There is something deeply satisfying about watching a film like “Sentimental Value” break through in the middle of awards season. On paper, it is a small, intimate Norwegian drama about a fractured family and an aging filmmaker trying to mount one last comeback. In reality, it has become one of the most unexpected and deserved success stories of the year.
Directed by Joachim Trier, the film centers on Gustav, a once-celebrated director who returns home to Oslo with a new script and a singular focus: getting the film made. The script is personal, drawn from family history, and he wants his estranged daughter Nora to star in it. Nora is played by Renate Reinsve, who reunites with Trier after their acclaimed collaboration on “The Worst Person in the World.” The cast also includes Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas and Elle Fanning, rounding out a quartet of performances that give the film its emotional backbone.
At the center is Stellan Skarsgard as Gustav, delivering what may be the defining performance of his career. Skarsgard has long been one of Europe’s most respected actors, moving seamlessly between arthouse cinema and global franchises. In recent years, he has become newly essential to mainstream audiences with his work on “Andor,” where his commanding, morally grounded presence anchored the series. With his Academy Award nomination for “Sentimental Value,” he now finds himself not just admired, but firmly in the center of the awards conversation.
The film’s Oscar run has been nothing short of remarkable. “Sentimental Value” earned nine Academy Award nominations, including recognition for all four principal actors: Skarsgard, Reinsve, Lilleaas, and Fanning. For a modest Norwegian production to land that kind of across-the-board acting recognition is almost unheard of. Add to that its momentum across critics groups and international awards bodies, and it is clear this was not a fluke. The film connected.
What makes it resonate is its restraint. On the surface, the premise suggests a father attempting to repair his relationship with his daughter through art. That is certainly how many viewers read it. The emotional tension begins early, with subtle moments of friction between the sisters and pointed dialogue about who does or does not stand up to their father. Even small exchanges about inherited objects carry the weight of years of unresolved hurt.
But one of the most surprising aspects of my conversation with Skarsgard was learning that he did not approach Gustav as a man trying to reconcile with his daughter. For him, Gustav is first and foremost a monomaniacal director. The film is the obsession. The art comes first. As he told me, “I don’t think he realizes he’s making this film to connect with her. He thinks he’s just making a film and wants her to be in it.” Any emotional repair is secondary, if it registers at all. That interpretation reframes the entire narrative. What might look like a gesture toward connection can just as easily be read as another act of control.
In our conversation, Skarsgard reflects on his approach to Gustav, the psychology of artistic obsession, and why he resisted sentimentalizing a character who may not see himself as flawed at all.
Awards Focus: Stellan, it is a pleasure to see you. Looking back to when Joachim [Trier] and Eskil [Vogt] first brought the role of Gustav to you, what was your initial understanding of the character, and what did you feel you needed to protect about him?
Stellan Skarsgård: What I had to protect was his humanity. I also had to display why he does things, even if he doesn’t know why he’s doing them. He had to have, at his core, a love for his oldest daughter, Nora, and a recognition that she is a mirror of himself in a way—though he isn’t necessarily aware of it. I don’t think he realizes he’s making this film to connect with her. He thinks he’s just making a film and wants her to be in it, but he hasn’t analyzed the fact that he has this alternate motive at the bottom of everything.
AF: If repairing the relationship wasn’t his primary motive, do you believe Gustav at least felt he was helping her, knowing she had struggled with cycles of depression as an adult?
Skarsgård: No, I think he just wanted to make a film. It was very personal, and obviously one of the best scripts he’s ever written. He also thinks he will help her by getting her a role in a big film instead of the TV series she’s doing, but he doesn’t truly understand. The thing with directors is that they can be monomaniacal. They’re obsessed with their art and what they are doing. He doesn’t reflect on the effect this work has on his family, and that is his blind spot. It’s a blind spot many directors have; he is very sensitive when it comes to directing, listening in detail, and observing everything an actress does, but he’s incapable of doing that in his personal life.
AF: Gustav is constantly oscillating between being a father and being a director. Did you approach those as two distinct personas, or were you primarily focused on his identity as a filmmaker?
Skarsgård: The father was secondary. He is their father; there is nothing to be done about that, so he doesn’t have to put energy into it. But he’s making a film and it isn’t working. He doesn’t understand his daughters. It isn’t until the end of the film that he realizes what he has caused and the pain he has inflicted, and that it is totally different for both sisters. I’ve got eight kids; I’ve created different kinds of wounds in them, and they all have different needs.
AF: Are we meant to believe that Gustav favors Nora over Agnes?
Skarsgård: I don’t think so, but he has a much better relationship with Agnes because she isn’t fighting him. But his “twin soul” is, of course, Nora, the artist. She chose to become an actress, whereas the younger sister did not. Agnes went a different way, but she is fantastic because she becomes the center of love for the entire film. Without her, I don’t think they would have ever been able to reach each other.
AF: Agnes essentially forces Nora to read the script, which is a pivotal moment. Having worked with so many legendary directors throughout your career, did any of them specifically influence your portrayal of Gustav?
Skarsgård: No. Of course, I saw the opportunity for revenge by portraying some “assholes” I’ve known, but I didn’t fall into that trap. He is a director, but he could just as well be a painter, an artist, or even a CEO who works too much.
AF: The ending is quite ambiguous. Are we to believe Gustav is documenting history as it happened, or is he rewriting his past? When Nora returns to the room in the film-within-the-film, we don’t see the act of suicide. Were you and the team trying to convey a literal event or a reimagining of his history?
Skarsgård: What she does in the fictional suicide is a description of a woman who can’t take it anymore and takes her life instead. You don’t have to show her hanging there. Earlier, in a rehearsal, he describes how she climbs up, puts the noose around her neck, and then he kicks the stool over. That is how she commits suicide.
AF: Why is it healing for Gustav to revisit those specific memories rather than telling the story in a different way?
Skarsgård: I don’t believe in “healing.” That’s bullshit. People talk about “healing” and “closure,” but that’s all nonsense. You don’t heal; you just get scar tissue. There are always bleeding leftovers. To think you can heal them is a magical way of thinking about life, and I don’t have a magical way of thinking.
The ending is perfectly balanced because it gives you no “happy ending,” but it shows they have experienced something together. You see it in their faces. They look at each other and then look away. On the father’s face, there is a small smile. They’ve moved closer to forgiveness and reconciliation. They haven’t achieved it, because that’s not realistic, but it is something you can hope for. You shouldn’t have absolute goals in life; you should just try to forgive and connect. If you have absolute goals, you’ll never reach them.
AF: That explains my search for an “absolute” ending, whereas the reality is far more subtle, especially that exchange of glances between you and Renate [Reinsve]. How difficult was that to shoot? It seems like you aren’t looking directly at her, so how did you navigate that connection from twenty feet away?
Skarsgård: I look at her, but at first, I’m totally stunned—like, “What the fuck happened?” I’m looking away, and then I look up at her and really connect. She looks at me, and I can see she says something has happened. You don’t know exactly what it is, and when I look away, that small smile comes up. It wasn’t planned in detail; you just give space for those emotions to move through you. You carry the entire history of the film with you. This is the end of the film, so much has happened, and something has moved forward a little. In a way, that makes it a happy ending.
AF: This script is written with incredible restraint. When you first read it, how did you recognize that such a subtle story was something you wanted to take on?
Skarsgård: I wanted to do it precisely because it was so subtle on the page. But it was also dangerous. In the script, it just says they look at each other, and that’s it. The impulse is to have a “movie ending” with a hug, but it’s not that. I said to Joachim from day one that it was a very delicate scene. If you are too relaxed or sweet about it, it becomes unbearable and vulgarizes the whole film. But if you keep the balance, it will be fantastic. He nodded; he knew what he wanted.
AF: You’ve been part of massive franchises like Marvel and Star Wars, yet “Sentimental Value”, a small Norwegian drama has secured four acting nominations, including your own. How do you react to that level of recognition for an ensemble piece?
Skarsgård: It’s amazing. It’s a wonderful thing that they’ve recognized what an ensemble piece this is and how Joachim helped us find a tone where we are all playing in the same key. They don’t see that I’ve made 150 films while others have made one; we are equals. I had a director once, Bo Widerberg, who told me, “I know you know how to do this, but I don’t want to see your fucking tools. I want you to be as good as the amateurs in the film.” I understand exactly what he means. You should not show the tools.
AF: At this stage of your career, what does an Oscar nomination mean to you personally?
Skarsgård: The nomination means a lot to me. It’s fantastic recognition from my peers and everyone in this “circus” that is the film business. Most of all, it’s incredible for the film. Getting nine nominations for a small Norwegian film provides enough attention for it to be seen by people. We are up against films with unlimited resources for publicity and billboards, so this is vital.
AF: “Andor” was one of the best shows of the year, even if its “Star Wars” branding sometimes overshadows the craft. Do you see any similarities between Luthen Rael and Gustav?
Skarsgård: They are very different, but you could point to their monomaniacal dedication. They both have one goal and are absolutely convinced that it is the optimal goal.
AF: Finally, looking back on “Sentimental Value,” is there a specific scene that you’re most proud of, perhaps one that turned out even better than you imagined?
Skarsgård: I’m extremely proud of the ending we’ve discussed; I’m so glad we managed to hit that note. But I also like the scene where Renate and I are standing outside smoking. There is no dialogue, but you can see the connection in our faces—that they are made of the same fabric. Being around three such wonderful actresses was pure joy.
AF: It really is a remarkable film. Congratulations on the project and your nomination. I hope to see you at the Oscars.
Skarsgård: Thank you very much.