 |
Czech Documentary
Witnesses of Intermittent Time
1
The film tradition in the Czech lands is quite old, with the first films dating
back to 1898. Systematic documentary activities began in the mid-twenties, when
periodical film documents - newsreels - began appearing consistently. As early
as the beginning of the 1930s, documentary films bore the specific signatures
of their authors and gradually won appreciation as a full-fledged branch of the
both the film industry and film art.
After the war, however, the destiny of Czech documentary came under the sway
of politics. All professional cinematography was quickly nationalized in 1945
and the communist coup of 1948 was followed by the merciless dictates of communist
ideology. The result was a rapid devastation of the values created during the
long tradition of the Czech state, especially during the years of the democratic
interwar Czechoslovak Republic. The continuity of the development of Czech cinematography
was disrupted. Centralized production of documentaries, monopolized by the state,
was relegated to the field of political propaganda. Inevitably, feature film also
sank into a deep subjective and moral crisis, with its main role becoming that
of more or less refined and concealed servility to communist ideology.
During the 1950s, Czech culture was dealt a couple of severe blows which,
of course, did not spare cinematography. In later years, the communist regime
tried to somewhat improve its badly damaged reputation in the eyes of the world,
but evident processes of democratization were not observed until the mid-sixties.
This trend culminated at the end of the decade: the Communist Party remained in
full power, but cultural and social life was, at the same time, undergoing a remarkable
revival.
Despite the brevity of the period of relative freedom, an immediate impact
was made in Czechoslovakia by various sectors of the artistic community, such
as several generations of graphic artists who until then had experienced no possibility
of openly confronting their works, a strong rank of theater artists and writers,
and last but not least, the emergence of the New Wave generation of Czech filmmakers.
These Prague Film Academy (FAMU) graduates were mostly feature film directors
(Vera Chytilova, Jiri Menzel, Evald Schorm, and others) and did not exert much
influence on documentary in the 1960s. Nevertheless, New Wave film work was, as
a whole, a rare liberated and inspired contribution to film history. It is neither
the fault nor the merit of the New Wave that it has often served as a kind of
emblem of the so-called "Prague Spring," that short season of "socialism with
a human face."
2
In the Czech environment, 1960s documentary film became a very popular and attractive
form with the public. Complying with the general trend towards social criticism,
documentarists started embarking on more profound analyses of the state of society,
its traumas and concerns. It is mainly in this respect that enhanced social sensitivity,
one of the main features of Czech documentary, is so evident. Czech documentarists
started being more interested in the life attitudes and views of young people
and began availing themselves of the broad opportunities offered by film language.
In 1963, for example, Raduz Cincera, inter alia also the author of several
multimedia projects, made the captivating Romeo and Juliet '63 (1963),
a concise document of the creative tension accompanying the birth of a modern
staging of Shakespeare's classic. In the same emphatic way in which the final
production addressed the young generation, Cincera's film became a sensitive recording
of the spirit of the time. Cincera's Mist ("Mlha," 1966) is, on the other
hand, a purely metaphorical reflection of the contemporary world, where the mediated
atmosphere of a small Prague intellectual theater dominates excellently over the
existentialist haze of the day (the current Czech President Vaclav Havel may be
observed during the rehearsals of a new play).
Jan Spata has been one of the best known documentarists since the sixties.
He first made a marked contribution as a cameraman and then soon developed into
an artist with a typical style. The Greatest Wish ("Nejvetsi prani," 1964)
was a significant feat, a film that used a sociological approach in which the
filmmaker did a survey of young people by posing of them a seemingly simple question
(which also served as the title of the film). Spata asserted a pure film talent
that involved a feeling for economy of expression and details of meaning. He returned
to the subject of the young twenty-five years later with The Greatest Wish
II. That was in 1989 and thanks to that film, Spata found himself in the role
of chronicling the tense, revolutionary atmosphere of that particular year.
In Respice finem (1967), Spata observed the lives of solitary widows.
He let them narrate their story of waiting for death, a tale which for them was
not only about resignation but also about hope. Spata sought out strong emotional
themes for his later works as well. The ethical tone and emotional charge of his
films about ill and disabled people can, however, lead Spata into sentimentality.
This is evident in his work in the seventies and eighties, when he became a captive
of his own skill.
The films of Karel Vachek are marked by a different style, one less "pretty"
than that of Spata. Vachek's Moravian Hellas ("Moravska Hellas," 1963)
is at once about the magic of village folklore and at the same time its grotesque
commercialization. In 1968, Karel Vachek made a full-length document, Elective
Affinities ("Sprizneni volbou," 1968) about the election of the new Czechoslovak
president and the ambient political climate. He thus was able to film a unique
historical report about the very essence of politics in spite of the communist
regime in power at the time, actually recording in film the prelude to the Prague
Spring.
This short period of a certain kind of liberalization had a tragic end: the
occupation of Czechoslovakia by the armies of the Soviet Union and other Soviet-bloc
European countries. In August 1968, when Soviet tanks invaded Prague and the entire
republic, there were several filmmakers who, on their own and under the barrels
of tanks and machine guns, managed to shoot film evidence of the tragic impact
of this historical paradox and of the human suffering which was to be its consequence.
We had to wait another two decades before being able to view this testimony. And
yet, after all these years, documents like Evald Schorm's Confusion ("Zmatek,"
1968) have not lost their authentic, emotive force. Not only because the country's
fatal historical experience could somehow be squeezed into a short film form,
but also because the director did not succumb to the pathos of the moment and
forget to be a filmmaker, a documentarist. Even at such a moment, the strength
of the Czech documentary tradition was manifest in the linking of a powerful ethical
theme with professional purity and creative invention.
The years that followed, officially called the period of normalization, brought
a new wave of repression, the strengthening of ideological doctrine, and further
demoralization of the entire society. The lack of freedom was disguised by an
appearance of economic prosperity and social stability. After the upsurge at the
end of the sixties, Czech documentary plunged into a deep crisis. As in all other
fields, cinematography too experienced widespread purges which affected not only
the positions of power and decision-making, but all creative professions.
3
The continuous development of Czech cinematography was disrupted in all spheres
at the beginning of the seventies. Documentary film art, which had until recently
touched on the discovery of national roots, its rise and fall, revealing the painful
topics of individual and group history, was once again reduced to a servant role.
The monopoly of state cinematography, managing relatively large funds, was not
to be cast in doubt. These funds were, of course, used to eulogize the regime,
as was most apparent in the documentary field in the film newsreels screened in
cinemas before the main feature. The aims of propaganda and total ideologization
sometimes shifted documentary reporting to unintended, grotesque plains.
Marxist ideology enforced by the state made many topics taboo. It forced artists
who did not want to officiate directly in the celebration of the ruling regime
and its leaders to pick up escapist themes. For example, director Drahomira Vihanova,
who managed to complete her first full-length feature after the Soviet occupation,
could return to the filmmaking profession only after many years of enforced silence,
and that "only" to make documentaries. Her documentaries were, for instance, about
the work of the chief engineer at a coal mine (A Day of the Chief Engineer
("Den hlavniho inzenyra," 1981)), the canteen operations at a nuclear power plant
(Dukovany, a Boiling Cauldron ("Dukovany, vrouci kotel," 1987)), or a team
of harvester drivers. Vihanova, however, approached these not very attractive
assignments with full responsibility and great film talent. She spent a lot of
time first with her "protagonists," and then in the editing room later. Whatever
the topic, she always devoted all possible effort to her films, and the outcome
was a lively testimony, even today, of human striving, obsession with one's job,
as well as the fragility of inter-human relations.
Certain documentary elements have been manifest in the films of Vera Chytilova
since the beginning of the 1960s. In the seventies, when her activities were greatly
restricted, she made the documentary Time is Merciless ("Cas je neuprosny,"
1978), in which she portrayed several old people who, in various ways, were trying
to come to terms with their fate. The director lets them speak authentically,
but at the same time inserts various associative images that proliferate and stratify
the film statement.
Czech documentary art of the 1970s, and especially that of the 1980s, was
marked by a high professional aptitude. Annual short documentary film production
climbed into the hundreds and from time to time controversial subjects appeared
in this medium, one which had to fight a difficult battle with the "non-existent"
censorship of the time. A number of skilled artists who, for political or ideological
reasons, could not work in feature film or television, found a vent for expression
in the documentary sphere. Documentary films made on 16mm and 35mm stock were
a regular supplement to cinema film shows. In those days, television did not yet
broadcast film documents to such a large degree.
During the eighties, several extraordinary documentary projects managed to
be realized. First of all was a long-term cycle of documentary films by director
Helena Trestikova (made in 16mm and later distributed to cinema houses on 35mm)
called Marital Studies ("Manzeleske etudy"). The author worked with six
young husband and wife pairs for a period of six years. She followed and recorded
their destinies until, finally, a multiple testimony of the time, both individual
and general, emerged. The director then edited two full-length documentaries from
the material, which were shown on television and throughout the cinema network.
4
The democratic upheaval of 1989 was a special, starry moment not only for the
Czechs, but for all of Europe, as one communist regime after another was toppled.
Czech documentarists were on the spot. Rare documentary shots exist from the turning-point
confrontation between the peaceful student demonstrators and the state police.
During the "Velvet Revolution," striking students made numerous copies of video
testimonies and distributed them to all parts of the country. Television, indulging
in a spasmodic disinformation campaign, remained in the hands of the Communist
rulers, so every hour mattered. At that moment, everybody was aware in a very
practical way of the psychological power of the media, of the impact of a timely
pictorial report.
The revolutionary weeks at the end of 1989 immediately changed the seemingly
unchangeable rules. Until then the monopolistic state television never allowed
students, who since the very beginning had been the main driving force of the
revolution, to attend live broadcasts. The so-called Students Broadcasting, which
was set up in mostly non-professional surroundings (actually mostly on the street
or at the FAMU studio), was more a form of political reporting than a documentary.
The youngest generation of filmmakers, especially those who had earlier made themselves
known at university as outstanding individuals, acquired invaluable experience
and a special incentive for future professional activity. One of these was the
young Igor Chaun, an author capable of quick, yet creative reflection on the political
situation. He was, for instance, the creator of a non-traditional, approximately
four-hour long portrait of the current Czech prime minister, Vaclav Klaus. Chaun's
later activities, however, centered around features.
The only documentary which offers a concise picture of the life of free Czechoslovakia
and reflects the full commitment of the author is Karel Vachek's three-and-a-half
hour long documentary essay, The New Hyperion ("Novy Hyperion," 1992).
In a dynamic arrangement of both key and seemingly marginal aspects of the social
and political life of the country, Vachek manages to present a captivating testimony
about the people and the times. His film is enriched in an extraordinary way by
a sense for film expression and a feeling for the concealed farce of history.
At the end of 1992, the internal political development resulted in the disintegration
of the Czechoslovak federation. This political development was captured in an
excellent manner by the young documentarist Pavel Koutecky in his film The
Demise of Czechoslovakia in Parliament ("Zanik Ceskoslovenska v Parlamentu,"
1993).
It is obvious that the genesis of politics as well as the many symptoms of
a regular democracy, forgotten by Czechs over the fifty freedom-less years, attracted
documentarists enormously. Contemporary circumstances required new forms of documentary.
The number of heavy, psychologically probing works declined, whereas partial mosaic
views of issues of the moment became more attractive for the audience. These are
offered to the public by the very much followed TV political coverage, both on
public and independent TV.
5
Soon after 1989, the agile, independent Febio film and TV studio gained prominence
with its production of around eighty documentary and news films annually. Since
no documentary film market exists, Febio relies as do other independent producers
on public television. Every fortnight viewers watch The Eye ("Oko"), a
single theme documentary program produced at Febio independently of the public
television order. The authors of the individual, approximately 20 minute long
films included in The Eye cycle are mostly renowned film artists who deal
with the live issues of the day.
Director Fero Fenic, Febio's founding father, invented the unique Gen
project. In regularly broadcast, 15 minute long documentary films, different Czech
documentarists present a selected 100 important living personalities of Czech
culture, politics, and science. A slightly altered version of the cycle continues
to be broadcast and to enjoy incredibly high viewing rates. Jan Spata, who was
cited above as one of the outstanding personalities of Czech documentary from
the sixties to the eighties, has worked for Febio frequently in recent years.
Spata made a number of portraits of renowned personalities for the Gen
cycle, often in collaboration with Olga Sommerova.
The living tradition of Czech documentary film, albeit constrained by cash
problems, has discovered new opportunities. The Film and Sociology Foundation
operates as an independent production center where film documentarists join forces
with sociologists to jointly map the transformation of society and its problems.
The results are usually middle-length documentaries that are broadcast on television.
Individual directors like Petr Slavik, Pavel Koutecky, and others investigate
such topics as the transformation of Czech villages by using examples from individual
lives, the problem of modern day poverty, violence within the community, the return
of business enterprises to Czech lands, local elections, issues of racial coexistence,
and the like. These are always serious probes which speak a cultivated film language
and are more than just immediate news coverage.
The long-term projects of the Film and Sociology Foundation, such as A
Year Later ("Po roce"), A Year and One More Year Later ("Po roce a
zase po roce"), and Years Later ("Po letech"), offer a kind of regular
annual "summing up" of Czech politics and culture by several well-known personalities
who were extraordinarily active during the revolution of 1989 and later. The director
and author of these projects, Pavel Koutecky, submits not only a continuous testimony
about several human lives, but also an original report about himself.
Director Helena Trestikova had in the past developed her "time-collecting"
method, one which she has applied successfully in her cycle about juvenile delinquents.
As part of this project, the director meets her protagonists at irregular intervals
and observes and records their activities, their changes of attitude, and personality
development. This is followed by very demanding work in the editing room. The
"story" unfolds in time and the director thus exposes herself to the risk that
selected protagonists will not bear the topic eloquently enough in those parts
where it should be communicated. But Trestikova has luck with her "time-collecting"
films, even though she experienced problems which are not only of a creative nature
(while developing an acquaintance with one of her "heroes," a juvenile thief,
the latter broke into her flat one day, stole everything, and then wrote a letter
of apology (the film René (1992))). Trestikova is now her own independent
producer (Man and Time Foundation) and is working on a long-term and demanding
project aimed at presenting an image of the end of the millennium as found in
both the everyday as well as special life of Prague.
6
Different personalities belonging to several generations have come to the fore
of Czech cinematography, persons who do not seek permanent backing, but are investing
their creative forces into ambitious projects that do not promise immediate profit.
That is the style of cameraman and director Ivan Vojnar, for example, who in the
seventies and eighties acquired an excellent reputation as the co-author of Drahomira
Vihanova's documentary films. He is currently active as a documentary director,
finishing a documentary essay on the relativity of mental health in the environment
of a mental hospital, as well as a film on young actors in the existing avant-garde
theaters of Prague. The slightly younger Josef Cisarovsky is, amongst other things,
the author of a documentary film in three parts on the postwar history of Czechoslovakia
in which he makes a successful attempt to overcome various political taboos and
social stereotypes. His other films are mainly devoted to ecology as well as spiritual
matters. Other, very individual authors in the documentary field include Angelika
Hanaurova and Tomas Skrdlant who, while usually working on their own, have also
produced a joint documentary deserving special attention, A Hairy State in
a Bald Republic ("Vlasaty stat v holohlave republice," 1994), in which they
used a twenty-five year old unfinished "group portrait" of young, non-conforming
people and let them comment on their own past attitudes and views.
Some artists develop their own back-up production facilities within small
private companies with the aim of achieving the best possible conditions for their
own documentary work. Director Pavel Stingl, for instance, whose interest is focused
consistently on topics of social and racial coexistence and on the question of
the effect of politics on the everyday life of man, founded the K2 private production
company. He wants to assist the creation of new documentaries aiming at a deeper
comprehension of the social and political aspects of the contemporary world. The
span is not limited to the Czech lands or to Central Europe, but also includes
the Balkans, South Africa, and other places of conflict in the world. The K2 company
is trying to become an organizational mediator in future international documentary
projects.
Among the youngest generation of filmmakers, FAMU students Tomas Hejtmanek
and Martina Kudlacek ought to be mentioned. Hejtmánek has confidently set
out on the difficult road of challenging, intricately composed film communication.
Be it an imaginary portrait of the remarkable artist Vladimir Boudnik, A Hundredth
Part ("Jedna setina," 1993), or a film essay on traveling by train, Report
About the Journey ("Zprava o ceste," 1992), his films are powerful because
of their earnestness, their endeavor to produce a statement structured in pure
film language. The Czech-Austrian director Martina Kudlacek has made an impact
so far with her successful film Positivity ("Positivita," 1994), about
an outstanding generation of young photographers from Slovakia. It is an original
group portrait of creative artists who, while clearly having individual features
and differences in poetic quality, have much in common: namely, respect for their
own past, respect for their roots, and the will to seek out new roads of classical
photography.
Another member of the youngest generation is Petr Vaclav who during his studies
at FAMU made a rather extraordinary document, Madame Le Murie ("Pani Le
Murie," 1993), a kind of conspicuous epitaph in memory of this civilization. Vaclav
presents both the poetic and dramatic fate of an old lady of noble descent who,
at a difficult time in history several decades earlier, had decided to live the
remaining part of her life in quiet retirement, serving her family. The obligation
of family tradition, however, is not a burden but an unquestioned duty. Nevertheless,
with her whole being she shares in the experience of the inexorable cycle of nature
to arrive at the apprehension of the finiteness of the civilization that managed
to liquidate the natural conditions of its existence. At a slow pace, yet with
great inner excitement, this fascinating lady describes her observations, relating
her story with striking cuts through history. She melds with nature; she is dignified
and at the same time grotesque in her role of caretaker for the old garden surrounding
the dilapidated property where she lives. Petr Vaclav, in a rare symbiosis with
cameraman Stepan Kucera, succeeded in creating a solid, dynamic image with which,
using a concrete and completely unique case, they touched the mysterious pages
of life and the world. The film narration is refined, yet modest: as if time stands
still and through film we are allowed to see a glimpse of our own depths.
7
Fortunately, the question of the further development of documentary film in the
Czech lands remains open. Czech society is managing quite successfully to overcome
the stumbling blocks on the road to total political, economic, and social transformation,
and it is a good omen that in doing so, it is not neglecting the cultural and
spiritual dimension of life. As the gloomy forecasts for economic and political
development have not come true, so the dark augury pointing to the demise of documentary
film in the Czech lands has been misguided. It is obvious that the future lies
mainly in the creative potential of Czech documentarists. That, it seems, is not
negligible: members of the new generation are gaining recognition and the long
tradition of Czech documentary film seems to be living on.
Important addresses:
The Film and Sociology Foundation
Jindrisska 34
CZ-110 00 Praha 1
Czech Republic
Tel: (42-2) 67091-228; Fax: (42-2) 67091-222
Febio
Ruzova 13
CZ-110 00 Praha 1
Czech Republic
Tel: (42-2) 2421-3933; Fax: (42-2) 2421-4254
Man and Time Foundation
Kostelni 14
CZ-170 00 Praha 7
Czech Republic
Tel: (42-2) 375-976
K2, Ltd.
Na Folimance 5
CZ-120 00 Praha 2
Czech Republic
Tel: (42-601) 216-447
Fax & Tel: (42-2) 870-651
FAMU (Film Academy)
Smetanovo nabr. 2
CZ-110 00 Praha 1
Czech Republic
Tel: (42-2) 2422-9468; Fax: (42-2) 2423-0285
Michal Bregant
After graduating from Charles University in Prague, was employed at the National
Film Archive, first as curator of the Czech film collection, and then from 1992
as an independent research worker in the department of film theory and history,
specializing mainly in the historical development of film language, with a focus
on Czech cinematography. Lecturer in film aesthetics at the Film Academy (FAMU).
Address:
National Film Archive
Bartolomejska 11
CZ-110 00, Praha 1
Czech Republic
 |
 |