Agents of Chaos

This is a desperately complex story with multiple threads. It's a more sedate Active Measures, which is no bad thing.

Let's be fair, the full unclassified version of events won't appear for another 50 years.

This doc spreads the blame to everyone for 2016, where it should be. Don't care what anyone says or tells you. It points out the role that Trump (realistically) played, the role Hilary played (her team really let her down), the role the DNC played, the role Obama's administration played, and the role Russia (well the small group) played. Also talks about the role of media, not just mainstream, but independent as well and the events that happened before 2016. Anyone with a real bias eye, this is what you want, someone to point out the faults of all parties involved. It breaks down the social engineering taking place by BOTH, yes, BOTH parties. Look, I would tell anyone to watch The Social Dilemma, Frontline 20/20-Trump vs Biden (they breakdown both tactics very well) and this, you won't be disappointed with the knowledge.

Sad story about where we are heading. Polarisation of the world just so the narrative will suit a few.

BECAUSE IT'S VERY DRY AND QUITE EXPANSIVE.

Now buckle in because that's the only light-hearted bit you're getting. Gibney's sprawling account of Russian ties to the 2016 US election is a massive achievement and rather meticulous - and like any piece of investigative journalism it doesn't really answer any questions or provide many simple truths. It's pleasingly intricate and despite being deeply American doesn't opt for many of the hyperbole that mires US documentary work.

In terms of the subject matter there's rather a lack of American investigative journalists - you've got a Yahoo! News journo but most of the US talking heads are sincere but biased big-hitters like former deputy director of the FBI or National Security Council member Celeste Wallander. This is a choice of course, and hearing from some of the central players in the narrative is quite compelling, although it means that you only get the merest tantalizing glimpse of the larger social context for a lot of what it all means beyond fairly high tier political figures, however odd they may be.

As other reviewers have hinted, as enormous as this documentary is, there is likely an even larger story at play here and these elements that Gibney has laboriously pieced together is only the view from the present. What revelations are to come are going to be all the more fascinating - and hopefully will be communicated in a slightly more succinct fashion.

I loved Alex Gibney's documentary on Scientology.

His documentary on Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos was on shakier ground but still very compelling because of the sheer mountain of documentation and interviews detailing the funny business.

This "expose" on Russia's influence on the 2016 US elections is a huge comedown.

First, the positives. Information on Vladimir Putin's hold on power, is thorough. The network of Russian operatives successfully planting misinformation on world events is given some time, mostly well spent.

The "tell" - the turd in the punchbowl - comes 45 minutes into the first episode: Gibney, in his own voice, pushes the theory Putin put into play interfering in the US Presidential election because Hillary Clinton would be too tough on Putin and Russia, based on Gibney's perception of Hillary's supposed toughness as Secretary of State.

The next few minutes has Gibney talking about Trump using the very early perceptions from the Pundit Class in 2015. Five years from then through today, with perspective, fails to change his tone.

It falls apart from here.

The biggest "name" interviewed is John Podesta, one of the senior members of the Clinton campaign. That's fine; a mature viewer can clean something from Podesta.

The rest of the "experts" interviewed are ex-ambassadors, career low level bureaucrats, and tech folks who, while in government, were clueless as to Russian doings, if true, but often sounding like papering over their resumes and spinning tall tales for future work. THESE folks sound today like they knew all these alleged doings all along.

How can Russian operatives be so sloppy and yet so brilliant at the same time? For the last 3 1/4 hours, Gibney never asks, and no one has the answers.

Discussions on this may fill time on the twitterverse and on Cable talk shows, but it's empty talk.

Gibney lowered his standards to weave a story that is only somewhat true in a limited way It fails to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.