Swiss made: Oscar-nominated director Reto Caffi.Lost On the Line
By John Esther
A security guard at a department store, Rolf (Roeland Wiesnekker) spends his days watching others. From the floor to the vantage point of multiple cameras with zoom capabilities, Rolf knows his way around the place. A leader who stays calm when others get out of line, Rolf is a symbol of Swiss security.
Yet love is always a glitch in one’s secure domain. For the lonely Rolf, there moves his co-worker, Sarah (Catherine Janke). Rolf spends a little too much time watching her from the eyes in the sky, but he appears harmless enough.
Off camera, Rolf has three primary opportunities to seduce Sarah. The first one is awkward. The second one is tragic. The third is his response to the first two.
One of five live shorts nominated for an Academy Award, Reto Caffi’s 30-minute On the Line (Auf der Strecke) sets up more than one huge dilemma for his protagonist.
Born, raised and educated in Switzerland, Caffi’s short films have won over 50 awards at festivals. In town for the Academy Awards ceremonies this Sunday, we caught up with Caffi to briefly discuss his short film.
JEsther Entertainment: Why did you want to make this film?
Reto Caffi: It was interesting for me to have an impossible love story, to create a situation where there is no real solution. Do you tell the truth and lose the love of your life? How long can you live with your own guilt? I also like to ask questions and put the viewer on the spot a little bit. With this film you could ask a lot of questions that are all around us without necessarily moralizing.
JE: Which of the characters do you identify with the most and why?
RC: With the tragic hero, Rolf. He’s a good guy and makes one little thing go wrong for very understandable reasons. We have a lot of stories in Switzerland, actually, where somebody is beaten up in a train and 10 people watch. This is a whole topic by itself, but I thought by having the whole love story, him being jealous, it makes it so understandable. I find it very personally easy to identify with him and go with him.
JE: The film begins with him watching a woman and ends with him watching a woman, only to have her turn and look at him/us. What were you trying to say about the male gaze in cinema?
RC: This came in the second [stage]. It deals with the concept of being so close but so very far away. We wanted to reflect that on a visual level. It’s a very contemporary thing, cameras everywhere. Give him a profession where he can do that very naturally, not being a creep; he just uses what he has anyway. On top of that he’s a security guard; he’s trained, which makes it even worse! He’s the guy who definitely could have done something. In the end it was a sense of uniting them, getting a sense of closure, but let the movie resonate with the audience.
JE: It is funny you say he is trained. Time and time again he misinterprets what he sees, thus he fails to act adequately. RC: How many times do we misinterpret what we see? Sometimes it’s not a big deal but, in one case here, it is a big deal. He didn’t want [the man] killed. He could have been the shining hero for the girl.
JE: Instead of looking rather ridiculous in the succeeding comical scene with the conductor (Hansjürg Müller).
RC: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I like this scene. You play with expectations. It provides comic relief. Does this scene actually work for you? In some countries it doesn’t because they don’t have ticket controls. In Switzerland people laugh.
JE: Americans who travel or take the train here get it. How do you think the Oscar nomination has changed your career?
RC: It will definitely get the film and me a lot of attention. But I’m just trying to be realistic. I want to make good films, one after the other. I’m being offered some scripts now, which, to be honest, aren’t very good. When it’s clear whether I am going to do my own script or someone else’s, finances will be easier. The choice and the execution are all up to me.
JE: Do you feel any additional pressure on your next project?
RC: Of course, you want to reach out to an audience. If you want to do something for yourself you can write a diary. If the audiences don’t like it, the critics don’t like it, and it’s a flop, then, of course, I’m going to be devastated. Awards are fine, but the greatness of a film is how people respond.
JE: What is going on in the Swiss film community now?
RC: It’s small. You know the people.
JE: Are there any primary concerns, themes? How does it compare to 10 years ago?
RC: There’s a new generation of Swiss filmmakers. It’s more oriented towards commercial cinema. Sometimes I feel a bit awkward about it, because at the moment, there’s a tendency to copy, to make a Swiss version of Die Hard. It can never be as good; you don’t have $120 million to blow up. In small countries with small budgets you have to make small films about real people. Don’t try to copy the big blockbuster. I feel this is Switzerland’s chance. Denmark is a country that succeeded enormously well in making films without a lot of money, focusing on stories and characters. I don’t want to make silly, stupid films, but I want to entertain people as well and challenge them. You can have both. This is the red line in the middle you have to meet.
JE: And you want to be “on the line”?
RC: [Laughs]. Yes. I’m not really art house. I want peoples’ attention, basically. Getting an Oscar nomination in Switzerland is a big thing. It’s stupid, I don’t want to feel like a candle of hope, but I can feel the enthusiasm for the film.
