Le voyage du directeur des ressources humaines

I don't know how much of what the movie omits is in the novel, but as the movie stands, we have several people each of whose lives has taken a turning-- not always for the worse, but usually-- and the details of that past turning are vague. The full Hebrew title would translate as THE MISSION OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER, and his mission takes him to the boondocks of Eastern Europe to meet the bereaved relatives of a murdered employee. It's a big contrast between familiar surroundings and exotic ones, and the contrast may be lost to viewers for whom the place where the action starts, Israel, is exotic anyway. Another thing lost is the word translated as MANAGER in the title. The word in the Hebrew title doesn't really mean "manager," it means "the appointee responsible." The protagonist (Mark Ivanir carries the movie well in this role) has less authority than he would like, and the plot takes him on a shaggy-dog road trip from one misfortune to another, becoming somewhat more light-hearted and philosophical along the way and showing many moments of altruism. There are some improbabilities and a few minor and unfortunate clichés, such as the fellow who-- like so many characters beset by a crisis in a movie-- had been trying to give up smoking. But the movie has momentum, the minor characters are colorful, the music is enjoyable, the sad and comic sides are well balanced, and I for one was left with a hankering to read the book. In English, by the way, the book is called A WOMAN IN JERUSALEM.

I interpreted Eran Riklis's "Shlihuto shel Ha'Memuneh al Mash'abey Enosh" ("The Human Resources Manager" in English) as a contrast of cultures. The title character has to go to Romania and finds a world totally different from what he's used to in in ultra-modern Israel. If this movie is to be believed, much of rural Romania looks untouched from the 1950s. I've never been there, so I can't vouch for it.

If that was the purpose, then it succeeded. What I liked was hearing the different languages spoken. What I found questionable was that the movie presented a number of topics but didn't seem interested in fleshing them out all the way.

A man who gradually lost his way, in contact with other people with the same problem, remembers what is really important. When you sum it up like this it sounds very trite and predictable. Fortunately this movie isn't. Former military man who runs the human resources in the bakery like a war operation, has to accompany the body of a former employee back to unnamed Eastern European country( to those who can read it is obviously Romania). Stark, desolate landscape, country in transition and general lack of hope. Gray, flat land, gray post-socialist buildings and people seemingly gray, too, but only at first sight. There are bright colors of strong emotions, pale shades of despair and shockingly strong bursts of uncontrolled anger. All primal and deeply necessary to keep us alive, no matter what forsaken part of the world we were unfortunate to be born in. There is only one life and one skin and only as much blood and tears we can shed, and as much joy we can sustain before the inevitable end.

The Hebrew name of the film is a little longer than the one chosen by the distributors for the English version. It reads 'The Mission of the Human Resources Manager' and actually the word used is 'shlihut' which has a wider significance - it means not only mission, but also the acts of performing an important duty, or of being a messenger for important news. The news in this case are about a death, but the film touches only marginally the reasons and the absurdity of that death, and deals more about how the people who remained in life cope with the disappearance and how this impacts their lives - including the one of the messenger.

Based on a novel of AB Yehoshua the film tells the story of the aftermath of a terror attack, one of these crazy suicidal acts that took place during the second intifada about a decade ago. One of the victims of the attack is identified quite lately as a Romanian woman working a manual job in a bakery in the town. A beautiful woman whose face we know only from a photo and later from a short film made on a phone, whose body nobody came to claim or identify because she was one of the thousand of foreign workers who come to Israel and perform hard and low paid works nobody else wants to do in order to support their families back home. The duty to take the coffin with the body home to Romania, and try to compensate the family there falls on the manager of the human resources (the absurdity of the terminology is so well exposed by this film), a man who has problems of his own - solidly acted by Mark Ivanir, an actor I did not notice until now - he works more for the TV and games industry in the US, here he gets an opportunity to make a serious role in an Israeli film, and does it fine. What results is a trip in unknown territory for the Jerusalemite clerk and the journalist accompanying him (Guri Alfi, better known here as a stand-up comedian), a clash not only of two different cultures and but also of different approaches to life and death.

The film is not bad, but it's a missed opportunity. Made in 2010, a year when both the Romanian and Israeli films industry were riding high on waves of success, it could have brought together some of the best in the two schools of cinematography - the Israeli dramatic school of political cinema which after decades of avoiding the tough questions raised by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict succeeded in a few film that take a sharp and uncompromising look at the issues and the Romanian minimalist realism which looks back to the Communist era and the transition that followed, and also to the contemporary chaotic situation in Romania not only with anger, but also with humor and especially with human understanding. Amazingly, director Eran Riklis' style and place in the Israeli cinema fits rather well the Romanian cinema style. The problem lies in the folklorist approach taken in dealing with the Romanian reality. If the Israeli team would have taken a local director as consultant, they could have maybe avoided some of the stereotypes of the script. I should say that the Romanian actors do their best to fill in the holes of the story on this respect, but this is not always enough. Even so, it's a pleasure to see great actors like Irina Petrescu (a Romanian legend) or Gila Almagor who can be considered as her Israeli counterpart on the same cast (although they never meet on screen). And more than all, this is the last and final role in the career of Rozina Cambos. Despite its flaws Riklis' film has enough good parts to make for an interesting viewing.

Yulia Petracka was her name and she worked cleaning the largest bakery in Jerusalem, Israel. When she gets killed in a suicide bombing in January 2002, the human resources manager is confronted with insensitivity from the press and pressure to do the right thing. Yulia was a foreigner in Israel, a second class citizen who wasn't even Jewish. She was Romanian Christian immigrant. The Human Resources manager without a name like in the book entitled "A Woman in Jerusalem," goes on a journey to discover this woman's life who touched her son, mother, ex-husband, and a co-worker. He makes the long traveling journey to Romania with the journalist photographer and is met by the Israeli consul at the airport. I actually read and loved the book itself. This movie something that I had to have because I found the book to be passionate, thought-provoking, and brilliant. This film does the book's justice even if it made modifications for the screen. The book and the film reminds us that a person makes a difference, a huge difference when we least expect it, dead or alive.