Print Story Puttin' on the Ritz
By TheophileEscargot (Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 09:20:22 AM EST) Theatre, MLP (all tags)
Theatre: "Frankenstein". MLP

Saw the much-hyped Danny Boyle directed Frankenstein at the National Theatre. Benedict Cumberbatch was "indisposed" that day though, so we got Jonny Lee Miller as the Monster and Daniel Ings as Victor Frankenstein instead. Lots of disappointment before the play, but I think they got it done OK.

Some clever staging making full use of the Olivier theatre's box of tricks with various bits of set dropping down, rising up, revolving into view or appearing on tracks. Impressively there's a huge wedge of filament light bulbs with waves of light sweeping across for lightning, and an apparently real church bell with a near-deafening toll.

The play is a new adaptation by Nick Dear, sticking quite closely to the book in terms of events. Victor Frankenstein becomes a cerebral, sexually repressed intellectual. The monster seems more horrible because his crimes take place on set, including an unpleasant rape scene. Occasionally gets a bit schematic when the characters spell out the Issues, but generally fast and effective..

Good performances too, if slightly over-the-top.

Overall, a good play, glad I saw it.

Review, review, review, review, review, article, roundup.

Socioeconomics. Why it's harder for British banks to relocate than they claim. Feminization of HR.

Email disclaimers are pointless.

Video. Unicode characters 0 - 65536.

< Quick question for everyone: | The Birthers must hate Kal-El with a passion. >
Puttin' on the Ritz | 5 comments (5 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Whenever I see a dude in HR by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 09:59:31 AM EST
I remind them that they're a token minority for the job and probably not good enough for it because they're estrogenocally-challenged.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

HR by duxup (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 11:11:50 AM EST
In a previous incarnation of my employer our company had hit a rough patch and after a few general layoffs a layoff occurred that only hit "non customer facing" and "non revenue generating" groups.   It was long overdue as several groups in the organization were enormous compared to others.  HR being one of them.

Desperate to stay relevant the HR director came up with a whole slew of required training classes created and taught by his HR staff.  Their people now had a purpose and a connection to those of us who ... worked.   These people had no training experience, no experience doing what they were training, had no clue about even what they did.  One of them happily once annoucned that we could now view our 401k online, and make changes online...but we had to fill out the old paper forms that you used to use before we made any changes.  You didn't have to fill out the paper forms, we had been able to view and change our 401ks for years...  On another occasion HR over a series of company wide e-mails defended their choice to still hold a big expensive company party after the first two layoffs.  Why?  I suspect the reason was because some folk in HR were dedicated to that project much of the time. 

So despite no expertise, training ability, we were required to attend these classes.  They were about "soft skills" and so I guess the theory is that HR folk are supposed to be experts in that area as they are in HR.  Much like I am an elephant expert if I get hired by the zoo, it didn't make it so.  It was a disaster.  They started the class with a room full of overworked engineers, support personnel, all guys, 100% men, mostly older guys, mostly guy guys, not even many geeky guys.  These guys when not working were likely shooting something, camping, etc.

So they start the class (no joke):

"So who watched last nights episode of Judging Amy?"

It did not go well from there.

Danny Boyle's films by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #3 Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 11:51:19 AM EST
Are let down by sloppiness IMO. He has some great ideas, but just doesn't seem to be able to hold things together very well.

It's political correctness gone mad!

Email disclaimers by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #4 Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 12:39:11 PM EST
I have on one occasion sent a letter to an incorrect address where a person who used the contents of the letter would be committing an imprisonable offence. There was no disclaimer in the letter.

The contents of the letter? A prescription for ADHD drugs. I wasn't the person who'd got the address written down incorrectly, fortunately, but there was a proper incident report and investigation following that.

Email Disclaimer by jimgon (2.00 / 0) #5 Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 09:09:39 PM EST

I have a friend who is a corporate lawyer.  I asked him one day when I got curious.  He said it wasn't enforceable pretty much for the same reasons cited in the article.

Technician - "We can't even get decent physical health care. Mental health is like witchcraft here."
Puttin' on the Ritz | 5 comments (5 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback