The creators of "Corporate" deserve some credit for miraculously making sympathetic a cutthroat head of the Human Resources department in a corporation.
At first glance, Emilie Tesson-Hansen seems responsible for the intimidation of an employee named Didier Dalmont, who takes his life after being harassed and let go by the company. What follows is an investigation into corporate malfeasance, and the target of the inquest is the HR director Tesson-Hansen. The major question raised by the film: Was Tesson-Hansen the instigator of abusive practice, or was she also a victim?
While there were some slick production values of the unpleasant and unwholesome work environment, the film was ultimately unsuccessful in demonstrating inhumane working conditions in what are undoubtedly standard hiring and firing practices in the corporate world.
It was especially unconvincing that an outside "inspector," Marie Borrel, would be sent in conduct interviews and then work in concert with Tesson-Hansen to unmask the executive Stéphane Foncart for his devious plan to offload undesirable members of the staff.
Another shortcoming of the film was the depiction of the home life of Tesson-Hansen and a truly bizarre scene that involved Emilie conducting what would appear to be an interview of her husband and disrobing in the process. The husband's role in the affairs of her office work was never made clear. And what was the purpose of the scene where Tesson-Hansen decided to get drunk with a coterie of Japanese businessmen?
In the end, the film was not absorbing as an exposé of corporate shenanigans. It was slow-paced with far too many extraneous details. Arguably, every employee of Tesson-Hansen's corporation was a victim for choosing to work for such a sleazy operation in the first place.
At first glance, Emilie Tesson-Hansen seems responsible for the intimidation of an employee named Didier Dalmont, who takes his life after being harassed and let go by the company. What follows is an investigation into corporate malfeasance, and the target of the inquest is the HR director Tesson-Hansen. The major question raised by the film: Was Tesson-Hansen the instigator of abusive practice, or was she also a victim?
While there were some slick production values of the unpleasant and unwholesome work environment, the film was ultimately unsuccessful in demonstrating inhumane working conditions in what are undoubtedly standard hiring and firing practices in the corporate world.
It was especially unconvincing that an outside "inspector," Marie Borrel, would be sent in conduct interviews and then work in concert with Tesson-Hansen to unmask the executive Stéphane Foncart for his devious plan to offload undesirable members of the staff.
Another shortcoming of the film was the depiction of the home life of Tesson-Hansen and a truly bizarre scene that involved Emilie conducting what would appear to be an interview of her husband and disrobing in the process. The husband's role in the affairs of her office work was never made clear. And what was the purpose of the scene where Tesson-Hansen decided to get drunk with a coterie of Japanese businessmen?
In the end, the film was not absorbing as an exposé of corporate shenanigans. It was slow-paced with far too many extraneous details. Arguably, every employee of Tesson-Hansen's corporation was a victim for choosing to work for such a sleazy operation in the first place.