On paper, his new film, ‘Pacifiction’, tells of a French politician stationed in Tahiti who gradually succumbs to nuclear paranoia, but anyone who knows the previous work of the director from Banyoles will sense that this description in no way does justice to the experience that seeing it provides the viewer. It is, by far, the most radical and intrepid of all the fictions that this year aspire to the Palme d’Or. What will the jury that this year is chaired by actor Vincent Lindon think of it? It only takes a few hours for us to find out.
Why did you choose ‘Pacifiction’ as the international title of the film?
It’s a no-brainer. The title is a contraction of the words Pacific and fiction, and the film is a fiction set in the Pacific Ocean. I confess that I have not worried about the title of the film or the design of the poster or the credits. I am responsible for all the images in your footage, from the first to the last, but nothing else. At one point during the production I came up with a title that I found interesting, ‘Ultramerde’, which combined the words overseas and ‘merde’ [en francés, mierda]. Of course, she didn’t like it.
Would you say it is your most elaborate film?
Yes, on a narrative and thematic level it is more ambitious, or maybe it is better to say that my previous films are more conceptual and more closed in on themselves. ‘Pacifiction’ is more free and crazy. Transit through different themes, tones and atmospheres; and also, in its own way, it touches on a very topical topic: the ever-increasing distance that separates ordinary people from the powerful that rule the world.
The protagonist of the film is situated between both extremes…
Exactly, he is a politician who speaks and behaves spontaneously, and not like a robot. In general, political leaders never say what they really think, they never deviate from the slogans of the program, the party, the government. They are like talking machines. If the populists are so successful lately it is because they at least break the monotony.
Why did you decide to shoot in French Polynesia?
Because setting the film in an urban environment, such as Paris, seemed very boring and very bourgeois to me. Spending in Tahiti gives it an exoticism, an artifice and a very interesting mystery. And shooting it there helped give it the same purity and innocence that all of my cinema has.
Do you consider yourself a pure and innocent filmmaker?
Of course. Those qualities are essential for an auteur film director. My films are increasingly sophisticated and refined but, at the same time, in all of them they avoid any form of reflection. When a film ceases to be innocent, clichés, posturing and falsehood take over, and these are essential ingredients in most of today’s cinema.
I am not interested in controlling what happens, I prefer to cause lack of control
The film talks about the dark side of power. How do you deal with the power that, as a director, you have on the set?
I have always thought that all of us who participated in the filming should have a good time. For this reason, during it I like to generate a certain chaos in different ways; for example, giving a little alcohol to the actors, I don’t know. It’s more fun. I think my best qualities as a director come out in the midst of chaos. What I try to create during the shoot is not progression but destruction, making arbitrary decisions, and leaving no room for self-censorship or political correctness. I am not interested in controlling what happens, I prefer to cause lack of control.
What is the position that you think you occupy in Spanish cinema?
I think I am like the Mother Teresa of Calcutta of Spanish cinema, because I give a lot and receive very little. Really, I feel that I am very generous, because my films cost the industry very little money and, in return, give it a lot of prestige. It is just the opposite that happens with all those productions that receive a lot of public money for their financing and neither go to festivals nor attract a single spectator to the cinema.
Competing is good if you end up winning. If you don’t win, the truth is, it’s not so funny
‘Pacifiction’ is the fifth of your films to participate in the Cannes Film Festival, but the first to compete for the Palme d’Or. How do you feel about that?
I don’t have much to say about it. I have not chosen to compete this year, just as I have not chosen not to compete with my previous films. And competing is good if you end up winning. If you don’t win, the truth is, it’s not so funny.
It is an eminently French film but, if it ends up winning the Palme d’Or, from Spain it will be sold as a triumph of Spanish cinema…
The film is a co-production, yes. Most of the funding comes from France, and most of its actors are French. But, on the other hand, all the heads of the technical team are Catalans, my friends. I think it no longer makes sense to talk about nationalities when making films. In the field in which I work, the label ‘Spanish cinema’ has lost all meaning. And, in any case, I am not worried about what is said about my cinema. Doing so would kill my creativity.
I have six books written by Michael O’Leary, the CEO of Ryanair, I must be the only person in the world
And what, or who, stimulates your creativity?
Very different people, like Dalí and Karl Lagerfeld. Also Michael O’Leary, the CEO of Ryanair.
Related news
How do you say?
Yes, I have six books written by O’Leary, I must be the only person in the world. He is a guy who has always done what he wanted, who has laughed in the face of ministers and even the president of his own country, Ireland, and who has turned his company into the airline with the most passengers in Europe showing at all times that his customers do not give a damn. That has a lot of merit. I’m not saying that I don’t give a damn about the spectators, I worry about offering them something that allows them to monetize the 10 euros they pay for the ticket. But, as I say, I make movies to have fun.