The Norwegian director made his entry in the privileged club of Palme d’or contenders with his first English language film Louder than Bombs that had its world premiere on Monday at Cannes’ Grand Théâtre Lumière. The director spoke to us ahead of the screening.

How do you feel about being wrapped in the Norwegian flag and carrying the weight of your nation in Cannes?
Joachim Trier: It reminds me the moment in James Joyce’s novel The Dubliners when a man stands on a chair and says ‘I am a nation!! It’s always complicated the idea of a film being a national film or representing a nation. I grew up in Norway so obviously that has influenced my way of telling stories in ways I’m probably not aware of myself. But ultimately a story remains something very personal. I actually studied film in the UK so it was natural to film in English. Then I went back to Norway where I made two films. The irony is that you can be culturally specific and still tell universal stories. For instance I’ve had people from New York or Tokyo who told me they could recognise themselves in Oslo, August 31st because of the specificity of the story. So I think the concept of nationality is very complex. That said, it is of course an honour to represent Norway in competition and I’m embracing the celebrations that come with it. 

You mentioned in a previous interview that Woody Allen is your hero. Did you meet him in Cannes?
JT:
No I didn’t see him but I bumped into his cinematographer Darius Khondji whom I know. We were both shooting in 35mm, using the same lab in New York but when we left unfortunately it closed down. Going back to Woody Allen yes I’m a huge fan of his and in a way Louder than Bombs is also inspired by his more dramatic works such as Interiors or Another Woman.

Your first two films focused on people in their early 20s (Reprise) and in their 30s (Oslo, August 31st), whereas Louder than Bombs is cross-generational, featuring family ties and interrelations. How did you and Eskil Vogt come up with this idea?
JT:
I think it started with many small ideas and finally turned into a family story. We wanted to make a film about identity, memory and the sense of togetherness in a modern family. How do we communicate and find a shared narrative in a family when we relate to each other and our past so differently? In this case the story starts three years after the mother has passed away. The father Gene has to grapple not with the immediate loss, but with the aftermath and existential implications of grief.

Did you have the actors in mind when you wrote the script with Eskil, such as Isabelle Huppert?
JT:
The characters have to be abstract as an idea and then you go about finding the right actor to fit that character and then again we rewrite when we’ve cast to fit it even more, so it’s a back and forth process. Concerning Isabelle Huppert, I had met her at the Stockholm Film Festival in 2011 when I received the Golden Horse Award and she was given an Honorary Award. We stayed in touch and suddenly I realised when the story developed that she would be perfect.

For your first English language film with star actors and a bigger budget, did you feel more pressure to deliver and was it harder to impose your vision?
JT:
I’ve always been a final cut director and will always want to be. That has a lot to do with the trust between the actors and me. I take care of the rushes and of the actors’ personal input in the film. With the financiers I had a similar relationship built on trust and we all worked towards the same goal. There was never any conflict of any sort.

Just like with your two earlier works, you play with the film medium and use a non-linear structure for the storyline…
JT: A lot of what I do is intuitive, and I’m a true believer of free form. I think it’s very easy to get stuck within certain narrative conventions at the moment. There is a kind of expected way of doing things. But I never think of my films in terms of genre or expected norm.  To get into the head of a character, into their thinking, sometimes it’s good to come up with alternative ways than just dialogue scenes. Louder than Bombs does have a lot of dialogue too, but it’s interesting to follow patterns of thought, use montage scenes, voice over etc. Just like with Reprise, it’s a bit like a scrap book idea, a sequential movie. I love borrowing from the literary world and enjoying the freedom I find in novels, where you can come and go freely within the story. 

What’s your next project?
JT: With Eskil, we’re working on a Norwegian language film and we will shoot next year. We also have an international film in preparation but I think the Norwegian film will happen first.  

What are your views on today’s theatrical market that tends to be polarised between auteur films for the arthouse circuit and big budget mainstream movies?
JT
: Big commercial successes come and go, but auteur cinema can strive only if there is political support allowing filmmakers to explore their art with proper budgets. My worry is that everyone believes that personal movies can be made for no money while big budget movies are mainstream films. First of all a mainstream film can be personal as well, carry a director’s vision and do well in the marketplace. These days people watch TV series, they want character-driven dramas. We just have to make sure we make good versions of that for the big screen as well. There are many ways to tell intimate stories for a wider audience on the big screen and I love that!