Franisdumb If your movie from one and a half hour feels like one and a half year, you have a problem. While watching the movie I thought "Why does this movie exists?". Every single aspect of this film felt like if no one wanted to work on it. The directing is boring, there is no style, making the whole movie boring. The actors felt like they were about to die, when watching them, they looked like they were about to die. And the story isn't interesting, I never cared about what was going to happen with Franck or his dad. The moment I finished watching this movie I just felt relief that the movie was over. This movie, is a waste of time, don't watch it for your own wealth

Andres-Camara The first thing I have to say is that as a film it seems like a simple movie, without any aspiration. It is not good for planning, photography, or anything special. The only good thing is the actors that at least make it credible. To those interested in the explanation of the title in the spoiler.Spoiler: As a movie for people who do not even dedicate themselves to the movies or have to do it seems to me that it is a movie that can be seen. Although I do not agree with his message, I have to say that as a movie it is worth it.It seems to me a film for the last century because there are all the ingredients, the totalitarian trade unionist, the boss who goes in the back, the employees less subservient to Leninism and then the clerks, who all over the world branded entrepreneurs and are mere currants. The trick comes when the prepared person arrives and it is not based on nonsense if not in today's world, liberal and raises things to see if they work, although this proved the 35 hours failed in France for not being competitive, without bias ideological. I saw his point well until, as it has not led to an ideological point, nothing reasonable and totally sentimental. It is clear that today you have to update whether you or your father.By the way I am amazed at the lack of freedom that the film asks for and only one critic has commented, when you are forced to go on strike, why does not it look like the free choice to work or strike, does anyone oblige to strike? Nobody realizes that at the end of the film, if the second part were done, if the strike had lasted a long time, they would all be unemployed by bankruptcy and if it had not lasted, they would all be unemployed, because of bankruptcy and That the costs today are unbearable.What the driver of errands would say when I passed him, the same thing but it is called evolution and you have to assume it. I hope not to disturb anyone with what I say, but to see if we have already evolved

Mats This could have been a great film about labour relations in a globalised world. Instead we get a much more narrow and black and white perspective. Management basically being crooks and the communist union protecting genuine workers' right. It is sad that the direction didn't have a better grasp of reality. Still the move has good moments and raises interesting questions.One thing I don't like is the director's way of using dirty tricks to get his audience on the union side. First the union woman is portrayed as an awful and disgusting person. Then the same person gets the last word after the audience have started to dislike her. Cheap trick.Still the movie is quite good but nothing extraordinary. My limit of a watchable film is 6 and a great film is 9 on the IMDb scale.

Movie-12 HUMAN RESOURCES / (1999) ***1/2 (out of four)By Blake French: The powerful, heartbreaking new French drama "Human Resources," written by Laurent Cantet and Gilles Marchand, is so authentic the only true professional actor in the cast is Jalil Lespert, who plays Franck, the son of a workaholic. The rest of the performers were chosen from unemployment organizations in regard to the business the characters would have to play. "The title "human resources" is first of all a reaction against the cynicism of that expression," explains director Laurent Cantet in an interview. "A human being is administered the same way you would administer stocks or capital." After watching this film we understand what he means by those words. The working characters employed by a personnel division factory where Franck's dad is currently employed. He has been working there for thirty years and is happier when his son is emotionally further apart from him. Franck has defied his family heritage, went to college, and has recently returned to the French home where his parents live. He gets a job as a manager at the company in which his father works. This is where he becomes torn between business opportunities and staying loyal to his principles of fairness and morality. The people at the factory treat the workers like machines, and it is then when he understands "human resources" refers to people as variables in the production flow graphs. Director Laurent Cantet is not from a working class family, as cleared up in a press kit, so these skillful and wise foreign filmmakers decided to get ideas confirmed by those who did live that life. The parts of the factory workers are played by actual workers; the boss is a real boss; the union leader is a real union leader. The film is also shot in an authentic working factory, as if a documentary was in the creation. Cantet was absolutely correct: who better to imitate the positions and postures of a worker's body bent over a factory machine, or especially the language itself, much of which was selected the workers themselves. The factory's supervisors are cutting back, and Franck gets the privilege of listening to the suggestions that a recent questionnaire asks. The questionnaire is to help make the employers, who are drained of most consciousness on the job, feel they are important to the success of the corporation. Then, while snooping around on the boss's computer, Franck finds the questionnaire is nothing but a pretense for upcoming layoffs, that of which his father is on the list. While Franck is furious at the deceptions, his father refuses to even go on strike after learning of his fate-he is simply to used to consistence and routine, he fears change. The movie is more about the inner struggle between Franck and his father than the actual protesting by the employees or how the factory supervisors fight back. American movies are not often about factory workers, and when they are, the subject is more parody, like in "Officer Space" (1999), than class struggle. One of the best arguments this movie makes is that class struggle is still alive today, and has a high impact of various societies. There are other themes in "Human Resources": greed and power, communication between Franck and his family, the father-son association he has with his boss, finding one's place in society, and shame and regret. "Human Resources" is of the most penetrating films of the year; it offers descriptive writing and empathizing characters. Shot in a documentary style, the direction is focused and sincere, and the performances are mesmerizing. The only thing keeping it from perfection is the somewhat slow-moving script that occasionally strays idle when some of the most important events take place. Beyond that, however, "Human Resources" is a must-see if you are a fan of original, reality theme-based dramas.