Captain America: The Winter Soldier

I'm a nitpicker. I usually find dozens of things wrong with every movie I watch.

This time, I was struggling. Okay, there were a few times when they did scenes setless and I could tell - that technology still isn't quite there yet even on a movie budget.

But that's it. I'm not sure I liked what they did with SHIELD, but I'm willing to give it a chance and see how things develop from here (most especially in the TV show).

Samuel L. Jackson kicked even more butt than usual - some of it literally. It was nice to see Fury shown as something other than a desk jockey.

The appearance of Falcon (who was, by the way, the first African-American superhero created) gave Marvel an opportunity - and they took it! They gave him a new origin closer to his Ultimates origin than the comics, and one which made him a solid, positive role model for black men. We need more of those. I want to see more of the character.

The fight choreography was absolutely superb. This is something I'm very picky about (I also love the fight choreography in Arrow). It's really important in a movie that focuses on lower power levels to have choreography that looks like it actually works - and they managed to make it spectacular as well.

Oh, and thanks, Marvel, for ditching the awful Avengers uniform. The ones he wore in this movie were much better.

And they had a great Bucky.

So. Yeah. Uh...I actually may give this one a very rare five stars. There has to be stuff wrong with it, but I just can't find it right now.

Divergent - And Other YA

I haven't read Veronica Roth's Divergent trilogy yet. As sometimes happens it came on my radar when I saw a trailer for the movie - and I have a policy of avoiding the book until I've seen the movie if I find out about them at the same time. This is in part because of the general rule of "the book is better."

So, please bear with me. I'm going to say - overall, I liked this movie, even if it is part of the current rash of YA dystopia (They're also doing "The Giver"). After an unspecified war, Chicago is left high and dry, with Lake Michigan having receded (I suspect we're supposed to think Nuclear Winter here). Its surviving population, believing themselves to be the last of mankind, have set themselves up into a sort of bizarre twist Brave New World via aptitude testing. They're divided into five factions based off of human virtues: Amity (kindness) provides the food, Candor (truthfulness) runs the legal system, Dauntless (courage) defends the settlement from unspecified "monsters" and also acts as police, Erudite (intelligence) does R&D and Abnegation (selflessness) runs the welfare system...and the government. The main character, Beatrice, is the daughter of a leading politician and is now facing her coming of age - in which she will choose which faction she will be a member of as an adult.

Before the choosing, she's subjected to an aptitude test designed to determine which of the five virtues is ascendent in her personality and help her make the best choice...except it doesn't work on her. She's a Divergent - somebody who breaks the faction system (and is at least partially immune to brainwashing and mental control).

This was a very cool movie. The visuals of the half-destroyed Chicago, the insane electric fence surrounding the city, and the various sets were fantastic. Shailene Woodley does a great job as Tris and the chemistry between her and Four is better than I've seen lately. Oh, and Kate Winslet knocked her role out too.

Here's my question, though. If we can have Divergent, why can't we have Scott Westerfeld's Uglies? Better yet, why can't we have some of these people involved in making it? The visual feel was very similar to that series.

Answer: Scott Westerfeld is wholly underrated. Yes, I'm a fan of his, but I'd really like to see him get a true breakout.

Or an Uglies movie. How about it?

Review: Future Lovecraft

I'm probably the wrong person to review this book - I've never really "done" Lovecraft. The heart of the problem is simple: The mythos doesn't scare me. I think part of it is that I'm so steeped in gamer culture, in which Cthulhu is more often a source of humor than fear (Maybe that's the only way to really deal with ultimate, alien evil).

If you want to scare me, don't wave tentacles in my direction. Point at a stone angel and yell "Don't Blink." That'll get me every time. So I'm not immune to monsters.

I do a lot better with non-mythos Lovecraft and, fortunately, there were quite a few non-mythos stories in this volume. Most of the stories editors Silvia Moreno-Garcia and Paula R. Stiles have chosen are short and there are a few poems. Lovecraft lends itself to being treated in poetry.

So, I found the mythos-based stories weaker, but that might be my personal bias. Some of them had the problem of being bleak, but not frightening or interesting and a couple left my suspension of disbelief at the door. Peter Rawlik's "In the Hall of the Yellow King" was definitely not one of my favorites...for just that reason. Lovecraftian horrors ruling the future doesn't work for me. What worked better was Ada Hoffman's "Harmony Among The Stars." That was actually one of my favorites.

The soviets on Mars story had the issue of feeling dated in the post Soviet world, but was very well done ("Trajectory of a Cursed Spirit" Meddy Ligner).

In all honesty - if you love Lovecraft, get it. There's some interesting material here. If you don't like Lovecraft, don't bother.

Three and a half stars.

(Review copy obtained at Balticon).