Icarus starts out much better than it finishes. In the beginning we are watching a cyclist learning how he can 'dope' himself up in such a way that he can avoid getting caught. He is working with a Russian whom, it turns out, is intimately connected with not only the Russian Olympics program, but is also intimately involved with the laboratory which was responsible for testing athletes at the Sochi Olympics. We watch with fascination as the cyclist, and the maker of this film, injects himself with testosterone (and steroids?) in order to gain an unfair advantage in competition.
As the movie evolves, however, we lose sight of the personal and become wrapped up in the political - the unbelievable lengths to which Russian goes to win medals at those Olympics, apparently including outright fraudulent analysis of athlete's urine samples. At the end of the movie, it rightly becomes more of an international spy thriller involving Putin and lesser Russians in what amounts to a massive scandal to defraud the world. Trying to keep all of this straight becomes a difficult exercise and a bit bewildering.
This IS the movie that brought down the Russians and resulted in their being banned from many future sporting events. As such, it is a significant and meaningful movie and one that probably won the Best Documentary Award simply because of the political impact.
But that doesn't necessarily make it a good movie. In comparing this one to some of the other documentaries in this year's competition (I'm thinking especially of The Last Men in Aleppo, and Abacus: Small Enough to Prosecute), this movie failed to generate significant emotions. In these other two movies, my sense of injustice made me feel horribly angry at men in power. Icarus, on the otherhand, made me feel a little curious, but I didn't leave the movie with any new understanding of Putin or the Russian state's moral failings. Sure, they were obviously committing moral, and legal, crimes of huge proportion, but there was nothing surprising about that.
OK, perhaps that was because the story has already played out. In Abacus, I had never heard of that bank before, nor did I have any understanding of what legal proceedings finally emerged after the 2008 financial crisis. In the Aleppo movie, I had never seen anything about the White Helmets before and so gained a valuable new perspective on the Syrian civil war.
But Icarus simply laid out the details in a story where we already knew the outcome. Perhaps if the filmmakers personal story about doping was explored more, than the impact might have been greater. What happened in the races he entered? What was the reaction from his competitors after they found out? How did he personally suffer from his actions? Perhaps that would have made for a the better movie, by providing a personal context for the Russian story. Instead, the movie turns from his story, to that of the Russian doctor who had to defect to the U.S. and is now under witness protection.
In short, the film fails to identify a focus and carry it through. It is a movie worth watching, only to understand the context for the Russian Olympic doping scandal and the reasons it broke. But the movie is not, in itself, a consistent and well organized documentary. For these reasons, I just give it a 6 stars. Watch only if you are interested in the topic!
As the movie evolves, however, we lose sight of the personal and become wrapped up in the political - the unbelievable lengths to which Russian goes to win medals at those Olympics, apparently including outright fraudulent analysis of athlete's urine samples. At the end of the movie, it rightly becomes more of an international spy thriller involving Putin and lesser Russians in what amounts to a massive scandal to defraud the world. Trying to keep all of this straight becomes a difficult exercise and a bit bewildering.
This IS the movie that brought down the Russians and resulted in their being banned from many future sporting events. As such, it is a significant and meaningful movie and one that probably won the Best Documentary Award simply because of the political impact.
But that doesn't necessarily make it a good movie. In comparing this one to some of the other documentaries in this year's competition (I'm thinking especially of The Last Men in Aleppo, and Abacus: Small Enough to Prosecute), this movie failed to generate significant emotions. In these other two movies, my sense of injustice made me feel horribly angry at men in power. Icarus, on the otherhand, made me feel a little curious, but I didn't leave the movie with any new understanding of Putin or the Russian state's moral failings. Sure, they were obviously committing moral, and legal, crimes of huge proportion, but there was nothing surprising about that.
OK, perhaps that was because the story has already played out. In Abacus, I had never heard of that bank before, nor did I have any understanding of what legal proceedings finally emerged after the 2008 financial crisis. In the Aleppo movie, I had never seen anything about the White Helmets before and so gained a valuable new perspective on the Syrian civil war.
But Icarus simply laid out the details in a story where we already knew the outcome. Perhaps if the filmmakers personal story about doping was explored more, than the impact might have been greater. What happened in the races he entered? What was the reaction from his competitors after they found out? How did he personally suffer from his actions? Perhaps that would have made for a the better movie, by providing a personal context for the Russian story. Instead, the movie turns from his story, to that of the Russian doctor who had to defect to the U.S. and is now under witness protection.
In short, the film fails to identify a focus and carry it through. It is a movie worth watching, only to understand the context for the Russian Olympic doping scandal and the reasons it broke. But the movie is not, in itself, a consistent and well organized documentary. For these reasons, I just give it a 6 stars. Watch only if you are interested in the topic!