So, a bunch of people think that by “going naked” today that they can make the web better by promoting web standards, proper semantics and yadda-yadda. Now, I’m all for web standards and XHTML and all that, having been on the X Philes list since it started and generally encouraging standards, but this is a bloody silly idea.

Here are two scenarios for you, decide which is more likely:

1. A user stumbles on a site that is stripped of CSS and follows a link to the main Naked Day site, where they read all about the purpose (which isn’t actually explained in any detail) and say, “By George, I should be making my site better, like this great looking site!”.
2. A user stumbles on a site that is stripped of CSS and says, “By George, this site is either hideous or broken, best be going to another one that actually works”.

Sorry guys, but who is it you’re actually trying to reach? Either people already know about standards or not, and then either care or not. Making your site look crappy, even if perfectly usable won’t convince anyone. Just because it’s usable without stylesheets doesn’t mean people want to use it. You see that’s the side of usability that everyone seems to have forgotten for this idiocy: that you have to make the user want to use the site. If anything, this will have people running for the table-ridden sites that don’t look like they’re broken.

Here at Solitude, we appreciate the spirit of the day, really, but the implementation is broken; we’ll keep the clothing on, thanks.

I know people have developed some fairly clever systems for organising their priorities and tasks, but I’m still using post-it notes to organise (yes, it is a total nightmare). I’m looking for some system which is neither bureaucratic nor rigid.

Constraints:

• While I can see the point in organising to some extent (there’s no way I’d remember all that stuff without noting it down), I don’t want tied into dogma either. Just a simple way of doing things.
• Paper-based. I am not carrying around a PDA with me.
• Must be explainable in 60 seconds. If it takes longer than that then it’s probably far too complicated already.
• Update consolidation must be easy. That’s the real problem I have: a bunch of post-it notes that started with 5-10 items, and now have a handful each. There’s got to be an easy way of pulling together all the random items.

Got suggestions?

Living closer to the cinema (a 15 minute walk) has meant that this month has a massive eight films lined up.

Spielberg fills in the blanks after the infamous murder of the Israeli Olympic athletes two decades ago in his epic Munich. Focussing on the Mossad agents charged with vengeance on those responsible rather than the incident itself was the first error here. While we watch Eric Bana morph from struggling with his mission to becoming a paranoid but capable agent, we do not care; his inner turmoil is largely his own, motivated only by a flimsy patriotism which, self defeatingly, is gone in the end. The plot itself is entertaining, if a little plodding, but does nothing to communicate a message effectively to the viewer.

A Johnny Cash biopic was always going to feature music heavily, that’s a given. What is surprising is the impressive job that both Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon do in the lead roles, allegedly providing the song vocals themselves. The film looks at Cash’s rise to stardom in the first act, but swiftly changes to his pursuit of his would-be wife, despite his drug abuse and family. Sure, there are more interesting parts of his life that could have been looked at, but putting them in a plot would have been haphazard. The writers took an obvious and easy route that, not without challenging moments, paints the lead character as the anti-hero many take him for. Walk The Line is fitting, if rose-tainted.

Hidden (Cache) is, in words that I can only assure you are weak, absolutely dire. Two hours of twaddle that had some of the pieces to make an interesting film (a stalker mailing video tapes of the lead character and the paranoia around that) but was, instead, resolutely dull. For the vast majority of the two hour length, nothing happens. When the few events of the film actually occur, you will be too bored rigid to care. How does the film wrap? Perhaps with the lead character learning a lesson? The stalker being shown justice, or even escaping in some cunning way? Maybe some dubious or deep moralising? The plot strands (any of them) being resolved? Nope. Just a five minute shot of people coming out of a building. Really. An instant place in my worst three movies of all time.

Expecting a chick flick, Derailed both shocked and surprised. Beginning as a story about a man having an affair with a beautiful and intelligent woman, it quickly spirals into a blackmail drama with a sting in the tail. Though the twist is predictable, it is nonetheless enjoyable. The cast, as a whole, put in a sterling performance, the film hampered only by an extra fifteen minutes that tidy things up a little too nicely.

Final Destination 3 is nothing but trashy, fun horror. The “plot”, gaping holes and all, features the same prophetic warning of imminent disaster as seen in the previous two parts followed by fate closing in on the survivors of the accident. Essentially the whole film is just the set-up for some incredibly gory and intricate death scenes. Awful but enjoyable, chewing gum cinema.

The journalists who helped bring down Senator McCarthy get their story told by George Clooney in black and white biopic Good Night, And Good Luck. Tightly focussed on the respected newsmen who fight a lengthy media war to get rid of the overbearing paranoia and witch hunts for communists that the Senator used to get into power, it rarely falters into the extraneous. Smart, short, perfectly paced: along with his previous directorial effort (Confessions Of A Dangerous Mind) Clooney shows he has style and flair, and a well-judged knowledge of the subject matter.

On the other hand, Lucky Number Slevin is all style and no substance. Sharp, witty and off the wall dialogue is lost in a movie that can’t back it up. The plot attempts to be intricately woven and clever but is, in fact, just badly cut. Repeat to self: putting scenes out of order and using revelatory flashbacks is a difficult plot device to get right. Memento understands this, Lucky Number Slevin does not. Obvious, occassionally amusing, and nothing special.

Finally, Aeon Flux is exactly how not to adapt from other media. While I cannot claim to have seen the MTV cartoon on which this film is based, a brief inspection of the film shows that there is clearly a well planned, long term plot and a detailed, intricate universe. For inexperienced hands to fit it all into this 90 minute travesty of an action film means that much of the material is handled in the most juvenile way; trampling over the ideas, rather than nurturing them. That is bad enough; to then further the awful telling by focussing in all the wrong places for bite-sized pieces of time is just unforgivable. Awful.

The winner for February? Good Night, And Good luck. While the Johnny Cash film is excellent and Derailed is solid if not for the final scenes, Clooney’s work barely misses a beat.

While I was gone recently, I spent a few days near Southampton and saw some things I thought I’d never see. Leaving aside what I was in the area for (which turned out to be a bit out of the ordinary) and the horse we saw standing outside a front door trying (someone was in for a real surprise), Brockenhurst train station has some interesting leaflets to browse through. Some were just us being juvenile, some are genuinely frightening. Have a look for yourself in my first Flickr photo set: Signs Of Brockenhurst.

Incidentally, I was surprised by just how easy to use Flickr is. The uploadr software is one of the nicest bits of UI I’ve seen in a long time.

Though it is ever so slightly delayed, let’s go over this years first month of films anyway. It’s not going to prove useful for anyone looking to find something in the cinema (DVD releases must be imminent at this rate), but then again that has never been what this is all about.

First film of the year was Running Scared. The plot revolves around trying to find a kid who stole a gun, previously used to murder a cop, who shot his father. Yes, it’s that ridiculous. If you can suspend disbelief through the convoluted plot and bizarre b-plot (how that paedophile story got into the script, I do not know), you have a reasonably tense if fairly predictable action-drama. It’s not going to win any awards, but there are worse ways to spend your time.

Next up is the surprisingly warm Steve Martin film, Shopgirl. Written by the comedy legend himself, it’s a story that takes Martin away from the laughs (those are provided by the always excellent Jason Schwartzman) and puts Claire Danes in the middle of a love triangle while she tries to understand the changes in her life. At times tender, uncomfortable and nostalgic, this film portrays relationships in more dimensions than mainstream cinema has in the last decade: no-one is perfect and there are no relationships free from deep problems. Save for the misguided narration framing the piece, Shopgirl is a film worthy of anyone’s time.

A lot of people seem to have left Jarhead with the impression that nothing much happened. While that was overtly the point (the first Gulf War being uninvolving for most soldiers), it misses the fairly blinding subtext that this is a film packed with life: from the brutality of the boot camp to the shipping to the gulf to filling endless days in a desert with paranoia and mindless tricks to fight the boredom. A whole war happens and the marines can only bear witness to it, trapped between their old lives and new lives of combat. Beautifully shot, if occassionally overbearing, Jarhead is an experience- rather than plot-driven film. That’s why it was so good.

The final film of the month is A Cock And Bull Story: the impossible to describe, and devilishly clever retelling of the substance, if not the plot, of Tristram Shandy; a book about how life is too vibrant, detailed and fluid to ever be captured by art. While the film begins as a faithful retelling of the book (the first third focussing on the details of the titular character’s birth), it soon zooms out to incorporate the tales of the lead actors: Coogan’s pety one upmanship and affairs, Brydon’s fight for the limelight and terror when he finds it, parodying both of their public figures perfectly. In forgetting to tell the story of the book and, instead, showing the extraneous details that are needed to fully appreciate the telling, the director has captured the very essence of the book: the map is not the territory. An incredibly clever film.

Winner? Though I pointed at Jarhead as being the winner in a previous post, I think Cock And Bull Story has edged it in retrospect. It is a film with as much depth as one would expect from the classic novel it adapts. Though, it has to be said, three of the four films this month were worth seeing.