The Swedish director, winner of the ‘Triangle of Sorrow’ for his second Palme d’Or, affirms Buell’s figure and proposes the cinema as a stimulus and a meeting place.
- ‘The Triangle of Grief’ Ken Trinfadora
- dash uproar in cannes
“The first Palme d’Or may have been an accident, but the second …. Ruben Stallund (Styres, Sweden, 1974) joked on Saturday. The Cannes Film Festival awards ceremony just ended And who knows whether in the ellipsis he signaled victory over his critics, many of them frankly and ostentatiously angry. Criticism is part of the debate and I take it as a good sign for someone to be angry about a film. It means that what you do matters, that cinema matters, he remarked a few days ago in an interview after the presentation of Triangle of Sadness. With this, he has not only entered the select club of filmmakers with two palms, but is also one of the more elite of those who achieve him with two films in a row: Coppola, Haneke Yale,
- It was strange to see so many people laughing at one film in celebration of the Autism Film Festivals. How do you explain it?
- It was Michael Haneke, who created the . after the presentation of happySaid that the only serious and responsible way of portraying reality is a farce. see what happened to the movie don’t look up, My intention is to make a cinema that helps to discuss and think about reality. We must let go of the dichotomy between boring autobiographical cinema and stupid popular cinema. This is a wrong approach and condemns cinema.
- Do you think cinema is experiencing a kind of crossroads?
- I think European cinema has forgotten some of its authors. I’m thinking, for example, of Lena Wertmüller or Louis Buell. I don’t think it’s crazy to mix, or at least try, the best auteur cinema and the best American commercial cinema. Engagement with the audience is not something that can be ignored. You have to give people a reason to leave the house and go to the movies not only to have fun but to discuss important things… which is a way to have fun.
- Can we define your cinematic politics-tamasha?
- The cinema I try to make is a reflection of what I spent all my life at home. My mother considers herself a communist. He consolidated his ideology in the leftist movements of the 1970s. On the other hand, my brother is a right-wing liberal. Every meal at home is a heated debate about the divine and the human…
- What is your position in the discussions?
- I’m Swedish, be careful. An economist once compared equality to the law of gravitation. To maintain both one stone and equality, you have to intervene, you have to organize yourself, you have to distribute the wealth for the benefit of all. That said, Marx and Lenin also found merit in capitalism. I think the Left has forgotten Marx to some extent. Not all rich are petty and selfish; Nor the all genuine, generous and kind poor.
- I get lost.
- What I want is to affirm the value of politics and discussion; Things need to be thought of in general. Man’s greatest passion is equality. But we cannot make it an individual matter. If we see a beggar on the street, we think we have to do something, but giving him some coins won’t help much. If a billionaire finds himself in the same situation, what should he do? Give him all your money. I don’t think it helps either. Clearly the problem is social.
- All confirmation of the dialogue comes at a particularly tense moment, with the irresistible rise of nationalism, humiliation and extreme authority across Europe.
- really. The extreme right in Sweden was very successful in responding to a kind of general discontent of the people. Simple and wrong answer to a complex problem. The serious thing is that this way of understanding politics has spread to all other political parties which are prisoners of winning elections at any cost.
- A constant in their cinema is the exchange of roles. He has gained expertise in making pleasant situations uncomfortable. His characters are called repeatedly to discuss their identity…
- Yes, I am interested to talk and we talk about identity politics. On the one hand, I think they have opened a debate and fought for equality, let us return to that which is necessary. For example, I believe in the need for quotas and new social models. But on the other hand, exaggerating them leads to nonsense such as hunting down certain groups known simply as predators. I don’t think it is very suitable. Furthermore, I get the impression that a good portion of these policies have been hijacked by some economic force to such an extent that there is something like cynicism disguised as optimism.
- To reassure us, the huge scene where everyone else throws it is special effects, right?
- Half and half. The matter got out of hand.
according to the norms of