I hope I'm not the only one who sorta sees Mark as a subset of Matthew. I end up reading Matthew much more than Mark for that reason. And then when I read Mark again, I realize how wrong I am to have such a mentality. Reading Mark after having read Matthew so much is sorta like an easter-egg hunt the weekend after all the kids have had their whack. There are all these gems that stick out at you because you have this idea that "hey, that wasn't there before" (because the "before" was when you read Matthew's account).
Are you a Mark-Neglector?