German painter Albert Oehlen takes a jab at the art world – and himself – in Bad Painter [+lire aussi :
critique
bande-annonce
interview : Albert Oehlen
fiche film], which world-premiered in the Big Screen Competition at IFFR. Starring singer Kim Gordon, Michael Chow and Udo Kier – the latter cast as Oehlen himself, or at least as a version of him – it shows a man desperately looking for meaning. But it doesn’t come easily.

Cineuropa: I didn’t expect you to actually mock yourself in the film. What made you want to do it?
Albert Oehlen: I was driven by all of these clichés about “genius” artists. It was fun to play around with this contrast because this character, played by an actor, is obviously not me. There’s so little connection to my actual personality, so I did whatever came to my mind. It has nothing to do with me, or at least not too much.

It’s good to hear you’re not walking around shooting dogs, for example. But one also recognises many interactions here, like the one between the artist and the journalist. Do you value them, or are you tired of them?
I’m fine with them. Most of them are good – the only annoying thing is when it gets really boring or when I have to repeat myself. Otherwise, I enjoy it. Normally, I refuse to explain my work as a painter, but I like to talk about the impulses I have and the decisions I make. I can say what triggered me – that’s easy.

The film’s Oehlen has to deal with some vile criticism. One person compares his work to the “vomit of a lesbian”.
Someone said that to me once. It was interesting. It was obviously meant to sound nasty, but if your aim was to paint something that actually resembles that, how would it look? Now that’s something I can work with, as a painter.

The first film I was involved in, Der Mahler, started out as a documentation of my process. Then director Oliver Hirschbiegel said: “Look, we have a movie.” He said it – not me. We finished it, and step by step, all of these things came together. With this one, I didn’t do any casting. Charlotte Taschen is an actress and a good friend, and my wife told me to hire her – she plays Oehlen’s way-too-young girlfriend. His housekeeper/assistant works for us, too, and the fitness trainer is the guy who came by to keep me fit. I’ve known Udo for a long time because he’s in the art world as well. Maybe 30 years ago, he said to me: “If you ever make a movie one day, I’d like to be in it.” I remember that very well because back then, I thought: “What would I do with an actor? I am no director.” And then suddenly I was, by accident.

When you hear “Udo Kier”, you expect something crazy. You allow him to be subtle or even sweet, like when he sings, “Happy birthday to myself.”
That scene was all him. Udo’s one of the nicest people I’ve ever met. At first, the film wasn’t supposed to end up in that horror zone. It came much later, but once it happened, I realised Udo always plays a villain. I didn’t want that. I wanted him to be a victim, just to break up the routine.

The whole story is about having problems and solving them. You see a painting being created in front of you, and it’s a real thing – I wanted to capture every move and every brushstroke. You mostly see my hand in these scenes, but on day four, I realised it was ugly. I didn’t like my own painting [laughs]. I really didn’t see that coming. Luckily, once I added horror-like elements, things started to be fun again.

In most films, the contemporary art world is usually the butt of most jokes. Did you also want to point out things you don’t like? After all, you are in the middle of it.
This kind of mockery usually fails, apart from maybe in The Square [+lire aussi :
critique
bande-annonce
interview : Ruben Östlund
fiche film]. I didn’t like the film itself, but its observations of the art world were so precise and its criticism really sharp. I’m inside of it, that’s true, and I can make fun of myself. I can have this actor repeat my name, saying: “I am Albert Oehlen and I’m the greatest.” That was fun [laughs]. As artists, we really are put in the situation where we say we’re geniuses. It’s ridiculous and embarrassing. Still, you need that attitude – otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to do the things we do. We wouldn’t dare.

Throughout our conversation, you have been saying you are a painter, not a filmmaker, but it feels like you were still trying to make an entertaining film.
I’m not an expert in entertainment. I don’t know how to keep people in their seats; I just put things together, the things I enjoy, not knowing what will come out at the end. I’m sure a big part of the film industry is all about finding ways to entertain people. I’m not there: I am too old for that. I can only be myself and entertain myself. And then I see if I can share it with others.