User Reviews

Icarus starts naively enough, like most documentaries with a desire to learn something. A "what if" that could make a good story; perhaps an episode-long piece on "60 Minutes" or "20/20".

Bryan Fogel, who directed it, is like a man wanting to learn what is like to be a tiger and, in wanting to get closer to the truth, inadvertently locks himself in the tiger's cage.

Icarus is like two stories. The silly, and somewhat egotistical quest of Bryan Fogel to prove that doping is rampant and easy to get away with (duh!) while helping himself win the amateur race that has eluded him for years. It is difficult to find a way to sympathize for any person during this part of the story. Then Bryan meets a very amusing and very cynical Russian scientist named Grigory Rodchenkov, who is going to help him. They talk via Skype frequently, and even their dogs participate. We then go into the obligatory montage of training, preparation, and failures that seems all too familiar. That is, until something changes.

There is a marked and brilliant turning point in the movie when Grigory, a smiling and joking class clown up until that point, faces directly at the camera in a Skype conversation with Bryan and asks "have you seen a movie about me?" From that point on, the story's point of view changes from Bryan to Grigory and we learn something that we cannot unlearn, and realize that there is no going back. We learn that Grigory is the real protagonist and we are heading in a very dark and dangerous direction for Grigory, for Bryan, and for those around them.

One cannot blame those viewers who, prior to that point, were bored and wondered if this would be yet another expose on how privileged guys like Bryan were cheating the system for a moment of temporary glory and how doping had permeated into the weekend warriors scene. One cannot blame those viewers for walking away (I almost did), if they thought that's where we were going. I am sure that's where Bryan thought he was going too. That is, until the cage locked behind us...

What I call the second story in Icarus is based on terror; a terror of the light, not the dark, to borrow a line from Grigory. Real people get killed (allegedly) - this is a documentary, so death is very real. The ride is frantic, claustrophobic, and bitter-sweet. There is an ending but, then again, there isn't one. At the end of the story, we care deeply for Grigory, Bryan, and even Max the dog, and continue to wonder "what if".

Icarus is one of the most brilliant documentaries that I have ever seen.

Brian Fogel wondered and was semi successful at cycling in his younger days and was disappointed with his results. He trains hard and races for a year and then decides to dope for a year to see if he can improve.

He realizes that most cyclists, indeed most professional athletes in any physical sport are taking drugs increase performance. The Olympics are no exception and gets in touch with a pro doping chemist.

The story could end there but takes a wild turn and becomes a sort of international thriller, unintended and believable.

I'm not so sure about the 1 star reviews saying this is propaganda, I think he got lucky and was able to contact the chemist due to his own willingness to help.

After watching this documentary you understand that real life events are so much more interesting and often far scarier then a roller coaster Hollywood blockbuster.

The documentary start with a simple investigation what doping does but end in a dramatic unfolding of epic proportions of whistle blowing how Russia used there athletes in the greatest doping scandal of the 21 century.

This is for sure a must watch and deep respect for the people behind the story.

I'm not saying that the cheating didn't take place. It did. But the movie spent a great amount of time and energy making us like the corrupt to the bone testing lab guy, and making him out as a victim. And it was just a bit too slick for a true documentary, with the victim's Orwell quotes and philosophical musings. Still, I acknowledge that it was well done and still worth the watch. Just not the 'best documentary I've ever seen', as many have proclaimed.

I like this topic, in the last couples of years I read and watched some stuff about doping and I had hopes to get more and new information. This documentary leaves me with unsatisfied but also confused. First it's a super-szie-me-experiment which is strange, because we know drugs can enhance your performance. But it didn't work for our moviemaker. Then it's not the point of that story, because suddenly it's all about this Russian lab director Rodchenkov. And then again there is this huge conspiracy of state sponsored doping and it's all connected to Rodchenkov and Putin. On the one hand this show wants you to tell he is victim because the Russian state is evil, on the other hand he is a mastermind, well he was called mastermind and he didn't correct it. His role in planning and execution is not really clear. A lot of the interviews with Rodchenkov are simplified. This show is flashy and a lot of phrases you will hear can be used in a trailer. But there is not much of content, nothing you couldn't read in the newspapers. So there is no research in this work, just some public statements and footage by the moviemaker. This guy never worked as a investigative journalist, so you don't get deep digging. And this whole conspiracy is build around Rodchenkov. But what if he didn't tell the whole truth, history has shown some people will tell all kind of stories. And this guy working for decades for the purest evil suddenly turns away and is now the good guy. And it all started because some American moviemaker needed a doc and a lab to do some stupid stuff and then they become friends and together they uncover a dark conspiracy and all this in a time when the cold war is raising again and they fight each other on any field. This show leaves you with a lot of unanswered questions but gives you their view on who is evil and who is the good guy. Maybe this whole issue about state sponsored and individual doping is much more complex, but this show is just a starting point for you to go deeper and learn more about it.

Oh and then there is this cheesy part about George Orwell. Sometimes less is more.

Saw "Icarus" on Netflix, awesome shaggy dog of a documentary that starts off as a kind of "Supersize Me" movie about an amateur cyclist, Bryan Fogel (director, producer, obsessive/futile/driven amateur cyclist) who is interested in how performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) would effect his own performance but then it goes down the rabbit hole of general athletic doping specifically in regard to Russia's state sponsored program. (His own project is jettisoned about a third in) Essentially, the movie maker stumbles on the main players involved in Russia and the movie becomes both a wonderful piece of muck raking journalism as well as an actual political thriller where real people's lives are changed/threatened. The movie chronicles how the Russian World anti doping agency (WADA) office actually was responsible for enabling doping in Russian athletics, similar to Generals in Mexico responsible for fighting the drug cartels who were actually heading the cartels. The main character in the movie, Grigory Rodchenkov, is a garrulous, smart and morally complex person who is put at genuine risk by "turning states evidence" against the Russian program. One of his closest associates has a mysterious fatal heart attack. His superior is a close friend of Putin's, and is now something like Deputy prime minister, so this goes all the way up. There was a very careful description how doping controls were cannily circumvented at the Sochi Olympics (lots of James Bond level subterfuge). Further, no matter your position on doping in sports, I personally don't care what adults do, turns out WADA is pretty helpless/useless. A truly great movie, starts in one place - ends up going somewhere else completely.

I watch every documentary in a objective way and in my opinion it is very critical when one country (USA) makes a documentary about another country (Russia), especially when it is about politics, corruption, doping, cheating etc. The audience should listen and watch very carefully. Here what they say, what words they are using and what the message is.

The beginning of this documentary was neutral, but after some time it is very easy to recognize what it is the main purpose of this documentary. Sentence like "Putin will kill me" - come on, really? Or saying "When Putin started the war against Ukraine" - every fool knows what Russia did was the reaction (!) of what the US did in Ukraine with the coup.

Unfortunately a documentary is not really credible, when there are lies and sentences like this included.

Just imagine the Russians, Chinese or any other country would make a documentary about the US government, Olympic team or military. It would be declared as "Propaganda" even before its release.

Say what you will about Netflix, the multi-million dollar streaming service used the world over that has come under intense scrutiny in the past year for its debatable participation in the Cannes Film Festival, but its ability to fuel water-cooler chit-chat has done wonders for the documentary genre. The 10-part true crime series Making a Murderer became a phenomenon, proving so popular that it managed to cast doubts over the guilt of its subject and on the American justice system as a whole. The service's most recent conversation-starter is Icarus, directed by amateur cyclist Bryan Fogel, which started out like a Super Size Me expose on the world of doping but evolved into something else entirely. While it certainly has its flaws, it's an astonishing tale that would have been missed by most on a limited cinema run, but in the wide-reaching hands of Netflix, it has a chance to cause a stir.

Director Fogel's only previous directorial credit is 2012's little- seen Jewtopia, a gross-out comedy which does little to suggest he is a natural fit for a crusading documentary filmmaker. But, in the early stages of Icarus, he proves himself adept chronicling his journey from amateur cyclist to doped-up competition-winner. Hoping to replicate the process adopted by the likes of exposed drug cheat Lance Armstrong, Fogel spends much of the films first half-hour injecting testosterone and God-knows-what-else into his thighs and buttocks, and hitting the gym to prepare to win a gruelling seven- day cycle across France. He seeks guidance from Grigory Rodchenkov, the head of anti-doping in Russia, who seems to know every trick in the book on how to cheat the drug tests and avoid detection by WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency). Yet while his tests show a huge improvement on his physical prowess, he struggles to make any impact on the race, with a huge margin remaining between him and the top 10 racers. It seems his entire documentary is crumbling around him.

Then the news breaks of Russia's participation in a doping operation that dates back decades, and Rodchenkov starts to worry for his life. When his friend and colleague dies under mysterious circumstances, Rodchenkov flees to America to turn whistle-blower, and Fogel, having formed a close friendship with the charismatic, larger-than-life filmmaker's dream, gets the scoop. The director wisely relegates himself into the background as Rodchenkov's story and personality take over, and the film takes on the tone of a thriller. It's a story you have no doubt read about in the media, but Icarus boasts the opportunity to hear it directly from the horse's mouth, and Fogel is happy to let his subject talk. Having stumbled upon a goldmine, it's a wonder why Fogel chose to keep so much of his original narrative in the movie. While his lack of vanity in accepting his failure is admirable, it would have worked better with 15 minutes or so shaved off, and the film feels baggy and overlong as a result. Still, Icarus has the ability to shock, revealing that the scandal goes all the way to the very top, and may have been employed as a politic tactic by Putin to justify his invasion of Ukraine.

Watch this documentary. In the beginning of the film, the viewer is lulled to think that it's just an experiment of the documentarist, Bryan Fogle, to see how much better doping will make him, and to investigate if he can cheat the doping testing system. In his quest, the sympathetic Russian anti-doping lab director, Grigori Rodschenkov, gives him detailed instructions on how to administer the performance-enhancing drugs, and most importantly, how they will cheat the doping testing.

Things take an unexpected turn, when during the period of filming, a German TV-channel publishes a documentary in which they blame Russia for having a state-run doping program, Grigori being at its head. The viewer is sent on a ride towards the deep bowels of Russian doping activities. Icarus is an incredibly well constructed story with distinct parts to help make for a clear and enjoyable viewing experience. What really made this movie 10/10 for me was relying on the George Orwell novel '1984' to set the entire story into a broader narrative. Both protagonists, Bryan and Grigori, are very natural and relatable, and the viewer can follow their friendship develop throughout the film.

What struck me most was the seemingly overwhelming amount of evidence for the existence of a Russian doping system, both as accounted by Grigori, and as confirmed by the so-called "McLaren Report". I was impressed by how well Bryan and the rest of the production crew had adapted to an an unanticipated challenge, which was to capture the full the extent of doping in Russia, as well as protecting Grigori from harm.

I thought that this film would be just some anti-Russia propaganda, but the evidence seems to support all of the allegations in the film. The main take-away isn't that Russians are bad, but that the entire anti-doping system is thoroughly flawed. WADA, and the IOC will not be happy when they see this.