A recent four-part documentary series about boxing icon Mike Tyson, released by Netflix, has been characterized as one of the platform’s most peculiar sports documentaries. The Guardian’s review notes that while Netflix has a history of producing sports hagiographies—narratives often lacking objectivity similar to political agitprop—this particular installment stands out for feeling particularly biased and uncomfortable.
Reviewer Robin Brown describes the series as “truly irresponsible” due to its lack of critical distance from its subject. The narrative traverses Tyson’s use of psychedelics, emotional vulnerability, and his facial tattoos. However, the review suggests the program reaches a zenith of oddness with the inclusion of former US President Donald Trump, who appears to defend Tyson. Brown characterizes the cameo as a significant catch for producers but ultimately confusing and ill-advised.
The series concludes with a controversial scene in which the former heavyweight champion consumes DMT, a hallucinogenic compound he refers to as “the toad.” In this sequence, Tyson is depicted sobbing and inviting the documentary’s director to join him in the experience. While some episodes may find viewers compelling, the overarching tone has left many feeling that the production fails to provide adequate scrutiny of its subject.
I found Tyson’s vulnerability compelling, but I see why critics call it hagiography. Needs more critical distance.
The Trump cameo was totally unnecessary. Why include that when the rest of the documentary is already so unbalanced?