Russians at war: Venice documentary sparks heated criticism and debate

Anastasia Trofimova, a Russian-Canadian director, spent seven months with a Russian military battalion in eastern Ukraine, where she documented the soldiers' daily lives. The material she prepared aimed to showcase the personal motivations of young people who decided to join the invasion of Ukraine, portraying them not only as fighters but also as individuals grappling with internal dilemmas.

One recurring theme in the documentary is the soldiers' confusion about the purpose of the conflict.

It’s so confusing here, I don’t even know what we’re fighting for - says one of the soldiers in the film.

It was precisely the lack of a detailed portrayal of military actions and the consequences of the Russian invasion that elicited a sharp reaction from critics. They claim that Trofimova’s film does not provide an accurate depiction of what is happening in Ukraine, omitting the massive scale of destruction and suffering brought about by the Russian aggression.

At a press conference in Venice, Trofimova, when asked about war crimes, responded that the soldiers she spent seven months with were "ordinary people" and added that she had not witnessed any crimes during her stay.

In Russia, they are these heroes who never die. In the West, they are mostly war criminals, war criminals, war criminals. I think in Western media, that's what Russian soldiers are associated with at this point, because there were no other stories. This is another story, - responded the director.

The director's words and the documentary itself sparked immediate opposition from the Ukrainian artistic community.

Ukrainian producer, Darya Bassel, whose documentary depicting Ukraine's suffering titled "Songs of Slow Burning Earth" also premiered in Venice, sharply criticised the decision to showcase Trofimova's film. Bassel described it as a movie that "presents a very distorted picture of reality, spreading false narratives."

We can only be happy for her [Trofimova] that she was fortunate enough not to witness any war crimes. Unfortunately, thousands of Ukrainians have not been so lucky - wrote Bassel in a Facebook post after watching the film.

The controversies surrounding Trofimova’s documentary fueled the debate on the ethics of filmmaking in Russia and its occupied territories. While in Ukraine, foreign reporters can relatively freely travel to the front, in Russia, access to independent journalists is strictly limited, and selected individuals can only participate in organised and controlled press visits - reports The Guardian.

Trofimova defended her decision to make the film, emphasising that the human face of those participating in the war was lacking.

The point of view of Russian soldiers is not usually heard and I think it’s so important to see through the fog of the war: to see the tragedy that the war is and to see people for people, outside politicians’ black-and-white reasoning and war propaganda - argued the director.

Ukrainian critics, including Bassel, hold a completely different view. They argue that the documentary does not convey the responsibility of Russian soldiers for their actions. They point out that the film portrays them more as victims, ignoring the fact that they are active participants in the aggression against an independent state.

It is important to remember that these individuals joined the army that invaded an independent country, many of them willingly. Are their crimes any less significant simply because they claim to be unaware of why they are involved in this war? - asked Bassel.

"Russians at War" sparked a wide-ranging discussion in which different viewpoints clashed on how to document war and portray its participants. Although Trofimova’s film presents a personal perspective, it remains controversial as—according to many—it omits crucial elements of the tragedy unfolding on Ukrainian soil.