Stolen: Heist of the Century

I don't think I have ever written a review of a documentary. Having seen many good documentaries, I was interested in watching this one. What a disappointment! It is just a continuous natterring of a cop's voice with some background assumed happening of the heist. Watching this was a total bore and no facts were laid bare other than assumptions. Eventually it comes to a conclusion after 1 and a half hours, but by then I was totally fed-up and sorry I watched it to conclusion.

From the outset, it's unclear whether we're watching a faithful reconstruction of real events or a Blair Witch-style fiction. That ambiguity seems deliberate, and while it unsettles, it also piques curiosity.

The restrained tone in presenting the events is appreciated-it enhances their plausibility. I understand that stories like this require certain narrative and stylistic liberties, and overall, the staging works.

However, as the film progresses, inconsistencies begin to emerge, creating narrative dissonance. By the end, the viewer is likely left with basic, even crucial questions that the director appears to have deliberately avoided. That omission not only weakens the story but leaves the audience with a lingering sense of emptiness.

What initially promised to be a compelling documentary ultimately dissolves into a narrative that doesn't dare to close its own doors. In the end, you're left with a "well... I guess that's it," when you were hoping for something far more impactful.

This series presents a detailed look at a diamond heist. It features interviews with police and robbers, as well as tons of photographs and videos from the case. Overall, it does a great job breaking down the crime, the investigation, and the aftermath.

I didn't know anything about this occurrence before watching but I felt it provided a good picture based on all available evidence.

The only thing I didn't like was the attitude of some of the police who openly admitted they didn't understand how the robbers did certain things which is fine, and obvious. But then based on nothing, they then called the thieves liars when they explained how they did what they did. Basically, policeman came across as unknowledgeable, incompetent, But also extremely confident whatever did happen, the thieves aren't telling the truth...Seem like the lawman was still salty after all these years and just wanted to talk bad about the robbers.

As "Stolen: The Heist of the Century" (2025 release; 95 min.) opens, it is "Monday, 17th February 2003", and we learn that over the weekend, the District Center in Antwerp, Belgium has been breached, with millions worth of diamonds gone. Antwerp is the diamond capital of the world (85% of the world's diamonds pass through it.) Who could have possibly done this? And, even more intriguingly, HOW? At this point we are less than 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: this is directed by Mark Lewis ("Vatican Girl"). Here he reassesses after more than 2 decades how this heist was executed. The sheer audacity and brazenness of this heist immediately made me think of some of the Mission Impossible movies. Except of course this is not fiction, and it really did happen. I'm not going to spoil anything. Just sit back, relax and enjoy this real life Mission Impossible. I hasten to add that I myself hail from Antwerp, Belgium (but now a longtime resident of the US), and I immediately recognized most of the footage showing Antwerp (affectionally nicknamed by the locals as "t Stad", which means "the City" in English). I was in Antwerp just last week in fact.

""Stolen: The Heist of the Century" started streaming recently on Netflix, which "suggested" it to me based on my viewing habits. Thanks Netflix! If you are in the mood for a captivating true crime documentary that is as stunning as it is brazen, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

1. The heist was carried out in 2003, so one week after that incident, the main culprit comes back to diamond building and the detective gets a call to his android mobile phone while he driving his bike to home. I mean seriously!! The android phone in 2003!.

2. The day of heist is Feb 15th and 16th of 2003. They showed us that cctv the video cassettes were missing for those 2 days that's fine. But they revealed that after performing that heist in 15th night, the robbers take out the cassettes of 11th Feb from the rack and at that time there were no cassettes of 15th and 16th and the cassettes of 17, 18, ,19, and 20th of Feb are there in that row ( this happens in 15tg night).

I mean how the hell are those cassettes got missed on the same date? And how the hell the cassettes of next 4 days were kept there ( you can't have cctv footage of tomorrow and day after tomorrow on today right??)