Anke Engelke: “I never took the step to using a smartphone”

On the tenth floor of a Berlin hotel, Anke Engelke enters the room in good spirits, where the interview is to take place. A few sweets are on a table. Anke Engelke sits down on the sofa and begins by asking the interviewer what he thinks of her new film, "Then Life Happens."

Ms. Engelke, I have a little apprehension about our interview.

Why this?

You don't talk about your private life. But your film "Then Life Happens" is about relationships. It will be a delicate balancing act to ask you personal questions, but not too personal ones.

That's right, I don't answer personal questions. But don't worry! We'll figure it out. But first, I'd like to know what you thought of the film?

I think it's a very intense, sometimes even very sad, portrait of two people who have grown apart and for whom – without giving too much away – a pivotal event changes everything. I also like the way the film is told, very calmly. But what do you think of the film?

I'm very happy with the result; I think the film is very well done. And I agree with you: this narrative style can be very satisfying. I think it's important to take your time with a topic like this and not to patronize the audience. I also don't want everything explained to me a hundred times while watching a film, and then have every topic discussed to death at the end. Of course, I'm incredibly curious to see how people in the cinema will receive this style of storytelling.

Since you're already addressing the audience: I would argue that "Then Life Happens" is more of a film for older people. Is it a prerequisite for connecting with the film and the three main characters – father, mother, and adult son – that one has experience with long-term relationships?

Interesting. My initial reaction would have been, no, the film is also suitable for younger people. Of course, no twelve-year-old would watch it, but I think people in their early twenties and up could get something out of it. Nevertheless, I understand your line of reasoning: Have you lived enough? Have you been someone's child long enough? Have you already separated from your parents or from your child?

The film is about an older couple whose relationship has reached a dead end. It's very dark. Have you ever made a film with so much darkness?

No, not that I know of. I acted in a children's film, "Lippel's Dream," a Paul Maar adaptation. The film also had a dark element; in the protagonist's dream world, I played a very evil character. Helmut Dietl also sometimes depicted darkness in his marital drama "On Searching for and Finding Love," using the Greek underworld, after all. But it's never been as dark as this.

One could almost say that the roller shutters play an important supporting role.

These are very relevant; they are extremely important to the film's director, Neele Vollmar. The house also plays a supporting role. The search for a suitable building was very intensive, and Neele let us be a part of it: Which house will it be, which house will we get?

Unlike shutters in countries like Italy, which open fully and let in light immediately, roller shutters allow light to enter the room gradually. Was that important?

Absolutely. Hans mentions "those damn roller shutters" at one point. Rita, on the other hand, is firstly a staunch energy saver, and secondly, it means a lot to her to ease into the day. And to ease into the day. That says a lot about her as a person. That's why she goes swimming. She swims her laps slowly to maintain her inner peace. That's why Rita doesn't go jogging. I've had to jog in so many films. But because of that, I've also been able to buy a lot of running shoes from the respective productions for half price…

Rita and Hans have been living together for over 30 years. Based on your own experiences and observations: Is it inevitable that after such a long time, people eventually just live side by side?

I didn't do intensive research for this film, following the motto: "I can only play this role if I've talked to a certain number of older, married couples." I had many conversations with Neele, and the three of us rehearsed extensively with my co-star Ulrich Tukur. Otherwise, I was able to draw on my own observations, and I'm left with the unsatisfying conclusion that I'm familiar with both perspectives.

Namely?

I know couples who have been together for a very long time, who have settled into a comfortable routine, but no longer feel any closeness to each other. It's like Rita and Hans. But I also observe the other extreme. I know couples who have something symbiotic about them. But not in the negative sense in which the word is often used. Rather, these couples live together; they don't just reside together, they truly live together. And you can tell that they need each other to thrive. I think that's wonderful.

Is relationship work – a terrible word – always necessary to maintain a good relationship?

Of course, there are relationships where everything just flows smoothly. But I think in most cases, relationship work is necessary. You have to check in with yourself every now and then: Is this okay for you? Is it alright the way things are going in our relationship right now? If so, why? If not, why not? Why doesn't it feel good to you right now? Why aren't you happy right now? That's all relationship work.

Is it important for relationships to ask each other questions?

Yes. Absolutely! And not just always the question: Are you happy right now? But also exploring everyday life: Who was your meeting with today, and how was it? You were a little nervous beforehand, weren't you? And then, of course, as a partner, returning the favor. Ideally, this isn't some kind of planned inquiry, but genuine interest. At best, a real conversation develops from this. But we're talking a lot about traditional relationships here, like the one Rita and Hans have. I'm also fascinated by modern approaches.

Which ones do you mean?

I often find it very beautiful to observe, very beautiful to experience, how freedom is defined in some relationships. I also enjoy observing open relationships. I know of a three-way relationship now, two men and a woman, who have a child together. It's working perfectly, I really like that.

In open relationships, it's even more important to talk to each other a lot.

Yes, they talk. And talk. I couldn't stand it. But it's going great. It makes you happy for the child.

Should you share everything in a relationship, discuss everything?

That's the question: What do I actually want to know? I think that's something you should clarify early on. Do I really want to know everything about my partner's past relationships? I, for example, am always interested in experiences from school: What was school like for my partner, and so on—I find that extremely important. That's why I also find class reunions incredibly fascinating.

What also becomes clear is the relationship between Rita and Gitti, who are colleagues but also share a friendship. For some people, friends have become a substitute for family, sometimes even a substitute for romantic relationships. What do friendships mean to you?

I have two best male friends and a favorite female friend; we're very close. All three are incredibly important people in my life. Definitely! They know everything about me. But I think it's wrong to compare or judge romantic relationships and friendships. Friendships have changed in recent years, migrating into the digital world.

What's barely mentioned in the film are cell phones. These days, you often read about young people saying goodbye to their smartphones and buying so-called dumbphones…

… Dumbphones?

Phones that can do nothing except make calls and send text messages, which are therefore "dumb".

I'm a specialist in this area because I've never owned a smartphone, only used simple old Nokia phones. I still get asked this a lot: How do you manage? My answer: I don't know any different, so it's not some great achievement, no heroic feat or superpower. I simply feel comfortable without a smartphone.

Do you feel no limitations when almost everyone else around you owns and uses a smartphone?

I don't want it, which is why I've never taken the step to getting a smartphone. I don't want to be constantly available, nor do I want the constant interaction with the phone. And I don't want to negotiate everything immediately. If you send me an email, you know there won't be a reply right away because I can't read it while I'm out. You'll have to wait until the evening when I'm back at my laptop, or even until the next day if, for example, I'm on a train and turn on my laptop there. It's certainly a privilege that people I'm related to or friends with are okay with this. The feedback I often get is: "I wish it were like that." But apparently, it's too difficult to implement.

There is currently a lot of discussion about banning mobile phones in schools. Do you think this makes sense? Or should children also learn media literacy in schools?

Then I'll choose option B. Smartphones don't only have disadvantages. We shouldn't demonize them either; I'd be careful about that. I wouldn't demonize social media either, because a lot of remarkable things happen there that are essential, right, and good. However, I would wish for a world where people talk to each other more, are interested in each other, and take time for each other. A smartphone often suggests that you gain time.

Which is completely untrue.

No. I haven't noticed anywhere that people have more free time thanks to their smartphones. Instead, I'm often the only one who has the time, who takes the time and leisure to read books, have conversations, listen, or even just keep quiet – and sometimes not know something. There's a lot I don't know. I'm unfamiliar with many phenomena that are hot topics online. But I survive this lack of knowledge. It doesn't make me outdated or uninformed. I have other sources. I simply find reading more interesting than swiping on a smartphone.

You're currently featured in Deutsche Bahn's marketing campaign, "Boah, Bahn" (Wow, Rail). You even completed an internship at the railway company for it. Why is it important to you to improve the company's image?

I hadn't really thought of it that way before the internship; my main goal was to study and understand the atmosphere on the trains. The suggestion that the train staff should be insulted less has nothing to do with image: I would simply appreciate it if we treated each other more politely and if the company could ensure punctuality.

Do you understand the critics who are now saying: A little humor and a campaign like this won't improve anything; the company should instead address problems like the massive delays seriously?

Sure. If I miss my holiday flight because trains are cancelled, or I don't make it to the family celebration on time, even funny train commercials won't help.

Will the campaign continue? Will you keep going?

I definitely have ideas and enthusiasm; the collaboration was fantastic.