With a freedom à la Rossellini it summarizes the sweet political fierceness of a satire with the filmic intensity of the bodies, the elements, the water, the faces, discovering cinema as a killing-the-evil machine and the power as a killing-the-good machine; our sight kills everything while dreaming the death of death.

Because it represents solitude with an audiovisual purity together with a poetic synthesis.

For its completeness shown at a narrative and technical level and for the awareness and the research in the specific use of video image.

For its capacity to translate into animation a song text, and for its superbe balance between images and music.

For its strength, upsetting all stereotypes, that plays a restless feast and the pain of death, that puts on stage the comedy of the disappearing and the tragedy of being there, the frivolous mythology and the anguishing inconsistent heaviness of family love, filming the obsessive fullness of bodies and the stellar emptiness of social space with a constant re-feeling.

For the way in which an apparently simple cinema breaths, in each sequence and in each instant, the complexity and ambiguity of situations, the light of the landscape and of the eyes, with a moved and economical look on the political cultural generational encounters/collisions on the most crucial set of the Mediterranean globalization.

Because it gathers the physical and mystic universe of nature describing a universe and its characters.

Because it represents, in a ironic way, the ambitious expectations of the patient and the absolute psycho-analytic position of the therapist, and it reveals how the main character's transfert is not the word but the magic.

The Jury wishes to mention the extraordinary intensity and measure of the magnificent ambiguous presence/apparition of Jean-Claude Vallod (the "father") in the film Ressources Humaines by Laurent Cantet.

For the high aesthetic level expressed by both authors, due to a deep and personal poetic vein.

For the high aesthetic level expressed by both authors, due to a deep and personal poetic vein.

For its insight capacity into a socially relevant phenomenon like soccer fanaticism.

Because it tells, in a human and believable way, the story of some workers engaged in a fight to save their working place.

Starting from the 35 days at FIAT in 1980, it tells the professional and human changes of the five characters of the film.

For the originality of the characters' stories, wounded and suspended between maples in love, cellos and ideograms.

For the continuity given by the filmmaker through the contrasts, between formal realization, narrative content and the characters' emotionality.

For its capacity in putting on stage a ruthless criticism of daily consumism with irony.

For its accuracy in reconstructing a social reality, for the depth in outlining the relationship between father and son, for the attention to the characters' changes and transformations, for its high civil meaning, for the sobriety of a directing way that gives value to a script respecting the truth of dialogues and feelings.

For its capacity to characterize dance as a life metaphor, that eliminates, in the game or in reality, the individuals through grotesque and unexpected situations. For its strength in representing the impossibility to lie to oneself. For its sensitiveness in representing, with an ironic and disillusioned eye, all aspects of existence, the ones that gather all human beings into a common suffering, expressed in a simple but meaningful question: "Who's got pain?"