×
‘The Fantastic Four: First Steps’ Isn’t Quite Fantastic, But It’s Pretty Great

‘The Fantastic Four: First Steps’ Isn’t Quite Fantastic, But It’s Pretty Great

Tech-news , , , , , ,

The Fantastic Four: First Steps is like an ice-cold drink on a warm summer’s day. A slice of apple pie with a glass of milk. It’s a nice, simple, familiar-feeling movie that will make you feel warm and fuzzy for a while but maybe doesn’t have the lasting power of something stronger. It’s easily the best Fantastic Four movie ever, and yet, falls just short of being fully “fantastic.” Nevertheless, it’s still highly enjoyable.

Directed by Matt Shakman (Wandavision), Fantastic Four takes place four years after Reed Richards (Pedro Pascal), Sue Storm (Vanessa Kirby), Ben Grimm (Ebon Moss-Bachrach), and Johnny Storm (Joseph Quinn) went to space, encountered a strange occurrence, and returned to Earth with superpowers. In that time, they’ve become, dare we say it, Earth’s mightiest heroes, protecting everyone, everywhere. But the story picks up with Reed and Sue learning they’re going to have a baby, which, despite what they tell themselves, means everything is about to change.

In most iterations of the Fantastic Four, the fact that the group is such a tight-knit family unit is half the charm. In First Steps, it’s all of the charm. Not only does the movie just drop in on these four adding one more to the group, but that group is magic together, exhibiting a comfortable chemistry that perfectly approximates their closeness. You can tell they know each other inside and out, and that gives the film an almost palpable energy. Simply put, we love anytime any of them are on screen, and the more they are on screen together, the better.

– Marvel Studios

The cast itself is primarily responsible for this, as each brings distinct characteristics and points of view to their characters. Pascal, for example, turns Reed into this linchpin that’s both super confident and also surprisingly vulnerable. With that dichotomy, he can almost supercharge whoever he’s on screen with by giving them so much to work with. Quinn’s Johnny, who has some of the most entertaining lines and throughlines in the movie, reaps the most benefits from that and easily becomes the standout of the film.

Across from him, Moss-Bachrach is perfect as Ben, giving the character a grounded, homely quality. It’s just unfortunate that of the four, he gets kind of shortchanged in terms of more fully realized arcs, but we love him anyway. Then there’s Kirby’s Sue, who holds the whole group together—sometimes literally—with her charisma and likability. Put them together, and it’s lightning in a bottle.

That’s tested, though, when a silver surfer (played by Julia Garner, who is never referred to as the “Silver Surfer,” but instead goes by Shalla-Bal, an occasional alternate herald to Galactus from the comics) comes to Earth to let them know it has been marked for death by Galactus. Galactus (played by Ralph Ineson) is one of the biggest, baddest villains in all of Marvel Comics, and Fantastic Four does him justice, especially visually. It also sets him up as a near-impossible foe to beat, which raises the stakes and tension. The film then ups the ante of its warmth and kindness with themes of selflessness and family as we watch the world come together to back these heroes against a common enemy.

Galactus’ story, which ends up directly tying into Sue and Reed’s child, Franklin, keeps the movie chugging along but also works against its best feature: the chemistry. As the group attempts to find a way to beat Galactus, each has to deal with their own emotions and reactions. When that happens, the film’s aw-shucks, comfort food vibe clashes with the brooding and drama.

It also doesn’t help that, ultimately, everything happening with Galactus is a little too familiar, especially when the movie builds to our heroes saving the world by winning a battle in New York. Again. As a result, the film can at times lose a bit of its spark. It’s not a big thing, but it’s there, and you feel it.

Silver Surfer Fantastic Four Marvel Studios
© Marvel Studios

One thing that always lights that spark is whenever Michael Giacchino’s score blares across the soundtrack. The man who has made music for Batman, Spider-Man, Star Wars, Star Trek, and more has crafted another banger of a score for Fantastic Four. Anytime it cranks up, the whole movie is elevated by it. But, conversely, when the film gets a little quiet or personal, that lack of electricity (and music) is once again noticeable.

Fantastic Four is set on Earth-828 (after co-creator Jack Kirby’s birthday), which is different from Earth-616, the primary MCU timeline. In this place, things turned out much differently. It’s a futuristic 1960s. A live-action Jetsons, basically, and that unique design and look is another huge factor in the film’s charm. However, beyond those choices of the settings and, of course, the cast, very little about Fantastic Four stands out. There’s nothing wild, or overly interesting about the movie. It looks beautiful, has tons of charm, and breezes by as quickly as can be. It just never seems as if it’s interested in being a top-tier Marvel movie. At all times, it plays things incredibly safe.

Which, of course, is probably also the reason why it works at all. The Fantastic Four: First Steps is a first step for these characters into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and even if it’s not a home run, it had to work on a base level to move the franchise forward. And it does that. There are more than a few standout moments thanks to the cast, visuals, and music. But by ultimately playing it safe, we’re left with something nice and sweet but a little underwhelming.

Thankfully, the movie does such a wonderful job endearing the audience to these characters and this place that we leave wanting to see more of them. And we will soon (in Avengers Doomsday). In the end, film is indeed a great first step, but we were kind of hoping for a giant leap.

The Fantastic Four: First Steps opens in theaters July 25.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

Source link
#Fantastic #Steps #Isnt #Fantastic #Pretty #Great

Tag

Related Posts


The original mysterious black box wasn’t an AI model at all, but the Kaaba, the black cube at the center of the Sacred Mosque of Mecca. Prior to Muhammad’s conquest of Mecca, the Kaaba was a sort of all-purpose repository of 360 sacred symbols from around the region. If you were, say, a busy merchant on his way to Medina, whatever the great spiritual truths of the universe may be, they were in there somewhere, so a prayer to the Kaaba had you covered in the god department and you were good to go.

Anthropic seems to be doing something along these lines with Claude.

Last week, representatives from Anthropic—along with OpenAI—attended an event in New York called the “Faith-AI Covenant” roundtable. The New York Board of Rabbis, the Hindu Temple Society of North America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the U.S.-based Sikh Coalition, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were all in attendance.

Last month, I wrote about a series of meetings and dinners Anthropic organized with a collection of 15 Christian leaders. Anthropic was looking for advice from the Christians, and guidance on the supposed “spiritual development” of its Claude AI model. At the time Anthropic said it was working on arranging meetings with moral thinkers who represented other groups.

It’s not clear from a fresh Associated Press piece about the Faith-AI Covenant meeting whether these latest conversations with religious leaders and the earlier meetings with Christians were part of a single coherent program at Anthropic, and whether the staff members who participated in the Christian summit participated in this one as well. Gizmodo asked Anthropic for clarity about this on Saturday, but Anthropic did not return our request as of this writing.

The Associated Press also says OpenAI and Anthropic “initiated outreach,” but also that a Swiss NGO called the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities organized it, and has plans for future events along similar lines in China, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. Also mentioned as a “key partner” was Baroness Joanna Shields, a member of the British House of Lords.

There’s not a single clear takeaway in the AP story—no religious instructions laid out by all these spiritual leaders. But what Anthropic calls Claude’s constitution includes a dissection of the philosophically fraught moral work Anthropic is at least trying to do by injecting morals into a machine: getting it to make the decision of a person with perfect values when there’s no way to write a rule for a situation that arises, and the consequences of making the wrong decision could be dire. This, Anthropic writes, is “centrally because we worry that our efforts to give Claude good enough ethical values will fail.”

To this end, the Associated Press story extracts some quietly devastating commentary from Rumman Chowdhury, CEO of a nonprofit called Humane Intelligence: “I think a very naive take that Silicon Valley has had for a couple of years related to generative AI was that we could arrive at some sort of universal principles of ethics,” Chowdhury told the AP, adding, “They have very quickly realized that that’s just not true. That’s not real. So now they’re looking at maybe religion as a way of dealing with the ambiguity of ethically gray situations.”

They are indeed looking at maybe religion. But it’s hard to picture Anthropic coming away from these meetings converted, and inserting one set of specific religious doctrines into Claude. They’re just trying to glean high order ethical truths, and demonstrating to the world that they’ve—ostensibly—left no stone unturned in searching for them.

Your mileage will vary on whether you think a machine charged with making decisions or giving important advice would, when the chips are down, be able to synthesize ideal morals thanks to meetings its creators held with administrators from some of humanity’s premier religions. It probably can’t hurt, sorta like nodding at the pre-Islamic Kaaba. But then again, only God knows for sure.

#Anthropic #Added #Religions #Quest #Inject #Perfect #Morals #ClaudeArtificial intelligence,religion">Anthropic Has Added Several More Religions on Its Quest to Inject Perfect Morals into Claude The original mysterious black box wasn’t an AI model at all, but the Kaaba, the black cube at the center of the Sacred Mosque of Mecca. Prior to Muhammad’s conquest of Mecca, the Kaaba was a sort of all-purpose repository of 360 sacred symbols from around the region. If you were, say, a busy merchant on his way to Medina, whatever the great spiritual truths of the universe may be, they were in there somewhere, so a prayer to the Kaaba had you covered in the god department and you were good to go. Anthropic seems to be doing something along these lines with Claude. Last week, representatives from Anthropic—along with OpenAI—attended an event in New York called the “Faith-AI Covenant” roundtable. The New York Board of Rabbis, the Hindu Temple Society of North America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the U.S.-based Sikh Coalition, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were all in attendance. Last month, I wrote about a series of meetings and dinners Anthropic organized with a collection of 15 Christian leaders. Anthropic was looking for advice from the Christians, and guidance on the supposed “spiritual development” of its Claude AI model. At the time Anthropic said it was working on arranging meetings with moral thinkers who represented other groups. It’s not clear from a fresh Associated Press piece about the Faith-AI Covenant meeting whether these latest conversations with religious leaders and the earlier meetings with Christians were part of a single coherent program at Anthropic, and whether the staff members who participated in the Christian summit participated in this one as well. Gizmodo asked Anthropic for clarity about this on Saturday, but Anthropic did not return our request as of this writing. The Associated Press also says OpenAI and Anthropic “initiated outreach,” but also that a Swiss NGO called the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities organized it, and has plans for future events along similar lines in China, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. Also mentioned as a “key partner” was Baroness Joanna Shields, a member of the British House of Lords. There’s not a single clear takeaway in the AP story—no religious instructions laid out by all these spiritual leaders. But what Anthropic calls Claude’s constitution includes a dissection of the philosophically fraught moral work Anthropic is at least trying to do by injecting morals into a machine: getting it to make the decision of a person with perfect values when there’s no way to write a rule for a situation that arises, and the consequences of making the wrong decision could be dire. This, Anthropic writes, is “centrally because we worry that our efforts to give Claude good enough ethical values will fail.” To this end, the Associated Press story extracts some quietly devastating commentary from Rumman Chowdhury, CEO of a nonprofit called Humane Intelligence: “I think a very naive take that Silicon Valley has had for a couple of years related to generative AI was that we could arrive at some sort of universal principles of ethics,” Chowdhury told the AP, adding, “They have very quickly realized that that’s just not true. That’s not real. So now they’re looking at maybe religion as a way of dealing with the ambiguity of ethically gray situations.” They are indeed looking at maybe religion. But it’s hard to picture Anthropic coming away from these meetings converted, and inserting one set of specific religious doctrines into Claude. They’re just trying to glean high order ethical truths, and demonstrating to the world that they’ve—ostensibly—left no stone unturned in searching for them. Your mileage will vary on whether you think a machine charged with making decisions or giving important advice would, when the chips are down, be able to synthesize ideal morals thanks to meetings its creators held with administrators from some of humanity’s premier religions. It probably can’t hurt, sorta like nodding at the pre-Islamic Kaaba. But then again, only God knows for sure. #Anthropic #Added #Religions #Quest #Inject #Perfect #Morals #ClaudeArtificial intelligence,religion

was a sort of all-purpose repository of 360 sacred symbols from around the region. If you were, say, a busy merchant on his way to Medina, whatever the great spiritual truths of the universe may be, they were in there somewhere, so a prayer to the Kaaba had you covered in the god department and you were good to go.

Anthropic seems to be doing something along these lines with Claude.

Last week, representatives from Anthropic—along with OpenAI—attended an event in New York called the “Faith-AI Covenant” roundtable. The New York Board of Rabbis, the Hindu Temple Society of North America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the U.S.-based Sikh Coalition, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were all in attendance.

Last month, I wrote about a series of meetings and dinners Anthropic organized with a collection of 15 Christian leaders. Anthropic was looking for advice from the Christians, and guidance on the supposed “spiritual development” of its Claude AI model. At the time Anthropic said it was working on arranging meetings with moral thinkers who represented other groups.

It’s not clear from a fresh Associated Press piece about the Faith-AI Covenant meeting whether these latest conversations with religious leaders and the earlier meetings with Christians were part of a single coherent program at Anthropic, and whether the staff members who participated in the Christian summit participated in this one as well. Gizmodo asked Anthropic for clarity about this on Saturday, but Anthropic did not return our request as of this writing.

The Associated Press also says OpenAI and Anthropic “initiated outreach,” but also that a Swiss NGO called the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities organized it, and has plans for future events along similar lines in China, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. Also mentioned as a “key partner” was Baroness Joanna Shields, a member of the British House of Lords.

There’s not a single clear takeaway in the AP story—no religious instructions laid out by all these spiritual leaders. But what Anthropic calls Claude’s constitution includes a dissection of the philosophically fraught moral work Anthropic is at least trying to do by injecting morals into a machine: getting it to make the decision of a person with perfect values when there’s no way to write a rule for a situation that arises, and the consequences of making the wrong decision could be dire. This, Anthropic writes, is “centrally because we worry that our efforts to give Claude good enough ethical values will fail.”

To this end, the Associated Press story extracts some quietly devastating commentary from Rumman Chowdhury, CEO of a nonprofit called Humane Intelligence: “I think a very naive take that Silicon Valley has had for a couple of years related to generative AI was that we could arrive at some sort of universal principles of ethics,” Chowdhury told the AP, adding, “They have very quickly realized that that’s just not true. That’s not real. So now they’re looking at maybe religion as a way of dealing with the ambiguity of ethically gray situations.”

They are indeed looking at maybe religion. But it’s hard to picture Anthropic coming away from these meetings converted, and inserting one set of specific religious doctrines into Claude. They’re just trying to glean high order ethical truths, and demonstrating to the world that they’ve—ostensibly—left no stone unturned in searching for them.

Your mileage will vary on whether you think a machine charged with making decisions or giving important advice would, when the chips are down, be able to synthesize ideal morals thanks to meetings its creators held with administrators from some of humanity’s premier religions. It probably can’t hurt, sorta like nodding at the pre-Islamic Kaaba. But then again, only God knows for sure.

#Anthropic #Added #Religions #Quest #Inject #Perfect #Morals #ClaudeArtificial intelligence,religion">Anthropic Has Added Several More Religions on Its Quest to Inject Perfect Morals into ClaudeAnthropic Has Added Several More Religions on Its Quest to Inject Perfect Morals into Claude The original mysterious black box wasn’t an AI model at all, but the Kaaba, the black cube at the center of the Sacred Mosque of Mecca. Prior to Muhammad’s conquest of Mecca, the Kaaba was a sort of all-purpose repository of 360 sacred symbols from around the region. If you were, say, a busy merchant on his way to Medina, whatever the great spiritual truths of the universe may be, they were in there somewhere, so a prayer to the Kaaba had you covered in the god department and you were good to go. Anthropic seems to be doing something along these lines with Claude. Last week, representatives from Anthropic—along with OpenAI—attended an event in New York called the “Faith-AI Covenant” roundtable. The New York Board of Rabbis, the Hindu Temple Society of North America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the U.S.-based Sikh Coalition, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were all in attendance. Last month, I wrote about a series of meetings and dinners Anthropic organized with a collection of 15 Christian leaders. Anthropic was looking for advice from the Christians, and guidance on the supposed “spiritual development” of its Claude AI model. At the time Anthropic said it was working on arranging meetings with moral thinkers who represented other groups. It’s not clear from a fresh Associated Press piece about the Faith-AI Covenant meeting whether these latest conversations with religious leaders and the earlier meetings with Christians were part of a single coherent program at Anthropic, and whether the staff members who participated in the Christian summit participated in this one as well. Gizmodo asked Anthropic for clarity about this on Saturday, but Anthropic did not return our request as of this writing. The Associated Press also says OpenAI and Anthropic “initiated outreach,” but also that a Swiss NGO called the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities organized it, and has plans for future events along similar lines in China, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. Also mentioned as a “key partner” was Baroness Joanna Shields, a member of the British House of Lords. There’s not a single clear takeaway in the AP story—no religious instructions laid out by all these spiritual leaders. But what Anthropic calls Claude’s constitution includes a dissection of the philosophically fraught moral work Anthropic is at least trying to do by injecting morals into a machine: getting it to make the decision of a person with perfect values when there’s no way to write a rule for a situation that arises, and the consequences of making the wrong decision could be dire. This, Anthropic writes, is “centrally because we worry that our efforts to give Claude good enough ethical values will fail.” To this end, the Associated Press story extracts some quietly devastating commentary from Rumman Chowdhury, CEO of a nonprofit called Humane Intelligence: “I think a very naive take that Silicon Valley has had for a couple of years related to generative AI was that we could arrive at some sort of universal principles of ethics,” Chowdhury told the AP, adding, “They have very quickly realized that that’s just not true. That’s not real. So now they’re looking at maybe religion as a way of dealing with the ambiguity of ethically gray situations.” They are indeed looking at maybe religion. But it’s hard to picture Anthropic coming away from these meetings converted, and inserting one set of specific religious doctrines into Claude. They’re just trying to glean high order ethical truths, and demonstrating to the world that they’ve—ostensibly—left no stone unturned in searching for them. Your mileage will vary on whether you think a machine charged with making decisions or giving important advice would, when the chips are down, be able to synthesize ideal morals thanks to meetings its creators held with administrators from some of humanity’s premier religions. It probably can’t hurt, sorta like nodding at the pre-Islamic Kaaba. But then again, only God knows for sure. #Anthropic #Added #Religions #Quest #Inject #Perfect #Morals #ClaudeArtificial intelligence,religion

The original mysterious black box wasn’t an AI model at all, but the Kaaba, the black cube at the center of the Sacred Mosque of Mecca. Prior to Muhammad’s conquest of Mecca, the Kaaba was a sort of all-purpose repository of 360 sacred symbols from around the region. If you were, say, a busy merchant on his way to Medina, whatever the great spiritual truths of the universe may be, they were in there somewhere, so a prayer to the Kaaba had you covered in the god department and you were good to go.

Anthropic seems to be doing something along these lines with Claude.

Last week, representatives from Anthropic—along with OpenAI—attended an event in New York called the “Faith-AI Covenant” roundtable. The New York Board of Rabbis, the Hindu Temple Society of North America, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the U.S.-based Sikh Coalition, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were all in attendance.

Last month, I wrote about a series of meetings and dinners Anthropic organized with a collection of 15 Christian leaders. Anthropic was looking for advice from the Christians, and guidance on the supposed “spiritual development” of its Claude AI model. At the time Anthropic said it was working on arranging meetings with moral thinkers who represented other groups.

It’s not clear from a fresh Associated Press piece about the Faith-AI Covenant meeting whether these latest conversations with religious leaders and the earlier meetings with Christians were part of a single coherent program at Anthropic, and whether the staff members who participated in the Christian summit participated in this one as well. Gizmodo asked Anthropic for clarity about this on Saturday, but Anthropic did not return our request as of this writing.

The Associated Press also says OpenAI and Anthropic “initiated outreach,” but also that a Swiss NGO called the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities organized it, and has plans for future events along similar lines in China, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. Also mentioned as a “key partner” was Baroness Joanna Shields, a member of the British House of Lords.

There’s not a single clear takeaway in the AP story—no religious instructions laid out by all these spiritual leaders. But what Anthropic calls Claude’s constitution includes a dissection of the philosophically fraught moral work Anthropic is at least trying to do by injecting morals into a machine: getting it to make the decision of a person with perfect values when there’s no way to write a rule for a situation that arises, and the consequences of making the wrong decision could be dire. This, Anthropic writes, is “centrally because we worry that our efforts to give Claude good enough ethical values will fail.”

To this end, the Associated Press story extracts some quietly devastating commentary from Rumman Chowdhury, CEO of a nonprofit called Humane Intelligence: “I think a very naive take that Silicon Valley has had for a couple of years related to generative AI was that we could arrive at some sort of universal principles of ethics,” Chowdhury told the AP, adding, “They have very quickly realized that that’s just not true. That’s not real. So now they’re looking at maybe religion as a way of dealing with the ambiguity of ethically gray situations.”

They are indeed looking at maybe religion. But it’s hard to picture Anthropic coming away from these meetings converted, and inserting one set of specific religious doctrines into Claude. They’re just trying to glean high order ethical truths, and demonstrating to the world that they’ve—ostensibly—left no stone unturned in searching for them.

Your mileage will vary on whether you think a machine charged with making decisions or giving important advice would, when the chips are down, be able to synthesize ideal morals thanks to meetings its creators held with administrators from some of humanity’s premier religions. It probably can’t hurt, sorta like nodding at the pre-Islamic Kaaba. But then again, only God knows for sure.

#Anthropic #Added #Religions #Quest #Inject #Perfect #Morals #ClaudeArtificial intelligence,religion

The only downside I could find with the G2 is that it is largely devoid of offline features, so the glasses have to be connected to the internet to do much of anything. Considering the G2’s capabilities, it’s a trade-off I am more than happy to make.

Other Captioning Glasses I Tested

There are plenty of capable captioning eyeglasses on the market, but they are surprisingly similar in both looks and features. While many are quite capable, none had the combination of power and affordability that I got with Even’s G2. Here’s a rundown of everything else I tested.

Leion’s Hey 2 is the price leader in this market, and even its prescription lenses ($90 to $299) are pretty affordable. The hardware, however, is heavy: 50 grams without lenses, 60 grams with them. A full charge gets you six to eight hours of operation; the case adds juice for up to 12 recharges.

I like the Leion interface, which lays out caption, translation, “free talk” (two-way translation), and a teleprompter feature on its clean app. You get access to nine languages; using Pro minutes expands that to 143. Leion sells its premium plan by the minute, not the month, so you need to remember to toggle this mode off when you don’t need it. Pricing is $10 for 120 minutes, $50 for 1,200 minutes, and $200 for 6,000 minutes. There’s no offline use supported, and I often struggled to get AI summaries to show up in English instead of Chinese (regardless of the recorded language).

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

You’re not seeing double: XRAI and Leion use the same manufacturer for their hardware, and the glasses weigh the same. The battery spec is also similar, with up to eight hours on the frames and another 96 hours when recharging with the case. XRAI claims its display is significantly brighter than competitors’, but I didn’t see much of a difference in day-to-day use.

The features and user experience are roughly the same, though Leion’s teleprompter feature isn’t implemented in XRAI’s app, and it doesn’t offer AI summaries of conversations. I also didn’t find XRAI’s app as user-friendly as Leion’s version, particularly when trying to switch among the admittedly exhaustive 300 language options. Only 20 of these are included without ponying up for a Pro subscription, which is sold both by the month and minute: $20/month gets you a max of 600 upgraded transcription minutes and 300 translation minutes; $40/month gets you 1,800 and 1,200 minutes, respectively. On the plus side, XRAI does have a rudimentary offline mode that works better than most. For prescription lenses, add $140 to $170.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

AirCaps

AirCaps Smart Glasses

AirCaps does not make its own prescription lenses. Instead, you must purchase a pair of $39 “lens holders” and take them to an optician if you want prescription inserts. I was unable to test these with prescription lenses and ultimately had to try them out over my regular glasses, which worked well enough for short-term testing. Frames weigh a hefty 53 grams without add-on lenses; the company couldn’t tell me how much extra weight prescription lenses would add to that, but it’s safe to say these are the bulkiest and heaviest captioning glasses on the market. Despite the weight, they only carry two to four hours of battery life, with 10 or so recharges packed into the comically large case. Another option is to clip one of AirCaps’ rechargeable 13-gram Power Capsules ($79 for two) to one of the arms, which can provide 12 to 18 extra hours of juice.

The AirCaps feature list and interface make it perhaps the simplest of all these devices, with just a single button to start and stop recording. Transcriptions and translations are available for free in nine languages. For $20/month, you can add the Pro package, which offers better accuracy, access to more than 60 languages, and the option to generate AI summaries on demand (though only if recordings are long enough). As a bonus: Five hours of Pro features are free each month. Offline mode works pretty well, too. The only bad news is that these bulky frames just aren’t comfortable enough for long-term wear.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

The most expensive option on the market (up to $1,399 with prescription lenses!) weighs a relatively svelte 40 grams (52 grams with lenses) and offers about four hours of battery life. There’s no charging case; the glasses must be charged directly using the included USB-connected dongle.

The glasses are extremely simple, offering transcription and translation features—with support for about 80 languages, which is impressive. I unfortunately found the prescription lenses Captify sent to be the blurriest of the bunch, making the captions comparatively hard to read. And while the device supports offline transcription, performance suffered badly when disconnected from the internet. I couldn’t get translations to work at all when offline. For $15/month, you get better accuracy and speaker differentiation, and access to AI summaries of conversations. Prescription lenses cost between $99 and $600.

#Captioning #Smart #Glasses #Leads #Packbuying guides,shopping,smart glasses,eyewear,health,augmented reality,accessibility">I Tried the Best Captioning Smart Glasses, and Only One Leads the PackUnlike the other glasses I tested, Even doesn’t sell a subscription plan; everything’s included out of the box.The only downside I could find with the G2 is that it is largely devoid of offline features, so the glasses have to be connected to the internet to do much of anything. Considering the G2’s capabilities, it’s a trade-off I am more than happy to make.Other Captioning Glasses I TestedThere are plenty of capable captioning eyeglasses on the market, but they are surprisingly similar in both looks and features. While many are quite capable, none had the combination of power and affordability that I got with Even’s G2. Here’s a rundown of everything else I tested.Photograph: Christopher NullPhotograph: Christopher NullPhotograph: Christopher NullLeion’s Hey 2 is the price leader in this market, and even its prescription lenses ( to 9) are pretty affordable. The hardware, however, is heavy: 50 grams without lenses, 60 grams with them. A full charge gets you six to eight hours of operation; the case adds juice for up to 12 recharges.I like the Leion interface, which lays out caption, translation, “free talk” (two-way translation), and a teleprompter feature on its clean app. You get access to nine languages; using Pro minutes expands that to 143. Leion sells its premium plan by the minute, not the month, so you need to remember to toggle this mode off when you don’t need it. Pricing is for 120 minutes, for 1,200 minutes, and 0 for 6,000 minutes. There’s no offline use supported, and I often struggled to get AI summaries to show up in English instead of Chinese (regardless of the recorded language).Photograph: Christopher NullPhotograph: Christopher NullYou’re not seeing double: XRAI and Leion use the same manufacturer for their hardware, and the glasses weigh the same. The battery spec is also similar, with up to eight hours on the frames and another 96 hours when recharging with the case. XRAI claims its display is significantly brighter than competitors’, but I didn’t see much of a difference in day-to-day use.The features and user experience are roughly the same, though Leion’s teleprompter feature isn’t implemented in XRAI’s app, and it doesn’t offer AI summaries of conversations. I also didn’t find XRAI’s app as user-friendly as Leion’s version, particularly when trying to switch among the admittedly exhaustive 300 language options. Only 20 of these are included without ponying up for a Pro subscription, which is sold both by the month and minute: /month gets you a max of 600 upgraded transcription minutes and 300 translation minutes; /month gets you 1,800 and 1,200 minutes, respectively. On the plus side, XRAI does have a rudimentary offline mode that works better than most. For prescription lenses, add 0 to 0.Photograph: Christopher NullPhotograph: Christopher NullAirCapsAirCaps Smart GlassesAirCaps does not make its own prescription lenses. Instead, you must purchase a pair of “lens holders” and take them to an optician if you want prescription inserts. I was unable to test these with prescription lenses and ultimately had to try them out over my regular glasses, which worked well enough for short-term testing. Frames weigh a hefty 53 grams without add-on lenses; the company couldn’t tell me how much extra weight prescription lenses would add to that, but it’s safe to say these are the bulkiest and heaviest captioning glasses on the market. Despite the weight, they only carry two to four hours of battery life, with 10 or so recharges packed into the comically large case. Another option is to clip one of AirCaps’ rechargeable 13-gram Power Capsules ( for two) to one of the arms, which can provide 12 to 18 extra hours of juice.The AirCaps feature list and interface make it perhaps the simplest of all these devices, with just a single button to start and stop recording. Transcriptions and translations are available for free in nine languages. For /month, you can add the Pro package, which offers better accuracy, access to more than 60 languages, and the option to generate AI summaries on demand (though only if recordings are long enough). As a bonus: Five hours of Pro features are free each month. Offline mode works pretty well, too. The only bad news is that these bulky frames just aren’t comfortable enough for long-term wear.Photograph: Christopher NullPhotograph: Christopher NullThe most expensive option on the market (up to ,399 with prescription lenses!) weighs a relatively svelte 40 grams (52 grams with lenses) and offers about four hours of battery life. There’s no charging case; the glasses must be charged directly using the included USB-connected dongle.The glasses are extremely simple, offering transcription and translation features—with support for about 80 languages, which is impressive. I unfortunately found the prescription lenses Captify sent to be the blurriest of the bunch, making the captions comparatively hard to read. And while the device supports offline transcription, performance suffered badly when disconnected from the internet. I couldn’t get translations to work at all when offline. For /month, you get better accuracy and speaker differentiation, and access to AI summaries of conversations. Prescription lenses cost between and 0.#Captioning #Smart #Glasses #Leads #Packbuying guides,shopping,smart glasses,eyewear,health,augmented reality,accessibility

Leion’s Hey 2 is the price leader in this market, and even its prescription lenses ($90 to $299) are pretty affordable. The hardware, however, is heavy: 50 grams without lenses, 60 grams with them. A full charge gets you six to eight hours of operation; the case adds juice for up to 12 recharges.

I like the Leion interface, which lays out caption, translation, “free talk” (two-way translation), and a teleprompter feature on its clean app. You get access to nine languages; using Pro minutes expands that to 143. Leion sells its premium plan by the minute, not the month, so you need to remember to toggle this mode off when you don’t need it. Pricing is $10 for 120 minutes, $50 for 1,200 minutes, and $200 for 6,000 minutes. There’s no offline use supported, and I often struggled to get AI summaries to show up in English instead of Chinese (regardless of the recorded language).

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

You’re not seeing double: XRAI and Leion use the same manufacturer for their hardware, and the glasses weigh the same. The battery spec is also similar, with up to eight hours on the frames and another 96 hours when recharging with the case. XRAI claims its display is significantly brighter than competitors’, but I didn’t see much of a difference in day-to-day use.

The features and user experience are roughly the same, though Leion’s teleprompter feature isn’t implemented in XRAI’s app, and it doesn’t offer AI summaries of conversations. I also didn’t find XRAI’s app as user-friendly as Leion’s version, particularly when trying to switch among the admittedly exhaustive 300 language options. Only 20 of these are included without ponying up for a Pro subscription, which is sold both by the month and minute: $20/month gets you a max of 600 upgraded transcription minutes and 300 translation minutes; $40/month gets you 1,800 and 1,200 minutes, respectively. On the plus side, XRAI does have a rudimentary offline mode that works better than most. For prescription lenses, add $140 to $170.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

AirCaps

AirCaps Smart Glasses

AirCaps does not make its own prescription lenses. Instead, you must purchase a pair of $39 “lens holders” and take them to an optician if you want prescription inserts. I was unable to test these with prescription lenses and ultimately had to try them out over my regular glasses, which worked well enough for short-term testing. Frames weigh a hefty 53 grams without add-on lenses; the company couldn’t tell me how much extra weight prescription lenses would add to that, but it’s safe to say these are the bulkiest and heaviest captioning glasses on the market. Despite the weight, they only carry two to four hours of battery life, with 10 or so recharges packed into the comically large case. Another option is to clip one of AirCaps’ rechargeable 13-gram Power Capsules ($79 for two) to one of the arms, which can provide 12 to 18 extra hours of juice.

The AirCaps feature list and interface make it perhaps the simplest of all these devices, with just a single button to start and stop recording. Transcriptions and translations are available for free in nine languages. For $20/month, you can add the Pro package, which offers better accuracy, access to more than 60 languages, and the option to generate AI summaries on demand (though only if recordings are long enough). As a bonus: Five hours of Pro features are free each month. Offline mode works pretty well, too. The only bad news is that these bulky frames just aren’t comfortable enough for long-term wear.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

The most expensive option on the market (up to $1,399 with prescription lenses!) weighs a relatively svelte 40 grams (52 grams with lenses) and offers about four hours of battery life. There’s no charging case; the glasses must be charged directly using the included USB-connected dongle.

The glasses are extremely simple, offering transcription and translation features—with support for about 80 languages, which is impressive. I unfortunately found the prescription lenses Captify sent to be the blurriest of the bunch, making the captions comparatively hard to read. And while the device supports offline transcription, performance suffered badly when disconnected from the internet. I couldn’t get translations to work at all when offline. For $15/month, you get better accuracy and speaker differentiation, and access to AI summaries of conversations. Prescription lenses cost between $99 and $600.

#Captioning #Smart #Glasses #Leads #Packbuying guides,shopping,smart glasses,eyewear,health,augmented reality,accessibility">I Tried the Best Captioning Smart Glasses, and Only One Leads the Pack

Unlike the other glasses I tested, Even doesn’t sell a subscription plan; everything’s included out of the box.

The only downside I could find with the G2 is that it is largely devoid of offline features, so the glasses have to be connected to the internet to do much of anything. Considering the G2’s capabilities, it’s a trade-off I am more than happy to make.

Other Captioning Glasses I Tested

There are plenty of capable captioning eyeglasses on the market, but they are surprisingly similar in both looks and features. While many are quite capable, none had the combination of power and affordability that I got with Even’s G2. Here’s a rundown of everything else I tested.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

Leion’s Hey 2 is the price leader in this market, and even its prescription lenses ($90 to $299) are pretty affordable. The hardware, however, is heavy: 50 grams without lenses, 60 grams with them. A full charge gets you six to eight hours of operation; the case adds juice for up to 12 recharges.

I like the Leion interface, which lays out caption, translation, “free talk” (two-way translation), and a teleprompter feature on its clean app. You get access to nine languages; using Pro minutes expands that to 143. Leion sells its premium plan by the minute, not the month, so you need to remember to toggle this mode off when you don’t need it. Pricing is $10 for 120 minutes, $50 for 1,200 minutes, and $200 for 6,000 minutes. There’s no offline use supported, and I often struggled to get AI summaries to show up in English instead of Chinese (regardless of the recorded language).

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

You’re not seeing double: XRAI and Leion use the same manufacturer for their hardware, and the glasses weigh the same. The battery spec is also similar, with up to eight hours on the frames and another 96 hours when recharging with the case. XRAI claims its display is significantly brighter than competitors’, but I didn’t see much of a difference in day-to-day use.

The features and user experience are roughly the same, though Leion’s teleprompter feature isn’t implemented in XRAI’s app, and it doesn’t offer AI summaries of conversations. I also didn’t find XRAI’s app as user-friendly as Leion’s version, particularly when trying to switch among the admittedly exhaustive 300 language options. Only 20 of these are included without ponying up for a Pro subscription, which is sold both by the month and minute: $20/month gets you a max of 600 upgraded transcription minutes and 300 translation minutes; $40/month gets you 1,800 and 1,200 minutes, respectively. On the plus side, XRAI does have a rudimentary offline mode that works better than most. For prescription lenses, add $140 to $170.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

AirCaps

AirCaps Smart Glasses

AirCaps does not make its own prescription lenses. Instead, you must purchase a pair of $39 “lens holders” and take them to an optician if you want prescription inserts. I was unable to test these with prescription lenses and ultimately had to try them out over my regular glasses, which worked well enough for short-term testing. Frames weigh a hefty 53 grams without add-on lenses; the company couldn’t tell me how much extra weight prescription lenses would add to that, but it’s safe to say these are the bulkiest and heaviest captioning glasses on the market. Despite the weight, they only carry two to four hours of battery life, with 10 or so recharges packed into the comically large case. Another option is to clip one of AirCaps’ rechargeable 13-gram Power Capsules ($79 for two) to one of the arms, which can provide 12 to 18 extra hours of juice.

The AirCaps feature list and interface make it perhaps the simplest of all these devices, with just a single button to start and stop recording. Transcriptions and translations are available for free in nine languages. For $20/month, you can add the Pro package, which offers better accuracy, access to more than 60 languages, and the option to generate AI summaries on demand (though only if recordings are long enough). As a bonus: Five hours of Pro features are free each month. Offline mode works pretty well, too. The only bad news is that these bulky frames just aren’t comfortable enough for long-term wear.

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

  • Photograph: Christopher Null

The most expensive option on the market (up to $1,399 with prescription lenses!) weighs a relatively svelte 40 grams (52 grams with lenses) and offers about four hours of battery life. There’s no charging case; the glasses must be charged directly using the included USB-connected dongle.

The glasses are extremely simple, offering transcription and translation features—with support for about 80 languages, which is impressive. I unfortunately found the prescription lenses Captify sent to be the blurriest of the bunch, making the captions comparatively hard to read. And while the device supports offline transcription, performance suffered badly when disconnected from the internet. I couldn’t get translations to work at all when offline. For $15/month, you get better accuracy and speaker differentiation, and access to AI summaries of conversations. Prescription lenses cost between $99 and $600.

#Captioning #Smart #Glasses #Leads #Packbuying guides,shopping,smart glasses,eyewear,health,augmented reality,accessibility

Today’s Wordle answer should be easy to solve if you love coziness.

If you just want to be told today’s word, you can jump to the bottom of this article for today’s Wordle solution revealed. But if you’d rather solve it yourself, keep reading for some clues, tips, and strategies to assist you.

SEE ALSO: Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more: Play games on Mashable
SEE ALSO: NYT Connections hints today: Clues, answers for May 10, 2026

Where did Wordle come from?

Originally created by engineer Josh Wardle as a gift for his partner, Wordle rapidly spread to become an international phenomenon, with thousands of people around the globe playing every day. Alternate Wordle versions created by fans also sprang up, including battle royale Squabble, music identification game Heardle, and variations like Dordle and Quordle that make you guess multiple words at once. 

Wordle eventually became so popular that it was purchased by the New York Times, and TikTok creators even livestream themselves playing.

What’s the best Wordle starting word?

The best Wordle starting word is the one that speaks to you. But if you prefer to be strategic in your approach, we have a few ideas to help you pick a word that might help you find the solution faster. One tip is to select a word that includes at least two different vowels, plus some common consonants like S, T, R, or N.

What happened to the Wordle archive?

The entire archive of past Wordle puzzles was originally available for anyone to enjoy whenever they felt like it, but it was later taken down, with the website’s creator stating it was done at the request of the New York Times. However, the New York Times then rolled out its own Wordle Archive, available only to NYT Games subscribers.

Is Wordle getting harder?

It might feel like Wordle is getting harder, but it actually isn’t any more difficult than when it first began. You can turn on Wordle‘s Hard Mode if you’re after more of a challenge, though.

SEE ALSO: NYT Pips hints, answers for May 10, 2026

Here’s a subtle hint for today’s Wordle answer:

A hooded jacket.

Mashable 101 Fan Fave: Vote for your favorite creators today

Does today’s Wordle answer have a double letter?

The letter A appears twice

Today’s Wordle is a 5-letter word that starts with…

Today’s Wordle starts with the letter P.

SEE ALSO: Wordle-obsessed? These are the best word games to play IRL.

The Wordle answer today is…

Get your last guesses in now, because it’s your final chance to solve today’s Wordle before we reveal the solution.

Drumroll please!

The solution to today’s Wordle is…

PARKA

Don’t feel down if you didn’t manage to guess it this time. There will be a new Wordle for you to stretch your brain with tomorrow, and we’ll be back again to guide you with more helpful hints. Are you also playing NYT Strands? See hints and answers for today’s Strands.

Reporting by Chance Townsend, Caitlin Welsh, Sam Haysom, Amanda Yeo, Shannon Connellan, Cecily Mauran, Mike Pearl, and Adam Rosenberg contributed to this article.

If you’re looking for more puzzles, Mashable’s got games now! Check out our games hub for Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more.

Not the day you’re after? Here’s the solution to yesterday’s Wordle.

#Wordle #today #answer #hints">Wordle today: The answer and hints for May 10, 2026 Today’s Wordle answer should be easy to solve if you love coziness.If you just want to be told today’s word, you can jump to the bottom of this article for today’s Wordle solution revealed. But if you’d rather solve it yourself, keep reading for some clues, tips, and strategies to assist you. SEE ALSO: Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more: Play games on Mashable SEE ALSO: NYT Connections hints today: Clues, answers for May 10, 2026 Where did Wordle come from?Originally created by engineer Josh Wardle as a gift for his partner, Wordle rapidly spread to become an international phenomenon, with thousands of people around the globe playing every day. Alternate Wordle versions created by fans also sprang up, including battle royale Squabble, music identification game Heardle, and variations like Dordle and Quordle that make you guess multiple words at once. Wordle eventually became so popular that it was purchased by the New York Times, and TikTok creators even livestream themselves playing.What’s the best Wordle starting word?The best Wordle starting word is the one that speaks to you. But if you prefer to be strategic in your approach, we have a few ideas to help you pick a word that might help you find the solution faster. One tip is to select a word that includes at least two different vowels, plus some common consonants like S, T, R, or N.What happened to the Wordle archive?The entire archive of past Wordle puzzles was originally available for anyone to enjoy whenever they felt like it, but it was later taken down, with the website’s creator stating it was done at the request of the New York Times. However, the New York Times then rolled out its own Wordle Archive, available only to NYT Games subscribers. Is Wordle getting harder?It might feel like Wordle is getting harder, but it actually isn’t any more difficult than when it first began. You can turn on Wordle‘s Hard Mode if you’re after more of a challenge, though. SEE ALSO: NYT Pips hints, answers for May 10, 2026 Here’s a subtle hint for today’s Wordle answer:A hooded jacket. Mashable Top Stories Mashable 101 Fan Fave: Vote for your favorite creators todayDoes today’s Wordle answer have a double letter?The letter A appears twiceToday’s Wordle is a 5-letter word that starts with…Today’s Wordle starts with the letter P. SEE ALSO: Wordle-obsessed? These are the best word games to play IRL. The Wordle answer today is…Get your last guesses in now, because it’s your final chance to solve today’s Wordle before we reveal the solution.Drumroll please!The solution to today’s Wordle is…PARKADon’t feel down if you didn’t manage to guess it this time. There will be a new Wordle for you to stretch your brain with tomorrow, and we’ll be back again to guide you with more helpful hints. Are you also playing NYT Strands? See hints and answers for today’s Strands.Reporting by Chance Townsend, Caitlin Welsh, Sam Haysom, Amanda Yeo, Shannon Connellan, Cecily Mauran, Mike Pearl, and Adam Rosenberg contributed to this article.If you’re looking for more puzzles, Mashable’s got games now! Check out our games hub for Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more.Not the day you’re after? Here’s the solution to yesterday’s Wordle. #Wordle #today #answer #hints

Wordle answer should be easy to solve if you love coziness.

If you just want to be told today’s word, you can jump to the bottom of this article for today’s Wordle solution revealed. But if you’d rather solve it yourself, keep reading for some clues, tips, and strategies to assist you.

SEE ALSO: Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more: Play games on Mashable
SEE ALSO: NYT Connections hints today: Clues, answers for May 10, 2026

Where did Wordle come from?

Originally created by engineer Josh Wardle as a gift for his partner, Wordle rapidly spread to become an international phenomenon, with thousands of people around the globe playing every day. Alternate Wordle versions created by fans also sprang up, including battle royale Squabble, music identification game Heardle, and variations like Dordle and Quordle that make you guess multiple words at once. 

Wordle eventually became so popular that it was purchased by the New York Times, and TikTok creators even livestream themselves playing.

What’s the best Wordle starting word?

The best Wordle starting word is the one that speaks to you. But if you prefer to be strategic in your approach, we have a few ideas to help you pick a word that might help you find the solution faster. One tip is to select a word that includes at least two different vowels, plus some common consonants like S, T, R, or N.

What happened to the Wordle archive?

The entire archive of past Wordle puzzles was originally available for anyone to enjoy whenever they felt like it, but it was later taken down, with the website’s creator stating it was done at the request of the New York Times. However, the New York Times then rolled out its own Wordle Archive, available only to NYT Games subscribers.

Is Wordle getting harder?

It might feel like Wordle is getting harder, but it actually isn’t any more difficult than when it first began. You can turn on Wordle‘s Hard Mode if you’re after more of a challenge, though.

SEE ALSO: NYT Pips hints, answers for May 10, 2026

Here’s a subtle hint for today’s Wordle answer:

A hooded jacket.

Mashable 101 Fan Fave: Vote for your favorite creators today

Does today’s Wordle answer have a double letter?

The letter A appears twice

Today’s Wordle is a 5-letter word that starts with…

Today’s Wordle starts with the letter P.

SEE ALSO: Wordle-obsessed? These are the best word games to play IRL.

The Wordle answer today is…

Get your last guesses in now, because it’s your final chance to solve today’s Wordle before we reveal the solution.

Drumroll please!

The solution to today’s Wordle is…

PARKA

Don’t feel down if you didn’t manage to guess it this time. There will be a new Wordle for you to stretch your brain with tomorrow, and we’ll be back again to guide you with more helpful hints. Are you also playing NYT Strands? See hints and answers for today’s Strands.

Reporting by Chance Townsend, Caitlin Welsh, Sam Haysom, Amanda Yeo, Shannon Connellan, Cecily Mauran, Mike Pearl, and Adam Rosenberg contributed to this article.

If you’re looking for more puzzles, Mashable’s got games now! Check out our games hub for Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more.

Not the day you’re after? Here’s the solution to yesterday’s Wordle.

#Wordle #today #answer #hints">Wordle today: The answer and hints for May 10, 2026

Today’s Wordle answer should be easy to solve if you love coziness.

If you just want to be told today’s word, you can jump to the bottom of this article for today’s Wordle solution revealed. But if you’d rather solve it yourself, keep reading for some clues, tips, and strategies to assist you.

SEE ALSO: Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more: Play games on Mashable
SEE ALSO: NYT Connections hints today: Clues, answers for May 10, 2026

Where did Wordle come from?

Originally created by engineer Josh Wardle as a gift for his partner, Wordle rapidly spread to become an international phenomenon, with thousands of people around the globe playing every day. Alternate Wordle versions created by fans also sprang up, including battle royale Squabble, music identification game Heardle, and variations like Dordle and Quordle that make you guess multiple words at once. 

Wordle eventually became so popular that it was purchased by the New York Times, and TikTok creators even livestream themselves playing.

What’s the best Wordle starting word?

The best Wordle starting word is the one that speaks to you. But if you prefer to be strategic in your approach, we have a few ideas to help you pick a word that might help you find the solution faster. One tip is to select a word that includes at least two different vowels, plus some common consonants like S, T, R, or N.

What happened to the Wordle archive?

The entire archive of past Wordle puzzles was originally available for anyone to enjoy whenever they felt like it, but it was later taken down, with the website’s creator stating it was done at the request of the New York Times. However, the New York Times then rolled out its own Wordle Archive, available only to NYT Games subscribers.

Is Wordle getting harder?

It might feel like Wordle is getting harder, but it actually isn’t any more difficult than when it first began. You can turn on Wordle‘s Hard Mode if you’re after more of a challenge, though.

SEE ALSO: NYT Pips hints, answers for May 10, 2026

Here’s a subtle hint for today’s Wordle answer:

A hooded jacket.

Mashable 101 Fan Fave: Vote for your favorite creators today

Does today’s Wordle answer have a double letter?

The letter A appears twice

Today’s Wordle is a 5-letter word that starts with…

Today’s Wordle starts with the letter P.

SEE ALSO: Wordle-obsessed? These are the best word games to play IRL.

The Wordle answer today is…

Get your last guesses in now, because it’s your final chance to solve today’s Wordle before we reveal the solution.

Drumroll please!

The solution to today’s Wordle is…

PARKA

Don’t feel down if you didn’t manage to guess it this time. There will be a new Wordle for you to stretch your brain with tomorrow, and we’ll be back again to guide you with more helpful hints. Are you also playing NYT Strands? See hints and answers for today’s Strands.

Reporting by Chance Townsend, Caitlin Welsh, Sam Haysom, Amanda Yeo, Shannon Connellan, Cecily Mauran, Mike Pearl, and Adam Rosenberg contributed to this article.

If you’re looking for more puzzles, Mashable’s got games now! Check out our games hub for Mahjong, Sudoku, free crossword, and more.

Not the day you’re after? Here’s the solution to yesterday’s Wordle.

#Wordle #today #answer #hints

Post Comment