Swedish writer-director Ruben Östlund is famous for making wonderfully outrageous movies as well as sweeping top international awards. Last year, he joined the exclusive club of directors who have won two Palme d'Ors (for The Square in 2017 and Triangle of Sadness in 2022), the highest award at the Cannes Film Festival. This year, he is returning there as the first Swedish Cannes jury president since Ingrid Bergman in 1973. Triangle of Sadness, Östlund’s most commercially successful film, was released in India this week by Impact Films. A biting social satire, Triangle of Sadness explores the politics of beauty and privilege. When Carl and Yaya, influencers and fashion models, get the opportunity to travel free on a luxury cruise, they find arms dealers and an oligarch as their co-passengers. The situation goes out of control when the cruise is hit by a storm. After some passengers find themselves stranded on an island, their roles and social status are rejigged. The 48-year-old, who has also made much talked-about movies like Involuntary (2008) and Force Majuere (2014), speaks about being an agitator, cinema being a collective experience and the 'trouble wrinkle' as a starting point for the story. Excerpts: Triangle of Sadness is a scathing commentary on capitalism and class. How do you see yourself – provocateur, social scientist or story-teller? I think 'agitator' is a good word to describe someone who is trying to shake things up and make us look at things from a different perspective. I grew up in a family where there were a lot of discussions about issues. My mother is a painter. My great grandfather was one of the founders of the Swedish art collective Halmstadgruppen. I have been brought up with the idea that art should make us explore new thoughts instead of promoting the existing one. If provocation is needed for this, then you have to use it. What are your thoughts on the movie finally releasing in Indian theatres? I really wanted to make a movie that people watch together in theatres. Cinema offers a social experience, completely different from sitting alone with your phone. I had a fun year promoting the film. You are in the exclusive club of directors who have won two Palme d'Ors. What next? Winning one Palme d'Or put pressure on me. Winning the second for Triangle of Sadness took away the pressure. Instead, it created a dream that maybe I can win three Palme d'Ors in a row. So, my next goal is to win the third one – something no other director has ever achieved. At the Oscars, Triangle of Sadness is nominated in three prime categories (best picture, director and original screenplay). What are your thoughts? I am happy to be in the same room with other nominated filmmakers. The problem with Oscars is that when you are nominated and don't win, you have to spend the following year taking care of other people who are sad about it. It's like going for a funeral. Unfortunately, our chances of winning are quite slim this time. So, I am preparing myself for one year of receiving sad reactions (laughs). Where did the title Triangle of Sadness come from? The idea of the film started when I was talking to my wife (fashion photographer Sina Görcz) about her profession. She told me about models who came from different sections of the society. Their beauty was a ticket to climb the social ladder. I got very interested in that aspect of beauty. She told me about her friend who was on a date with a plastic surgeon, who commented that she had a deep 'triangle of sadness', referring to the area between her eyebrows. He assured her that it can be fixed with the help of botox. In Swedish, this is called 'a trouble wrinkle' and you get it when you are troubled by something. What the doctor suggested sounded like an American approach, as if by fixing the surface one can fix what's wrong inside. The ending of Triangle of Sadness is one of the most debated sequences. What's your take? The ending was conceived very early. I was inspired by sociology where we identify a situation but don't point our finger at any individual. I wanted to end the scene in a dilemma where Abigail (the toilet manager of a luxury yacht who is the only one with survival skills and becomes the captain of those stranded on an island) had the possibility of killing another human being to maintain her position or change her mind and lose the position. I wanted half of the audience to say Abigail should kill her and the other half to say she should not. I wanted us to identify with the materialistic circumstances rather than with a good or bad character. Now that you use English as the language of your films, do you miss the Swedish nuances? Yes, I do. But I am getting better at English as I speak to my wife in it. Something I enjoy while talking in English is that I have to cut out the bullshit. While speaking in Swedish, I could be a master at manipulating. To do that in English, I should have the ability and understanding of the language. So, I have to be honest while talking in English. Editing the 15-minute scene, when the passengers get seasick and throw up, took about six months. Are you finicky as a filmmaker? My mother would spend at least half a year on one painting. She would sit under the fluorescent light or in darkness, and paint everyday. The idea is to reach the goal of what you think is right; it's a long journey. When you are in creative control, you should present it the way you visualised it even if it takes a long time to achieve it. How closely do you work with your cast? I use improvisation during the writing process. I ask the actors what they would do if they were dealing with that situation. Once the camera setting changes, then there is no improvisation.
