Close-up

The Existentialist
Alexander Fehling: not only is he liked, he is loved. However, can he be as good as he appears to be? Text by David Baum Pictures by Julian Broad Translation by Nadja Gartz

There must be some kind of suspense, some kind of spell emanating from him. How else can it be explained that all interviewers return visibly in rapt and some even with a crush from their meetings with Alexander Fehling? Take one colleague from the Sddeutsche Zeitung, for example, who believes to have made out a laser cut, almost pretentious symmetry. Der Tagesspiegel enthusiastically talks about his timbre, as Fehling owns the voice of a seducer one hardly could escape from. Even Rainald Goetz, the author, spotted the young Fehling in this army of performers at Peter Steins Wallenstein project in 2007 and praised him as a strong and determined bloke in Vanity Fair. Alexander Fehling: so handsome, so winning, and so talented. Is it not exhausting to dispense such a projection screen? To always have the audience hearts? Or lets ask him even straighter and more annoyingly; Does it bother you to be so beautiful? It does not. The whole time, Alexander Fehling confidently stood at the counter of the photo studio, located in Saarbrcker Strae in Berlin, sipping on his Crmant, swapped the Louis Vuitton sweater with the Louis Vuitton shirt, joked around with the stylists and in between glamorously posed in front of Julian Broads camera. Everything was perfect, as it always is and now such a crappy question. But he still has something else up his sleeve. He is a really likeable guy. That is so unfair, he shouts, putting on his best puppy-like expression. He hummed and hawed, contemplating an answer perhaps after all and then replied: That is mined territory. I would rather not think about it. However, as an actor, compared to other professions, one naturally is constantly confronted with pictures of oneself. So you cant help but to face it; though appearance is the least I am concerned with. Its rather a question of what all of this has to do with myself.

Not a bad answer. All embarrassments avoided, giving the inquirer the feeling to have been honest without really have given anything away. Acted smartly, and been confident. It is quite obvious why a classy girl like Nora Tschirner had a crush on this guy and both Moritz Bleibtreu and August Diehl not only shoot films with him but are his friends. Why everybody wants him. In short: why this man is considered to be the prototype of the new German film star everyone had longed for so long and who now is to finally be produced on a large scale. One, who speaks English fluently, does not self-consciously fidget on the red carpet, has perfect white teeth, and does not smell as if he had spent the previous night with Rainer Werner Fassbinder. And god, yes, one who can truly act and not only pretends to. And what is, perhaps, most important: one, who wants all of it exactly like this. Alexander Fehling has always wanted. Mostly, in this crucial moment when he went to the casting for Goethe! and was one of the first in line and in whom director Phillip Stlzl obviously found his leading actor only after a few minutes; that there was sitting the young Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. I really and truly wanted this. I had both the Storm and the Stress within myself and I was certain that I can pull this off. Which simply boils down to: I am willing and able to try this. Certainly, failing is a possibility but it is important to have tried. Years earlier, the very first role he played for an amateur theatre, that was giving performances in kindergartens, was the donkey in The Town Musicians of Bremen. From it, he seems to have kept the motto We will always find something better than death, for since then he always performs as if it is about surviving, about convincing. Everybody or nobody. I always need a core. And it is having absolute faith in the idea, the story or the director. If that is the case, almost like a basic sense of trust, I am dashing off; even into the unknown. The unknown, first had been community service in a psychiatry ward, followed by innumerable committees for the admission at drama school, who first refused him until the one from Ernst Busch drama school finally had recognized his talent. Even before graduation he received his first theatre prize by the Berlin Academy of Arts. All major roles he has performed since then have one thing in common: All characters are in existential life situations, in which everything suddenly becomes condensed and offers the opportunity to escape mediocrity. And be it by ones own death. Each one is about making a decision. For example the restless guy he performed in Robert Thalheims And along come Tourists, who does his community service in Auschwitz and tracked down himself. The Wehrmacht soldier Wilhelm in Quentin Tarantinos Inglourious Basterds, who has just become a father but unfortunately is sitting in the wrong place where all hell is about to break loose. Probably the only nice character in this film, which, out of gratitude, is not being scalped but merely shot to death.

Different: the young Goethe who struggles with love and rhyme and lastly gives in to both but not to convention. Or Andreas Bader in If not us, who, who had been portrayed by so many, but here becomes comprehensible as a character as Fehling interprets him before he becomes a leader. Alexander Fehling listened very carefully to this list of roles and

furrowed his brows at the interpretation but then announced: It is true. They all have the courage to do something. It is about making a choice in life. Is it possible that this is his message, one that has not been declared by all the directors and screenwriters but by Alexander Fehling himself? Many are convinced that people of my age and generation have all the opportunities and we only have to decide on what we want to do. I believe this to be only a figment and it shows what kind of ideas and suggestions we are permanently exposed to. First, we are not as free as we like to believe. Second, neither of us has to make decisions of life and death. We are making lots of small chichi decisions. So naturally, there is this yearning for life, for the truly important things. At least in films or on stage should be a room for this, which may also show what could be missing in life.

Nearly everything he says has something existential. Anything else would be beneath him. As an actor you have your script. And it is hardly ever your own. However, this doesnt mean to completely rely on it and get comfortable. This would be dull. I also want to seek the unknown and occasionally leave my comfort zone. Maybe his experience to have lived in the GDR for 8 years shimmers through these statements; to have an inkling of not being free; or at least the awareness of the possibility of a radical change. When he closes his eyes and thinks about the GDR he says that images still emerge, different colours. But that is all. He does remember, though, how his parents, journalists with the Jungen Welt and later with the Berliner Zeitung, have dealt with the ideology; and his grandparents who have believed in the system and struggled to have to give it up. As an actor, is it possible to be political these days? For starters, Fehling returns the question. What is this, being political? Isnt one always? I am not interested in everyday politics and especially not in ideologies. I focus on interpersonal relations, the so-called small stuff. And in politics: institutions, movements, states, nations. After all it is always humans who think, feel and act. Leaving the comfort zone. That sounds exciting. And presumptuous. Especially for such a lucky bloke. He of all people, who at the very start was given the opportunity to play in an Oscar-winning movie and who is seated in the front row at fashion shows. But, as a matter of fact, Fehling got down to business. Even though, after he played Goethe! and after his role as yearning lover in Heinrich Breloers Buddenbrooks, he could have had a brilliant career as the nations womanizer.

By the way, this might not necessarily have been a mistake either. I dont mind great emotions or a light comedy. It doesnt always have to be existential. I simply dont like taboos; to rule out something in advance. But, of course, the next film has an existential touch after all. With a friend, the undergraduate director Jan Zabeil, he takes a chance with the project The River used to be a man and leaves his usual filming comfort zone. All the noise and promises about making a decision and dashing into the unknown Fehling means to keep. This time the nowhere is called Africa and thither he not only ventures as an actor but as utterly himself.

It was a project that could have gone totally wrong and we all paid the price. We have all been quite aware of the facts but were desperate to do it. We had no script, only an idea and a central theme and went through the wilderness with the smallest cast of one actor, one director, one camera man and one man for the sound. The idea was not to go to Africa and implement a script that has been thought up in Germany but to actually learn on location what represents Africa. It was not our intention to be colonists with a camera. And again he is playing this young German at a crossroad, who has reached the foundations of his being and who travels the Okavango delta with a native fisherman, a man of age and wisdom, who shows him this world and then dies, leaving him to cope with this world alone and with a corpse to boot. Indeed, the risk and the challenge seem to have been the attraction for Fehling. Quite different but still with the same subtext is the film he finished together with August Diehl. They have already played in several movies but never had actual scenes together. Well, now they play two guys from the GDR who, at the beginning of the 80s, work in the Rostock harbour and dream of freedom. For them this freedom is out there on the ocean, which is why they want to become sailors. Yet, even there the meanness of the authoritarian snitch state prevails and implants betrayal between the two friends. The title of the film is likely to be No mans land (Niemandsland) which again would be quite fitting to someone who enjoys stepping into the unknown. Alexander Fehling refuses to name a mentor let alone a role model that might have inspired him. He often says that, as a child, he enjoyed watching films with Bud Spencer. This could be taken as an affront. Normally, young actors go into raptures about the grand seigniors they had the privilege to film with. In that respect, Fehling would have a lot to offer. After all was he filming or being on stage with Armin Mueller-Stahl, Klaus Maria Braundauer, Henry Hbchen, Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt. Anything he learned by merely observing? Nope. Empty, reluctant look. In any case, not a complete answer but half the answer. There are many people I admire but I am not emulating anyone. Inspiration: yes. But I am not following suit. Well, then vice versa. Is it his intention to distinguish himself from his older predecessors, to create something completely new, be completely different? Just like his characters often do, perhaps like his classical alter ego Johann Wolfgang von?

Goethe had one advantage: He wasnt obliged to speak into TV mikes. Maybe, nowadays, Goethe would appear in every talk show and get on everybodys nerves. A nice thought, beautiful idea and a humorous image. Fehling is smiling, the image finds his liking. Then he replies: During my work it is hardly ever solutions I am interested in but tasks. Not the answers but the questions. In the end, one leaves the interview as captured as all the others and truly believes to have met the future of German cinema. And exactly as he prefers, more questions than answers remain. One in particular: Is it even possible for someone to meet everything that is expected of him by so many others?