‘Russians at War’ is painful and one-sided but an important slice of a complex story

TIFF invited me to view the controversial movie “Russians at War” and I attended the evening screening downtown on Tuesday. The experience was unusual for me, with angry protesters and a dozen or more police officers outside the TIFF Lightbox theatre on King St. W.
Before I became the Star’s public editor, I was a news reporter for the paper and I’ve covered numerous protests in the city. But on Tuesday you could say I was on the “other side” of the news story this time.
Some of the anger and frustration from those protesters was directed at me and other attendees of the movie.
At one point I was booed by several in the crowd. One protester shouted loudly at me, singled me out and accused me of helping to “finance Russian propaganda.”
The movie looks at the conflict through the eyes of its soldiers. Doing so is devastating for Ukrainians and I get that.
But what lessons, if any, can we learn from this Russian perspective, horrible for some as it is?
In my role as public editor I often hear opposing views from readers concerning our coverage of news stories and features on global conflicts. Much of my job entails ensuring we are accurate, fair and balanced in the stories we publish about war.
There’s been a lot of media coverage of “Russians at War,” a first-person style documentary by Russian-Canadian filmmaker Anastasia Trofimova. For seven months she was able to accompany Russian soldiers belonging to a battalion headed to fight in eastern Ukraine.
As we know, screening of the film was paused by TIFF last week after TIFF staff received disturbing and violent threats from members of the public opposed to the movie.
TIFF officials changed their mind days later and went ahead with the screenings. TIFF CEO Cameron Bailey said in part that while they are sympathetic to the pain of Ukrainians, it’s important to defend “independent media” and that the film is a powerful statement against the war.
My sense is that was the correct decision.
A major criticism of the film is that it is “Russian propaganda” that glosses over “war crimes” — rapes, murders, looting — committed by Russian forces in Ukraine, crimes UN investigators have reported on.
In interviews since the release of her documentary, the filmmaker said she didn’t see any war crimes during her time with the fighters. “This is another story and this was the reality they lived,” Trofimova said in one interview, defending what she depicted in her film.
The documentary is unique in that Trofimova is the first person to get such in-depth access to Russian fighters on the front lines of the war with Ukraine.
Before I entered the theatre, I spoke with one of the protesters outside, in part so I could have her perspective in mind while I watched the movie.
Sofiya Yusypovych, a 28-year-old master’s student of Ukrainian background, told me the movie angered her. She said she attended the afternoon screening but couldn’t sit through it all because she found it “too one-sided.”
“It made victims out of the soldiers. The aggressors’ voices are forwarded and amplified,” she complained to me.
Seeing the film, I certainly didn’t get the sense it’s propaganda the government in Moscow would benefit from or appreciate.
The litmus test for me was asking myself this question: would Russian dictator Vladimir Putin be proud of this film? Would he want it shown at the Kremlin? Would he use it to encourage young men and women being sent to the front lines in Ukraine?
I would overwhelmingly say no.
The movie provides a stark picture of confusion, hopelessness, sadness, loneliness, regret and doubt. It shows how utterly mundane war can be.
Often with blank expressions, the Russian fighters gaze into the camera to explain their motivations for being in the war.
One talks about being a patriot and fighting “Nazis” in Ukraine. Another mentions wanting revenge. Yet another explains he is fighting so his children won’t have to.
Several reflect on the fact they need the money, either to support themselves or family. One complains that he hasn’t even been paid yet.
Others admit they don’t even know why they’re there. “We’re being sent into slaughter,” one of them complains.
For me, a definitive comment comes from a Russian medic, who becomes pregnant in the war zone and mulls the question of whether she will tell her child about the war after the baby is born. The expectant mother cynically says words to the effect of: “Some people at the top are making a lot of money and there are a lot of people at the bottom who are dying. How do you explain that to a child?”
For me, “Russians at War” can’t be taken as the final word on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Far from that.
Rather, it’s a slice, a segment of an extremely complex and nuanced war. A conflict that a viewer needs to absorb and fully comprehend before sitting down to watch this stark — and yes, one-sided — view of the Russia-Ukraine battle.