Doing a lot for very little…

Just when you thought it was safe… I drag you back into cXML validation! Hey – put down the torture devices…. it’s not what you think!  Remember a few posts back – we built a quicky validation tool?

Well had someone ask if I actually use that, and the truth is – no I don’t.  The actual tool that I use is the one shown here.  But all of this began as something very similar to the code you saw here.  There’s a lot more exception handling – and slew of features added into it since we / I use this for all kinds of cool eCommerce tests around work.  

As you can see the initial purpose of the tool remains the same, which is to validate cXML documents.  With this I can load the documents into the tool – and using any of the pre-populated addresses – it is capable of process an actual file, which is to say round tripping where we begin with the PunchOut set up request and go all the way through the Purchase Order (OrderRequest) and even the POOM (PunchOutOrderMessage).

It was built completely on the free VB Express system from Microsoft so it cost literally nothing to build.  Were I to sell this – I’d probably charge around $500 to $1200 depending on the added features I’ve put in there and people would I have no doubt pay that for it.  (I know because I’ve been offered that much for it).  So there’s no reason that with a bit of ingenuity someone looking to really add to their portfolio or even just make a few dollars can’t do this. Which is kind of the point to the exercises that I put up here. 

With the economy currently in shambles for the tech industry there’s a lot of things you can do for very little cash that can reap some good rewards.   You don’t have to spend $$$ or have a lot of start up cash, software or hardware.  What you need is to sit down and say, “What tools need to be built?”, “What do I need to do my job better?”. 

There is always a better mousetrap out there – and even if your budget is nil – all it takes is some very basic coding skills to make something that you, your department, your boss really needs.

Thats the root of it really using your skills to their best advantage.  If you happen to make a really great whatever so much the better.  And you’ll note I don’t use some exotic code – I use the very basic, very simple Visual Studio Express and a bit of code here and there to really  create a tool I need for my job.  This one was built because we didn’t have any test tools like this where I work.  Once again – you see a need – you build a tool.  The more you build the more indispensable you become.  Don’t wait for your job to out pace you  … out pace the job.  Create things.  Get messy.  Have fun.  It’s when we do this that we stand out from the crowd and get noticed.

Just some food for thought… take care until next week.

great website designs … for free

Haven’t spoken much on building just your basic website in a while and I thought I’d share a few quick and easy tips on what you can do for next to nothing.

Went out on www.mineeds.com and found myself someone looking for a new website – and I have to be honest the prices being quoted to this guy were pretty off the wall.  Granted, he wanted a shopping cart with a 50,000 song catalog… but I have to say $4,500 is a pretty steep bid (since the shopping cart does most of the heavy lifting and he’s already picked one out).

Had to ask myself – if I were starting a business could I really afford that?  Probably not.  What I’d be looking for is something a bit cheaper… like FREE.  Now most people don’t have the ability to do free – but many web builders can work a lot on prices to help small businesses by using a free template, a bit of ingenuity and a decent eye.

Here – on the left is what our guy started with.  Which… is pretty barren, and looks a bit retro-web 1990.  They want obviously a very upbeat pro-site – and those are not cheap.  But I figured I’d see what I could do with FREE just for fun.

(BTW – definitely check out the site here in a bit when the catalog is up sounds like they have got some good stuff there.)

I went to a number of free template sites – and finally found one or two that actually were free.  (Which is rare these days it seems – but that’s another rant for another day.)

Now, after some perusing I selected two free templates in PSD format that didn’t look half bad for something that said “Youth, Fun, Hot, Music” to me.  The author is listed as http://www.free-templates-download.com/?id=25 and you can get this one there.  It’s not bad – there’s a kind of music DJ flavor and it’s a clean tech design – menu on the left – company name at the top – and we can use this page to replicate all the other pages we need.  All in all it’s not a bad choice. 

Which is what you want to look for in templates – something that you can replicate for each of the pages, that allows room for catalogs and shopping carts in the center where it catches the eye – and with a nice big logo to get you that branding that every business needs.

It is however … for all it’s hip attempts… about as bland as vanilla ice cream with the cold blues solid colors and grays and and sharp edges and we need to change that.  We need hotter – we need louder – and we need something that says using the site will make you cool.  So for that we need to do a bit of Emmeril on it and do a Salsa BAM!! to it…. when we do… we get the page on the left here.

Really all we did was bring it into Photoshop, do a bit of playing with the color overlays, give them a nice readable logo… and suddenly we have something cooking there.  Duplicate a few of the image layers – give them a standard gradient overlay, set that to a color burn.  Do a corona flare on the girl – a bit of beveling to a layer with the DJ… and we have a bit of a smoking site design from nothing that cost us nothing.  (Which… I would recommend that everyone read the “nothing” and “free” carefully these days.  Just grabbing a template does not make you the owner necessarily.  ALWAYS read the fine print!)

Now… off the same website I found… this design which is very very dark skateboarder.  But… for some reason I saw something different.  I saw not the dark moody gray and black but a very fluid motion between the skateboarder and the tendrils above him that said, “Hey this catches an eye” but it needs to say “HOTTER” and “LOUDER”.  Which in some ways … is a shame because it’s such a nice simple design.  So … I did my best to make it loud and fun.

  And this is what I got.  I got flowing glowing tendrils of the night and flames coming off a glowing logo as a raving dancer dives into the heat of a party.  

Okay… that’s the schpeil I’d use to sell it – but the truth is the same design as above with a bit of “BAM” and you’ve got something recycled into a very cool look.  All of which – is essentially free, just takes a bit of elbow grease to unlock the look into something very unique.  Which is important.

Just grabbing a free template which has a decent design for a small business isn’t enough.  If the design is even half way good someone else has it.  You need to take it and make it your own.  How?  Simple.  Do what I did.  Don’t look at the design from “What can I make out of this?” but “What can I make this INTO?”  – basically what can I create from this that isn’t there.  Well – I figured music – I figured party – I figured South Beach – hot nights, good times, and smoking good toons.  Thats what they need.

The catalog is the easy part.  It’s just something displayed on a page.  The hard part is knowing what the page needs to say or do or look like to really sell.  It’s the difference between the 1990’s retro-web page with the simple text and links … and really hot links that sell items.

 

 

it’s not my dog…

years ago… in a bygone era… there was a comedy medium called “vaudeville”.  People performed short skits on stage and made people laugh. 

One of the more famous bits out there was a skit where a small boy and a large dog are standing on a street corner.  A guy comes walking up to the kid and says, “Hey kid does your dog bite?” and the kid says “No sir.  My dog’s the nicest dog in the world.”.  The guy reaches down to pet the dog and it all but rips his arm off.  The guy yells at the kid, “Hey Kid I thought you said your dog didn’t bite!!” and the kid says, “Yeah – but that ain’t my dog!”.

As with all comedy – there are valuable lessons to be learned here.  The first is obvious.  Never assume anything.  Just because a dog sits next to someone doesn’t make it their dog.   (Don’t accept responsibility for an event beyond your control.)  Lesson two… don’t blame someone else for your assumptions.  It’s not the kids fault.  Yelling at them because you assumed something does not make you less dumb.  It just makes you loud… and still wrong.

Lesson three is that just because a dog stands next to you – you don’t have to make it your dog.  A responsible person in fact, does not accept responsibility for the actions of dog standing next to them – and they don’t accept responsibility for the actions of people who assume things just because they’re in proximity to the mistake that’s been made.

Now, you can say the kid was misleading – but he wasn’t.  The man asked a direct question, the boy gave a direct answer, and the out come was a near disaster.  Is it the boys fault for answering a mans question?  No – because the man never asked probably the most important question in that situation.  “Is that your dog?”. 

We all make mistakes and we all make assumptions.  The quickest way to avoid both is very simply to know what is our actual situation.  Where are we.  What we’re doing.  And what is going on around us.  There’s a tendency for us all to become jaded as we get older and assume that when we enter situations we’ve been in before that we have all the information. 

Boy with dog = boy owns dog = boy knows about dog. 

But that’s not always the case.  We need to begin to start accepting we don’t know it all.  That what we see isn’t always the case, and to question the obvious whenever possible.    In the mean time – begin with something small… learn to say “It’s not my dog.”.

things that help pay bills…

I had a couple calls this weekened from friends who are going through some rough spots.  Naturally we talked about things to bring in a little extra money.  Now one thing that always happens when people go through rough times is there is this tendency to not think about what resources they do have.

For example – a few months back I did a blog about how to do set-extensions.  A video set extension is a relatively simple illusion used on almost every TV show.  If the look isn’t right – the buildings wrong – the sky’s too this … you need a castle next door – you do a set extension.  It’s basically like doing a photo-shop for video.  Here’s an example…

I took a few seconds of video of my backyard – actually the back arena area.  A few seconds on Flickr – and boom – we’ve got Skyscrapers. 

Which – if you’re looking to add a few dollars to your pocket and have the skills – is a pretty simple trick. 

Go out – find some “Future Home” of signs, do some video of those locations.  If possible get some good images of the proposed site with buildings on it… offer your services to help sell their sites.  Show off your presentation skills. 

Believe it or not – this is the sort of work which can bring in a good $50 – $150 a month for very little work.  Include PhotoShop files as well as video in case they don’t have it.  The idea is to allow them to sell better.  Realators, Construction Companies, Architectural firms – all have a need for this kind of service.

Naturally, no promises but yeah, I do know that this sort of thing does help pay the bills.  So there’s my tip for this month – - and for everyone hoping I’d do a update on the cXML work I’m doing … I promise – that is coming.  But I’ve had a lot on my plate so – have had to work at … well, work. 

all burned up…

Okay… so had a few minutes this weekend and my son had asked about how the demons do their warps in the tv series “Charmed”. Ironically enough … Andrew Kramer had on his blog this week a bit that’s very much like the old “staked” flame away from Buffy and Angel.  So this is my way of giving and unabashed plug to Andrew and his site… and I would be really evil – if I didn’t mention he’s got all kinds of updated video tools you can buy there. 

Anyway – after a bit of telling my son that these effects weren’t as hard as you might imagine led to me grabbing some old video footage… And here’s a couple examples I did in After Effects to show him how easy these effects are to do.  Very fun – and surprisingly easy – they just take time.  My only complaint is I really need to break down and get a better quality camera because it’s sad when the CG work has better quality than the original footage. 

Now – admittedly the warping / warbling warp in on this is largely to cover the fact I was too lazy to go out and shoot any new footage so I took a bit of garbage footage lying around and used that as a quickie bit for the burn effect.

A better copy of the burn – is below.  Here I’m using a simple image of a penny and you can really see how the right media really makes the effect. 

So… let’s get down to how the effect layers out – and that is really the secret to making it work, a lot of layers each one over lapping the other. Now this is explained a whole lot better in one of Andrew Kramer’s tutorials and since I don’t do tutorials – and Andrew Does I’m going to refer you to him here. 

The only real twists I’m adding to this is – I don’t use any pre-comp’d smoke which he does, and I’ve simplified this up a bit so we’re not using several layers that he is.  Remember I’m doing this for just a very quick effect on some very grainy footage and Andrew’s outputting HD level.   For a lot of work (web for example) this is good enough and it’s very quick. 

So – we take a simple comp shot of just the woods – and another shot of me walking in these same woods.  If you have a green screen you can do this very quick – but if you’re just using raw footage it won’t take long for you to matte the woods out – and then overlay these shots.

Now – we apply the layered burn effect which is really just a combination of linear radiant’s on a texture – that is then applied with color.  As this transitions across the layer it causes it to glow.

The next set of layers uses a similar radiant and glow effect on a texture – that we’ve boosted to a point where it’s pretty much a very jagged linear ramp that as we transition this across – gives the effect of it erasing or burning away what is below. 

We add over this a layer of smoke and some particles that pass over it. You can see that we need to do this on a very semi-transparency to the overlapping layers that are placed over the footage.  But that’s really how easy this effect is to pull off.  It’s not complicated – it’s just a bit of repeating the same effect with slight variations one over the top of the other, and then applying them in a set order.

Once again – you can get a great detailed video tutorial on this over at Andrew Kramer’s VideoCopilot.net site who is pretty much the definitive guy for any After Effects effect.  Any of us who do anything with video from your basic beginner to long time pros can learn a lot from him – so even if you’ve never used AE that’s the place to go if you want to learn these effects.

Make some color happen…

I’m taking a breather from the next installment of eCommerce talk.  Not that discussing the glories of PunchOut catalogs and on line supplier services isn’t hoot – but I needed to add a little color so I

grabbed a bit of video I had lying around and I did just that.  If you take a gander at the clip here ther’s a couple tricks that are pretty easy to create some very dramatic and colorful footage out of well, kind of drab footage. 

The clip here has the original footage, first – just a simple few seconds of the back yard around the house here on a typical Seattlish late afternoon.  Meaning – it’s overcast and dark.   And that’s not a bad thing – in fact the nice thing about it always being overcast here is that it’s easy to light a video shot, and you seldom ever have to worry about over exposing the shot.  But life isn’t always about various shades of grey.  Now, the original footage isn’t all that bad – there is some color there.  But as you can see its a bit washed out.  So one of the first fun things you can do to boost the color is to replace the sky entirely.  So I did – I spent a few minutes out there on Flickr and got a very nice flaming red sunset. 

¹Fun tip for Video and Design:

Which … btw – is under a creative commons license that allows it to be used.  Flickr has a very nice feature that allows you to do a search for works that are under the Creative Commons – so keep that in mind.  It’s under the Advanced Search settings – scroll to the bottom of the search options and check the boxes for Creative Commons reuse policies.  You can even have it search for stuff that you can use commercially – which – is pretty cool.  (Be even cooler if you could download actual video instead of flash videos – but hey, beggars can’t be choosers.)

Anyway, like I said, I got on on Flickr and looked around for a very very dramatic flaming red sky since I really wanted to give the shot a vibrant dramatic boost.  Now the trick to doing this with a shot that’s very effective and very quick is not to roto-scope all the frames but to do a color matte.  What’s a color matte? It’s really simple to do in After Effects and it’s very useful.  First things first – is to duplicate the shot, and then desaturate it completely.  Then hit the levels and totally boost the sky so it’s got a really almost black and white look.  Then, last but not least bring in a good luma key.  Drop the photo in behind it so it shows through the key – and wallah – you have a very dramatic sunset.  Now, you may have noticed that it’s ALL black where it’s not colored sunset… so drop a mask across the area you want to show at the bottom and pin to that the original footage.  Do a little color correction on it and you have the very dramatic scene you see here.  (A little more work and we could get the little color spots out of the edging – but this was done very quickly  – even still its very dramatic.  Got a nice vibe to it and the colors’ literally scream at you. 

What it is not however … is particularly realistic.  And the downside of this technique is that you really make the fine details get blocky and pixelated. So its really good for less than photo realistic effects but you need to use it wisely or it really will drown out any moments that need to be done subtley.  So … how do you color it up without losing detail and without making it… blah?   Color correction gel.  What’s that?

Simple – the way you’d get a similar effect is to use Andrew Kramer’s free AE plugin – the Colored Gel Effect.  It takes a bit of getting used to and tweaking to get just the look you want – but the results are awesome.  If you look at the detail of the trees – they keep that very soft pine needle blur, and when they move in their own way they’re very … cabin on the lake.  I was tempted to play around with a mask or two on the barn down there – but decided to leave it be – basking in the golden sun.    You know they say that Lighting sets the mood for a shot quicker than anything – faster than sounds, faster than anything in the shot.  So play around with some color, have some fun with it.  I will.

The joys of being a POSR

Nope… not a mis-spelling – that’s POSR, as in Punch Out Setup Request.  As part of this current set of postings on cXML and the magic that is eCommerce that’s the subject dujuor.  The totally awesome and completely cool … POSR.

Now, a POSR is probably the single most important part of the eCommerce step by step.  It’s what authenticates and allows and online catalog to be sent to you. 

Here’s what one looks like  courtesy of www.cxml.org…

The first section of a POSR handles the Doctype and how to handle the document…

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE cXML SYSTEM "http://xml.cXML.org/schemas/cXML/1.2.020/cXML.dtd">
<cXML payloadID=1233444@ariba.com   timestamp="2000-03-12T18:39:09-08:00">

Now the grey line up there has the doctype and you can put all kinds of good things in there but what I’m showing here is the most important part – the DTD.  With this badboy you can write an app that will allow you to validate all your cXML and make sure it works, using some very simple XML routines and a few free tools available on the web. 

TIP:
You can – also find xml validators that can read the DTD – but many will choke on this line.  XML Notepad for example is designed for pretty much XML only and not cXML, and will choke.  The same thing goes for some browser based viewers.  If that’s all you’ve got to view xml – remove this line and you’ll find it’ll load the file fine.

Anyway, you can use the DTD to learn a lot about what’s wrong with any cXML that you’re given (or that you create) by validating it against the DTD.  So if you’re not – do so.  It’ll save you weeks of headaches.  This is especially true if you’re dealing with SAP or some of the Oracle solutions out there that like to write their own versions of cXML, or worse let you output in any fashion you want without telling you there are rules to how cXML is processed. 

<cXML DTD and  Consultant Rant Begins Here>
I would say 80% of the work I’m currently doing is on telling people how to validate their cXML, and fighting with people who tell me, “But we work successfully with dozens of vendors doing it this way…”.  That may be the case – but cXML has rules, and it doesn’t matter how anyone else works – if you’re outputting to cXML you follow it’s rules or you pay.

The reward for following the rules is that if you do have a valid document – cXML is as stable as a rock, and your cXML will process like cannonball from a cannon.  So it is worth the effort to do it right, even if your “consultant” tells you it’s not necessary.  (Clue – if your “expert” tells you it’s not necessary to follow a standard… slap them.  They either don’t know how to follow the standard, have been told by a software application advertisement it’s not necessary, or something but the bottom line is – they don’t know.  I’ve seen a rash of “consultants” who claim this standard or that standard isn’t needed.  It usually is – and the only reason why they don’t or they won’t use the recommended DTD standard is that they assume what they’ve been told by articles or others who are not familiar with them, that a DTD is basically the same thing as an XSD schema.  

They hold many things in common, and often have a degree of interchangeability – but there is a reason why a DTD and an XSD exist and we don’t just use one or the other.  The subtle nuances in how they work allow them to perform different degrees of use for different types of uses.  For cXML the DTD is the model you need to be using, and one of the reasons is that certain required fields within the cXML DTD file enforce rules needed to make cXML work efficiently and correctly.  When consultants try to slip around these rules, or try to get loose with the rules – it may work fine on their local system, but when they try to connect to anyone else, it becomes costly and time consuming.
</End Rant>

Before move on, it’s important to point out one thing in the DTD.  DTDs are versioned.  Each version has it’s own requirements and rules.  If you find that you’re not validating – check the version which you’re validating against – it does make often a very big difference.  You can read more about each of the versions, and get copies of them at www.cxml.org.

So… let’s get back to the POSR.  What this does is it handles the hand shaking between the customer who is “Punching Out” to the vendor who has the catalog of goods that they will punch out to us.  Now the concept of the “PunchOut” is very simple.  A customer may have a massive catalog of items, but we don’t want all of them, or we may have rules regarding certain items in the catalog.  (Joe the Janitor probably isn’t allowed to buy the same things that Victor the V.P. does at a company.)   This can be controlled by the catalog that is “punched out” to the customer.  And all of this – begins with the POSR, where we authenticate not just the company but often the employee at the company who is requesting access to the catalog. 

This is done at the header of the POSR.  Here’s what a header looks like:

<Header>
        <From>
            <!– Supplier’s identity –>
            <Credential domain="NetworkID">
              <Identity lastchangedTimestamp="2000-03-12T18:39:09-08:00">AN01333333333</Identity>
            </Credential>
        </From>
        <To>
            <!– BCE’s identity –>
            <Credential domain="NetworkID">
                <Identity>AN01222222222</Identity>
            </Credential>
        </To>
        <Sender>
            <Credential domain="AribaNetworkUserId">
                <Identity>admin@ariba.com</Identity>
                <SharedSecret>bce’s shared secret with AN</SharedSecret>
            </Credential>
            <UserAgent>Ariba Network v20</UserAgent>
        </Sender>
    </Header>

The area you need to pay closest attention to is the one that reads “AribaNetworkUserId”, which I’m going to break from things here and point out that cXML is a standard developed by Ariba, and so – you’re going to see a lot of cheerleading for them in it.  But you will probably have to change this for some eCommerce companies who… ahem… have competing products.  But what you should never deviate from – is the use of a ID and SharedSecret.  These will generally be supplied to you – from the vendor doing the punchout.  These are the most important part of the punchout.  Without them… you won’t authenticate, you won’t get a catalog and you will most definitely not pass go and collect $200.

Now if you’re familiar with earlier versions of cXML you’ll note that up in the Suppliers Identity – there’s a lastChangedTimestamp and you may not have seen that before.  The truth is cXML (even with all those DTD rules) is very flexible.  And you can actually put in your own Identities in this section so if your internal cXML processor needs other names to identify it – go to it.  I’ve actually seen cXML where there were up to 15 Identities here.  So long as the Identity that you and your vendor have agreed upon is in here amongst the others you can get pretty creative and this is a good place for you as an organization to make use of multiple identities.

The next part of a good punchout setup request is … the request itself.   It contains a cookie, and if you have to do debugging something really handy… the BrowserFormPost.  If you can locate this you can discover exactly here it originated from – and often this can help with network an connectivity issue resolution.  So – keep track of that. 

<Request>
    <ProviderSetupRequest>
        <OriginatorCookie>c546794949</OriginatorCookie>
        <BrowserFormPost>
             <URL>http://service.ariba.com/returntome</URL>
        </BrowserFormPost>
        <Followup>
             <URL>http://service.ariba.com/laterUpdates</URL>
        </Followup>
        <SelectedService>BCE.Edi</SelectedService>
        <Extrinsic name="user">
           <Identity>user234</Identity>
        </Extrinsic>
        <Extrinsic name="url">
           <URL>http://service.ariba.com/anotherurl</URL>
        </Extrinsic>
    </ProviderSetupRequest>
</Request>

Also up in there… are the extrinsics.  Now I’ll let you in on a secret.  Most of the stuff you see up there?  Look up in the DTD – you’ll find a lot of it is not required.  Remember that rant on DTDs I had up above?  The DTD – will tell you exactly what fields are required and which fields are optional for cXML.  Now, some vendors may have rules over and above those – but the DTD is core.  It speaks – the world listens.  So – check to see what you need and what you don’t need. A good rule of thumb for efficient processing is that if you don’t need to be sending  it – don’t.  All that does is make the systems on the vendor’s end have to read through it and figure out if it’s needed or not.

Put into a cXML document only those things you absolutely need for the best performance. 

And that leaves us to the last part about the POSR… the closing tag. 

</cXML>

I won’t go into a rant over tags here – but I will say that a well formed document with complete tags is essential.  Don’t get sloppy.  cXML is not forgiving when it comes to tags.  It’s not chopped HTML where an unclosed tag will let it slide through.  It may work on your system – but validate, validate, validate. 

Get a tool which handles DTD validations, or roll your own.  Either way – validate your stuff.  If you use a tool like SAP or Oracle, find out how to get your output – even if you have to get it from the server logs and validate that.  Make sure the application you’re using actually does churn out valid cXML if you’re sending it to a vendor.  The time you save on that one chore – may save you weeks of arguing back and forth which of you has the problem.  Don’t just assume your cXML output is good – KNOW it’s good because with the flexibility in some tools that I’ve mentioned it will actually let you create very bad cXML that no one can run no matter how forgiving their system is.

Well this is a larger post than I meant – but I’ve been behind on my postings… so seemed I should make up for it here.  Next we’ll look at the PunchOutSetupResponse (the return to the POSR) – the OrderRequest and the POOM.  (Yeah, yeah… I can tell you’re all shaking with anticipation.)

See you next week.

what’s been keeping me up at night…

Been a bit busy… so I figured I’d give everyone a taste of the somewhat promised cXML eCommerce toy I’m working on.  So here are a few screen shots.  As you can see – it’s designed to load cXML or XML and perform validations.  It also allows the tester to actually POST the cXML PunchOut and OrderRequests directly to the server.  This retrieves complete header information.  The tester can auto-generate OCI HTML web forms that can be sent to customers for their own testing.  

You can also verify Authentication Tokens, Session IDs, and perform HostName / IP Address checks. 

The cXML validation allows the user to validate against any of a number of DTD files, from cXML to those used by OSN or even 3rd party or local files.  Anyway… that’s what has been keeping me from Posting.   In the next week or so – I’ll get some code up and discuss how eCommerce procurement systems work a little more directly. 

Until then… you’re just going to have use these shots and wonder.  (And for the record … yes I have removed any sensitive info from these screen shots.  The cXML displayed is a generic OrderRequest form. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boredom leads to adventures…

So I’ve been pretty bored of late.  Over at work I’m working on eCommerce issues – mostly dealing with the various choices vendors have in linking to our network and they all involve XML based products.  You’d be surprised how many top notch IT departments have grown so reliant on tools by Oracle and others for their procurement solutions they literally click buttons and fill in forms without knowing how their tool really works. 

Not that I’m an expert on procurement (well actually I suppose technically I am) but it seems to me that any time you’ve sufficiently automated yourself to the point that you don’t know what kind of XML you’re pumping out, how it gets to the other guy and what kind of an output you need to put out… your over adapted to your technology and now dependant on it.  Which is never a good thing.

So naturally – since I handle a lot of post-production troubleshooting these days… I automated things with a few tools.  I’ll detail these out in a future blog since I’m pretty sure most people have never had to deal with cXML or understand the difference between it and standard XML, and I’ve encountered several “Oracle Gurus” who keep insisting that what Oracle pumps out is “XML”… it is – but not in the classical sense anyone else would expect.

So I’ve started a couple projects there to make it easier for people and those are forth coming…

I also… decided to do a bit of video fun and that… is how I fought off boredom this weekend.  Did two bits you can find here

 

and here…

 

Who watched the Watchmen?

I think by now everyone knows – I’m a fan of Alan Moores the Watchmen.  I also think that there’s a fair chance a lot of people have seen the movie.  Experienced it. 

The graphic novel is a very powerful story that you either get – or you don’t.  As they went to the effort of creating the world of the Watchmen on film they were so very careful to keep the detail of the visual.  Zach Snyder the director – is great for those kind of details.  And he did – he pegged it visually almost perfectly So where the movie works best is in replicating that world. 

Where it fails is in those areas that don’t fit on film.  The subtle nuances that can only come from a book.  What we are left with on screen from his efforts can best be described as a visual feast – an optical orgasm – a color filled three dimensional… turd.

(If you have not seen the movie – turn back now – spoilers ahead)

I am not a purist.  When I heard that the original ending wasn’t used I kind of wanted to cut Zach a break because all of the visual elements of the film were done so well in the pre-release scenes we got to see.  Now I have to admit that by removing the original ending and substituting Doc Manhattan as the “big evil” that the world must fear to draw us together.  Now not only didn’t this work as a plot device but there is a rule about monkeying with a classic story – if you’re going to change the plot – change it for the better.  So – all of that was a waste.  Zach’s attempt to provide us with the message that the only reason we’re decent humans is our fear of Dr. Manhattan (substitute “God” for Dr. Manhattan and you’ll see what Snyder was shooting for and missed) – this message almost everyone missed who wasn’t watching for Dreibergs lines at the very end.

And the hinting that – perhaps – maybe – there could be “more of the story” a … sequel?  That’s just incredibly poor taste.  For those who missed these hints – trust me it’s all there.  It was blended carefully … hidden, almost like a subtle threat – but it’s there.  Snyder sold any die hard fan out with that ending.  The original, would have made far more sense.  I had to ask several people if anyone else caught the supposed logic of tying the nukes to the death of the inmate Rorschach “greases” in the film. 

With the supposed logic that when he died – the prison would go insane – and this somehow would be the trigger for Dr. Manhattan’s global attack.  Umm… yeah… that… is a lot more believable to the world and will bring them together than being attacked by an alien life form which wipes out all of New York, and causes madness for miles around. 

The film was rushed – and although visually detailed – the story was so lacking as to cause a feeling as if we, like Dr. Manhattan, are merely observers to this world and have no real emotional stake in it.   And I can’t blame the actors who did amazing jobs on this.  Each understood their characters so well and brought them to life adroitly – with the exception of Ozymandias.  Who was, card board – a cut out of the book’s character and not a very good one at that. 

If it were not for Jackie Earle Hailey’s stabilizing presence of the character Rorschach this film would not even merit discussion.  It’s his complete and total ability to sell the character of Rorschach that allows the film to work even on a basic level.  He’s supported of course by the other performances that are damned good, but it’s his time on screen both with the mask on and off that really sells this movie. 

Even the death scene works without going over the top, and he brings to the role the sensitivity and an empathy needed for us to buy the meaning to his death.  This is where the film really works – in the scenes with Rorschach.  Here Snyder can wring out of the story something close to what the story really is, his attempts with Manhattan, and NiteOwl are well intended but they’re only “good”.

This is not a movie that can get away with “good”.  You either have bought into the premise presented and are going along with it or you haven’t.  Which frankly is where it fails and falls flat. It’s the insecurity of Snyder’s need as a director to reinforce the world he’s created that moves it from allowing us to accept it to rub it in our faces.  It’s in his need to keep beating us over the head with “Hey this is an alternate 1985” or “Hey did you notice I can put yet another blue penis into this shot in spite of the fact that it wasn’t in the book… I just thought it’d be cool to show a blue man’s penis so you’d know he has not concept of or the need for clothing…”.  So instead of just having these details where they belong – they become a gaudy display, they rub our noses into this world. 

Instead of acceptance it becomes a struggle to accept.  The actors have given us their all, the sets, the crew, all have provided us with a perfect replica of the world needed for us to fall into this reality … and then the Director has to screw it up by forcing this world on us rather than letting us see it, accept it, and not need to have storied aesthetics that add nothing and make us go “Huh?  What? – Why… Wha?” and before we can digest it – have the story move on again to a moment which seems not to make any more sense than the words before.  As a result … It’s a long movie that ambles all over the place trying to make a point and in trying to make so many points – it’s doubtful if it ever does. 

Others may judge this film differently but to me – this was a film that needed to be made in 3 films – and to take your time.  But that’s not what we got.  It was pretty.  It was kind of deep.  But it was not… the Watchmen.