steven Spielberg‘s movie still inspires wonder no matter how many lackluster sequels follow. That said, Jurassic World: Rebirth does have a harder road to hoe, given that it comes off of the dismal Jurassic World Dominion (aka, the one with more locusts than dinosaurs).

    Rebirth hopes to correct course by going back to the original. Not only is the trailer full of callbacks to the first movie, but it even boasts a script by David Koepp, screenwriter of the 1993 film. Furthermore, Rebirth director Gareth Edwards (Godzilla, Rogue One) seems to be aiming for old-school adventure in which a scientist (Jonathan Bailey) hires two mercenaries (Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali) to help him find dino genetics that could lead to pharmaceutical breakthroughs. Not exactly cutting edge in plot, but, honestly, as long as Jurassic World: Rebirth has cool dinos eating some folks in cool ways, we’ll be there.

    The Old Guard 2

    July 2

    It’s been five years since Netflix released The Old Guard, an excellent fantasy action film based on the comic book by Greg Rucka and Leandro Fernández. In the passing years, The Old Guard hasn’t quite become the cult sensation that it deserves to be, but the story is worthy of continuing, especially if new director Victoria Mahoney can match the mixture of action and character depth established by her predecessor Gina Prince-Bythewood.

    The Old Guard 2 brings back Charlize Theron as Andromache of Scythia, aka Andy, the leader of a group of near-immortals who travel the world doing good. She’s joined by newest recruit Nile Freeman (KiKi Layne) and her reliable teammates, all of whom she’ll need to counter a vengeful former lover (Vân Veronica Ngô), who spent the past centuries trapped in an underwater grave.

    Superman

    July 11

    This late in the cycle of superhero movies, we all believe a man can fly. What remains an open questions is if Warner Bros. can make a Superman film as inspirational as the 1978 classic with that tagline in 2025. Hiring true genre aficanado James Gunn seemed like a great start, but can the guy who cut his teeth with Troma, and gleefully slaughtered Z-listers in The Suicide Squad, be the one to pull it off?

    Yet with each new look at Superman, our belief grows. Rachel Brosnahan is pitch-perfect casting for Lois Lane and David Corenswet seems to embody the Clark Kent/Superman divide. After The Great and The Menu, Nicholas Hoult has become the ideal person to play the megalomaniacal Lex Luthor. Throw in a compelling supporting cast with inspired choices, including Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner and Skyler Gisondo as Jimmy Olsen, and its getting easier to believe every minute.

    I Know What You Did Last Summer

    July 18

    As the Scream franchise burns up the goodwill its relaunch earned with a series of unforced errors, its kid sister rises to take its place. The 2025 version of I Know What You Did Last Summer follows a group of attractive young people who get chased around a seaside town by a killer fisherman with a hook hand, all penance for some secret crime committed the previous year… just like in the 1997 film.

    To its credit, the I Know What You Did Last Summer 2025 seems to recognize the improbability of its premise and leans into it. The trailer not only highlights the pretty new set of victims, led by Glass Onion’s Madelyn Cline, but also originals Freddie Prinze Jr. and Jennifer Love Hewitt, both of whom deliver some self-aware dialogue. If director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson (Do Revenge) can nail the balance of metatextual references and nasty slasher kills, Scream may indeed become the stuff of forgotten summers.

    Eddington

    July 18

    Ari Aster made his name by shocking viewers: first with the deeply unsettling Hereditary and then with the still-beguiling Midsommar, which drove people back to his inexplicable short films, before completely baffling everyone with his comic odyssey Beau Is Afraid.

    All of that’s a long way of saying that we have no idea what to expect from his latest entry, Eddington. A teaser trailer suggests that Aster’s taking a more satirical edge, as it shows a man played by Joaquin Phoenix scrolling to his phone to see ripped-from-the-headlines videos about COVID, public shaming, and MAGA protests, and here performed by actors as adored as Pedro Pascal and Emma Stone. But that sounds way too easy for a filmmaker like Aster, so prepare for Eddington to shock you in ways you could never foresee.

    The Fantastic Four: First Steps

    July 25

    Together with Superman, The Fantastic Four: First Steps seeks to revitalize the superhero movie genre with a dose of bright-eyed optimism. And like its cousin over at the Distinguished Competition side of the street, First Steps has to cleanse public memory of some pretty terrible predecessors. It’s taking the right steps with its cast, which includes favorites Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Joseph Quinn, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as the central quartet.

    Adding to the appeal is the retro-futuristic aesthetic, brought to life by WandaVision’s Matt Shakman. However, that does raise questions about First Steps’ placement in the larger Marvel Universe. Will the world-devourer Galactus (Ralph Ineson) and his herald Silver Surfer (Julia Garner) destroy this world, immediately tarnishing Marvel’s brightly-hued new entries? We’ll have to wait for the post-credits to know for sure.

    Happy Gilmore 2

    July 25

    Forget I Know What You Did Last Summer. 2025’s most surprising ‘90s come back belongs to hockey player-turned-golfer Happy Gilmore who comes to Netflix with a sequel 29 years in the making. Adam Sandler reteams with original writer Tim Herlihy for the latest in Happy’s shenanigans.

    Happy Gilmore 2 finds Happy returning to the green for some reason. But let’s be honest, the reason doesn’t matter. Adam Sandler movies are mostly about watching him have fun with his friends, and that’s exactly what Happy Gilmore 2 promises, complete with appearances by Julie Bowen, Christopher McDonald, and Ben Stiller, all reprising their characters from the first movie, along with lots of golfer cameos.

    The Bad Guys 2

    August 1

    Based on the popular line of children’s illustrated novels, The Bad Guys stars Sam Rockwell as Mr. Wolf, the leader of a group of carnivores/criminals who seek to rehabilitate their image. Thanks to its solid voice acting from Rockwell and co-stars, including Marc Maron and Awkwafina, and its use of the animation techniques pioneered by Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, The Bad Guys was a surprise hit in 2022.

    The sequel hopes to continue that success, bringing back all of the principle cast, director Pierre Perifel, and the same animation engine. Following the “bigger is better” approach to sequels, The Bad Guys 2 introduces the Bad Girls, lady animals voiced by the likes of Danielle Brooks and Natasha Lyonne. As long as it can provide the zany energy that kids liked about the first film, The Bad Guys are sure to do good once again at the box office.

    The Naked Gun

    August 1

    On paper the long-in-development remake of The Naked Gun sounds like a disaster. Who today has the same dry humor of the late, great Leslie Nielsen? Who has the same eye for parodic detail as the Zucker Brothers and Jim Abrams? Heck, does our current world of non-stop police procedurals have anything like M Squad, the forgotten show that inspired The Naked Gun’s predecessor, Police Squad?

    Most of those concerns fall away when we see the first teaser for The Naked Gun 2025. Directed by the Lonely Island’s Akiva Schaffer, The Naked Gun has an inspired pick in Liam Neeson as Frank Drebin Jr., leader of a new version of Police Squad, and he’s joined by Paul Walter Hauser as Ed Hocken Jr. and Moses Jones as Nordberg Jr. Just reading that sentence boosts confidence that, somehow, Schaffer and company have figured out how to replicate the ZAZ humor for today’s audiences.

    Freakier Friday

    August 8

    The train of long-in-the-making sequels continues with Freakier Friday, a continuation of the 2003 Disney remake with Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan. In the 2003 version, mother and daughter Tess and Anna Coleman swapped bodies, leading to good-hearted shenanigans and family bonding. The sequel doubles up with a four-way swap, bringing a daughter and step-daughter (Julia Butters and Sophia Hammons, respectively) into the mix.

    Judging by the trailer, director Nisha Ganatra (Late Night, The High Note) knows exactly what fans expect from this outing and plans to give it to them. A game Curtis and Lohan throw themselves into their age-inappropriate roles and the quadruple swap changes things up just enough. Throw familiar faces such as Chad Michael Murray and Rosalind Chao from the first movie and add Manny Jacinto as a new love interest, and Freakier Friday’s set to be a warm reunion for 2000s kids ready for some nostalgia.

    Weapons

    August 8

    Weapons director Zach Cregger isn’t a new name, having performed for years in the sketch group The Whitest Kids U’ Know and even co-directed Miss March with late co-star Trevor Moore. But Cregger proved we didn’t really know him at all with his solo director debut, the 2022 shocker Barbarian.

    Weapons seeks to surprise us all over again, beginning with a cryptic ad campaign of blurry surveillance footage. Weapons presents itself as a missing persons story, dealing with the mass exodus of children from a suburban neighborhood. But if Barbarian is any indication, that premise just starts the upsetting story that Cregger wants to tell.

    Nobody 2

    August 15

    No one watching Mr. Show in its heyday could have predicted that Bob Odenkirk would have gone from guy who shouts obscenities in sketch comedies to beloved dad who warmly greets his little women. Even more shocking was Odenkirk’s turn to action hero in 2021’s Nobody, in which he played a put-upon suburbanite who recovers his international assassin skills after an attack on his family. If that sounds similar to John Wick, well, it is written by Derek Kolstad, who co-created the Keanu Reeves character.

    Nobody 2 picks up where the first movie left off, with Odenkirk’s Hutch Mansell and his FBI agent father David (Christopher Lloyd) trying to return to their old lives after the latter’s night of chaos. This time around, Kolstad shares a writing credit with three others (including Odenkirk), but Timo Tjahjanto (who co-directed the “Safe Haven” segment of V/H/S/ 2 with Gareth Evans) steps into direct.

    Eden

    August 22

    By this point, you know what to expect from a Ron Howard movie: something that’s solidly well-made or—occasionally—a project that unintentionally unleashes nightmares upon the country, as with 2020’s Hillbilly Elegy. We’re hoping for more of the former with Eden, starring Jude Law, Vanessa Kirby, Ana de Armas, and Sydney Sweeney.

    Based on a true story, Eden follows two German scientists (Law and Kirby) as they flee their home country in 1929 to settle on Floreana Island in the Galápagos. Soon others follow, creating trouble in their apparent paradise. Will the story of Europeans colonizing Latin American land provide entertainment in the year 2025 or will Howard’s style of middlebrow blockbusters be rejected by modern audiences? We’ll see soon enough.

    Caught Stealing

    August 29

    Darren Aronofsky movies aren’t always good, but they are always interesting, so we can’t help but look with anticipation toward Caught Stealing. Working from a script by author Charlie Huston, Caught Stealing stars Austin Butler as a baseball player who descends into the criminal underworld of 1990s New York. While he’s made some out-there fantasias such as The Fountain and mother!, Aronofsky’s biggest hits tend to be gritty tales such as Requiem for a Dream, Black Swan, and The Wrestler. Huston’s writing seems to tend toward the more realistic side with hints of surrealism, which suits Aronofsky’s style just fine.

    The Toxic Avenger

    August 29

    Video store kids of the ‘80s and ‘90s all know about Toxie, the breakout hero and mascot of Troma Entertainment. Does that name mean anything today? After all, Troma is very much a product of the VHS era when the demand for home video made a reliable market for their low-budget movies, designed to nothing more than offend moral and aesthetic taste. The Toxic Avenger from 1984 brought Troma and Toxie to the masses, but when kids today have instant access to the worst humanity has to offer, what can Troma do?

    We’ll find out when the remake of The Toxic Avenger finally hits theaters this summer. Originally debuting at Fantastic Fest in 2023, The Toxic Avenger stars Peter Dinklage as janitor Winston Gooze, transformed into the titular anti-hero after a bullying accident. But the most promising part of this update is behind the camera, as actor Macon Blair, a regular of Jeremy Saulnier’s troupe and the director of I Don’t Feel at Home in This World Anymore, writes and directs.

    The Roses

    August 29

    Closing out a summer full of surprising sequels and remakes is the most unlikely of them all. Directed by Jay Roach and written by Tony McNamara, The Roses is based on the 1981 novel The War of the Roses by Warren Adler, which was previously adapted into a 1989 movie starring Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, and Danny DeVito. In this version, Olivia Coleman and Benedict Cumberbatch play a successful, upper-class couple who turn destructive as they head toward divorce.

    Unlike some others on this list, The Roses feels like exactly the type of movie that needs a refresh in 2025. Movies for adults have taken a backseat to the big-budget PG-13 fair of the past two decades, and we’re worse off for it. A comedy about grown ups, even grown up behaving like children, might be exactly the palate cleanser we need as we head into the awards-friendly autumn.

    The post Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • Star Wars: Andor – Senator Bail Organa Casting Change Explained

    Star Wars: Andor – Senator Bail Organa Casting Change Explained

    This article contains spoilers for Andor season 2 episodes 4-6. Senator Bail Organa of Alderaan was first introduced to the current Star Wars canon in Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, and has since become an important character in the Clone Wars era and into the Galactic Civil War. Most know him as […]

    The post Star Wars: Andor – Senator Bail Organa Casting Change Explained appeared first on Den of Geek.

    For some people, the summer months mean beaches and long days outdoors. For Den of Geek readers, the summer means staying inside air conditioned movie theaters and watching big budget spectacles! And boy, does summer 2025 have spectacles. But if superheroes and dinosaurs aren’t your bag, you don’t have to skip cinemas altogether this season. Everything from comedy revivals to existential horrors will be hitting screens over the next couple of months, promising cool entertainment for all. And we got it all here for your viewing pleasure.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Another Simple Favor

    May 1

    Paul Feig continues to be one of the more mercurial figures in Hollywood. He’s directed or co-created some excellent stuff, including Freaks & Geeks, Spy, and the deeply underrated Last Christmas. But he’s also behind absolute stinkers such as The Heat and Jackpot!, making for a checkered filmography.

    This year, Feig returns to one of his more successful projects with the sequel Another Simple Favor. Blake Lively and Anna Kendrick reprise their roles as the stylish, suspicious rivals Emily Nelson and Stephanie Smothers. This time, the murder that binds them occurs in Capri, Italy, promising even more magazine-spread sophistication than the first movie.

    Thunderbolts*

    May 2

    Who can say what kind of movie Thunderbolts* will be? It follows Captain America: Brave New World, a movie that seemed to embarrass even Marvel, and precedes the highly-anticipated The Fantastic Four: First Steps. Throw in a delayed production process that lost Steven Yeun and Ayo Edebiri, replaced by Lewis Pullman and Geraldine Viswanathan, and the tea leaves might be ambiguous.

    But maybe that misfit status will work in the film’s favor. Thunderbolts* walks the same path as Suicide Squad and this year’s Star Trek: Section 31 as a story about people who don’t belong together forming a team. Unlike those dismal films, however, Thunderbolts* seems to understand its ragtag place, with marketing leaning heavily on the mountains of charisma that Florence Pugh and David Harbour bring, alongside Sebastian Stan’s beloved Winter Soldier.

    The Surfer

    May 2

    By this point, Nicolas Cage has completed his purgation from being ironically loved by the internet to actually loved by the internet, to finally recognized (again) as one of the most interesting working actors in cinema. So even the the ad campaign for The Surfer has been as spartan as its title, we can’t help but be intrigued.

    Directed by Irish filmmaker Lorcan Finnegan (Vivarium, Nocebo) and written by Thomas Martin, The Surfer features Cage as a man who brings his son to surf an Australian beach he loved in his youth only to be menaced by local roughs. That sounds a lot like Cage’s recent masterpiece Pig, and some reviewers have compared it to the Aussie New Wave classic Wake in Fright, making The Surfer one of the more compelling entries on this list.

    Friendship

    May 9

    Speaking of internet faves, Friendship stars Tim Robinson as a bored suburbanite who makes fast friends with a new neighbor played by Paul Rudd. Feeling that the bond has restored his lost youth, Robinson’s character soon becomes an obsessive and even destructive force in his neighbor’s life while alienating himself from his wife (Kate Mara).

    To anyone familiar with I Think You Should Leave, that description fills the mind with images of slicked back hair and sloppy steaks, which should both excite and worry us. Robinson’s humor works great in five-minute sketches, but will that translate to feature length? Fortunately, Robinson and Rudd have Our Flag Means Death and PEN15‘s Andrew DeYoung onboard to direct.

    Final Destination: Bloodlines

    May 16

    The Final Destination franchise has tried to close itself out twice, first with 2009’s awful The Final Destination and again in 2011’s excellent Final Destination 5. But Death’s work is never complete, so it’s fitting that a new entry would appear with Final Destination: Bloodlines.

    To be honest, Bloodlines has some stiff competition, not only because it comes more than a decade after the last and best entry, but also because Oz Perkins already gave us a glorious pseudo-Destination this year with The Monkey. Directors Zach Lipovsky and Adam Stein don’t exactly build the most confidence, as they won acclaim for their work on Disney XD shows. But Bloodlines does give us one last look at the late, great Tony Todd as mortician William Bludsworth, so we will be there on day one.

    Hurry Up Tomorrow

    May 14

    On the heels of Smile 2 and Opus comes another horror movie about the plight of being an internationally beloved pop star. Based on his own album, Hurry Up Tomorrow stars Abel Tesfaye, aka The Weeknd, as a fictionalized version of himself who suffers a paranoid breakdown.

    For those who only know The Weeknd from gifs, Hurry Up Tomorrow also stars Jenna Ortega as the pop star’s girlfriend and Barry Keoghan as a mysterious stranger. For cinephiles, the most compelling name on the poster is that of Trey Edward Shults, who broke out with the world’s scariest Thanksgiving movie Krisha and then followed it up with highly divisive movies It Comes at Night and Waves. Judging by Hurry Up Tomorrow‘s trailer, Shults has no intention of becoming predictable now.

    Lilo & Stitch

    May 23

    Having already desecrated its classic and renaissance era in order to mine for ugly remakes that can be shoved into theaters, Disney turns to its oddball post-renaissance period for its latest live-action rehash. Are they remaking Brother Bear or Home on the Range, bad movies that might be improved by a second draft? Of course not! They’re remaking the good ones because those have name recognition!

    Lilo & Stitch seems to repeat the exact same beats of the 2002 movie in which a fuzzy but dangerous alien (Chris Sanders) crash lands on Hawaii and befriends a lonely orphaned girl (Maia Kealoha) and her guardian big sister (Sydney Agudong). The one sliver of hope comes in the fact that Lilo & Stitch 2025 is directed by Dean Fleischer Camp, who made the delightful Marcel the Shell With Shoes On. Then again, if Camp is successful and Lilo & Stitch does well, then we’re bound to see live-action version of The Emperor’s New Groove, and no one wants that.

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning

    May 23

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning promises to do what Owen Davian, Solomon Lane, and Jim Phelps could never accomplish: It will bring a stop to Ethan Hunt. Maybe. Through sure force of will and madness, Tom Cruise has transformed the Mission: Impossible franchise from a TV series best known for its theme song into a big-budget stunt spectacular in which we flock to see him risk his life for our amusement. But time comes even for Cruise, so Final Reckoning is being marketed as Hunt’s last outing.

    At least he’s going out with a bang. Once again directed by Christopher McQuarrie, The Final Reckoning reveals the mastermind behind the rogue AI known as the Entity as someone with ties to the first film. Along the way, he’ll get help from his team, including mainstays played by Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, as well as newer additions played by Hayley Atwell, Vanessa Kirby, and Pom Klementieff. Also, Tom Cruise will hang off a plane, which is what we’re really here to see.

    Fear Street: Prom Queen

    May 23

    If you’re over the age of 25, you may only know Fear Street as the YA novels written by Goosebumps author R.L. Stein. However, the three Fear Street movies released by Netflix have been horror favorites of Gen Z, thanks to viral videos shared online. Fear Street: Prom Queen breaks from the trilogy format of the first three movies for a standalone story about scary things occurring at a 1988 prom queen race. Matt Palmer steps in for departing director Leigh Janiak, but as long as he can bring the gory thrills, Zoomers are sure to love it.

    Fountain of Youth

    May 23

    English director Guy Ritchie continues to broaden his offerings with the adventure tale Fountain of Youth. Penned by veteran screenwriter James Vanderbilt (Zodiac, The Amazing Spider-Man), Fountain of Youth stars John Krasinski and Natalie Portman as siblings searching for the titular water source. They’re joined by a gaggle of character actors like Domhnall Gleeson, Eiza Gonzalez, and Stanley Tucci. That all sounds like a throwback good time to at least the heyday of National Treasure and Tomb Raider if not Indiana Jones. But one has to wonder if Fountain of Youth will be hampered by the fact that it’s straight to Apple TV+, dulling the sense of scale that adventure tales usually need.

    Karate Kid: Legends

    May 30

    Karate Kid: Legends offers a rarity even in this age of IP-first filmmaking, a legacy sequel combined with a remake. Legends sees original Karate Kid Daniel LaRusso (Ralph Macchio) team with Kung Fu master Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) of the 2010 remake to train newcomer Li Fong (Ben Wang).

    It’s a strange maneuver on Sony’s part, pivoting away from the very popular Karate Kid legacy series Cobra Kai, which recently ended its six season run on Netflix, and toward the lesser-loved 2010 remake. Will Legends uncover a hidden trove of fans nostalgic for the 2010 movie? Or is it time to finally bring back Hilary Swank from The Next Karate Kid? We’ll find out this summer.

    The Phoenician Scheme

    May 30, June 6 (wide)

    Although initially panned upon its release in 2005, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou has been reclaimed as on of Wes Anderson‘s best movies (including by us!). So it’s good to see Anderson take another swing at the action genre with The Phoenician Scheme.

    That said, The Phoenician Scheme does feel slightly different from most of Anderson’s movies, mostly because he’s shaking up his usual stable of players. Benicio del Toro, who had only previously worked with Anderson on The French Dispatch, takes the lead as businessman Zsa-zsa Korda, alongside new additions Mia Threapleton, Michael Cera, and Riz Ahmed. Of course familiar faces Tom Hanks, Bill Murray, and Scarlett Johansson are on hand, as is Anderson’s impeccable aesthetic.

    Bring Her Back

    May 30

    Aussie twins Danny and Michael Philippou made the jump from YouTube to indie cult status with 2022’s Talk To Me. They’re ready to ride that momentum with their follow-up Bring Her Back, once again distributed by A24. Bring Her Back follows a recently orphaned brother and sister who come to the home of a foster mother played by Sally Hawkins, who already cares for a troubled boy who may have mystical powers. Judging by Bring Her Back‘s trailer, the Philippou brothers plan a movie just as troubling and intense as their debut.

    From the World of John Wick: Ballerina

    June 6

    John Wick: Chapter 4 seemed to bring an end to the Baba Yaga, but you can’t keep a financially successful franchise down. Thus comes Ana de Armas in From the World of John Wick: Ballerina, complete with an appropriately ostentatious title. Even if you don’t think the John Wick series needed a movie that isn’t about John Wick, Ballerina has a few things in its favor. First, the movie sees the return of not just Reeves’ titular killer (this film is a side-quel set simultaneously during the events of Chapter 3 and 4), but also Ian McShane as Winston and Lance Reddick in his final performance as Charon. The “directed by” credit for Len Wiseman doesn’t inspire much hope, but behind-the-scenes reports indicate that original series director Chad Stahelski shot some of the fight scenes and spearheaded the reshoots. So maybe Ballerina‘s worth checking out after all.

    The Life of Chuck

    June 6

    For the past few years, Mike Flanagan has established himself as one of the most interesting television creators working today. Although his last movie Doctor Sleep has its fans, supporters explicitly cite the Director’s Cut as the preferred version, arguing that the extended run time better suits the dazzling monologues Flanagan writes.

    So we greet Flanagan’s return to the big screen with a bit of trepidation. Yes, he’s adapting Stephen King once again, and yes, he has most of his familiar ensemble in tow, including Kate Siegel, Rahul Kohli, Mark Hamill, and Carl Lumbly, alongside Tom Hiddleston stepping out of the MCU for a minute. But The Life of Chuck clocks in at under two hours, which seems like far too little time for these brilliant actors to deliver Flanagan’s lines about fate, faith, and the meaning of life. However, the buzz the film has generated out of TIFF, where it won the audience award and threw Oscar prognosticators’ end-of-year predictions into chaos (since this is a June 2025 release) fills us with curiosity.

    How to Train Your Dragon (June 13)

    The live-action Disney remakes can at least claim that they’re reimagining beloved classics. Great as the original How to Train Your Dragon, it’s only 15 years old. Worse, the remake seems to be using the exact same plot, the exact same CG designs of the dragons, and even the exact same Gerard Butler to play grumpy father Stoick the Vast. Why so many similarities? Because the remake is directed by the same guy who dreamed up the original, Dean DeBlois.

    Still, maybe there’s some magic to be found in the new cast, which includes The Black Phone‘s Mason Thames as Hiccup and The Last of Us‘s Nico Parker as Astrid. If they can provide just enough energy, and if DeBlois can recapture some of the original’s magic he brought to the animated trilogy, then How to Train Your Dragon might stand on its own.

    Materialists

    June 13

    Materialists may not be getting the same push as the summer’s superhero and remake entries, but it’s easily one of the more exciting movies coming soon. First, there’s the buzzy cast, including Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal, and Chris Evans. Then there’s the director Celine Song, making her follow-up to 2023’s Past Lives. Finally, there’s the design of the poster, which finds the central trio doing catalogue poses in an image surrounded by a thick white border.

    Everything about Materialists recalls the adult romantic comedies of the ’80s and ’90s, especially its plot. Johnson plays a high-powered matchmaker who, against her better judgment, gets caught in a triangle. If it has even an ounce of the verve of Broadcast News and half the humanity of Past Lives, Materialists will be a favorite long after summer’s end.

    Echo Valley

    June 13

    Speaking of big names in a low-stakes picture, Mare of Eastown creator Brad Ingelsby returns to the features with Echo Valley for Apple TV+. Julianne Moore and Sydney Sweeney play a mother and daughter who reunite after a tragedy. Sweeney may have broken out with the flashy series Euphoria, but Echo Valley may be another chance to show off the acting chops witnessed in Reality. As seen in his scripts for Mare of Eastown, The Way Back, and Out of the Furnace, Ingelsby understands the nuances of small town life, giving Sweeney plenty of room to develop a complex character.

    28 Years Later

    June 20

    It’s only been 23 years since director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland un-nevered the world with their zombie thriller 28 Days Later, but we’re willing the fudge the math to get the pair together again. As its title suggests, 28 Years Later takes place more than a quarter century after a rage virus ravaged England. Despite the new status quo, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and his son Spike (Alfie Williams) must leave their island village to face the monsters.

    Back in 2002, before George Romero’s return to the genre and all of The Walking Dead, zombies felt fresh and digital photography seemed innovative. Both the technology and the genre have lost some of their bite today. but if there’s anyone who can reanimate the dead forms, it’s Boyle and Garland. We’ll see if 28 Years Later proves worth the wait.

    Elio

    June 20

    Even though Pixar isn’t the surefire studio it once was, a new release still deserves our attention, especially when the trio of directors includes Turning Red‘s Domee Shi and Coco‘s Adrian Molina. Both helmers of two of the best recent Pixar movies, Shi and Molina are joined by Madeline Sharafian, making her feature debut.

    Elio follows the titular outer-space nerd (Yonas Kibreab) as he’s somehow selected o represent humanity in an intergalactic council. If all goes well, Elio will learn about life while going through some wacky hijinks, and kids and adults alike will be moved to tears.

    M3GAN 2.0

    June 27

    You can’t keep a viral sensation down, so it’s no surprise to see Blumhouse‘s pre-teen murder-bot make her return for M3GAN 2.0. Taking a page out of the Terminator 2 handbook, M3GAN 2.0 sees the reconstituted robot (voiced by Jenna Davis and performed by Amie Donald) doing battle with an upgraded successor called Amelia (Ivanna Sakhno).

    Allison Williams is back as M3GAN’s inventor as is Violet McGraw as her charge/victim. James Wan produces again, as does original co-writer Akela Cooper and director Gerard Johnstone scripting. The question is whether this one will be as heavy on the meme-ready action?

    F1

    June 27

    Most movie fans point to baseball and boxing as the most cinematic of sports, but racing is a pretty close third. So the prospect of seeing Brad Pitt drive fast cars is enough to get butts in seats for F1, especially with direction by Joseph Kosinski of Tron: Legacy and Top Gun: Maverick.

    F1 has a well-worn sports plot, with Pitt playing a driver whose career ended with a crash decades ago but is now brought back to mentor a promising up-and-comer (Damson Idris). But racing’s all about improvisations within a set track, and if Kosinski can shoot cars like he shot fighter jets, then no one will care about familiar plot beats.

    Jurassic World: Rebirth

    July 2

    Perhaps the greatest testament to the power of the original Jurassic Park is how Steven Spielberg‘s movie still inspires wonder no matter how many lackluster sequels follow. That said, Jurassic World: Rebirth does have a harder road to hoe, given that it comes off of the dismal Jurassic World Dominion (aka, the one with more locusts than dinosaurs).

    Rebirth hopes to correct course by going back to the original. Not only is the trailer full of callbacks to the first movie, but it even boasts a script by David Koepp, screenwriter of the 1993 film. Furthermore, Rebirth director Gareth Edwards (Godzilla, Rogue One) seems to be aiming for old-school adventure in which a scientist (Jonathan Bailey) hires two mercenaries (Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali) to help him find dino genetics that could lead to pharmaceutical breakthroughs. Not exactly cutting edge in plot, but, honestly, as long as Jurassic World: Rebirth has cool dinos eating some folks in cool ways, we’ll be there.

    The Old Guard 2

    July 2

    It’s been five years since Netflix released The Old Guard, an excellent fantasy action film based on the comic book by Greg Rucka and Leandro Fernández. In the passing years, The Old Guard hasn’t quite become the cult sensation that it deserves to be, but the story is worthy of continuing, especially if new director Victoria Mahoney can match the mixture of action and character depth established by her predecessor Gina Prince-Bythewood.

    The Old Guard 2 brings back Charlize Theron as Andromache of Scythia, aka Andy, the leader of a group of near-immortals who travel the world doing good. She’s joined by newest recruit Nile Freeman (KiKi Layne) and her reliable teammates, all of whom she’ll need to counter a vengeful former lover (Vân Veronica Ngô), who spent the past centuries trapped in an underwater grave.

    Superman

    July 11

    This late in the cycle of superhero movies, we all believe a man can fly. What remains an open questions is if Warner Bros. can make a Superman film as inspirational as the 1978 classic with that tagline in 2025. Hiring true genre aficanado James Gunn seemed like a great start, but can the guy who cut his teeth with Troma, and gleefully slaughtered Z-listers in The Suicide Squad, be the one to pull it off?

    Yet with each new look at Superman, our belief grows. Rachel Brosnahan is pitch-perfect casting for Lois Lane and David Corenswet seems to embody the Clark Kent/Superman divide. After The Great and The Menu, Nicholas Hoult has become the ideal person to play the megalomaniacal Lex Luthor. Throw in a compelling supporting cast with inspired choices, including Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner and Skyler Gisondo as Jimmy Olsen, and its getting easier to believe every minute.

    I Know What You Did Last Summer

    July 18

    As the Scream franchise burns up the goodwill its relaunch earned with a series of unforced errors, its kid sister rises to take its place. The 2025 version of I Know What You Did Last Summer follows a group of attractive young people who get chased around a seaside town by a killer fisherman with a hook hand, all penance for some secret crime committed the previous year… just like in the 1997 film.

    To its credit, the I Know What You Did Last Summer 2025 seems to recognize the improbability of its premise and leans into it. The trailer not only highlights the pretty new set of victims, led by Glass Onion’s Madelyn Cline, but also originals Freddie Prinze Jr. and Jennifer Love Hewitt, both of whom deliver some self-aware dialogue. If director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson (Do Revenge) can nail the balance of metatextual references and nasty slasher kills, Scream may indeed become the stuff of forgotten summers.

    Eddington

    July 18

    Ari Aster made his name by shocking viewers: first with the deeply unsettling Hereditary and then with the still-beguiling Midsommar, which drove people back to his inexplicable short films, before completely baffling everyone with his comic odyssey Beau Is Afraid.

    All of that’s a long way of saying that we have no idea what to expect from his latest entry, Eddington. A teaser trailer suggests that Aster’s taking a more satirical edge, as it shows a man played by Joaquin Phoenix scrolling to his phone to see ripped-from-the-headlines videos about COVID, public shaming, and MAGA protests, and here performed by actors as adored as Pedro Pascal and Emma Stone. But that sounds way too easy for a filmmaker like Aster, so prepare for Eddington to shock you in ways you could never foresee.

    The Fantastic Four: First Steps

    July 25

    Together with Superman, The Fantastic Four: First Steps seeks to revitalize the superhero movie genre with a dose of bright-eyed optimism. And like its cousin over at the Distinguished Competition side of the street, First Steps has to cleanse public memory of some pretty terrible predecessors. It’s taking the right steps with its cast, which includes favorites Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Joseph Quinn, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as the central quartet.

    Adding to the appeal is the retro-futuristic aesthetic, brought to life by WandaVision’s Matt Shakman. However, that does raise questions about First Steps’ placement in the larger Marvel Universe. Will the world-devourer Galactus (Ralph Ineson) and his herald Silver Surfer (Julia Garner) destroy this world, immediately tarnishing Marvel’s brightly-hued new entries? We’ll have to wait for the post-credits to know for sure.

    Happy Gilmore 2

    July 25

    Forget I Know What You Did Last Summer. 2025’s most surprising ‘90s come back belongs to hockey player-turned-golfer Happy Gilmore who comes to Netflix with a sequel 29 years in the making. Adam Sandler reteams with original writer Tim Herlihy for the latest in Happy’s shenanigans.

    Happy Gilmore 2 finds Happy returning to the green for some reason. But let’s be honest, the reason doesn’t matter. Adam Sandler movies are mostly about watching him have fun with his friends, and that’s exactly what Happy Gilmore 2 promises, complete with appearances by Julie Bowen, Christopher McDonald, and Ben Stiller, all reprising their characters from the first movie, along with lots of golfer cameos.

    The Bad Guys 2

    August 1

    Based on the popular line of children’s illustrated novels, The Bad Guys stars Sam Rockwell as Mr. Wolf, the leader of a group of carnivores/criminals who seek to rehabilitate their image. Thanks to its solid voice acting from Rockwell and co-stars, including Marc Maron and Awkwafina, and its use of the animation techniques pioneered by Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, The Bad Guys was a surprise hit in 2022.

    The sequel hopes to continue that success, bringing back all of the principle cast, director Pierre Perifel, and the same animation engine. Following the “bigger is better” approach to sequels, The Bad Guys 2 introduces the Bad Girls, lady animals voiced by the likes of Danielle Brooks and Natasha Lyonne. As long as it can provide the zany energy that kids liked about the first film, The Bad Guys are sure to do good once again at the box office.

    The Naked Gun

    August 1

    On paper the long-in-development remake of The Naked Gun sounds like a disaster. Who today has the same dry humor of the late, great Leslie Nielsen? Who has the same eye for parodic detail as the Zucker Brothers and Jim Abrams? Heck, does our current world of non-stop police procedurals have anything like M Squad, the forgotten show that inspired The Naked Gun’s predecessor, Police Squad?

    Most of those concerns fall away when we see the first teaser for The Naked Gun 2025. Directed by the Lonely Island’s Akiva Schaffer, The Naked Gun has an inspired pick in Liam Neeson as Frank Drebin Jr., leader of a new version of Police Squad, and he’s joined by Paul Walter Hauser as Ed Hocken Jr. and Moses Jones as Nordberg Jr. Just reading that sentence boosts confidence that, somehow, Schaffer and company have figured out how to replicate the ZAZ humor for today’s audiences.

    Freakier Friday

    August 8

    The train of long-in-the-making sequels continues with Freakier Friday, a continuation of the 2003 Disney remake with Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan. In the 2003 version, mother and daughter Tess and Anna Coleman swapped bodies, leading to good-hearted shenanigans and family bonding. The sequel doubles up with a four-way swap, bringing a daughter and step-daughter (Julia Butters and Sophia Hammons, respectively) into the mix.

    Judging by the trailer, director Nisha Ganatra (Late Night, The High Note) knows exactly what fans expect from this outing and plans to give it to them. A game Curtis and Lohan throw themselves into their age-inappropriate roles and the quadruple swap changes things up just enough. Throw familiar faces such as Chad Michael Murray and Rosalind Chao from the first movie and add Manny Jacinto as a new love interest, and Freakier Friday’s set to be a warm reunion for 2000s kids ready for some nostalgia.

    Weapons

    August 8

    Weapons director Zach Cregger isn’t a new name, having performed for years in the sketch group The Whitest Kids U’ Know and even co-directed Miss March with late co-star Trevor Moore. But Cregger proved we didn’t really know him at all with his solo director debut, the 2022 shocker Barbarian.

    Weapons seeks to surprise us all over again, beginning with a cryptic ad campaign of blurry surveillance footage. Weapons presents itself as a missing persons story, dealing with the mass exodus of children from a suburban neighborhood. But if Barbarian is any indication, that premise just starts the upsetting story that Cregger wants to tell.

    Nobody 2

    August 15

    No one watching Mr. Show in its heyday could have predicted that Bob Odenkirk would have gone from guy who shouts obscenities in sketch comedies to beloved dad who warmly greets his little women. Even more shocking was Odenkirk’s turn to action hero in 2021’s Nobody, in which he played a put-upon suburbanite who recovers his international assassin skills after an attack on his family. If that sounds similar to John Wick, well, it is written by Derek Kolstad, who co-created the Keanu Reeves character.

    Nobody 2 picks up where the first movie left off, with Odenkirk’s Hutch Mansell and his FBI agent father David (Christopher Lloyd) trying to return to their old lives after the latter’s night of chaos. This time around, Kolstad shares a writing credit with three others (including Odenkirk), but Timo Tjahjanto (who co-directed the “Safe Haven” segment of V/H/S/ 2 with Gareth Evans) steps into direct.

    Eden

    August 22

    By this point, you know what to expect from a Ron Howard movie: something that’s solidly well-made or—occasionally—a project that unintentionally unleashes nightmares upon the country, as with 2020’s Hillbilly Elegy. We’re hoping for more of the former with Eden, starring Jude Law, Vanessa Kirby, Ana de Armas, and Sydney Sweeney.

    Based on a true story, Eden follows two German scientists (Law and Kirby) as they flee their home country in 1929 to settle on Floreana Island in the Galápagos. Soon others follow, creating trouble in their apparent paradise. Will the story of Europeans colonizing Latin American land provide entertainment in the year 2025 or will Howard’s style of middlebrow blockbusters be rejected by modern audiences? We’ll see soon enough.

    Caught Stealing

    August 29

    Darren Aronofsky movies aren’t always good, but they are always interesting, so we can’t help but look with anticipation toward Caught Stealing. Working from a script by author Charlie Huston, Caught Stealing stars Austin Butler as a baseball player who descends into the criminal underworld of 1990s New York. While he’s made some out-there fantasias such as The Fountain and mother!, Aronofsky’s biggest hits tend to be gritty tales such as Requiem for a Dream, Black Swan, and The Wrestler. Huston’s writing seems to tend toward the more realistic side with hints of surrealism, which suits Aronofsky’s style just fine.

    The Toxic Avenger

    August 29

    Video store kids of the ‘80s and ‘90s all know about Toxie, the breakout hero and mascot of Troma Entertainment. Does that name mean anything today? After all, Troma is very much a product of the VHS era when the demand for home video made a reliable market for their low-budget movies, designed to nothing more than offend moral and aesthetic taste. The Toxic Avenger from 1984 brought Troma and Toxie to the masses, but when kids today have instant access to the worst humanity has to offer, what can Troma do?

    We’ll find out when the remake of The Toxic Avenger finally hits theaters this summer. Originally debuting at Fantastic Fest in 2023, The Toxic Avenger stars Peter Dinklage as janitor Winston Gooze, transformed into the titular anti-hero after a bullying accident. But the most promising part of this update is behind the camera, as actor Macon Blair, a regular of Jeremy Saulnier’s troupe and the director of I Don’t Feel at Home in This World Anymore, writes and directs.

    The Roses

    August 29

    Closing out a summer full of surprising sequels and remakes is the most unlikely of them all. Directed by Jay Roach and written by Tony McNamara, The Roses is based on the 1981 novel The War of the Roses by Warren Adler, which was previously adapted into a 1989 movie starring Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, and Danny DeVito. In this version, Olivia Coleman and Benedict Cumberbatch play a successful, upper-class couple who turn destructive as they head toward divorce.

    Unlike some others on this list, The Roses feels like exactly the type of movie that needs a refresh in 2025. Movies for adults have taken a backseat to the big-budget PG-13 fair of the past two decades, and we’re worse off for it. A comedy about grown ups, even grown up behaving like children, might be exactly the palate cleanser we need as we head into the awards-friendly autumn.

    The post Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • Andor Season 2 Gives An Important Star Wars Character (and Substance) A Backstory

    Andor Season 2 Gives An Important Star Wars Character (and Substance) A Backstory

    This article contains spoilers for Andor season 2 episodes 4-6. We’re already halfway through the final season of Andor, and with it, there are just two in-universe years left until showrunner Tony Gilroy drags us into the tragic events of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. As we fill in the gaps about what some […]

    The post Andor Season 2 Gives An Important Star Wars Character (and Substance) A Backstory appeared first on Den of Geek.

    For some people, the summer months mean beaches and long days outdoors. For Den of Geek readers, the summer means staying inside air conditioned movie theaters and watching big budget spectacles! And boy, does summer 2025 have spectacles. But if superheroes and dinosaurs aren’t your bag, you don’t have to skip cinemas altogether this season. Everything from comedy revivals to existential horrors will be hitting screens over the next couple of months, promising cool entertainment for all. And we got it all here for your viewing pleasure.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Another Simple Favor

    May 1

    Paul Feig continues to be one of the more mercurial figures in Hollywood. He’s directed or co-created some excellent stuff, including Freaks & Geeks, Spy, and the deeply underrated Last Christmas. But he’s also behind absolute stinkers such as The Heat and Jackpot!, making for a checkered filmography.

    This year, Feig returns to one of his more successful projects with the sequel Another Simple Favor. Blake Lively and Anna Kendrick reprise their roles as the stylish, suspicious rivals Emily Nelson and Stephanie Smothers. This time, the murder that binds them occurs in Capri, Italy, promising even more magazine-spread sophistication than the first movie.

    Thunderbolts*

    May 2

    Who can say what kind of movie Thunderbolts* will be? It follows Captain America: Brave New World, a movie that seemed to embarrass even Marvel, and precedes the highly-anticipated The Fantastic Four: First Steps. Throw in a delayed production process that lost Steven Yeun and Ayo Edebiri, replaced by Lewis Pullman and Geraldine Viswanathan, and the tea leaves might be ambiguous.

    But maybe that misfit status will work in the film’s favor. Thunderbolts* walks the same path as Suicide Squad and this year’s Star Trek: Section 31 as a story about people who don’t belong together forming a team. Unlike those dismal films, however, Thunderbolts* seems to understand its ragtag place, with marketing leaning heavily on the mountains of charisma that Florence Pugh and David Harbour bring, alongside Sebastian Stan’s beloved Winter Soldier.

    The Surfer

    May 2

    By this point, Nicolas Cage has completed his purgation from being ironically loved by the internet to actually loved by the internet, to finally recognized (again) as one of the most interesting working actors in cinema. So even the the ad campaign for The Surfer has been as spartan as its title, we can’t help but be intrigued.

    Directed by Irish filmmaker Lorcan Finnegan (Vivarium, Nocebo) and written by Thomas Martin, The Surfer features Cage as a man who brings his son to surf an Australian beach he loved in his youth only to be menaced by local roughs. That sounds a lot like Cage’s recent masterpiece Pig, and some reviewers have compared it to the Aussie New Wave classic Wake in Fright, making The Surfer one of the more compelling entries on this list.

    Friendship

    May 9

    Speaking of internet faves, Friendship stars Tim Robinson as a bored suburbanite who makes fast friends with a new neighbor played by Paul Rudd. Feeling that the bond has restored his lost youth, Robinson’s character soon becomes an obsessive and even destructive force in his neighbor’s life while alienating himself from his wife (Kate Mara).

    To anyone familiar with I Think You Should Leave, that description fills the mind with images of slicked back hair and sloppy steaks, which should both excite and worry us. Robinson’s humor works great in five-minute sketches, but will that translate to feature length? Fortunately, Robinson and Rudd have Our Flag Means Death and PEN15‘s Andrew DeYoung onboard to direct.

    Final Destination: Bloodlines

    May 16

    The Final Destination franchise has tried to close itself out twice, first with 2009’s awful The Final Destination and again in 2011’s excellent Final Destination 5. But Death’s work is never complete, so it’s fitting that a new entry would appear with Final Destination: Bloodlines.

    To be honest, Bloodlines has some stiff competition, not only because it comes more than a decade after the last and best entry, but also because Oz Perkins already gave us a glorious pseudo-Destination this year with The Monkey. Directors Zach Lipovsky and Adam Stein don’t exactly build the most confidence, as they won acclaim for their work on Disney XD shows. But Bloodlines does give us one last look at the late, great Tony Todd as mortician William Bludsworth, so we will be there on day one.

    Hurry Up Tomorrow

    May 14

    On the heels of Smile 2 and Opus comes another horror movie about the plight of being an internationally beloved pop star. Based on his own album, Hurry Up Tomorrow stars Abel Tesfaye, aka The Weeknd, as a fictionalized version of himself who suffers a paranoid breakdown.

    For those who only know The Weeknd from gifs, Hurry Up Tomorrow also stars Jenna Ortega as the pop star’s girlfriend and Barry Keoghan as a mysterious stranger. For cinephiles, the most compelling name on the poster is that of Trey Edward Shults, who broke out with the world’s scariest Thanksgiving movie Krisha and then followed it up with highly divisive movies It Comes at Night and Waves. Judging by Hurry Up Tomorrow‘s trailer, Shults has no intention of becoming predictable now.

    Lilo & Stitch

    May 23

    Having already desecrated its classic and renaissance era in order to mine for ugly remakes that can be shoved into theaters, Disney turns to its oddball post-renaissance period for its latest live-action rehash. Are they remaking Brother Bear or Home on the Range, bad movies that might be improved by a second draft? Of course not! They’re remaking the good ones because those have name recognition!

    Lilo & Stitch seems to repeat the exact same beats of the 2002 movie in which a fuzzy but dangerous alien (Chris Sanders) crash lands on Hawaii and befriends a lonely orphaned girl (Maia Kealoha) and her guardian big sister (Sydney Agudong). The one sliver of hope comes in the fact that Lilo & Stitch 2025 is directed by Dean Fleischer Camp, who made the delightful Marcel the Shell With Shoes On. Then again, if Camp is successful and Lilo & Stitch does well, then we’re bound to see live-action version of The Emperor’s New Groove, and no one wants that.

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning

    May 23

    Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning promises to do what Owen Davian, Solomon Lane, and Jim Phelps could never accomplish: It will bring a stop to Ethan Hunt. Maybe. Through sure force of will and madness, Tom Cruise has transformed the Mission: Impossible franchise from a TV series best known for its theme song into a big-budget stunt spectacular in which we flock to see him risk his life for our amusement. But time comes even for Cruise, so Final Reckoning is being marketed as Hunt’s last outing.

    At least he’s going out with a bang. Once again directed by Christopher McQuarrie, The Final Reckoning reveals the mastermind behind the rogue AI known as the Entity as someone with ties to the first film. Along the way, he’ll get help from his team, including mainstays played by Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, as well as newer additions played by Hayley Atwell, Vanessa Kirby, and Pom Klementieff. Also, Tom Cruise will hang off a plane, which is what we’re really here to see.

    Fear Street: Prom Queen

    May 23

    If you’re over the age of 25, you may only know Fear Street as the YA novels written by Goosebumps author R.L. Stein. However, the three Fear Street movies released by Netflix have been horror favorites of Gen Z, thanks to viral videos shared online. Fear Street: Prom Queen breaks from the trilogy format of the first three movies for a standalone story about scary things occurring at a 1988 prom queen race. Matt Palmer steps in for departing director Leigh Janiak, but as long as he can bring the gory thrills, Zoomers are sure to love it.

    Fountain of Youth

    May 23

    English director Guy Ritchie continues to broaden his offerings with the adventure tale Fountain of Youth. Penned by veteran screenwriter James Vanderbilt (Zodiac, The Amazing Spider-Man), Fountain of Youth stars John Krasinski and Natalie Portman as siblings searching for the titular water source. They’re joined by a gaggle of character actors like Domhnall Gleeson, Eiza Gonzalez, and Stanley Tucci. That all sounds like a throwback good time to at least the heyday of National Treasure and Tomb Raider if not Indiana Jones. But one has to wonder if Fountain of Youth will be hampered by the fact that it’s straight to Apple TV+, dulling the sense of scale that adventure tales usually need.

    Karate Kid: Legends

    May 30

    Karate Kid: Legends offers a rarity even in this age of IP-first filmmaking, a legacy sequel combined with a remake. Legends sees original Karate Kid Daniel LaRusso (Ralph Macchio) team with Kung Fu master Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) of the 2010 remake to train newcomer Li Fong (Ben Wang).

    It’s a strange maneuver on Sony’s part, pivoting away from the very popular Karate Kid legacy series Cobra Kai, which recently ended its six season run on Netflix, and toward the lesser-loved 2010 remake. Will Legends uncover a hidden trove of fans nostalgic for the 2010 movie? Or is it time to finally bring back Hilary Swank from The Next Karate Kid? We’ll find out this summer.

    The Phoenician Scheme

    May 30, June 6 (wide)

    Although initially panned upon its release in 2005, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou has been reclaimed as on of Wes Anderson‘s best movies (including by us!). So it’s good to see Anderson take another swing at the action genre with The Phoenician Scheme.

    That said, The Phoenician Scheme does feel slightly different from most of Anderson’s movies, mostly because he’s shaking up his usual stable of players. Benicio del Toro, who had only previously worked with Anderson on The French Dispatch, takes the lead as businessman Zsa-zsa Korda, alongside new additions Mia Threapleton, Michael Cera, and Riz Ahmed. Of course familiar faces Tom Hanks, Bill Murray, and Scarlett Johansson are on hand, as is Anderson’s impeccable aesthetic.

    Bring Her Back

    May 30

    Aussie twins Danny and Michael Philippou made the jump from YouTube to indie cult status with 2022’s Talk To Me. They’re ready to ride that momentum with their follow-up Bring Her Back, once again distributed by A24. Bring Her Back follows a recently orphaned brother and sister who come to the home of a foster mother played by Sally Hawkins, who already cares for a troubled boy who may have mystical powers. Judging by Bring Her Back‘s trailer, the Philippou brothers plan a movie just as troubling and intense as their debut.

    From the World of John Wick: Ballerina

    June 6

    John Wick: Chapter 4 seemed to bring an end to the Baba Yaga, but you can’t keep a financially successful franchise down. Thus comes Ana de Armas in From the World of John Wick: Ballerina, complete with an appropriately ostentatious title. Even if you don’t think the John Wick series needed a movie that isn’t about John Wick, Ballerina has a few things in its favor. First, the movie sees the return of not just Reeves’ titular killer (this film is a side-quel set simultaneously during the events of Chapter 3 and 4), but also Ian McShane as Winston and Lance Reddick in his final performance as Charon. The “directed by” credit for Len Wiseman doesn’t inspire much hope, but behind-the-scenes reports indicate that original series director Chad Stahelski shot some of the fight scenes and spearheaded the reshoots. So maybe Ballerina‘s worth checking out after all.

    The Life of Chuck

    June 6

    For the past few years, Mike Flanagan has established himself as one of the most interesting television creators working today. Although his last movie Doctor Sleep has its fans, supporters explicitly cite the Director’s Cut as the preferred version, arguing that the extended run time better suits the dazzling monologues Flanagan writes.

    So we greet Flanagan’s return to the big screen with a bit of trepidation. Yes, he’s adapting Stephen King once again, and yes, he has most of his familiar ensemble in tow, including Kate Siegel, Rahul Kohli, Mark Hamill, and Carl Lumbly, alongside Tom Hiddleston stepping out of the MCU for a minute. But The Life of Chuck clocks in at under two hours, which seems like far too little time for these brilliant actors to deliver Flanagan’s lines about fate, faith, and the meaning of life. However, the buzz the film has generated out of TIFF, where it won the audience award and threw Oscar prognosticators’ end-of-year predictions into chaos (since this is a June 2025 release) fills us with curiosity.

    How to Train Your Dragon (June 13)

    The live-action Disney remakes can at least claim that they’re reimagining beloved classics. Great as the original How to Train Your Dragon, it’s only 15 years old. Worse, the remake seems to be using the exact same plot, the exact same CG designs of the dragons, and even the exact same Gerard Butler to play grumpy father Stoick the Vast. Why so many similarities? Because the remake is directed by the same guy who dreamed up the original, Dean DeBlois.

    Still, maybe there’s some magic to be found in the new cast, which includes The Black Phone‘s Mason Thames as Hiccup and The Last of Us‘s Nico Parker as Astrid. If they can provide just enough energy, and if DeBlois can recapture some of the original’s magic he brought to the animated trilogy, then How to Train Your Dragon might stand on its own.

    Materialists

    June 13

    Materialists may not be getting the same push as the summer’s superhero and remake entries, but it’s easily one of the more exciting movies coming soon. First, there’s the buzzy cast, including Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal, and Chris Evans. Then there’s the director Celine Song, making her follow-up to 2023’s Past Lives. Finally, there’s the design of the poster, which finds the central trio doing catalogue poses in an image surrounded by a thick white border.

    Everything about Materialists recalls the adult romantic comedies of the ’80s and ’90s, especially its plot. Johnson plays a high-powered matchmaker who, against her better judgment, gets caught in a triangle. If it has even an ounce of the verve of Broadcast News and half the humanity of Past Lives, Materialists will be a favorite long after summer’s end.

    Echo Valley

    June 13

    Speaking of big names in a low-stakes picture, Mare of Eastown creator Brad Ingelsby returns to the features with Echo Valley for Apple TV+. Julianne Moore and Sydney Sweeney play a mother and daughter who reunite after a tragedy. Sweeney may have broken out with the flashy series Euphoria, but Echo Valley may be another chance to show off the acting chops witnessed in Reality. As seen in his scripts for Mare of Eastown, The Way Back, and Out of the Furnace, Ingelsby understands the nuances of small town life, giving Sweeney plenty of room to develop a complex character.

    28 Years Later

    June 20

    It’s only been 23 years since director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland un-nevered the world with their zombie thriller 28 Days Later, but we’re willing the fudge the math to get the pair together again. As its title suggests, 28 Years Later takes place more than a quarter century after a rage virus ravaged England. Despite the new status quo, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and his son Spike (Alfie Williams) must leave their island village to face the monsters.

    Back in 2002, before George Romero’s return to the genre and all of The Walking Dead, zombies felt fresh and digital photography seemed innovative. Both the technology and the genre have lost some of their bite today. but if there’s anyone who can reanimate the dead forms, it’s Boyle and Garland. We’ll see if 28 Years Later proves worth the wait.

    Elio

    June 20

    Even though Pixar isn’t the surefire studio it once was, a new release still deserves our attention, especially when the trio of directors includes Turning Red‘s Domee Shi and Coco‘s Adrian Molina. Both helmers of two of the best recent Pixar movies, Shi and Molina are joined by Madeline Sharafian, making her feature debut.

    Elio follows the titular outer-space nerd (Yonas Kibreab) as he’s somehow selected o represent humanity in an intergalactic council. If all goes well, Elio will learn about life while going through some wacky hijinks, and kids and adults alike will be moved to tears.

    M3GAN 2.0

    June 27

    You can’t keep a viral sensation down, so it’s no surprise to see Blumhouse‘s pre-teen murder-bot make her return for M3GAN 2.0. Taking a page out of the Terminator 2 handbook, M3GAN 2.0 sees the reconstituted robot (voiced by Jenna Davis and performed by Amie Donald) doing battle with an upgraded successor called Amelia (Ivanna Sakhno).

    Allison Williams is back as M3GAN’s inventor as is Violet McGraw as her charge/victim. James Wan produces again, as does original co-writer Akela Cooper and director Gerard Johnstone scripting. The question is whether this one will be as heavy on the meme-ready action?

    F1

    June 27

    Most movie fans point to baseball and boxing as the most cinematic of sports, but racing is a pretty close third. So the prospect of seeing Brad Pitt drive fast cars is enough to get butts in seats for F1, especially with direction by Joseph Kosinski of Tron: Legacy and Top Gun: Maverick.

    F1 has a well-worn sports plot, with Pitt playing a driver whose career ended with a crash decades ago but is now brought back to mentor a promising up-and-comer (Damson Idris). But racing’s all about improvisations within a set track, and if Kosinski can shoot cars like he shot fighter jets, then no one will care about familiar plot beats.

    Jurassic World: Rebirth

    July 2

    Perhaps the greatest testament to the power of the original Jurassic Park is how Steven Spielberg‘s movie still inspires wonder no matter how many lackluster sequels follow. That said, Jurassic World: Rebirth does have a harder road to hoe, given that it comes off of the dismal Jurassic World Dominion (aka, the one with more locusts than dinosaurs).

    Rebirth hopes to correct course by going back to the original. Not only is the trailer full of callbacks to the first movie, but it even boasts a script by David Koepp, screenwriter of the 1993 film. Furthermore, Rebirth director Gareth Edwards (Godzilla, Rogue One) seems to be aiming for old-school adventure in which a scientist (Jonathan Bailey) hires two mercenaries (Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali) to help him find dino genetics that could lead to pharmaceutical breakthroughs. Not exactly cutting edge in plot, but, honestly, as long as Jurassic World: Rebirth has cool dinos eating some folks in cool ways, we’ll be there.

    The Old Guard 2

    July 2

    It’s been five years since Netflix released The Old Guard, an excellent fantasy action film based on the comic book by Greg Rucka and Leandro Fernández. In the passing years, The Old Guard hasn’t quite become the cult sensation that it deserves to be, but the story is worthy of continuing, especially if new director Victoria Mahoney can match the mixture of action and character depth established by her predecessor Gina Prince-Bythewood.

    The Old Guard 2 brings back Charlize Theron as Andromache of Scythia, aka Andy, the leader of a group of near-immortals who travel the world doing good. She’s joined by newest recruit Nile Freeman (KiKi Layne) and her reliable teammates, all of whom she’ll need to counter a vengeful former lover (Vân Veronica Ngô), who spent the past centuries trapped in an underwater grave.

    Superman

    July 11

    This late in the cycle of superhero movies, we all believe a man can fly. What remains an open questions is if Warner Bros. can make a Superman film as inspirational as the 1978 classic with that tagline in 2025. Hiring true genre aficanado James Gunn seemed like a great start, but can the guy who cut his teeth with Troma, and gleefully slaughtered Z-listers in The Suicide Squad, be the one to pull it off?

    Yet with each new look at Superman, our belief grows. Rachel Brosnahan is pitch-perfect casting for Lois Lane and David Corenswet seems to embody the Clark Kent/Superman divide. After The Great and The Menu, Nicholas Hoult has become the ideal person to play the megalomaniacal Lex Luthor. Throw in a compelling supporting cast with inspired choices, including Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner and Skyler Gisondo as Jimmy Olsen, and its getting easier to believe every minute.

    I Know What You Did Last Summer

    July 18

    As the Scream franchise burns up the goodwill its relaunch earned with a series of unforced errors, its kid sister rises to take its place. The 2025 version of I Know What You Did Last Summer follows a group of attractive young people who get chased around a seaside town by a killer fisherman with a hook hand, all penance for some secret crime committed the previous year… just like in the 1997 film.

    To its credit, the I Know What You Did Last Summer 2025 seems to recognize the improbability of its premise and leans into it. The trailer not only highlights the pretty new set of victims, led by Glass Onion’s Madelyn Cline, but also originals Freddie Prinze Jr. and Jennifer Love Hewitt, both of whom deliver some self-aware dialogue. If director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson (Do Revenge) can nail the balance of metatextual references and nasty slasher kills, Scream may indeed become the stuff of forgotten summers.

    Eddington

    July 18

    Ari Aster made his name by shocking viewers: first with the deeply unsettling Hereditary and then with the still-beguiling Midsommar, which drove people back to his inexplicable short films, before completely baffling everyone with his comic odyssey Beau Is Afraid.

    All of that’s a long way of saying that we have no idea what to expect from his latest entry, Eddington. A teaser trailer suggests that Aster’s taking a more satirical edge, as it shows a man played by Joaquin Phoenix scrolling to his phone to see ripped-from-the-headlines videos about COVID, public shaming, and MAGA protests, and here performed by actors as adored as Pedro Pascal and Emma Stone. But that sounds way too easy for a filmmaker like Aster, so prepare for Eddington to shock you in ways you could never foresee.

    The Fantastic Four: First Steps

    July 25

    Together with Superman, The Fantastic Four: First Steps seeks to revitalize the superhero movie genre with a dose of bright-eyed optimism. And like its cousin over at the Distinguished Competition side of the street, First Steps has to cleanse public memory of some pretty terrible predecessors. It’s taking the right steps with its cast, which includes favorites Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Joseph Quinn, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as the central quartet.

    Adding to the appeal is the retro-futuristic aesthetic, brought to life by WandaVision’s Matt Shakman. However, that does raise questions about First Steps’ placement in the larger Marvel Universe. Will the world-devourer Galactus (Ralph Ineson) and his herald Silver Surfer (Julia Garner) destroy this world, immediately tarnishing Marvel’s brightly-hued new entries? We’ll have to wait for the post-credits to know for sure.

    Happy Gilmore 2

    July 25

    Forget I Know What You Did Last Summer. 2025’s most surprising ‘90s come back belongs to hockey player-turned-golfer Happy Gilmore who comes to Netflix with a sequel 29 years in the making. Adam Sandler reteams with original writer Tim Herlihy for the latest in Happy’s shenanigans.

    Happy Gilmore 2 finds Happy returning to the green for some reason. But let’s be honest, the reason doesn’t matter. Adam Sandler movies are mostly about watching him have fun with his friends, and that’s exactly what Happy Gilmore 2 promises, complete with appearances by Julie Bowen, Christopher McDonald, and Ben Stiller, all reprising their characters from the first movie, along with lots of golfer cameos.

    The Bad Guys 2

    August 1

    Based on the popular line of children’s illustrated novels, The Bad Guys stars Sam Rockwell as Mr. Wolf, the leader of a group of carnivores/criminals who seek to rehabilitate their image. Thanks to its solid voice acting from Rockwell and co-stars, including Marc Maron and Awkwafina, and its use of the animation techniques pioneered by Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, The Bad Guys was a surprise hit in 2022.

    The sequel hopes to continue that success, bringing back all of the principle cast, director Pierre Perifel, and the same animation engine. Following the “bigger is better” approach to sequels, The Bad Guys 2 introduces the Bad Girls, lady animals voiced by the likes of Danielle Brooks and Natasha Lyonne. As long as it can provide the zany energy that kids liked about the first film, The Bad Guys are sure to do good once again at the box office.

    The Naked Gun

    August 1

    On paper the long-in-development remake of The Naked Gun sounds like a disaster. Who today has the same dry humor of the late, great Leslie Nielsen? Who has the same eye for parodic detail as the Zucker Brothers and Jim Abrams? Heck, does our current world of non-stop police procedurals have anything like M Squad, the forgotten show that inspired The Naked Gun’s predecessor, Police Squad?

    Most of those concerns fall away when we see the first teaser for The Naked Gun 2025. Directed by the Lonely Island’s Akiva Schaffer, The Naked Gun has an inspired pick in Liam Neeson as Frank Drebin Jr., leader of a new version of Police Squad, and he’s joined by Paul Walter Hauser as Ed Hocken Jr. and Moses Jones as Nordberg Jr. Just reading that sentence boosts confidence that, somehow, Schaffer and company have figured out how to replicate the ZAZ humor for today’s audiences.

    Freakier Friday

    August 8

    The train of long-in-the-making sequels continues with Freakier Friday, a continuation of the 2003 Disney remake with Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan. In the 2003 version, mother and daughter Tess and Anna Coleman swapped bodies, leading to good-hearted shenanigans and family bonding. The sequel doubles up with a four-way swap, bringing a daughter and step-daughter (Julia Butters and Sophia Hammons, respectively) into the mix.

    Judging by the trailer, director Nisha Ganatra (Late Night, The High Note) knows exactly what fans expect from this outing and plans to give it to them. A game Curtis and Lohan throw themselves into their age-inappropriate roles and the quadruple swap changes things up just enough. Throw familiar faces such as Chad Michael Murray and Rosalind Chao from the first movie and add Manny Jacinto as a new love interest, and Freakier Friday’s set to be a warm reunion for 2000s kids ready for some nostalgia.

    Weapons

    August 8

    Weapons director Zach Cregger isn’t a new name, having performed for years in the sketch group The Whitest Kids U’ Know and even co-directed Miss March with late co-star Trevor Moore. But Cregger proved we didn’t really know him at all with his solo director debut, the 2022 shocker Barbarian.

    Weapons seeks to surprise us all over again, beginning with a cryptic ad campaign of blurry surveillance footage. Weapons presents itself as a missing persons story, dealing with the mass exodus of children from a suburban neighborhood. But if Barbarian is any indication, that premise just starts the upsetting story that Cregger wants to tell.

    Nobody 2

    August 15

    No one watching Mr. Show in its heyday could have predicted that Bob Odenkirk would have gone from guy who shouts obscenities in sketch comedies to beloved dad who warmly greets his little women. Even more shocking was Odenkirk’s turn to action hero in 2021’s Nobody, in which he played a put-upon suburbanite who recovers his international assassin skills after an attack on his family. If that sounds similar to John Wick, well, it is written by Derek Kolstad, who co-created the Keanu Reeves character.

    Nobody 2 picks up where the first movie left off, with Odenkirk’s Hutch Mansell and his FBI agent father David (Christopher Lloyd) trying to return to their old lives after the latter’s night of chaos. This time around, Kolstad shares a writing credit with three others (including Odenkirk), but Timo Tjahjanto (who co-directed the “Safe Haven” segment of V/H/S/ 2 with Gareth Evans) steps into direct.

    Eden

    August 22

    By this point, you know what to expect from a Ron Howard movie: something that’s solidly well-made or—occasionally—a project that unintentionally unleashes nightmares upon the country, as with 2020’s Hillbilly Elegy. We’re hoping for more of the former with Eden, starring Jude Law, Vanessa Kirby, Ana de Armas, and Sydney Sweeney.

    Based on a true story, Eden follows two German scientists (Law and Kirby) as they flee their home country in 1929 to settle on Floreana Island in the Galápagos. Soon others follow, creating trouble in their apparent paradise. Will the story of Europeans colonizing Latin American land provide entertainment in the year 2025 or will Howard’s style of middlebrow blockbusters be rejected by modern audiences? We’ll see soon enough.

    Caught Stealing

    August 29

    Darren Aronofsky movies aren’t always good, but they are always interesting, so we can’t help but look with anticipation toward Caught Stealing. Working from a script by author Charlie Huston, Caught Stealing stars Austin Butler as a baseball player who descends into the criminal underworld of 1990s New York. While he’s made some out-there fantasias such as The Fountain and mother!, Aronofsky’s biggest hits tend to be gritty tales such as Requiem for a Dream, Black Swan, and The Wrestler. Huston’s writing seems to tend toward the more realistic side with hints of surrealism, which suits Aronofsky’s style just fine.

    The Toxic Avenger

    August 29

    Video store kids of the ‘80s and ‘90s all know about Toxie, the breakout hero and mascot of Troma Entertainment. Does that name mean anything today? After all, Troma is very much a product of the VHS era when the demand for home video made a reliable market for their low-budget movies, designed to nothing more than offend moral and aesthetic taste. The Toxic Avenger from 1984 brought Troma and Toxie to the masses, but when kids today have instant access to the worst humanity has to offer, what can Troma do?

    We’ll find out when the remake of The Toxic Avenger finally hits theaters this summer. Originally debuting at Fantastic Fest in 2023, The Toxic Avenger stars Peter Dinklage as janitor Winston Gooze, transformed into the titular anti-hero after a bullying accident. But the most promising part of this update is behind the camera, as actor Macon Blair, a regular of Jeremy Saulnier’s troupe and the director of I Don’t Feel at Home in This World Anymore, writes and directs.

    The Roses

    August 29

    Closing out a summer full of surprising sequels and remakes is the most unlikely of them all. Directed by Jay Roach and written by Tony McNamara, The Roses is based on the 1981 novel The War of the Roses by Warren Adler, which was previously adapted into a 1989 movie starring Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, and Danny DeVito. In this version, Olivia Coleman and Benedict Cumberbatch play a successful, upper-class couple who turn destructive as they head toward divorce.

    Unlike some others on this list, The Roses feels like exactly the type of movie that needs a refresh in 2025. Movies for adults have taken a backseat to the big-budget PG-13 fair of the past two decades, and we’re worse off for it. A comedy about grown ups, even grown up behaving like children, might be exactly the palate cleanser we need as we head into the awards-friendly autumn.

    The post Summer Movie Preview 2025: From Superman to Fantastic Four and Beyond appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • That’s Not My Burnout

    That’s Not My Burnout

    Are you like me, reading about people fading away as they burn out, and feeling unable to relate? Do you feel like your feelings are invisible to the world because you’re experiencing burnout differently? When burnout starts to push down on us, our core comes through more. Beautiful, peaceful souls get quieter and fade into that distant and distracted burnout we’ve all read about. But some of us, those with fires always burning on the edges of our core, get hotter. In my heart I am fire. When I face burnout I double down, triple down, burning hotter and hotter to try to best the challenge. I don’t fade—I am engulfed in a zealous burnout

    So what on earth is a zealous burnout?

    Imagine a woman determined to do it all. She has two amazing children whom she, along with her husband who is also working remotely, is homeschooling during a pandemic. She has a demanding client load at work—all of whom she loves. She gets up early to get some movement in (or often catch up on work), does dinner prep as the kids are eating breakfast, and gets to work while positioning herself near “fourth grade” to listen in as she juggles clients, tasks, and budgets. Sound like a lot? Even with a supportive team both at home and at work, it is. 

    Sounds like this woman has too much on her plate and needs self-care. But no, she doesn’t have time for that. In fact, she starts to feel like she’s dropping balls. Not accomplishing enough. There’s not enough of her to be here and there; she is trying to divide her mind in two all the time, all day, every day. She starts to doubt herself. And as those feelings creep in more and more, her internal narrative becomes more and more critical.

    Suddenly she KNOWS what she needs to do! She should DO MORE. 

    This is a hard and dangerous cycle. Know why? Because once she doesn’t finish that new goal, that narrative will get worse. Suddenly she’s failing. She isn’t doing enough. SHE is not enough. She might fail, she might fail her family…so she’ll find more she should do. She doesn’t sleep as much, move as much, all in the efforts to do more. Caught in this cycle of trying to prove herself to herself, never reaching any goal. Never feeling “enough.” 

    So, yeah, that’s what zealous burnout looks like for me. It doesn’t happen overnight in some grand gesture but instead slowly builds over weeks and months. My burning out process looks like speeding up, not a person losing focus. I speed up and up and up…and then I just stop.

    I am the one who could

    It’s funny the things that shape us. Through the lens of childhood, I viewed the fears, struggles, and sacrifices of someone who had to make it all work without having enough. I was lucky that my mother was so resourceful and my father supportive; I never went without and even got an extra here or there. 

    Growing up, I did not feel shame when my mother paid with food stamps; in fact, I’d have likely taken on any debate on the topic, verbally eviscerating anyone who dared to criticize the disabled woman trying to make sure all our needs were met with so little. As a child, I watched the way the fear of not making those ends meet impacted people I love. As the non-disabled person in my home, I would take on many of the physical tasks because I was “the one who could” make our lives a little easier. I learned early to associate fears or uncertainty with putting more of myself into it—I am the one who can. I learned early that when something frightens me, I can double down and work harder to make it better. I can own the challenge. When people have seen this in me as an adult, I’ve been told I seem fearless, but make no mistake, I’m not. If I seem fearless, it’s because this behavior was forged from other people’s fears. 

    And here I am, more than 30 years later still feeling the urge to mindlessly push myself forward when faced with overwhelming tasks ahead of me, assuming that I am the one who can and therefore should. I find myself driven to prove that I can make things happen if I work longer hours, take on more responsibility, and do more

    I do not see people who struggle financially as failures, because I have seen how strong that tide can be—it pulls you along the way. I truly get that I have been privileged to be able to avoid many of the challenges that were present in my youth. That said, I am still “the one who can” who feels she should, so if I were faced with not having enough to make ends meet for my own family, I would see myself as having failed. Though I am supported and educated, most of this is due to good fortune. I will, however, allow myself the arrogance of saying I have been careful with my choices to have encouraged that luck. My identity stems from the idea that I am “the one who can” so therefore feel obligated to do the most. I can choose to stop, and with some quite literal cold water splashed in my face, I’ve made the choice to before. But that choosing to stop is not my go-to; I move forward, driven by a fear that is so a part of me that I barely notice it’s there until I’m feeling utterly worn away.

    So why all the history? You see, burnout is a fickle thing. I have heard and read a lot about burnout over the years. Burnout is real. Especially now, with COVID, many of us are balancing more than we ever have before—all at once! It’s hard, and the procrastinating, the avoidance, the shutting down impacts so many amazing professionals. There are important articles that relate to what I imagine must be the majority of people out there, but not me. That’s not what my burnout looks like.

    The dangerous invisibility of zealous burnout

    A lot of work environments see the extra hours, extra effort, and overall focused commitment as an asset (and sometimes that’s all it is). They see someone trying to rise to challenges, not someone stuck in their fear. Many well-meaning organizations have safeguards in place to protect their teams from burnout. But in cases like this, those alarms are not always tripped, and then when the inevitable stop comes, some members of the organization feel surprised and disappointed. And sometimes maybe even betrayed. 

    Parents—more so mothers, statistically speaking—are praised as being so on top of it all when they can work, be involved in the after-school activities, practice self-care in the form of diet and exercise, and still meet friends for coffee or wine. During COVID many of us have binged countless streaming episodes showing how it’s so hard for the female protagonist, but she is strong and funny and can do it. It’s a “very special episode” when she breaks down, cries in the bathroom, woefully admits she needs help, and just stops for a bit. Truth is, countless people are hiding their tears or are doom-scrolling to escape. We know that the media is a lie to amuse us, but often the perception that it’s what we should strive for has penetrated much of society.

    Women and burnout

    I love men. And though I don’t love every man (heads up, I don’t love every woman or nonbinary person either), I think there is a beautiful spectrum of individuals who represent that particular binary gender. 

    That said, women are still more often at risk of burnout than their male counterparts, especially in these COVID stressed times. Mothers in the workplace feel the pressure to do all the “mom” things while giving 110%. Mothers not in the workplace feel they need to do more to “justify” their lack of traditional employment. Women who are not mothers often feel the need to do even more because they don’t have that extra pressure at home. It’s vicious and systemic and so a part of our culture that we’re often not even aware of the enormity of the pressures we put on ourselves and each other. 

    And there are prices beyond happiness too. Harvard Health Publishing released a study a decade ago that “uncovered strong links between women’s job stress and cardiovascular disease.” The CDC noted, “Heart disease is the leading cause of death for women in the United States, killing 299,578 women in 2017—or about 1 in every 5 female deaths.” 

    This relationship between work stress and health, from what I have read, is more dangerous for women than it is for their non-female counterparts.

    But what if your burnout isn’t like that either?

    That might not be you either. After all, each of us is so different and how we respond to stressors is too. It’s part of what makes us human. Don’t stress what burnout looks like, just learn to recognize it in yourself. Here are a few questions I sometimes ask friends if I am concerned about them.

    Are you happy? This simple question should be the first thing you ask yourself. Chances are, even if you’re burning out doing all the things you love, as you approach burnout you’ll just stop taking as much joy from it all.

    Do you feel empowered to say no? I have observed in myself and others that when someone is burning out, they no longer feel they can say no to things. Even those who don’t “speed up” feel pressure to say yes to not disappoint the people around them.

    What are three things you’ve done for yourself? Another observance is that we all tend to stop doing things for ourselves. Anything from skipping showers and eating poorly to avoiding talking to friends. These can be red flags. 

    Are you making excuses? Many of us try to disregard feelings of burnout. Over and over I have heard, “It’s just crunch time,” “As soon as I do this one thing, it will all be better,” and “Well I should be able to handle this, so I’ll figure it out.” And it might really be crunch time, a single goal, and/or a skill set you need to learn. That happens—life happens. BUT if this doesn’t stop, be honest with yourself. If you’ve worked more 50-hour weeks since January than not, maybe it’s not crunch time—maybe it’s a bad situation that you’re burning out from.

    Do you have a plan to stop feeling this way? If something is truly temporary and you do need to just push through, then it has an exit route with a
    defined end.

    Take the time to listen to yourself as you would a friend. Be honest, allow yourself to be uncomfortable, and break the thought cycles that prevent you from healing. 

    So now what?

    What I just described is a different path to burnout, but it’s still burnout. There are well-established approaches to working through burnout:

    • Get enough sleep.
    • Eat healthy.
    • Work out.
    • Get outside.
    • Take a break.
    • Overall, practice self-care.

    Those are hard for me because they feel like more tasks. If I’m in the burnout cycle, doing any of the above for me feels like a waste. The narrative is that if I’m already failing, why would I take care of myself when I’m dropping all those other balls? People need me, right? 

    If you’re deep in the cycle, your inner voice might be pretty awful by now. If you need to, tell yourself you need to take care of the person your people depend on. If your roles are pushing you toward burnout, use them to help make healing easier by justifying the time spent working on you. 

    To help remind myself of the airline attendant message about putting the mask on yourself first, I have come up with a few things that I do when I start feeling myself going into a zealous burnout.

    Cook an elaborate meal for someone! 

    OK, I am a “food-focused” individual so cooking for someone is always my go-to. There are countless tales in my home of someone walking into the kitchen and turning right around and walking out when they noticed I was “chopping angrily.” But it’s more than that, and you should give it a try. Seriously. It’s the perfect go-to if you don’t feel worthy of taking time for yourself—do it for someone else. Most of us work in a digital world, so cooking can fill all of your senses and force you to be in the moment with all the ways you perceive the world. It can break you out of your head and help you gain a better perspective. In my house, I’ve been known to pick a place on the map and cook food that comes from wherever that is (thank you, Pinterest). I love cooking Indian food, as the smells are warm, the bread needs just enough kneading to keep my hands busy, and the process takes real attention for me because it’s not what I was brought up making. And in the end, we all win!

    Vent like a foul-mouthed fool

    Be careful with this one! 

    I have been making an effort to practice more gratitude over the past few years, and I recognize the true benefits of that. That said, sometimes you just gotta let it all out—even the ugly. Hell, I’m a big fan of not sugarcoating our lives, and that sometimes means that to get past the big pile of poop, you’re gonna wanna complain about it a bit. 

    When that is what’s needed, turn to a trusted friend and allow yourself some pure verbal diarrhea, saying all the things that are bothering you. You need to trust this friend not to judge, to see your pain, and, most importantly, to tell you to remove your cranium from your own rectal cavity. Seriously, it’s about getting a reality check here! One of the things I admire the most about my husband (though often after the fact) is his ability to break things down to their simplest. “We’re spending our lives together, of course you’re going to disappoint me from time to time, so get over it” has been his way of speaking his dedication, love, and acceptance of me—and I could not be more grateful. It also, of course, has meant that I needed to remove my head from that rectal cavity. So, again, usually those moments are appreciated in hindsight.

    Pick up a book! 

    There are many books out there that aren’t so much self-help as they are people just like you sharing their stories and how they’ve come to find greater balance. Maybe you’ll find something that speaks to you. Titles that have stood out to me include:

    • Thrive by Arianna Huffington
    • Tools of Titans by Tim Ferriss
    • Girl, Stop Apologizing by Rachel Hollis
    • Dare to Lead by Brené Brown

    Or, another tactic I love to employ is to read or listen to a book that has NOTHING to do with my work-life balance. I’ve read the following books and found they helped balance me out because my mind was pondering their interesting topics instead of running in circles:

    • The Drunken Botanist by Amy Stewart
    • Superlife by Darin Olien
    • A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived by Adam Rutherford
    • Gaia’s Garden by Toby Hemenway 

    If you’re not into reading, pick up a topic on YouTube or choose a podcast to subscribe to. I’ve watched countless permaculture and gardening topics in addition to how to raise chickens and ducks. For the record, I do not have a particularly large food garden, nor do I own livestock of any kind…yet. I just find the topic interesting, and it has nothing to do with any aspect of my life that needs anything from me.

    Forgive yourself 

    You are never going to be perfect—hell, it would be boring if you were. It’s OK to be broken and flawed. It’s human to be tired and sad and worried. It’s OK to not do it all. It’s scary to be imperfect, but you cannot be brave if nothing were scary.

    This last one is the most important: allow yourself permission to NOT do it all. You never promised to be everything to everyone at all times. We are more powerful than the fears that drive us. 

    This is hard. It is hard for me. It’s what’s driven me to write this—that it’s OK to stop. It’s OK that your unhealthy habit that might even benefit those around you needs to end. You can still be successful in life.

    I recently read that we are all writing our eulogy in how we live. Knowing that your professional accomplishments won’t be mentioned in that speech, what will yours say? What do you want it to say? 

    Look, I get that none of these ideas will “fix it,” and that’s not their purpose. None of us are in control of our surroundings, only how we respond to them. These suggestions are to help stop the spiral effect so that you are empowered to address the underlying issues and choose your response. They are things that work for me most of the time. Maybe they’ll work for you.

    Does this sound familiar? 

    If this sounds familiar, it’s not just you. Don’t let your negative self-talk tell you that you “even burn out wrong.” It’s not wrong. Even if rooted in fear like my own drivers, I believe that this need to do more comes from a place of love, determination, motivation, and other wonderful attributes that make you the amazing person you are. We’re going to be OK, ya know. The lives that unfold before us might never look like that story in our head—that idea of “perfect” or “done” we’re looking for, but that’s OK. Really, when we stop and look around, usually the only eyes that judge us are in the mirror. 

    Do you remember that Winnie the Pooh sketch that had Pooh eat so much at Rabbit’s house that his buttocks couldn’t fit through the door? Well, I already associate a lot with Rabbit, so it came as no surprise when he abruptly declared that this was unacceptable. But do you recall what happened next? He put a shelf across poor Pooh’s ankles and decorations on his back, and made the best of the big butt in his kitchen. 

    At the end of the day we are resourceful and know that we are able to push ourselves if we need to—even when we are tired to our core or have a big butt of fluff ‘n’ stuff in our room. None of us has to be afraid, as we can manage any obstacle put in front of us. And maybe that means we will need to redefine success to allow space for being uncomfortably human, but that doesn’t really sound so bad either. 

    So, wherever you are right now, please breathe. Do what you need to do to get out of your head. Forgive and take care.

  • Asynchronous Design Critique: Giving Feedback

    Asynchronous Design Critique: Giving Feedback

    Feedback, in whichever form it takes, and whatever it may be called, is one of the most effective soft skills that we have at our disposal to collaboratively get our designs to a better place while growing our own skills and perspectives.

    Feedback is also one of the most underestimated tools, and often by assuming that we’re already good at it, we settle, forgetting that it’s a skill that can be trained, grown, and improved. Poor feedback can create confusion in projects, bring down morale, and affect trust and team collaboration over the long term. Quality feedback can be a transformative force. 

    Practicing our skills is surely a good way to improve, but the learning gets even faster when it’s paired with a good foundation that channels and focuses the practice. What are some foundational aspects of giving good feedback? And how can feedback be adjusted for remote and distributed work environments? 

    On the web, we can identify a long tradition of asynchronous feedback: from the early days of open source, code was shared and discussed on mailing lists. Today, developers engage on pull requests, designers comment in their favorite design tools, project managers and scrum masters exchange ideas on tickets, and so on.

    Design critique is often the name used for a type of feedback that’s provided to make our work better, collaboratively. So it shares a lot of the principles with feedback in general, but it also has some differences.

    The content

    The foundation of every good critique is the feedback’s content, so that’s where we need to start. There are many models that you can use to shape your content. The one that I personally like best—because it’s clear and actionable—is this one from Lara Hogan.

    While this equation is generally used to give feedback to people, it also fits really well in a design critique because it ultimately answers some of the core questions that we work on: What? Where? Why? How? Imagine that you’re giving some feedback about some design work that spans multiple screens, like an onboarding flow: there are some pages shown, a flow blueprint, and an outline of the decisions made. You spot something that could be improved. If you keep the three elements of the equation in mind, you’ll have a mental model that can help you be more precise and effective.

    Here is a comment that could be given as a part of some feedback, and it might look reasonable at a first glance: it seems to superficially fulfill the elements in the equation. But does it?

    Not sure about the buttons’ styles and hierarchy—it feels off. Can you change them?

    Observation for design feedback doesn’t just mean pointing out which part of the interface your feedback refers to, but it also refers to offering a perspective that’s as specific as possible. Are you providing the user’s perspective? Your expert perspective? A business perspective? The project manager’s perspective? A first-time user’s perspective?

    When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back.

    Impact is about the why. Just pointing out a UI element might sometimes be enough if the issue may be obvious, but more often than not, you should add an explanation of what you’re pointing out.

    When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow.

    The question approach is meant to provide open guidance by eliciting the critical thinking in the designer receiving the feedback. Notably, in Lara’s equation she provides a second approach: request, which instead provides guidance toward a specific solution. While that’s a viable option for feedback in general, for design critiques, in my experience, defaulting to the question approach usually reaches the best solutions because designers are generally more comfortable in being given an open space to explore.

    The difference between the two can be exemplified with, for the question approach:

    When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Would it make sense to unify them?

    Or, for the request approach:

    When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same pair of forward and back buttons.

    At this point in some situations, it might be useful to integrate with an extra why: why you consider the given suggestion to be better.

    When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.

    Choosing the question approach or the request approach can also at times be a matter of personal preference. A while ago, I was putting a lot of effort into improving my feedback: I did rounds of anonymous feedback, and I reviewed feedback with other people. After a few rounds of this work and a year later, I got a positive response: my feedback came across as effective and grounded. Until I changed teams. To my shock, my next round of feedback from one specific person wasn’t that great. The reason is that I had previously tried not to be prescriptive in my advice—because the people who I was previously working with preferred the open-ended question format over the request style of suggestions. But now in this other team, there was one person who instead preferred specific guidance. So I adapted my feedback for them to include requests.

    One comment that I heard come up a few times is that this kind of feedback is quite long, and it doesn’t seem very efficient. No… but also yes. Let’s explore both sides.

    No, this style of feedback is actually efficient because the length here is a byproduct of clarity, and spending time giving this kind of feedback can provide exactly enough information for a good fix. Also if we zoom out, it can reduce future back-and-forth conversations and misunderstandings, improving the overall efficiency and effectiveness of collaboration beyond the single comment. Imagine that in the example above the feedback were instead just, “Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons.” The designer receiving this feedback wouldn’t have much to go by, so they might just apply the change. In later iterations, the interface might change or they might introduce new features—and maybe that change might not make sense anymore. Without the why, the designer might imagine that the change is about consistency… but what if it wasn’t? So there could now be an underlying concern that changing the buttons would be perceived as a regression.

    Yes, this style of feedback is not always efficient because the points in some comments don’t always need to be exhaustive, sometimes because certain changes may be obvious (“The font used doesn’t follow our guidelines”) and sometimes because the team may have a lot of internal knowledge such that some of the whys may be implied.

    So the equation above isn’t meant to suggest a strict template for feedback but a mnemonic to reflect and improve the practice. Even after years of active work on my critiques, I still from time to time go back to this formula and reflect on whether what I just wrote is effective.

    The tone

    Well-grounded content is the foundation of feedback, but that’s not really enough. The soft skills of the person who’s providing the critique can multiply the likelihood that the feedback will be well received and understood. Tone alone can make the difference between content that’s rejected or welcomed, and it’s been demonstrated that only positive feedback creates sustained change in people.

    Since our goal is to be understood and to have a positive working environment, tone is essential to work on. Over the years, I’ve tried to summarize the required soft skills in a formula that mirrors the one for content: the receptivity equation.

    Respectful feedback comes across as grounded, solid, and constructive. It’s the kind of feedback that, whether it’s positive or negative, is perceived as useful and fair.

    Timing refers to when the feedback happens. To-the-point feedback doesn’t have much hope of being well received if it’s given at the wrong time. Questioning the entire high-level information architecture of a new feature when it’s about to ship might still be relevant if that questioning highlights a major blocker that nobody saw, but it’s way more likely that those concerns will have to wait for a later rework. So in general, attune your feedback to the stage of the project. Early iteration? Late iteration? Polishing work in progress? These all have different needs. The right timing will make it more likely that your feedback will be well received.

    Attitude is the equivalent of intent, and in the context of person-to-person feedback, it can be referred to as radical candor. That means checking before we write to see whether what we have in mind will truly help the person and make the project better overall. This might be a hard reflection at times because maybe we don’t want to admit that we don’t really appreciate that person. Hopefully that’s not the case, but that can happen, and that’s okay. Acknowledging and owning that can help you make up for that: how would I write if I really cared about them? How can I avoid being passive aggressive? How can I be more constructive?

    Form is relevant especially in a diverse and cross-cultural work environments because having great content, perfect timing, and the right attitude might not come across if the way that we write creates misunderstandings. There might be many reasons for this: sometimes certain words might trigger specific reactions; sometimes nonnative speakers might not understand all the nuances of some sentences; sometimes our brains might just be different and we might perceive the world differently—neurodiversity must be taken into consideration. Whatever the reason, it’s important to review not just what we write but how.

    A few years back, I was asking for some feedback on how I give feedback. I received some good advice but also a comment that surprised me. They pointed out that when I wrote “Oh, […],” I made them feel stupid. That wasn’t my intent! I felt really bad, and I just realized that I provided feedback to them for months, and every time I might have made them feel stupid. I was horrified… but also thankful. I made a quick fix: I added “oh” in my list of replaced words (your choice between: macOS’s text replacement, aText, TextExpander, or others) so that when I typed “oh,” it was instantly deleted. 

    Something to highlight because it’s quite frequent—especially in teams that have a strong group spirit—is that people tend to beat around the bush. It’s important to remember here that a positive attitude doesn’t mean going light on the feedback—it just means that even when you provide hard, difficult, or challenging feedback, you do so in a way that’s respectful and constructive. The nicest thing that you can do for someone is to help them grow.

    We have a great advantage in giving feedback in written form: it can be reviewed by another person who isn’t directly involved, which can help to reduce or remove any bias that might be there. I found that the best, most insightful moments for me have happened when I’ve shared a comment and I’ve asked someone who I highly trusted, “How does this sound?,” “How can I do it better,” and even “How would you have written it?”—and I’ve learned a lot by seeing the two versions side by side.

    The format

    Asynchronous feedback also has a major inherent advantage: we can take more time to refine what we’ve written to make sure that it fulfills two main goals: the clarity of communication and the actionability of the suggestions.

    Let’s imagine that someone shared a design iteration for a project. You are reviewing it and leaving a comment. There are many ways to do this, and of course context matters, but let’s try to think about some elements that may be useful to consider.

    In terms of clarity, start by grounding the critique that you’re about to give by providing context. Specifically, this means describing where you’re coming from: do you have a deep knowledge of the project, or is this the first time that you’re seeing it? Are you coming from a high-level perspective, or are you figuring out the details? Are there regressions? Which user’s perspective are you taking when providing your feedback? Is the design iteration at a point where it would be okay to ship this, or are there major things that need to be addressed first?

    Providing context is helpful even if you’re sharing feedback within a team that already has some information on the project. And context is absolutely essential when giving cross-team feedback. If I were to review a design that might be indirectly related to my work, and if I had no knowledge about how the project arrived at that point, I would say so, highlighting my take as external.

    We often focus on the negatives, trying to outline all the things that could be done better. That’s of course important, but it’s just as important—if not more—to focus on the positives, especially if you saw progress from the previous iteration. This might seem superfluous, but it’s important to keep in mind that design is a discipline where there are hundreds of possible solutions for every problem. So pointing out that the design solution that was chosen is good and explaining why it’s good has two major benefits: it confirms that the approach taken was solid, and it helps to ground your negative feedback. In the longer term, sharing positive feedback can help prevent regressions on things that are going well because those things will have been highlighted as important. As a bonus, positive feedback can also help reduce impostor syndrome.

    There’s one powerful approach that combines both context and a focus on the positives: frame how the design is better than the status quo (compared to a previous iteration, competitors, or benchmarks) and why, and then on that foundation, you can add what could be improved. This is powerful because there’s a big difference between a critique that’s for a design that’s already in good shape and a critique that’s for a design that isn’t quite there yet.

    Another way that you can improve your feedback is to depersonalize the feedback: the comments should always be about the work, never about the person who made it. It’s “This button isn’t well aligned” versus “You haven’t aligned this button well.” This is very easy to change in your writing by reviewing it just before sending.

    In terms of actionability, one of the best approaches to help the designer who’s reading through your feedback is to split it into bullet points or paragraphs, which are easier to review and analyze one by one. For longer pieces of feedback, you might also consider splitting it into sections or even across multiple comments. Of course, adding screenshots or signifying markers of the specific part of the interface you’re referring to can also be especially useful.

    One approach that I’ve personally used effectively in some contexts is to enhance the bullet points with four markers using emojis. So a red square 🟥 means that it’s something that I consider blocking; a yellow diamond 🔶 is something that I can be convinced otherwise, but it seems to me that it should be changed; and a green circle 🟢 is a detailed, positive confirmation. I also use a blue spiral 🌀 for either something that I’m not sure about, an exploration, an open alternative, or just a note. But I’d use this approach only on teams where I’ve already established a good level of trust because if it happens that I have to deliver a lot of red squares, the impact could be quite demoralizing, and I’d reframe how I’d communicate that a bit.

    Let’s see how this would work by reusing the example that we used earlier as the first bullet point in this list:

    • 🔶 Navigation—When I see these two buttons, I expect one to go forward and one to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.
    • 🟢 Overall—I think the page is solid, and this is good enough to be our release candidate for a version 1.0.
    • 🟢 Metrics—Good improvement in the buttons on the metrics area; the improved contrast and new focus style make them more accessible.
    •  🟥  Button Style—Using the green accent in this context creates the impression that it’s a positive action because green is usually perceived as a confirmation color. Do we need to explore a different color?
    • 🔶Tiles—Given the number of items on the page, and the overall page hierarchy, it seems to me that the tiles shouldn’t be using the Subtitle 1 style but the Subtitle 2 style. This will keep the visual hierarchy more consistent.
    • 🌀 Background—Using a light texture works well, but I wonder whether it adds too much noise in this kind of page. What is the thinking in using that?

    What about giving feedback directly in Figma or another design tool that allows in-place feedback? In general, I find these difficult to use because they hide discussions and they’re harder to track, but in the right context, they can be very effective. Just make sure that each of the comments is separate so that it’s easier to match each discussion to a single task, similar to the idea of splitting mentioned above.

    One final note: say the obvious. Sometimes we might feel that something is obviously good or obviously wrong, and so we don’t say it. Or sometimes we might have a doubt that we don’t express because the question might sound stupid. Say it—that’s okay. You might have to reword it a little bit to make the reader feel more comfortable, but don’t hold it back. Good feedback is transparent, even when it may be obvious.

    There’s another advantage of asynchronous feedback: written feedback automatically tracks decisions. Especially in large projects, “Why did we do this?” could be a question that pops up from time to time, and there’s nothing better than open, transparent discussions that can be reviewed at any time. For this reason, I recommend using software that saves these discussions, without hiding them once they are resolved. 

    Content, tone, and format. Each one of these subjects provides a useful model, but working to improve eight areas—observation, impact, question, timing, attitude, form, clarity, and actionability—is a lot of work to put in all at once. One effective approach is to take them one by one: first identify the area that you lack the most (either from your perspective or from feedback from others) and start there. Then the second, then the third, and so on. At first you’ll have to put in extra time for every piece of feedback that you give, but after a while, it’ll become second nature, and your impact on the work will multiply.

    Thanks to Brie Anne Demkiw and Mike Shelton for reviewing the first draft of this article.

  • Asynchronous Design Critique: Getting Feedback

    Asynchronous Design Critique: Getting Feedback

    ” Any opinion” you might have? is perhaps one of the worst ways to ask for opinions. It’s obscure and unfocused, and it doesn’t give a clear picture of what we’re looking for. Getting good opinions starts sooner than we might hope: it starts with the demand.

    Starting the process of receiving feedback with a question may seem counterintuitive, but it makes sense if we consider that receiving input can be considered a form of design research. In the same way that we wouldn’t perform any studies without the correct questions to get the insight that we need, the best way to ask for feedback is also to build strong issues.

    Design criticism is never a one-time procedure. Sure, any great comments process continues until the project is finished, but this is especially true for layout because architecture work continues iteration after iteration, from a high level to the finest details. Each stage requires its unique set of questions.

    And suddenly, as with any great research, we need to review what we got up, get to the base of its perspectives, and take activity. Iteration, evaluation, and issue. This look at each of those.

    The query

    Being available to input is important, but we need to be specific about what we’re looking for. Any comments,” What do you think,” or” I’d love to hear your mind” at the end of a presentation are likely to garner a lot of different ideas, or worse, to make people follow the lead of the first speaker. And next… we get frustrated because vague issues like those can change a high-level moves review into folks rather commenting on the borders of buttons. Which topic may be a wholesome one, so it might be difficult to get the team to switch to the subject you wanted to concentrate on.

    But how do we get into this scenario? A number of elements are involved. One is that we don’t often consider asking as a part of the input method. Another is how healthy it is to leave the question open and assume that everyone else will agree. Another is that in nonprofessional debate, there’s usually no need to be that exact. In summary, we tend to undervalue the value of the issues, and we don’t make any improvements to them.

    The work of asking good questions guidelines and focuses the criticism. It also serves as a form of acceptance, outlining your willingness to make comments and the types of responses you want to receive. It puts people in the right emotional state, especially in situations when they weren’t expecting to give opinions.

    There isn’t a second best way to ask for opinions. It simply needs to be certain, and sensitivity can take several shapes. The one of stage over level is a concept for design critique that I’ve found to be particularly helpful in my coaching.

    Stage” refers to each of the steps of the process—in our case, the design process. The type of feedback changes as the user research moves on to the final design. But within a single step, one might still review whether some assumptions are correct and whether there’s been a proper translation of the amassed feedback into updated designs as the project has evolved. The layers of user experience could serve as a starting point for potential questions. What do you want to know: Project objectives? user requirements? Functionality? Content? Interaction design? Information architecture UI design? navigation planning Visual design? branding?

    Here’re a few example questions that are precise and to the point that refer to different layers:

    • Functionality: Is it desirable to automate account creation?
    • Interaction design: Take a look through the updated flow and let me know whether you see any steps or error states that I might’ve missed.
    • Information architecture: This page contains two competing pieces of information. Is the structure effective in communicating them both?
    • User interface design: What do you think about the top-most error counter, which ensures that you can see the next error even when the error is outside the viewport?
    • Navigation design: From research, we identified these second-level navigation items, but once you’re on the page, the list feels too long and hard to navigate. Do you have any suggestions for how to handle this?
    • Visual design: Are the sticky notifications in the bottom-right corner visible enough?

    The other axis of specificity is determined by how far you would like to go with the presentation. For example, we might have introduced a new end-to-end flow, but there was a specific view that you found particularly challenging and you’d like a detailed review of that. This can be especially helpful from one iteration to the next when it’s crucial to highlight the areas that have changed.

    There are other things that we can consider when we want to achieve more specific—and more effective—questions.

    A quick fix is to get rid of the generic qualifiers from questions like “good,” “well,” “nice,” “bad,” “okay,” and” cool.” For example, asking,” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is this interaction good”? is it possible to look specific, but you can spot the “good” qualifier and make the question” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is it clear what the next action is” look like?

    Sometimes we actually do want broad feedback. Although that’s uncommon, it can occur. In that sense, you might still make it explicit that you’re looking for a wide range of opinions, whether at a high level or with details. Or perhaps you should just say,” At first glance, what do you think”? so that it’s clear that what you’re asking is open ended but focused on someone’s impression after their first five seconds of looking at it.

    Sometimes the project is particularly broad, and some areas may have already been thoroughly explored. In these situations, it might be useful to explicitly say that some parts are already locked in and aren’t open to feedback. Although it’s not something I’d recommend in general, I’ve found it helpful in avoiding getting back into rabbit holes like those that could lead to even more refinement if what’s important right now isn’t.

    Asking specific questions can completely change the quality of the feedback that you receive. People with less refined criticism will now be able to provide more actionable feedback, and even expert designers will appreciate the clarity and effectiveness gained from concentrating solely on what’s needed. It can save a lot of time and frustration.

    The iteration

    Design iterations are probably the most visible part of the design work, and they provide a natural checkpoint for feedback. Many design tools have inline commenting, but many of them only display changes as a single fluid stream in the same file. In addition, these kinds of design tools automatically update shared UI components, make conversations disappear and require designs to always display the most recent version, unless these would-be useful features were manually disabled. The implied goal that these design tools seem to have is to arrive at just one final copy with all discussions closed, probably because they inherited patterns from how written documents are collaboratively edited. That’s probably not the most effective way to go about designing critiques, but even if I don’t want to be too prescriptive, it might work for some teams.

    The asynchronous design-critique approach that I find most effective is to create explicit checkpoints for discussion. I’m going to use the term iteration post for this. It refers to a write-up or presentation of the design iteration followed by a discussion thread of some kind. This can be used on any platform that can accommodate this structure. By the way, when I refer to a “write-up or presentation“, I’m including video recordings or other media too: as long as it’s asynchronous, it works.

    There are many benefits to using iteration posts:

    • It creates a rhythm in the design work so that the designer can review feedback from each iteration and prepare for the next.
    • Decisions are made immediately available for future review, and conversations are also always available.
    • It creates a record of how the design changed over time.
    • It might also make it simpler to collect and act on feedback depending on the tool.

    These posts of course don’t mean that no other feedback approach should be used, just that iteration posts could be the primary rhythm for a remote design team to use. And from there, there can develop additional feedback techniques ( such as live critique, pair designing, or inline comments ).

    I don’t think there’s a standard format for iteration posts. However, there are a few high-level components that make sense as a baseline:

    1. The goal
    2. The layout
    3. The list of changes
    4. The querys

    Each project is likely to have a goal, and hopefully it’s something that’s already been summarized in a single sentence somewhere else, such as the client brief, the product manager’s outline, or the project owner’s request. Therefore, I would repeat this in every iteration post, literally copy and pasting it. The idea is to provide context and to repeat what’s essential to make each iteration post complete so that there’s no need to find information spread across multiple posts. The most recent iteration post will have everything I need if I want to know about the most recent design.

    This copy-and-paste part introduces another relevant concept: alignment comes from repetition. Therefore, repeating information in posts helps to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

    The design is then the actual series of information-architecture outlines, diagrams, flows, maps, wireframes, screens, visuals, and any other kind of design work that’s been done. It’s any design artifact, in essence. For the final stages of work, I prefer the term blueprint to emphasize that I’ll be showing full flows instead of individual screens to make it easier to understand the bigger picture.

    It might also be helpful to have clear names on the objects since it makes them look better to refer to. Write the post in a way that helps people understand the work. It’s not very different from creating a strong live presentation.

    For an efficient discussion, you should also include a bullet list of the changes from the previous iteration to let people focus on what’s new, which can be especially useful for larger pieces of work where keeping track, iteration after iteration, could become a challenge.

    Finally, as mentioned earlier, it’s crucial that you include a list of the questions to help you guide the design critique in the desired direction. Doing this as a numbered list can also help make it easier to refer to each question by its number.

    Not every iteration is the same. Earlier iterations don’t need to be as tightly focused—they can be more exploratory and experimental, maybe even breaking some of the design-language guidelines to see what’s possible. Then, later, the iterations begin coming to a decision and improving it until the design process is complete and the feature is ready.

    I want to highlight that even if these iteration posts are written and conceived as checkpoints, by no means do they need to be exhaustive. A post might be a draft, just a concept to start a discussion, or it might be a cumulative list of all the features that have been added over the course of each iteration until the full picture is achieved.

    Over time, I also started using specific labels for incremental iterations: i1, i2, i3, and so on. Although this may seem like a minor labeling tip, it can be useful in many ways:

    • Unique—It’s a clear unique marker. Everyone knows where to go to review things, and it’s simple to say” This was discussed in i4″ with each project.
    • Unassuming—It works like versions ( such as v1, v2, and v3 ) but in contrast, versions create the impression of something that’s big, exhaustive, and complete. Attempts must be exploratory, incomplete, or partial.
    • Future proof—It resolves the “final” naming problem that you can run into with versions. No more files with the title “final final complete no-really-its-done” Within each project, the largest number always represents the latest iteration.

    The wording release candidate (RC ) could be used to indicate when a design is finished enough to be worked on, even if there are some areas that still need improvement and, in turn, require more iterations, such as” with i8 we reached RC” or “i12 is an RC” to indicate when it is finished.

    The review

    A back-and-forth between two people that can be very productive typically occurs during a design critique. This approach is particularly effective during live, synchronous feedback. However, using a different approach when we work asynchronously is more effective: adopting a user-research mindset. Written feedback from teammates, stakeholders, or others can be treated as if it were the result of user interviews and surveys, and we can analyze it accordingly.

    This shift has some significant advantages, making asynchronous feedback particularly effective, especially around these friction points:

    1. It removes the pressure to reply to everyone.
    2. It lessens the annoyance caused by swoop-by comments.
    3. It lessens our personal stake.

    The first friction point is having to press yourself to respond to each and every comment. Sometimes we write the iteration post, and we get replies from our team. It’s just a few of them, it’s simple, and there isn’t much of a problem with it. But other times, some solutions might require more in-depth discussions, and the amount of replies can quickly increase, which can create a tension between trying to be a good team player by replying to everyone and doing the next design iteration. This might be especially true if the respondent is a stakeholder or a person who is directly involved in the project and whom we feel we need to speak with. We need to accept that this pressure is absolutely normal, and it’s human nature to try to accommodate people who we care about. When responding to all comments, it can be effective, but when we consider a design critique more like user research, we realize that we don’t need to respond to every comment, and there are alternatives in asynchronous spaces:

      One is to let the next iteration speak for itself. When the design changes and we publish a follow-up iteration, that’s the response. You might tag all the people who were involved in the previous discussion, but even that’s a choice, not a requirement.
    • Another option is to respond politely to acknowledge each comment, such as” Understood. Thank you”,” Good points— I’ll review”, or” Thanks. These will be included in the upcoming iteration. In some cases, this could also be just a single top-level comment along the lines of” Thanks for all the feedback everyone—the next iteration is coming soon”!
    • One more thing is to quickly summarize the comments before proceeding. Depending on your workflow, this can be particularly useful as it can provide a simplified checklist that you can then use for the next iteration.

    The swoop-by comment, which is the kind of feedback that comes from a member of a team or non-project who might not be aware of the context, restrictions, decisions, or requirements, or of the discussions from earlier iterations, is the second friction point. On their side, there’s something that one can hope that they might learn: they could start to acknowledge that they’re doing this and they could be more conscious in outlining where they’re coming from. Swoop-by comments frequently prompt the simple thought,” We’ve already discussed this,” and it can be frustrating to have to keep coming back and forth.

    Let’s begin by acknowledging again that there’s no need to reply to every comment. However, if responding to a previously litigated point might be helpful, a brief response with a link to the previous discussion for additional information is typically sufficient. Remember, alignment comes from repetition, so it’s okay to repeat things sometimes!

    Swoop-by commenting can still be useful for two reasons: first, they might point out something that isn’t clear, and second, they might have the power to represent a user’s first impression of the design. Sure, you’ll still be frustrated, but that might at least help in dealing with it.

    The personal stake we might have in relation to the design could be the third friction point, which might cause us to feel defensive if the review turned out to be more of a discussion. Treating feedback as user research helps us create a healthy distance between the people giving us feedback and our ego ( because yes, even if we don’t want to admit it, it’s there ). And in the end, presenting everything in aggregated form helps us to prioritize our work more.

    Always remember that while you need to listen to stakeholders, project owners, and specific advice, you don’t have to accept every piece of feedback. You must examine it and come to a decision that can be justified, but sometimes “no” is the best choice.

    As the designer leading the project, you’re in charge of that decision. In the end, everyone has their area of specialization, and the designer is the one with the most background and knowledge to make the right choice. And by listening to the feedback that you’ve received, you’re making sure that it’s also the best and most balanced decision.

    Thanks to Mike Shelton and Brie Anne Demkiw for their initial review of this article.

  • Designing for the Unexpected

    Designing for the Unexpected

    Although I’m not certain when I first heard this statement, it has stuck with me over the centuries. How do you generate solutions for scenarios you can’t think? Or create materials that are functional on products that have not yet been created?

    Flash, Photoshop, and flexible pattern

    When I first started designing sites, my go-to technology was Photoshop. I started by making a design for a 960px canvas that I would later add willing to. The growth phase was about attaining pixel-perfect precision using set widths, fixed levels, and absolute setting.

    All of this was altered by Ethan Marcotte’s speak at An Event Apart and the subsequent article in A Checklist Off in 2010. I was sold on reactive style as soon as I heard about it, but I was even terrified. The pixel-perfect models full of special figures that I had formerly prided myself on producing were no longer good enough.

    My first encounter with reactive style didn’t help my fear. My second project was to get an active fixed-width website and make it reactive. You can’t really put responsiveness at the end of a job, which I learned the hard way. To make smooth design, you need to prepare throughout the style phase.

    A new way to style

    Making information accessible to all devices a priority when designing responsive or liquid websites has always been the goal. It relies on the use of percentage-based design, which I immediately achieved with local CSS and power groups:

    .column-span-6 { width: 49%; float: left; margin-right: 0.5%; margin-left: 0.5%;}.column-span-4 { width: 32%; float: left; margin-right: 0.5%; margin-left: 0.5%;}.column-span-3 { width: 24%; float: left; margin-right: 0.5%; margin-left: 0.5%;}

    Therefore using Sass to re-use repeated slabs of code and transition to more semantic premium:

    .logo { @include colSpan(6);}.search { @include colSpan(3);}.social-share { @include colSpan(3);}

    Media questions

    The next ingredient for reactive design is press queries. Without them, regardless of whether the information was still readable, may shrink to fit the available storage.

    Media questions prevented this by allowing us to add breakpoints where the design could adapt. Like most people, I started out with three breakpoints: one for desktop, one for tablets, and one for mobile. Over the years, I added more and more for phablets, wide screens, and so on. 

    For years, I happily worked this way and improved both my design and front-end skills in the process. The only problem I encountered was making changes to content, since with our Sass grid system in place, there was no way for the site owners to add content without amending the markup—something a small business owner might struggle with. This is because each row in the grid was defined using a div as a container. Adding content meant creating new row markup, which requires a level of HTML knowledge.

    String premium was a mainstay of early flexible design, present in all the frequently used systems like Bootstrap and Skeleton.

    1 of 7
    2 of 7
    3 of 7
    4 of 7
    5 of 7
    6 of 7
    7 of 7

    Another difficulty arose as I moved from a design firm building websites for smaller- to medium-sized companies, to larger in-house teams where I worked across a collection of related sites. In those capacities, I began to work more with washable pieces.

    Our rely on multimedia queries resulted in parts that were tied to frequent screen sizes. If the goal of part libraries is modify, then this is a real problem because you can just use these components if the devices you’re designing for correspond to the viewport sizes used in the pattern library—in the process never really hitting that “devices that don’t already occur” goal.

    Then there’s the problem of space. Media questions allow components to adapt based on the viewport size, but what if I put a component into a sidebar, like in the figure below?

    Container queries: our savior or a false dawn?

    Container queries have long been touted as an improvement upon media queries, but at the time of writing are unsupported in most browsers. Although there are JavaScript workarounds, they can lead to dependability and compatibility issues. The basic theory underlying container queries is that elements should change based on the size of their parent container and not the viewport width, as seen in the following illustrations.

    One of the biggest arguments in favor of container queries is that they help us create components or design patterns that are truly reusable because they can be picked up and placed anywhere in a layout. This is an important step in moving toward a form of component-based design that works at any size on any device.

    In other words, responsive elements are meant to replace responsive layouts.

    Container queries will help us move from designing pages that respond to the browser or device size to designing components that can be placed in a sidebar or in the main content, and respond accordingly.

    We still use layout to determine when a design needs to adapt, which is my concern. This approach will always be restrictive, as we will still need pre-defined breakpoints. For this reason, my main question with container queries is, How would we decide when to change the CSS used by a component?

    A component library that is disconnected from context and real content is probably not the best place to make that choice.

    As the diagrams below illustrate, we can use container queries to create designs for specific container widths, but what if I want to change the design based on the image size or ratio?

    In this example, the dimensions of the container are not what should dictate the design, rather, the image is.

    Without having strong cross-browser support for them, it’s difficult to say for certain whether container queries will be a success story. Responsive component libraries would definitely evolve how we design and would improve the possibilities for reuse and design at scale. However, we might need to modify these elements in order to fit our content.

    CSS is changing

    Whilst the container query debate rumbles on, there have been numerous advances in CSS that change the way we think about design. The days of fixed-width elements measured in pixels and floated div elements used to cobble layouts together are long gone, consigned to history along with table layouts. Flexbox and CSS Grid have revolutionized layouts for the web. We can now create elements that wrap onto new rows when they run out of space, not when the device changes.

    .wrapper { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, 450px); gap: 10px;}

    The repeat() function paired with auto-fit or auto-fill allows us to specify how much space each column should use while leaving it up to the browser to decide when to spill the columns onto a new line. Similar things can be achieved with Flexbox, as elements can wrap over multiple rows and “flex” to fill available space. 

    .wrapper { display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; justify-content: space-between;}.child { flex-basis: 32%; margin-bottom: 20px;}

    The biggest benefit of all of this is that you don’t need to wrap any containers in rows. Without rows, content isn’t tied to page markup in quite the same way, allowing for removals or additions of content without additional development.

    This is a big step forward when it comes to creating designs that allow for evolving content, but the real game changer for flexible designs is CSS Subgrid.

    Remember the days of crafting perfectly aligned interfaces, only for the customer to add an unbelievably long header almost as soon as they’re given CMS access, like the illustration below?

    Subgrid allows elements to respond to adjustments in their own content and in the content of sibling elements, helping us create designs more resilient to change.

    .wrapper { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(150px, 1fr)); grid-template-rows: auto 1fr auto; gap: 10px;}.sub-grid { display: grid; grid-row: span 3; grid-template-rows: subgrid; /* sets rows to parent grid */}

    CSS Grid allows us to separate layout and content, thereby enabling flexible designs. Meanwhile, Subgrid allows us to create designs that can adapt in order to suit morphing content. Subgrid is only supported in Firefox at the time of writing, but the above code can be implemented behind an @supports feature query.

    Intrinsic layouts

    I’d be remiss not to mention intrinsic layouts, a term used by Jen Simmons to describe a mix of contemporary and traditional CSS features used to create layouts that respond to available space.

    Responsive layouts have flexible columns using percentages. Intrinsic layouts, on the other hand, use the fr unit to create flexible columns that won’t ever shrink so much that they render the content illegible.

    frunits is a statement that says,” I want you to distribute the extra space in this way, but never make it smaller than the content that is inside.”

    —Jen Simmons,” Designing Intrinsic Layouts”

    Intrinsic layouts can also make use of a mix of fixed and flexible units, letting the content choose how much space it occupies.

    What makes intrinsic design stand out is that it not only creates designs that can withstand future devices but also helps scale design without losing flexibility. Without having the same breakpoints or the same amount of content as in the previous implementation, components and patterns can be lifted and reused.

    We can now create designs that adapt to the space they have, the content within them, and the content around them. We can create responsive components without relying on container queries using an intrinsic approach.

    Another 2010 moment?

    This intrinsic approach should in my view be every bit as groundbreaking as responsive web design was ten years ago. It’s another “everything changed” moment for me.

    But it doesn’t seem to be moving quite as fast, I haven’t yet had that same career-changing moment I had with responsive design, despite the widely shared and brilliant talk that brought it to my attention.

    One possible explanation for that might be that I now work for a sizable company, which is significantly different from the role I held as a design agency in 2010: In my agency days, every new project was a clean slate, a chance to try something new. Nowadays, projects use existing tools and frameworks and are often improvements to existing websites with an existing codebase.

    Another possibility is that I’m now more prepared for change. In 2010 I was new to design in general, the shift was frightening and required a lot of learning. Additionally, an intrinsic approach isn’t exactly all-new; it’s about applying existing skills and CSS knowledge in a unique way.

    You can’t framework your way out of a content problem

    Another reason for the slightly slower adoption of intrinsic design could be the lack of quick-fix framework solutions available to kick-start the change.

    Ten years ago, responsive grid systems were everywhere. With a framework like Bootstrap or Skeleton, you had a responsive design template at your fingertips.

    Because having a selection of units is a benefit when creating layout templates, intrinsic design and frameworks do not go hand in hand quite as well. The beauty of intrinsic design is combining different units and experimenting with techniques to get the best for your content.

    And then there are design tools. We probably all used Photoshop templates for desktop, tablet, and mobile devices to drop designs into and show how the site would appear throughout our careers at some point.

    How do you do that now, with each component responding to content and layouts flexing as and when they need to? This kind of design must take place in the browser, which is something I’m very fond of.

    The debate about “whether designers should code” is another that has rumbled on for years. When designing a digital product, we should, at the very least, design for a best- and worst-case scenario when it comes to content. It’s not ideal to do this in a graphics-based software package. In code, we can add longer sentences, more radio buttons, and extra tabs, and watch in real time as the design adapts. Still in use? Is the design too reliant on the current content?

    Personally, I look forward to the day intrinsic design is the standard for design, when a design component can be truly flexible and adapt to both its space and content with no reliance on device or container dimensions.

    First, the content

    Content is not constant. After all, to design for the unanticipated or unexpected, we must take into account changes in content, like in our earlier Subgrid card illustration, which allowed the cards to modify both their own content and that of their sibling components.

    Thankfully, there’s more to CSS than layout, and plenty of properties and values can help us put content first. Subgrid and pseudo-elements like ::first-line and ::first-letter help to separate design from markup so we can create designs that allow for changes.

    Instead of the dated markup tricks below,

    First line of text with different styling...

    —we can target content based on where it appears.

    .element::first-line { font-size: 1.4em;}.element::first-letter { color: red;}

    Much bigger additions to CSS include logical properties, which change the way we construct designs using logical dimensions (start and end) instead of physical ones (left and right), something CSS Grid also does with functions like min(), max(), and clamp().

    This flexibility allows for directional changes according to content, a common requirement when we need to present content in multiple languages. In the past, this was often achieved with Sass mixins but was often limited to switching from left-to-right to right-to-left orientation.

    Directional variables must be set in the Sass version.

    $direction: rtl;$opposite-direction: ltr;$start-direction: right;$end-direction: left;

    These variables can be used as values—

    body { direction: $direction; text-align: $start-direction;}

    —or as real estate.

    margin-#{$end-direction}: 10px;padding-#{$start-direction}: 10px;

    However, now we have native logical properties, removing the reliance on both Sass ( or a similar tool ) and pre-planning that necessitated using variables throughout a codebase. These properties also start to break apart the tight coupling between a design and strict physical dimensions, creating more flexibility for changes in language and in direction.

    margin-block-end: 10px;padding-block-start: 10px;

    There are also native start and end values for properties like text-align, which means we can replace text-align: right with text-align: start.

    Like the earlier examples, these properties help to build out designs that aren’t constrained to one language, the design will reflect the content’s needs.

    Fluid and fixed

    We briefly covered the power of combining fixed widths with fluid widths with intrinsic layouts. The min() and max() functions are a similar concept, allowing you to specify a fixed value with a flexible alternative. 

    For min() this means setting a fluid minimum value and a maximum fixed value.

    .element { width: min(50%, 300px);}

    The element in the figure above will be 50 % of its container as long as the element’s width doesn’t exceed 300px.

    For max() we can set a flexible max value and a minimum fixed value.

    .element { width: max(50%, 300px);}

    Now the element will be 50 % of its container as long as the element’s width is at least 300px. This means we can set limits but allow content to react to the available space.

    The clamp() function builds on this by allowing us to set a preferred value with a third parameter. Now we can allow the element to shrink or grow if it needs to without getting to a point where it becomes unusable.

    .element { width: clamp(300px, 50%, 600px);}

    This time, the element’s width will be 50 % of its container’s preferred value, with no exceptions for 300px and 600px.

    With these techniques, we have a content-first approach to responsive design. We can separate content from markup, meaning the changes users make will not affect the design. By anticipating unforeseen language or direction changes, we can begin creating future-proofing designs. And we can increase flexibility by setting desired dimensions alongside flexible alternatives, allowing for more or less content to be displayed correctly.

    Situation first

    Thanks to what we’ve discussed so far, we can cover device flexibility by changing our approach, designing around content and space instead of catering to devices. But what about that last bit of Jeffrey Zeldman’s quote,”… situations you haven’t imagined”?

    Rather than someone using a mobile phone and moving through a crowded street in glaring sunshine, it’s a very different design to be done for someone using a desktop computer. Situations and environments are hard to plan for or predict because they change as people react to their own unique challenges and tasks.

    This is why making a choice is so crucial. One size never fits all, so we need to design for multiple scenarios to create equal experiences for all our users.

    Thankfully, there is a lot we can do to provide choice.

    Responsible design is important.

    ” There are parts of the world where mobile data is prohibitively expensive, and where there is little or no broadband infrastructure”.

    On a 50 MB budget, I spent a day surfing the web.

    Chris Ashton

    One of the biggest assumptions we make is that people interacting with our designs have a good wifi connection and a wide screen monitor. However, our users may be commuters using smaller mobile devices that may experience drops in connectivity while traveling on trains or other modes of transportation. There is nothing more frustrating than a web page that won’t load, but there are ways we can help users use less data or deal with sporadic connectivity.

    The srcset attribute allows the browser to decide which image to serve. This means we can create smaller ‘cropped’ images to display on mobile devices in turn using less bandwidth and less data.

    Image alt text

    The preload attribute can also help us to think about how and when media is downloaded. It can be used to tell a browser about any critical assets that need to be downloaded with high priority, improving perceived performance and the user experience. 

      

    There’s also native lazy loading, which indicates assets that should only be downloaded when they are needed.

    …

    With srcset, preload, and lazy loading, we can start to tailor a user’s experience based on the situation they find themselves in. What none of this does, however, is allow the user themselves to decide what they want downloaded, as the decision is usually the browser’s to make. 

    So how can we put users in control?

    The media queries are returning.

    Media questions have always been about much more than device sizes. They allow content to adapt to different situations, with screen size being just one of them.

    We’ve long been able to check for media types like print and speech and features such as hover, resolution, and color. These checks allow us to provide options that suit more than one scenario, it’s less about one-size-fits-all and more about serving adaptable content.

    The Level 5 spec for Media Queries is still being developed as of this writing. It introduces some really exciting queries that in the future will help us design for multiple other unexpected situations.

    For instance, there is a light-level feature that enables you to alter a user’s style when they are in the sun or the darkness. Paired with custom properties, these features allow us to quickly create designs or themes for specific environments.

    @media (light-level: normal) { --background-color: #fff; --text-color: #0b0c0c; }@media (light-level: dim) { --background-color: #efd226; --text-color: #0b0c0c;}

    Another key feature of the Level 5 spec is personalization. Instead of creating designs that are the same for everyone, users can choose what works for them. This is achieved by using features like prefers-reduced-data, prefers-color-scheme, and prefers-reduced-motion, the latter two of which already enjoy broad browser support. These features tap into preferences set via the operating system or browser so people don’t have to spend time making each site they visit more usable. 

    Media questions like this go beyond choices made by a browser to grant more control to the user.

    Expect the unexpected

    In the end, the one thing we should always anticipate is that things will change. Devices in particular change faster than we can keep up, with foldable screens already on the market.

    We can design for content, but we can’t do it for this constantly changing landscape. By putting content first and allowing that content to adapt to whatever space surrounds it, we can create more robust, flexible designs that increase the longevity of our products.

    A lot of the CSS discussed here is about moving away from layouts and putting content at the heart of design. There is so much more we can do to adopt a more intrinsic approach, from responsive components to fixed and fluid units. Even better, we can test these techniques during the design phase by designing in-browser and watching how our designs adapt in real-time.

    When it comes to unexpected circumstances, we need to make sure our goods are usable when people need them, whenever and wherever that may be. We can move closer to achieving this by involving users in our design decisions, by creating choice via browsers, and by giving control to our users with user-preference-based media queries.

    Good design for the unexpected should allow for change, provide choice, and give control to those we serve: our users themselves.

  • Voice Content and Usability

    Voice Content and Usability

    We’ve been conversing for a long time. Whether to present information, perform transactions, or just to check in on one another, people have yammered aside, chattering and gesticulating, through spoken discussion for many generations. Only recently have we begun to write our conversations, and only recently have we outsourced them to the system, a system that exhibits a far greater affection for written communications than for the vernacular rigors of spoken speech.

    Laptops have trouble because between spoken and written speech, talk is more primitive. Machines must wrestle with the chaos of human statement, including the squabbling and pauses, the gestures and body vocabulary, and the dialect variations that can impede even the most skillfully created human-computer conversation. In the human-to-human situation, spoken language also has the opportunity of face-to-face call, where we can easily interpret verbal interpersonal cues.

    In contrast, written language develops its own fossil record of dated terms and phrases as we report it and keep utilization long after they are no longer needed in spoken communication ( for example, the welcome” To whom it may concern” ). Because it tends to be more consistent, smooth, and proper, written word is necessarily far easier for devices to interpret and know.

    Spoken speech lacks this pleasure. Besides the visual cues that mark conversations with emphasis and personal context, there are also linguistic cues and outspoken behaviors that mimic conversation in complex ways: how something is said, never what. Our spoken speech conveys much more than the written word may actually contain, whether it be rapid-fire, low-pitched, or high-decibel, sarcastic, awkward, or moaning. But when it comes to tone interfaces—the devices we conduct spoken discussions with—we experience exciting difficulties as designers and content strategists.

    Voice-to-text relations

    We interact with voice interfaces for a variety of reasons, but according to Michael McTear, Zoraida Callejas, and David Griol in The Conversational Interface, those motivations by and large mirror the reasons we initiate conversations with other people, too ( ). We typically strike up a discussion by:

    • we need something done ( such as a transaction ),
    • we want to know everything, or some kind of data, or
    • we are social people and want someone to talk to ( conversation for conversation’s pleasure ).

    A second talk from beginning to end that achieves some goal for the consumer, starting with the words interface’s initial greeting and ending with the user exiting the interface, also fits into these three categories, which I refer to as interpersonal, technical, and prosocial. Note here that a conversation in our human sense—a chat between people that leads to some result and lasts an arbitrary length of time—could encompass multiple transactional, informational, and prosocial voice interactions in succession. In other words, a voice interaction is a conversation, but it is not always just one voice interaction.

    Purely prosocial conversations are more gimmicky than captivating in most voice interfaces, because machines don’t yet have the capacity to really want to know how we’re doing and to do the sort of glad-handing humans crave. Users are also debating whether or not they prefer the kind of organic human conversation that starts with a prosocial voiceover and progresses seamlessly into other types. In fact, in Voice User Interface Design, Michael Cohen, James Giangola, and Jennifer Balogh recommend sticking to users ‘ expectations by mimicking how they interact with other voice interfaces rather than trying too hard to be human—potentially alienating them in the process ( ).

    A voice interface can also have two types of conversations we can have with one another that are both transactional and informational, each learning something new ( “discuss a musical” ).

    Transactional voice interactions

    When you order a Hawaiian pizza with extra pineapple, you’re typically having a conversation and a voice interaction when you’re tapping buttons on a food delivery app. Even when we walk up to the counter and place an order, the conversation quickly pivots from an initial smattering of neighborly small talk to the real mission at hand: ordering a pizza ( generously topped with pineapple, as it should be ).

    Alison: Hey, how are things going?

    Burhan: Hi, welcome to Crust Deluxe! It’s chilly outside. How can I help you?

    Alison, can I get a pineapple-onion pizza in Hawaii?

    Burhan: Sure, what size?

    Large, Alison.

    Burhan: Anything else?

    Alison: No, that’s it.

    Burhan: Something to drink?

    Alison, I’ll have a bottle of Coke.

    Burhan: You got it. It will cost about$ 15 and take fifteen minutes to complete.

    Each progressive disclosure in this transactional conversation reveals more and more of the desired outcome of the transaction: a service rendered or a product delivered. Conversations that are transactional have certain characteristics: they are direct, concise, and cost-effective. They quickly dispense with pleasantries.

    Informational voice interactions

    Meanwhile, some conversations are primarily about obtaining information. Alison might only want to place an order at Crust Deluxe, but she might not want to leave without a pizza at all. She might be just as interested in whether they serve halal or kosher dishes, gluten-free options, or something else. Even though we have a prosocial mini-conversation once more at the beginning to practice politeness, we are after much more.

    Alison: Hey, how are things going?

    Burhan: Hi, welcome to Crust Deluxe! It’s chilly outside. How can I help you?

    Alison: Can I ask a few questions?

    Burhan: Of course! Go right ahead.

    Alison, do you have any menu items that are halal?

    Burhan: Absolutely! On request, we can make any pie halal. We also have lots of vegetarian, ovo-lacto, and vegan options. Are you considering any additional dietary restrictions?

    Alison: What about gluten-free pizzas?

    Burhan: For both our deep-dish and thin-crust pizzas, we can definitely make a gluten-free crust for you. Anything else I can answer for you?

    Alison: That’s it for now. Good to know. Thank you!

    Burhan: Anytime, come back soon!

    This dialogue is entirely different. Here, the goal is to get a certain set of facts. Informational conversations are research expeditions to gather data, news, or facts in search of the truth. Voice interactions that are informational might be more long-winded than transactional conversations by necessity. Responses are typically longer, more in-depth, and carefully communicated to ensure that the customer understands the main ideas.

    Voice Interfaces

    Voice-based user interfaces use speech at the core to assist users in accomplishing their objectives. But simply because an interface has a voice component doesn’t mean that every user interaction with it is mediated through voice. We’re most concerned with pure voice interfaces, which depend entirely on spoken conversation and lack any visual component, making multimodal voice interfaces much more nuanced and challenging to deal with because they can lean on visual components like screens as crutches.

    Though voice interfaces have long been integral to the imagined future of humanity in science fiction, only recently have those lofty visions become fully realized in genuine voice interfaces.

    IVR ( interactive voice response ) systems

    Though written conversational interfaces have been fixtures of computing for many decades, voice interfaces first emerged in the early 1990s with text-to-speech ( TTS ) dictation programs that recited written text aloud, as well as speech-enabled in-car systems that gave directions to a user-provided address. We became familiar with the first real voice interfaces that could actually be spoken with the help of interactive voice response ( IVR ) systems, which were developed as an alternative to overburdened customer service representatives.

    IVR systems allowed organizations to reduce their reliance on call centers but soon became notorious for their clunkiness. When you call an airline or hotel company, which is a common practice in the corporate world, these systems were primarily intended as metaphorical switchboards to direct customers to a real phone agent (” Say Reservations to book a flight or check an itinerary” ), which are more likely to happen when you call one. Despite their functional issues and users ‘ frustration with their inability to speak to an actual human right away, IVR systems proliferated in the early 1990s across a variety of industries (, PDF).

    IVR systems have a reputation for having less scintillating conversations than we’re used to in real life ( or even in science fiction ), despite being extremely repetitive and monotonous.

    Screen readers

    The invention of the screen reader, a tool that converts visual content into synthesized speech, was a development of IVR systems in parallel. For Blind or visually impaired website users, it’s the predominant method of interacting with text, multimedia, or form elements. Perhaps the closest thing we have today to an out-of-the-box implementation of content delivered through voice is represented by screen readers.

    Among the first screen readers known by that moniker was the Screen Reader for the BBC Micro and NEEC Portable developed by the Research Centre for the Education of the Visually Handicapped (RCEVH) at the University of Birmingham in 1986 ( ). The first IBM Screen Reader for text-based computers was created by Jim Thatcher in the same year, which was later recreated for a computer with graphical user interfaces ( GUIs ) ( ).

    With the rapid growth of the web in the 1990s, the demand for accessible tools for websites exploded. Screen readers started facilitating quick interactions with web pages that ostensibly allow disabled users to traverse the page as an aural and temporal space rather than a visual and physical one with the introduction of semantic HTML and especially ARIA roles in 2008, allowing them to do so in an aural and temporal space. In other words, screen readers for the web “provide mechanisms that translate visual design constructs—proximity, proportion, etc. in A List Apart, writes Aaron Gustafson, “into useful information.” ” At least they do when documents are authored thoughtfully” ( ).

    Although incredibly instructive for voice interface designers, screen readers have a major flaw: they’re challenging to use and consistently verbose. The visual structures of websites and web navigation don’t translate well to screen readers, sometimes resulting in unwieldy pronouncements that name every manipulable HTML element and announce every formatting change. Working with web-based interfaces takes a cognitive toll for many screen reader users.

    In Wired, accessibility advocate and voice engineer Chris Maury considers why the screen reader experience is ill-suited to users relying on voice:

    I hated the way Screen Readers operated from the beginning. Why are they designed the way they are? It makes no sense to present information visually and then only to have that information translated into audio. All of the time and energy that goes into creating the perfect user experience for an app is wasted, or even worse, adversely impacting the experience for blind users. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    In many cases, well-designed voice interfaces can speed users to their destination better than long-winded screen reader monologues. After all, users of the visual interface have the advantage of freely scurrying around the viewport to find information without getting too close to it. Blind users, meanwhile, are obligated to listen to every utterance synthesized into speech and therefore prize brevity and efficiency. Users with disabilities who have long had no choice but to use clumsy screen readers might benefit from more streamlined user interfaces, especially more advanced voice assistants.

    Voice assistants

    Many of us immediately associate voice assistants with the subset of voice interfaces that are now commonplace in living rooms, smart homes, and offices with the film HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey or Majel Barrett’s voice as the omniscient computer in Star Trek. Voice assistants are akin to personal concierges that can answer questions, schedule appointments, conduct searches, and perform other common day-to-day tasks. And because of their assistive potential, they are quickly gaining more and more attention from accessibility advocates.

    Before the earliest IVR systems found success in the enterprise, Apple published a demonstration video in 1987 depicting the Knowledge Navigator, a voice assistant that could transcribe spoken words and recognize human speech to a great degree of accuracy. Then, in 2001, Tim Berners-Lee and others created their vision for a” semantic web agent” that would carry out routine tasks like” checking calendars, making appointments, and finding locations” ( hinter paywall ). It wasn’t until 2011 that Apple’s Siri finally entered the picture, making voice assistants a tangible reality for consumers.

    There is a significant variation in how programmable and customizable some voice assistants are compared to others due to the sheer number of voice assistants available today ( Fig 1 ). At one extreme, everything except vendor-provided features is locked down, for example, at the time of their release, the core functionality of Apple’s Siri and Microsoft’s Cortana couldn’t be extended beyond their existing capabilities. There are no other means by which developers can interact with Siri at a low level, aside from predefined categories of tasks like sending messages, hailing rideshares, making restaurant reservations, and other things, so even now it isn’t possible to program Siri to perform arbitrary functions.

    At the opposite end of the spectrum, voice assistants like Amazon Alexa and Google Home offer a core foundation on which developers can build custom voice interfaces. For this reason, developers who feel stifled by the limitations of Siri and Cortana are increasingly using programmable voice assistants that allow for customization and extensibility. Amazon offers the Alexa Skills Kit, a developer framework for building custom voice interfaces for Amazon Alexa, while Google Home offers the ability to program arbitrary Google Assistant skills. Users today have the option to choose from among the thousands of custom-built skills available in the Google Assistant and Amazon Alexa ecosystems.

    As businesses like Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Google continue to occupy their positions, they are also selling and open-sourcing an unheard array of tools and frameworks for designers and developers, aiming to make creating voice interfaces as simple as possible, even without code.

    Often by necessity, voice assistants like Amazon Alexa tend to be monochannel—they’re tightly coupled to a device and can’t be accessed on a computer or smartphone instead. In contrast, many development platforms, like Google’s Dialogflow, now support omnichannel features, allowing users to create a single conversational interface that then becomes a voice interface, textual chatbot, and IVR system upon deployment. I don’t prescribe any specific implementation approaches in this design-focused book, but in Chapter 4 we’ll get into some of the implications these variables might have on the way you build out your design artifacts.

    Voice content

    Simply put, voice content is content delivered through voice. Voice content must be free-flowing and organic, contextless and concise in order to preserve what makes human conversation so compelling in the first place. Everything written content is not.

    Our world is replete with voice content in various forms: screen readers reciting website content, voice assistants rattling off a weather forecast, and automated phone hotline responses governed by IVR systems. We’re most concerned with the audiobook content being delivered as a requirement rather than an option.

    For many of us, our first foray into informational voice interfaces will be to deliver content to users. One issue is that any content we already have isn’t in any way suitable for this new environment. So how do we make the content trapped on our websites more conversational? And how do we create fresh copy that works with voice-activated text?

    Lately, we’ve begun slicing and dicing our content in unprecedented ways. Websites are, in many ways, colossal vaults of what I call macrocontent: lengthy prose that can last for miles in a browser window, like microfilm viewers of newspaper archives. Back in 2002, well before the present-day ubiquity of voice assistants, technologist Anil Dash defined microcontent as permalinked pieces of content that stay legible regardless of environment, such as email or text messages:

    An example of microcontent can be a day’s weather forecast [sic], an airplane flight’s arrival and departure times, an abstract from a lengthy publication, or a single instant message. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    I would update Dash’s definition of microcontent to include all instances of bite-sized content that transcends written communiqués. After all, today we encounter microcontent in interfaces where a small snippet of copy is displayed alone, unmoored from the browser, like a textbot confirmation of a restaurant reservation. The best way to learn how to stretch your content to the limits of its potential is through microcontent, which will inform both established and new delivery methods.

    As microcontent, voice content is unique because it’s an example of how content is experienced in time rather than in space. We can instantly see when the next train is coming from a digital sign underground, but voice interfaces keep our attention occupied for so long that screen reader users are all too familiar.

    Because microcontent is fundamentally made up of isolated blobs with no relation to the channels where they’ll eventually end up, we need to ensure that our microcontent truly performs well as voice content—and that means focusing on the two most important traits of robust voice content: voice content legibility and voice content discoverability.

    Our voice content’s legibility and discoverability in general both depend on how it manifests in terms of perceived space and time.

  • Sustainable Web Design, An Excerpt

    Sustainable Web Design, An Excerpt

    In the 1950s, some members of the elite running group had come to accept the idea that it was impossible to run a hour in less than four hours. Riders had been attempting it since the later 19th century and were beginning to draw the conclusion that the human body just wasn’t built for the job.

    But on May 6, 1956, Roger Bannister caught anyone off guard. It was a cold, damp morning in Oxford, England—conditions no one expected to give themselves to record-setting—and but Bannister did really that, running a mile in 3: 59.4 and becoming the first people in the history books to run a mile in under four hours.

    The world today knew that the four-minute hour was possible thanks to this change in the standard. Bannister’s history lasted just forty-six days, when it was snatched aside by American sprinter John Landy. Finally, in the same race, three athletes managed to cross the four-minute challenge together. Since therefore, over 1, 400 walkers have actually run a mile in under four days, the current document is 3: 43.13, held by Moroccan performer Hicham El Guerrouj.

    We can do a lot more with what we think is possible, and we can only do it if we see that someone else has already done it. As with people running speed, there are also hard limits on how a website can accomplish.

    Establishing requirements for a green website

    The key environmental performance indicators for the majority of major industries are pretty well established, such as power per square metre for homes and miles per gallon for cars. The tools and methods for calculating those measures are standardized as well, which keeps everyone on the same site when doing economic evaluations. However, in the world of websites and apps, we aren’t held to any specific environmental standards, and we have only recently developed the tools and methods we need to also conduct an environmental assessment.

    The main objective in green web layout is to reduce carbon emissions. However, it’s nearly impossible to accurately assess the amount of CO2 that a website merchandise produces. We can’t measure the pollutants coming out of the exhaust valves on our devices. The pollution coming from power plants that burn coal and oil are far apart, out of sight, and out of mind. We have no way to track the particles from a website or app up to the power station where the light is being generated and really know the exact amount of house oil produced. What then do we do?

    If we can‘t measure the actual carbon emissions, then we need to get what we can estimate. The following are the main elements that could be used as coal pollution gauges:

    1. Transfer of data
    2. Coal content of light

    Let’s take a look at how we can use these indicators to calculate the energy use, and in turn the carbon footprint, of the sites and web applications we create.

    Transfer of data

    Most researchers use kilowatt-hours per gigabyte (k Wh/GB ) as a metric of energy efficiency when measuring the amount of data transferred over the internet when a website or application is used. This serves as a wonderful example of how much energy is consumed and how much carbon is released. As a rule of thumb, the more files transferred, the more electricity used in the data center, telecoms systems, and end users products.

    The most accurate way to calculate data exchange for a second visit for web pages is to measure the site weight, which is the first time a user visits the page in kilobytes. It’s very easy to measure using the engineer equipment in any modern internet browser. Statistics for the total data transfer of any web application are frequently included in your web hosting account ( Fig. 2.1 ).

    The great thing about website weight as a parameter is that it allows us to compare the effectiveness of web pages on a level playing field without confusing the issue with frequently changing traffic volumes.

    A large scope is required to reduce page weight. By early 2020, the median page weight was 1.97 MB for setups the HTTP Archive classifies as “desktop” and 1.77 MB for “mobile”, with desktop increasing 36 percent since January 2016 and mobile page weights nearly doubling in the same period ( Fig 2.2 ). Image files account for roughly half of this data transfer, making them the single biggest contributor to carbon emissions on a typical website.

    History clearly shows us that our web pages can be smaller, if only we set our minds to it. While the majority of technologies, including the web’s underlying technology like data centers and transmission networks, become more and more energy-efficient, websites themselves become less effective as time goes on.

    You might be aware of the project team’s focus on creating faster user experiences using the concept of performance budgeting. For example, we might specify that the website must load in a maximum of one second on a broadband connection and three seconds on a 3G connection. Performance budgets are upper limits rather than vague suggestions, much like speed limits while driving, so the goal should always be to come in within budget.

    Designing for fast performance does often lead to reduced data transfer and emissions, but it isn’t always the case. Page weight and transfer size are more objective and reliable benchmarks for sustainable web design, but web performance is frequently more about the subjective perception of load times than it is about the underlying system’s true efficiency.

    We can set a page weight budget in reference to a benchmark of industry averages, using data from sources like HTTP Archive. We can also use competitor page weights and the website’s current layout to compare it to. For example, we might set a maximum page weight budget as equal to our most efficient competitor, or we could set the benchmark lower to guarantee we are best in class.

    If we want to take it to the next level, we could start looking at how much more popular our web pages are when people visit them frequently. Although page weight for the first time someone visits is the easiest thing to measure, and easy to compare on a like-for-like basis, we can learn even more if we start looking at transfer size in other scenarios too. For instance, visitors who load the same page more frequently are likely to have a high percentage of the files cached in their browser, which means they don’t need to move all the files on subsequent visits. Likewise, a visitor who navigates to new pages on the same website will likely not need to load the full page each time, as some global assets from areas like the header and footer may already be cached in their browser. Moving away from the first visit and allowing us to determine page weight budgets for scenarios other than this one can help us learn even more about how to optimize efficiency for users who regularly visit our pages.

    Page weight budgets are easy to track throughout a design and development process. Although they don’t directly disclose carbon emissions and energy consumption data, they do provide a clear indicator of efficiency in comparison to other websites. And as transfer size is an effective analog for energy consumption, we can actually use it to estimate energy consumption too.

    In summary, less data transfer leads to more energy efficiency, a crucial component of reducing web product carbon emissions. The more efficient our products, the less electricity they use, and the less fossil fuels need to be burned to produce the electricity to power them. However, as we’ll see next, it’s important to take into account the source of that electricity because all web products require some.

    Coal content of light

    Regardless of energy efficiency, the level of pollution caused by digital products depends on the carbon intensity of the energy being used to power them. The term” carbon intensity” (gCO2/k Wh ) is used to describe how much carbon dioxide is produced for each kilowatt-hour of electricity ). This varies widely, with renewable energy sources and nuclear having an extremely low carbon intensity of less than 10 gCO2/k Wh ( even when factoring in their construction ), whereas fossil fuels have very high carbon intensity of approximately 200–400 gCO2/k Wh.

    The majority of electricity is produced by national or state grids, where energy from a variety of sources is combined with various levels of carbon intensity. The distributed nature of the internet means that a single user of a website or app might be using energy from multiple different grids simultaneously, a website user in Paris uses electricity from the French national grid to power their home internet and devices, but the website’s data center could be in Dallas, USA, pulling electricity from the Texas grid, while the telecoms networks use energy from everywhere between Dallas and Paris.

    Although we have some control over where our projects are hosted, we do not have complete control over the energy supply of web services. With a data center using a significant proportion of the energy of any website, locating the data center in an area with low carbon energy will tangibly reduce its carbon emissions. Danish startup Tomorrow reports and maps the user-provided data, and a look at their map demonstrates how, for instance, choosing a data center in France will result in significantly lower carbon emissions than choosing a data center in the Netherlands ( Fig. 2.3 ).

    Having said that, we don’t want to locate our servers too far away from our users; however, it takes energy to transmit data through the telecom’s networks, and the more energy is used, the further the data travels. Just like food miles, we can think of the distance from the data center to the website’s core user base as “megabyte miles” —and we want it to be as small as possible.

    We can use website analytics to determine the country, state, or even city where our core user group is located and measure the distance between that location and the data center that our hosting company uses as a benchmark. This will be a somewhat fuzzy metric as we don’t know the precise center of mass of our users or the exact location of a data center, but we can at least get a rough idea.

    For instance, if a website is hosted in London but the main audience is on the United States ‘ West Coast, we could look up the travel distance between London and San Francisco, which is 5,300 miles. That’s a long way! We can see how hosting it somewhere in North America, ideally on the West Coast, would significantly lessen the distance and the amount of energy required to transmit the data. In addition, locating our servers closer to our visitors helps reduce latency and delivers better user experience, so it’s a win-win.

    Reverting it to carbon emissions

    If we combine carbon intensity with a calculation for energy consumption, we can calculate the carbon emissions of our websites and apps. A tool my team created accomplishes this by measuring the data transfer over the wire when a web page is loaded, calculating the associated electricity consumption, and then converting that data into a CO2 figure ( Fig. 2.4). It also factors in whether or not the web hosting is powered by renewable energy.

    The Energy and Emissions Worksheet that comes with this book teaches you how to take it one step further and tailor the data more precisely to the unique aspects of your project.

    With the ability to calculate carbon emissions for our projects, we could actually expand our page weight budget and establish carbon budgets as well. CO2 is not a metric commonly used in web projects, we’re more familiar with kilobytes and megabytes, and can fairly easily look at design options and files to assess how big they are. Although translating that into carbon adds a layer of abstraction that isn’t as intuitive, carbon budgets do focus our minds on the main thing we’re trying to reduce, which supports the main goal of sustainable web design: reducing carbon emissions.

    Browser Energy

    Transfer of data might be the simplest and most complete analog for energy consumption in our digital projects, but by giving us one number to represent the energy used in the data center, the telecoms networks, and the end user’s devices, it can’t offer us insights into the efficiency in any specific part of the system.

    One part of the system we can look at in more detail is the energy used by end users ‘ devices. The computational load is increasingly shifting from the data center to users ‘ devices, whether they are phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, or even smart TVs, as front-end web technologies advance. Modern web browsers allow us to implement more complex styling and animation on the fly using CSS and JavaScript. Additionally, JavaScript libraries like Angular and React make it possible to create applications where the” thinking” process is performed either partially or completely in the browser.

    All of these advances are exciting and open up new possibilities for what the web can do to serve society and create positive experiences. However, more data is processed in a web browser, which means more energy is used by the user’s devices. This has implications not just environmentally, but also for user experience and inclusivity. Applications that put a lot of processing power on a user’s device unintentionally exclude users with older, slower devices and make the batteries on phones and laptops drain more quickly. Furthermore, if we build web applications that require the user to have up-to-date, powerful devices, people throw away old devices much more frequently. This not only hurts the environment, but it also places a disproportionate financial burden on society’s poorest.

    In part because the tools are limited, and partly because there are so many different models of devices, it’s difficult to measure website energy consumption on end users ‘ devices. The Energy Impact monitor inside the developer console of the Safari browser is one of the tools we currently have ( Fig. 2.5 ).

    You know what happens when your computer’s cooling fans start spinning so frantically that you suspect it might take off when you load a website? That’s essentially what this tool is measuring.

    It uses these figures to create an energy impact rating and shows the percentage of CPU used and how long the CPU used when loading the web page last. It doesn’t give us precise data for the amount of electricity used in kilowatts, but the information it does provide can be used to benchmark how efficiently your websites use energy and set targets for improvement.

  • Design for Safety, An Excerpt

    Design for Safety, An Excerpt

    According to anti-racist scholar Kim Crayton, “intention without plan is chaos.” We’ve discussed how our prejudices, beliefs, and carelessness toward marginalized and resilient parties lead to dangerous and irresponsible tech—but what, precisely, do we need to do to fix it? We need a strategy, not just the desire to make our technology safer.

    This book will provide you with that plan of action. It covers how to incorporate safety principles into your design work in order to make tech that’s secure, how to persuade your stakeholders that this work is important, and how to respond to the critique that what we really need is more diversity. ( Spoiler: we do, but diversity alone is not the solution to fixing unethical, unsafe technology. )

    The method for equitable safety

    Your objectives when designing for protection are as follows:

    • determine way your product can be used for misuse,
    • style ways to prevent the maltreatment, and
    • offer assistance for harmed people to regain control and power.

    The Process for Inclusive Safety is a tool to help you reach those goals ( Fig 5.1 ). It’s a method I developed in 2018 to better understand the different methods I used to create products that were designed with safety in mind. Whether you are creating an entirely new product or adding to an existing element, the Process can help you produce your product secure and diverse. The Process includes five public areas of action:

    • conducting studies
    • Creating tropes
    • pondering issues
    • Designing answers
    • Testing for security

    It is intended to be flexible, so teams might not want to utilize every action in all circumstances. Use the parts that are related to your special function and environment, this is meant to be something you can put into your existing style process.

    And once you use it, if you have an idea for making it better or simply want to give perspective of how it helped your staff, please get in touch with me. It’s a dwelling report that I hope technicians can use as a practical and useful resource in their day-to-day work.

    If you’re working on a product especially for a resilient team or survivors of some form of injury, such as an application for survivors of domestic violence, sexual abuse, or drug addiction, be sure to read Section 7, which covers that position directly and should be handled a bit different. The principles set forth here are for putting safety first when creating a more general product with a broad user base ( which, as we already know from statistics, will include some groups that should be protected from harm ). Chapter 7 is focused on products that are specifically for vulnerable groups and people who have experienced trauma.

    Step 1: Conduct research

    Design research should include a thorough analysis of how your technology might be used for abuse as well as specific insights into the experiences of those who have witnessed and perpetrated that kind of abuse. At this stage, you and your team will investigate issues of interpersonal harm and abuse, and explore any other safety, security, or inclusivity issues that might be a concern for your product or service, like data security, racist algorithms, and harassment.

    broad research

    Your project should begin with broad, general research into similar products and issues around safety and ethical concerns that have already been reported. For example, a team building a smart home device would do well to understand the multitude of ways that existing smart home devices have been used as tools of abuse. If you’re creating an AI product, be aware of the potential for racism and other issues that have been reported in other AI products. Nearly all types of technology have some kind of potential or actual harm that’s been reported on in the news or written about by academics. Google Scholar is a useful resource for locating these studies.

    Specific research: Survivors

    When possible and appropriate, include direct research ( surveys and interviews ) with people who are experts in the forms of harm you have uncovered. In order to have a better understanding of the subject and be better positioned to prevent retraumatize survivors, you should interview advocates working in the area of your research first. If you’ve uncovered possible domestic violence issues, for example, the experts you’ll want to speak with are survivors themselves, as well as workers at domestic violence hotlines, shelters, other related nonprofits, and lawyers.

    It is crucial to pay people for their knowledge and lived experiences, especially when interviewing survivors of any kind of trauma. Don’t ask survivors to share their trauma for free, as this is exploitative. While some survivors may not want to be paid, you should always make the offer in the initial ask. Donating to a cause that combated the kind of violence the interviewee experienced is an alternative to paying for. We’ll talk more about how to appropriately interview survivors in Chapter 6.

    Abusers specifically: research

    It’s unlikely that teams aiming to design for safety will be able to interview self-proclaimed abusers or people who have broken laws around things like hacking. Don’t make this a goal, rather, try to get at this angle in your general research. Attempt to understand how abusers or bad actors use technology to harm others, how they use it against others, and how they justify or explain the abuse.

    Step 2: Create archetypes

    Use your research after you’ve finished conducting it to create abuser and survivor archetypes. Archetypes are not personas, as they’re not based on real people that you interviewed and surveyed. Instead, they’re based on your research into likely safety issues, much like when we design for accessibility: we don’t need to have found a group of blind or low-vision users in our interview pool to create a design that’s inclusive of them. Instead, we base those designs on already-existing research to satisfy the requirements of this audience. Personas typically represent real users and include many details, while archetypes are broader and can be more generalized.

    The abuser archetype is defined as someone who views a product as a means of harm ( Fig. 5.2 ). They may be trying to harm someone they don’t know through surveillance or anonymous harassment, or they may be trying to control, monitor, abuse, or torment someone they know personally.

    Someone who is being abused with the product is the survivor archetype. There are various situations to consider in terms of the archetype’s understanding of the abuse and how to put an end to it: Do they need proof of abuse they already suspect is happening, or are they unaware they’ve been targeted in the first place and need to be alerted ( Fig 5.3 )?

    You may want to make multiple survivor archetypes to capture a range of different experiences. They may be aware of the abuse is occurring but not be able to stop it, such as when a stalker keeps figuring out where they are from ( Fig 5.4), or they may be aware that it is happening but not know how ( for example, when an abuser locks them out of IoT devices ). Include as many of these scenarios as you need to in your survivor archetype. These will be used later when you create solutions to help your survivor archetypes achieve their goals of preventing and ending abuse.

    It may be useful for you to create persona-like artifacts for your archetypes, such as the three examples shown. Focus on their objectives rather than the demographic details we frequently see in personas. The goals of the abuser will be to carry out the specific abuse you’ve identified, while the goals of the survivor will be to prevent abuse, understand that abuse is happening, make ongoing abuse stop, or regain control over the technology that’s being used for abuse. Later, you’ll think about how to help the survivor’s goals and the abuser’s goals.

    And while the “abuser/survivor” model fits most cases, it doesn’t fit all, so modify it as you need to. For example, if you uncovered an issue with security, such as the ability for someone to hack into a home camera system and talk to children, the malicious hacker would get the abuser archetype and the child’s parents would get survivor archetype.

    Step 3: Remind yourself of your issues

    After creating archetypes, brainstorm novel abuse cases and safety issues. You’re trying to identify entirely new safety issues that are unique to your product or service by using the term” Novel” in terms of things you’ve not found in your research. The goal with this step is to exhaust every effort of identifying harms your product could cause. You aren’t worrying about how to prevent the harm yet—that comes in the next step.

    What other abuses could your product be used for besides what you’ve already discovered through your research? I recommend setting aside at least a few hours with your team for this process.

    Try conducting a Black Mirror brainstorming session if you want to start somewhere. This exercise is based on the show Black Mirror, which features stories about the dark possibilities of technology. Try to figure out how your product would be used in an episode of the show—the most wild, awful, out-of-control ways it could be used for harm. Participants typically end up having a good deal of fun when I’ve led Black Mirror brainstorms ( which I think is great because having fun when designing for safety! ). I recommend time-boxing a Black Mirror brainstorm to half an hour, and then dialing it back and using the rest of the time thinking of more realistic forms of harm.

    You may still not feel confident that you have found every possible source of harm after identifying as many opportunities for abuse as possible. A healthy amount of anxiety is normal when you’re doing this kind of work. It’s common for teams designing for safety to worry,” Have we really identified every possible harm? What if something is missing, then? If you’ve spent at least four hours coming up with ways your product could be used for harm and have run out of ideas, go to the next step.

    It’s impossible to say 100 % assurance that you’ve done everything right, but instead of aiming for 100 % assurance, acknowledge that you’ve taken this step and have done everything you can, and pledge to keep putting safety first in the future. Once your product is released, your users may identify new issues that you missed, aim to receive that feedback graciously and course-correct quickly.

    Step 4: Design solutions

    You should now be able to identify potential harm-causing uses for your product as well as survivor and abuser archetypes describing opposing user objectives. The next step is to identify ways to design against the identified abuser’s goals and to support the survivor’s goals. This is a good addition to existing areas of your design process where you’re making recommendations for solutions to the various issues your research has identified.

    Some questions to ask yourself to help prevent harm and support your archetypes include:

    • Can you design your product in such a way that the identified harm cannot happen in the first place? If not, what barriers can you place to stop the harm from occurring?
    • How can you make the victim aware that abuse is happening through your product?
    • How can you assist the victim in understanding what they need to do to stop the problem?
    • Can you identify any types of user activity that would indicate some form of harm or abuse? Could your product help the user access support?

    In some products, it’s possible to proactively detect harm is occurring. For example, a pregnancy app might be modified to allow the user to report that they were the victim of an assault, which could trigger an offer to receive resources for local and national organizations. Although this kind of proactiveness is not always possible, it’s worthwhile to spend a half hour talking about how your product could help the user receive help in a safe manner if any kind of user activity would indicate some form of harm or abuse.

    That said, use caution: you don’t want to do anything that could put a user in harm’s way if their devices are being monitored. If you do offer some kind of proactive help, always make it voluntary, and think through other safety issues, such as the need to keep the user in-app in case an abuser is checking their search history. In the next chapter, we’ll examine a good illustration of this.

    Step 5: Test for safety

    The final step is to evaluate your prototypes from the perspective of your archetypes, who wants to harm the product and the victim of the harm who needs to regain control over the technology. Just like any other kind of product testing, at this point you’ll aim to rigorously test out your safety solutions so that you can identify gaps and correct them, validate that your designs will help keep your users safe, and feel more confident releasing your product into the world.

    Ideally, safety testing happens along with usability testing. If you work for a company that doesn’t conduct usability testing, you might be able to use safety testing to deftly perform both. A user who uses your design while trying to use it against someone else can also be encouraged to point out interactions or other design details that don’t make sense.

    You’ll want to conduct safety testing on either your final prototype or the actual product if it’s already been released. It’s okay to test an existing product that wasn’t created with safety goals in mind right away; “etrofitting” it for safety is a good thing to do.

    Remember that testing for safety involves testing from the perspective of both an abuser and a survivor, though it may not make sense for you to do both. Alternatively, if you made multiple survivor archetypes to capture multiple scenarios, you’ll want to test from the perspective of each one.

    You as the designer are probably too closely acquainted with the product and its design at this point, just like other usability testing techniques, and you know the product too well. Instead of doing it yourself, set up testing as you would with other usability testing: find someone who is not familiar with the product and its design, set the scene, give them a task, encourage them to think out loud, and observe how they attempt to complete it.

    Abuse testing

    The goal of this testing is to understand how easy it is for someone to weaponize your product for harm. Unlike with usability testing, you want to make it impossible, or at least difficult, for them to achieve their goal. Use your product to try to accomplish the objectives in the abuser archetype you created earlier.

    For example, for a fitness app with GPS-enabled location features, we can imagine that the abuser archetype would have the goal of figuring out where his ex-girlfriend now lives. With this in mind, you’d make every effort to discover the location of a different user who has their privacy settings in place. You might try to see her running routes, view any available information on her profile, view anything available about her location ( which she has set to private ), and investigate the profiles of any other users somehow connected with her account, such as her followers.

    If by the end of this you’ve managed to uncover some of her location data, despite her having set her profile to private, you know now that your product enables stalking. Reverting to step 4 and figuring out how to stop this from occurring is your next step. You may need to repeat the process of designing solutions and testing them more than once.

    testing for a Survivor

    testing for a Survivor involves identifying how to give information and power to the survivor. It might not always make sense based on the product or context. Thwarting the attempt of an abuser archetype to stalk someone also satisfies the goal of the survivor archetype to not be stalked, so separate testing wouldn’t be needed from the survivor’s perspective.

    However, there are cases where it makes sense. A survivor archetype’s goal, for instance, would be to discover what causes the temperature change when they aren’t altering it themselves. You could test this by looking for the thermostat’s history log and checking for usernames, actions, and times, if you couldn’t find that information, you would have more work to do in step 4.

    Another goal might be regaining control of the thermostat once the survivor realizes the abuser is remotely changing its settings. Are there any instructions that explain how to remove a user and change the password, and are they simple to locate? For your test, this would involve trying to figure out how to do this. This might again reveal that more work is needed to make it clear to the user how they can regain control of the device or account.

    stress testing

    To make your product more inclusive and compassionate, consider adding stress testing. This concept comes from Design for Real Life by Eric Meyer and Sara Wachter-Boettcher. The authors noted that personas typically focus on happy people, but that happy people are frequently anxious, stressed out, unhappy, or even go through a bad day. These are called” stress cases”, and testing your products for users in stress-case situations can help you identify places where your design lacks compassion. More information about how to incorporate stress cases into your design can be found in Design for Real Life, as well as in many other effective methods for compassionate design.