Con-man? (Spoilers)

I read very little about this movie before seeing it just I didn't have any preconceived notions, but I did notice more than review referring to the lead man as a "con-man".

I think they are using that term awfully loosely. I personally would describe him as a hired performance artist/actor/hit-man, but I might have to leave off the hit-man part to avoid spoilers.

Do you describe him as a con-man? If so why?

An accepted, slightly strict definition, is somebody who swindles other people through confidence. And I just don't see how that applies here.

The first segment, looks like he's a con-man, but we don't see him making any money from it, so he didn't actually swindle anybody.

The artistic movement segment, is way more of a performance artist than as a con-man.

The crazy person/model shoot segment, if we knew what his gain was, he could conceivably be a con-man there, but again, I would call him a performance artist.

The segment where he killed a guy, he's a hit-man. Plain and simple. And that's where I could no longer accept people calling him a con-man.

The father-daughter segment and the dying old man segment, he's an actor. Plain and simple.

I just don't see how people can get away with calling him a con-man. It doesn't even work past the begging old lady segment since he doesn't actually swindle anybody.