For a filmmaker whose latest film has been nominated for three Academy Awards and has won Cannes Film Festival’s top prize, the Palme d’Or, twice, it sounds strange to hear Ruben Ostlund not obsess over success. Maybe.
“I’m much more interested in when I fail as a person than when I succeed as a person,” said the Swedish director, who will head the jury at this year’s festival, which runs from Tuesday to May 27.
The 49-year-old Ostlund won the Palme d’Or last year for his class satire “Triangle of Sorrows,” set on a doomed luxury yacht, and his previous feature “The Square,” a lavish sensation in the art world. . , 2017. Mr. Ostlund is one of a kind 9 filmmakers He has won multiple Palme d’Or and is one of only three consecutive film winners.
After its success at Cannes, Mr. Ostlund’s first full-length English-language film, The Triangle of Sorrow, became an arthouse hit in both Europe and the United States, earning three Oscar nominations for Best Picture and Best Picture. was done. It won Best Director and Best Screenplay, but no wins.
In three recent features, starting with 2014’s Force Majeure, Mr. Ostland has consciously moved away from certain types of European arthouse cinema.
“I wanted to create a wild and interesting ride that was trying to talk about content that I thought was important and content that I was interested in, but not creating a conflict between them,” he said in late April. rice field. He spoke in a video interview from his home in Campos, Mallorca.
He combines the political comedy of Italian director Lina Wertmüller and the surreal provocation of Spanish filmmaker Luis Buñuel, whose 1974 film Swept Away was a clear touchstone for The Triangle of Sorrow. I gave it as an example of a serious movie. It’s also a lot of fun to watch.
and statement Festival organizers, who announced Ostlund as president of the jury in February, called the decision “a film that is uncompromisingly candid, always challenging its audience and demanding that art continue to create itself.” A tribute to the
“Contrary to popular belief, thought-provoking films can also be popular,” wrote Philip Bober, one of the producers of “Triangle of Sorrows,” in an email.
“We want to make uncompromising author films, but we also want to embrace our audience,” Bober continued. He has been working with Mr. Ostlund since his 2005.
“It’s bad news for producers,” Bover added, referring to himself and the film’s other Oscar-nominated producer, Eric Hemmmendorf. “If you want to make a good movie, you have to support the director’s radicalism: to experiment with form and content for a long time before making any money.”
The critical acclaim of “The Triangle of Sorrows” seems to confirm Mr. Bover’s confidence in Mr. Ostlund.
What makes the Swedish director’s films so entertaining is the humor, which is often sour, but often downright jarring and sometimes downright unnerving.His work has been seen by some viewers as manipulative or downright cruel (“Triangle of Sadness” contains a fearlessly long vomiting scene) and others have praised him as a social critic of extraordinary insight.
“I think all of my film approaches look at human behavior and create dilemmas because they try to tell us something about us,” said Ostlund. Furthermore, he added that he tried to create “a scene that I believe is an accurate and true picture of our actions” without accusation.
“I would be happy if we could reach the level of a really good sociological experiment,” he added.
according to Owen GleibermanVariety magazine’s chief film critic, said Triangle of Sorrow was “just about the movie of the moment.”
“It’s a matter of the 1 percent, it’s a matter of the 1 percent winning a comeback. And that’s a good theme, a welcome theme,” said Gleiberman, who attended the Cannes Film Festival for the first time in 1996. said Mr. At the same time, he said he felt the film was “too preoccupied with satirical excess”. He “was delighted to have won the unexpected Palme d’Or for “The Square”, but felt that “Triangle of Sodness” didn’t deserve it.”
“There’s no rule that says a director can’t win the Palme d’Or twice in five years,” Gleiberman said. “But it usually doesn’t mean that he made two of his masterpieces, but that he became a darling of Cannes.” The fact that it did “make perfect sense,” Gleiberman added.
“Actually, I was a little hesitant because of the weight of the position,” Ostrand said of being asked to chair the jury. His eight co-jurors include American actors Paul Dano and Brie Larson, Argentinian director Damien Chiffron, and 2021 controversial Bodie, who won the Palme d’Or for his horror film ‘Titan’. French film director Julia Ducournau.
No one decides the winner, but the prize at Cannes is often equated with that year’s jury president. Historically speaking, films that have won the Palme d’Or “are not on the list of masterpieces,” Gleiberman suggested.
“It’s more like good things, bad things, and ugly things,” he said.
Östlund seemed well aware of this when he suggested that the Palme d’Or awarded by the chief jury, for better or worse, “is something that lasts a lifetime.”
But Östlund said it was more important to stand by what Cannes stands for than anything else. “For me, it’s the world’s film festivals that are fighting for cinema on the barricades, a provocative approach to cinema as an art form,” he said.
“Last year, traveling with The Triangle of Sorrow, I tried to spread the word about the film, talking about the benefits of the film and about the nature of seeing things together rather than sitting in front of individuals. screen,” he added.
Another Cannes favourite, Hungarian filmmaker Kornel Mundorzo, said the festival made him “on what it means to be a filmmaker and a true believer in cinema as the seventh art.” The ethical and fundamental state of
Mundruzzo, 48, and Ostrund’s work have shared the line-up several times at Cannes. In 2014 they Both made headlines in the festival’s Un Certain Regard sidebar. Mundruczo’s ‘White God’ won first prize and Ostlund’s ‘Force Majeure’ won the Jury Prize. Mr. Mundruczo’s other three of his films screened in the main competition at Cannes. He was invited to the Cannes jury on his two occasions but declined due to prior commitments.
Mandruzzo, who has chaired juries at other film festivals, said he enjoyed the experience, even though he expressed concerns about showing a film like horses in the race.
“As a juror, I feel that you can convey your taste, your honesty, your vision for the future of cinema and all your love for cinema,” said Mandruzzo in Berlin, where he lives. said in an interview.
Ostlund, who has served as a juror at the festival before, said it was important to keep an eye on the group’s dynamics and make sure everyone felt “watched.”
“I think we’ll take a very Swedish approach when it comes to running juries,” he said.
“It will be a democracy.”
