Review of René (2008) by Frances S — 28 Sep 2008

It took a while for this documentary to grow on me. Rene is a familiar character, both intelligent and incredibly stupid, unable to get his life on track. He first went into gaol at the age of 15, for petty crime, and then became habituated to life in prison. Apparently the documentary started being filmed in the late 80s as part of a series of documentaries on young Czech people from different backgrounds. Rene was the token young criminal. Over the years (and with regime change), Helena Trestikova lost funding for that particular documentary, but found Rene interesting enough to want to follow him further. Rene also maintained contact with her via letters - he said later in the film that perhaps he was in love with her when he was young.

At first I wondered why Rene was interesting at all. He was just a young, fresh-faced petty criminal with a sense of entitlement and a chip on his shoulder. In 1990, he robs Helenaâ??s flat. Eventually, as Rene becomes an adult with a throaty, chainsmokerâ??s voice and is covered in prison tatts (including the wonderful â??fuck of peopleâ?? around his neck), he develops an intelligence and a poetry. With Helenaâ??s help he has two books published and starts to achieve a strange kind of fame. His stints in gaol and out of gaol begin to be recorded by the media.

Life in gaol has a timeless, listless quality, and the passage of time is marked only by the swearing in of different presidents, the revolution (most definitely televised), and the break-up of Czechoslovakia. Rene happily poses for glamour shots of himself keening for freedom, balanced on windowsills with his face turned to the sky, showing his tatts and looking mean, looking breakable and sick (he is later diagnosed with multiple sclerosis) over cups of stupidly strong tea, each at different stages of his life. Eventually the documentary becomes a documentary not on the passage of a writer/thinkerâ??s life (as the description optimistically states) but as a study of manipulation (on both sides) and the relationship between a documentary filmmaker and a documentary subject.

In the Q&A, Helena Trestikova, who is clearly much loved by the audience and was apparently a member of Parliament at some stage, seemed to dodge these questions (although I only heard her answers in halting translation) but in the documentary itself it is definitely the most interesting theme. The moments when Rene becomes self aware, decides to stop performing his role of disaffected, value-free social outcast, are touching - â??I would have been nothing without youâ??, he tells Helena. He can also be very bitter towards her at times, accusing her of ruining his life, of making him vulnerable, of putting his life on display, of buying him from himself because he had no other choice but to sell himself to her for her creative use. As the film progresses it seems more and more like a dysfunctional love relationship, at least on his side. Helena tries her best to keep a professional distance but is ultimately unable to maintain objectivity. Her defensive voice from behind the camera, with the tremble in it when she tells him he mustnâ??t come to her home, or tries to answer an intimate question diplomatically, is fascinating and terrifying. Movies have been made on this theme, of getting too close to the subject, I know, but to see it in action is something else entirely. A really amazing documentary.