indict the officer involved in the michael brown shooting had taken place. so i felt that the story needed to be told. >> rose: and we continue this evening with icarus, a new netflix film that explores russia's long-running state-sponsored doping program. >> i had the curiosity my whole life, what do the drugs do? would they make me a better athlete? could i possibly be a champion? so i had that curiosity. the second part of that curiosity is what decision does an athlete competing on a world level at the best of the sport have to make whether or not they're going to use or not use the substance if the system itself doesn't work. that was the driving force behind what i did. >> rose: the night at the movies when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: "detroit" is the new film from academy award winning director kathryn bigelow, set in the 1967 riots and features killing of three black men at the algiers motel. the "new york times" calls the film intense, excruciating and entirely necessary. here's a look at the trailer. >> i assume this is about what went on at the motel? >> what happened at the motel? you don't know, i'l there. there was a lot of shooting. ( gunfire ) >> when i went in there, three kids had been killed. >> no... so they were killed right before you got there? >> yes, sir. ou carry a .38, right? ( gunfire ) >> a revolver, you carry a revolver? >> i do have a .38. you ever shoot anyone? i didn't do it. please -- >> oh, here we go. here in "detroit," the city of war, violence continues -- >> we've made state police and national guardsmen available. >> i am declaring a public state of emergency. >> it's a war zone out there. they're destroying the city. >> police! i'm going to assume you're all criminals. >> if you don't talk about this -- you don't talk about this to anyone ever. do you understand? >> this city is rocked, but change is coming! >> i told you what i saw. i'm trying to help here. >> change is coming! what's the matter with you? change is coming! they're going to kill this man. >> change is coming! i need you to survive the night. survive the night -- survive the night -- >> melvin, you want to go home? yeah. what happened at the motel? >> rose: joining me director kathryn bigelow, director bryan fogel, producer dan cogan. welcome. some of you i saw previous occasions at this table. tell me how this came to be. >> this writer next to me whose work is extraordinary came to me with a story set against the "detroit" riots, detroit uprising in 1967, a true story of a true crime set in the middle of it in the algiers motel, and it was, simply put, an execution, and a portrait of police brutality and racial injustice that was extremely moving, very timely and topical and about the same time he told me this story, the decision not to indict the officer involved in the michael brown shooting had taken place. so i felt that the story needed to be told. >> rose: because it has lessons for today? >> because it has lessons for today. exactly. >> rose: had you been thinking about this? how long had you sort of been thinking, this is a story that we talked about it internally for a little while, and what really pushed it over into an actual script was a meeting i had up in detroit with one of the survivors who hadn't told his story in about 50 years and was hearing -- he's played in the movie by algee smith. it was his recollection of how he tried to survive this night and how his life completely changed that once i heard that i knew it was something i wanted to write. >> rose: do you still feel it in detroit today? is it a part of something detroit will always know? >> i think you feel two things. you feel the resiliency of the city and the people and, at the same time, the sort of -- a bit of struggle with its history. so i think that dichotomy is very much at play there and pretty inspiring place to visit. >> rose: did the rise of "black lives matter" have anyin? >> i don't think we really discussed that. >> input? what do you mean by that? >> rose: well, just issues raised by -- >> well, i mean, it's a good point because all of the stuff we've seen in the last five years that has become such a focal point of national conversation, "black lives matter," but just a larger conversation about policing, these events are part of a continuum and they're part of the history that goes back. i mean, the film sort of explores the roots of it but, of course, it pre-dates the film. so certainly what was going on in the moment is we're all aware of it because we're all alive and present, but it was really this recognition that these are connected, not to draw an easy equivalency between them but all these things are connected. >> rose: you have a powerful performance. we've said that to you before. how did you inform yourself for this, other than the life you weren't born in america? >> i think, number one, i am black, and the black experience is a very real thing. it's a global thing. there is a reason you mention "black lives matter." there is a reason when there is a rally in the united states, a "black lives matter" movement, there will be a rally in the u.k. and there was a rally in the u.k. because there's a universals language when it comes to the black experience, systematic races and all those things. so, for me, it wasn't necessarily a few miles for me to run in understanding the context of the story, but specifically this was about a particularly man, melvin. >> rose: describe him. the first thing i noticed from speaking with him from our first conversation is he's an introvert. i tried to separate him from the circumstances of what happened that night because i feel like if you connect the two you may get confused. he's an introvert. a deep sense of responsibility of the community in his community which i relate to because my father is the same way, an agape love, which adon't necessarily have that, if i'm being honest. i had to learn that. >> rose: describe the character. >> he -- >> rose: we saw that in the trailer. >> yeah, but he's a man trying to do good who is forced into a circumstance he wasn't prepared for. melvin, i actually got the opportunity to speak to him, which is great, and i found that he's stern in some respects but also a do-gooder. >> rose: when you talk to somebody and there's a text based in part on real events, are you looking for a spirit? are you looking for mannerisms, a voice? >> i look for spirit first because you can embody a lot about a human being when you get his core, his soul. also, intention because i knew i wouldn't be able to ask him every single night what he would do in this particular seen and circumstance. once you get the spirit in the beginning, your choices are always guided by that. >> rose: narrowed town by the text. >> yeah, and then there is kathryn bigelow. if i'm going wrong, you can easily guide me in the right direction by what she said. >> rose: and the words. and the words. >> rose: and what about the character you play? >> yeah, for me, the first step in approaching it like this is to educate myself where i lacked some pretty critical knowledge. i wasn't aware of the rebellion in detroit, and i think i lacked some knowledge just generally speaking when it came to the specifics of race relations in america as john touched upon. we have our own kind of, i suppose, you know, complex racial history in the u.k., but i really didn't know about this sort of state of affairs in america at that time. so learning the surface-level information was important to me. i think delving deep into the topic of race and racial history wasn't necessary because at that point i was really looking to embrace ignorance by playing a racist. i think that's what you do. you form your opinion on a lack of information or misinformation, as it were. so going in slightly ignorant was actually helpful, in that respect, and i kind of just intensified that ignorance in the most kind of aggressive and unapologetic way that i could because i think kathryn and i were in agreement about the fact that this character needed to be exposed rather than be developed with any sort of intention to insight empathy or any real compassion. >> rose: do you do the research in terms of understanding the facts of a story? can you do the research understanding the look of the story? is that too easy? >> no, no, no. i mean, i don't want to speak for mark, but he reported this entire story a significant amount of research. i had to understand and unpact motivations, intention that and really understand the characters and then, in so doing, you also get a visual tap industry of what might be possible in terms of how it will look and how the film will unfold. >> if i can just jump in, one of the things that was so startling to me when i went back to look at this was that there was a pretty richly-documented record of this incident from police department had done an investigation and talked to a lot of people and there were the transcripts or the summaries of those conversations were available. >> rose: and what does that give you? >> well, it gives me context, it gives me texture, it gives me detail and sometimes there is direct quotes of what people actually said, so it gives me manners of speech, it gives me a lot. then also the department of justice investigation and, after all the racial strife, there's the corne coroner commi, there's a lot of discussion around this in the '60s. what's so remarkable is you think, this is relevant to today. then just a couple of days ago the president of the united states makes remarks in front of a police group where he jokes about police brutality. >> rose: says later it was a joke. >> either way, it's a joke. but it's sort of shocking how little we've learned. >> rose: how much participation in terms of research did you get from involvement with the police officers that were involved in this? >> well, two of them had passed away. >> rose: right. so i had -- on the police side, there was the written record. >> rose: right. which, as i said, was quite extensive, and then on the -- for the people that survived that were the victims, i was able to speak to the man -- john portrayas and the other people who had been there that night. it's great to speak to somebody who can bring it to life for you. that was the turning point. >> the character julie, the real julie was on the set every single day. so giving everybody specificity was extraordinary. and she survived it. >> rose: but her purpose was to give you specificity and also if she thought you were under the wrong assumption to correct you? >> well, i invited that. rarely did she. i was hoping that would happen. but she was a strong supporter and a real inspiration, i think, to all of us on the set. >> rose: clearly from the trailer and seeing the movie, there's a sense of fast-moving events. there's a lot of close-up photography. give me a sense of how you wanted to make the film so that it would portray, you know, how you wanted to draw the audience in. >> well, i think, in our early discussions about it, i knew that it sort of needed to be immersive. it was sort of inviting active engagement with the screen instead of a passive one between the viewer and screen. >> rose: you're at the center of action. >> you're at the center of action that creates empathy and also invites dialogue about what you've experienced. so it becomes experiential. not unlike how we handled "hurt locker" when you were given an opportunity to experience a day in the life of a bomb tech. >> rose: took us inside his skin. >> and in this case take you inside this annex. sadly, the outcome is you're humanizing an unthinkable situation, i assume, for most people. so, in so doing, you can kind of, i suppose, walk away with a bit more information and enable an informed response. >> rose: take a look at this. this is a clip where will is rounding up the guests at the motel. here it is. >> now, let's not be stupid in this situation. ( crying ) we still have a crime scene here and you're all suspects, each and every one of you. don't look at me! turn around! face the wall! ( sobbing ) was karl doing the shooting? huh? somebody better start getting honest with me. hey! i want that gun! >> we looked around, didn't find a gun. >> doesn't mean it's not here! go find it! >> rose: tell me about that scene. >> well, during the 1967 rebellion, there was the threat of snipers, and there was a muzzle flash, presumably, that came from the annex, this particular building that they're in, and melvin dismukes, which i spent time with him pre-production, talked specifically about hearing and seeing the muzzle flash and he with the national guard detail descended with the police officers and state police to find the or jen of the sniper fire and that's what's happening there. what basically will poulter is doing with the other two officers is clearing floor by floor by floor, room by room by room the entire building looking for the gun that is responsible for the sniper fire, and that's kind of the engine of the early moments within the annex. >> rose: i think you said this, mark, that this script is built on a sturdy base of journalism and history but is not the same as journalism or history nor does it aspire to be. as the screen writer i take responsibility of being the creator of a tale, of transforming these raw materials into drama. that separates journalism from drama, from theater, from cinema. >> yeah, we need all of it, i think. >> rose: yeah. so it is a movie, and but it's important to remember why you're watching it because it's a very, very powerful movie, and i'm not saying that in any self-interested way. >> rose: it's the kind of thing you like to do, isn't it? well, think about zero dark thirty, and think about this. >> i'm drawn to challenging, compelling pieces and stories that have impact and also that can operate with content and messaging. i feel like that's the responsibility i have as a filmmaker to use the medium in a way that is informational, potentially journalistic and also experiential. but informational, i think it's really important to -- you know, in this case, i think what was most important to me was to invite a dialogue about race in this country, and i feel that's really critical. >> rose: tell me about your own acting training and what has given you the most tools to work with. >> i decided i wanted to act and went to my local theater group which had to do contemporary dance and ballet in order to do acting. it came as a deal package, so i had to do all of it. >> rose: ballet's probably good for motion, isn't it? >> it's good. i can still boogie down. ( laughter ) and after that i went to identity drama school, when i decided i wanted to pursue it seriously, i dropped out of university and went to identity, i met my agent and we started off on the journey together. that training was intense. >> rose: how long have you been doing this? >> i have been doing it professionally will be just six years, i think it will be. six years. >> rose: and what did you learn from this role, in this performance? >> "detroit" gave me purpose. >> rose: yeah. i like to do movies that have a big commentary on our world once in a while. i like to have fun most of the times, but sometimes my minds just draws me towards projects that just have serious context and, you know, it changed me in a sense because i'm having to tell my agents i don't want to go below the standard in "detroit" because i was exposed to a side of myself creatively -- >> rose: she got things out of you you might not even have known yourself? >> yeah, 100%. >> rose: did you feel some sense of urgency to make sure that we really find the rawest part of racism and show it? >> i think what was important, i don't want to speak for mark, was the truth and honesty of the story and tell it with as much integrity as possible. >> rose: yeah. what do you think, mark? >> i think that's a good question. i'm not sure i'd phrase it exactly like that but the way i thought about it is that a kind of very frank and unvarnished portrayal without -- well, you put it so eloquently on a panel the other day that racism is on one level a system of lies. so without trying to put a whole psychological framework around it or kind of -- like, we're not trying to shade it too much because i think if something's a lie, it's a lie. it's very black and white. i was thinking about that and the writing and the character because it would have been easy to maybe -- not easy, but possible to draw the character in a more -- not nuance like your performance is amazing, but in a way that it's a lie and he believes a lie. that, to me, is sort of -- there is something about the starkness of that that i thought, why not just go there? >> rose: he doesn't believe he's a racist, does he? or have you thought about that? >> no, i think he believes white doesn't actually makes him racist. he's wrong, he believes he's right and that makes him racist. >> rose: where did you get the voice? >> i don't know. i think i looked at a number of different -- >> rose: performances? you know what's frightening is you don't even have to look at performances. you can actually look very close to home and see inspiration and that's the unfortunate thing. i think the relevance that this film bears to recent cases of police brutality or, of course, harrowingly strong and it is all so relevant. but to see people with a similar mindset 50 years on still operating with the same degree of confidence and still causing such damage to communities and upholding the systems that continue to deny people social justice, it's real-life, horror movie material. >> rose: some of this is in the trailer but let me show this again. questioning karl green played by anthony mackey. this is you questioning, anthony mackey. >> says there, paratrooper eight years, two deployments. honorable discharge. >> this is a fake. no, sir. the this your girl? i just met her. what's his name? i don't know. his name is karl green. i wasn't asking you. i was asking her. what's his name? >> i just said his name. you're lucky i haven't broken your (bleep) neck yet. >> i see what you're trying to do. i'm not going to cause trouble, but i'm not going to lie down for you either. >> rose: what are you thinking? >> i really enjoy working with anthony mackey and will poulter. i like being in that room and around this incredible talent. >> rose: there's a moment in the director's life where the actors take it even beyond what you would have ever thought? >> absolutely. it's magic when that happens and that happened, i think, every day on the set. >> rose: how does the director get that? there is moments in which you guys take it beyond. what's her role, then? >> i think, for me, the best directors know how to collaborate. the best directors know the balance between technical and art because there are cameras, there are many things to concentrate on, but there's a balance that they hold, and, also, it's guidance. with notes, sometimes an actor when the cameras are rolling, you're thinking of yourself, and a director guides you to come back to character, to come back to story, and that's what kathryn does very, very well. >> i was going to say kathryn together with barry creates a really unique environment. it was astonishing to be on set and to feel genuinely immersed in that world. >> rose: you felt like you were in that world? >> yeah, absolutely, so it reduces the acting challenge for you. i think, also, for young actors to be given the freedom to do what you want, i was fully prepared to put myself in kathryn's hand and be micromanaged over the cadence of my line and every single expression but, often, she would bless me with just something as simple as do whatever feels natural and do whatever feels right, and that's the most -- >> i just have to say forks americas what was shocking, i've never experienced that, when the camera's been rolling. i've only experienced that on stage because, on stage, the director can't stop you or guide you, you're given this freedom, and i've never experienced it on film, so it's strange but i wish every project was like that. >> yeah, yeah. >> rose: right. it's allphill from here. what are the people in detroit saying? >> well, i think the response has been terrific, you know, especially the people who -- we just had a premiere there, and it's really been overwhelming. the response has been incredible. i was going to say, especially people who actually lived during the 1967 uprising. >> rose: and is there a sense that they thank somebody for telling our story, even though there have been investigations and lots of things written? i mean, film is a powerful chronicler of emotion. >> i think that -- i mean, that certainly is the message that has come back to me, that, you know, this has been in the dark for 50 years, and it's time that it be out there. i mean, i know i had -- i'm sorry. >> i was going to say, the city's been revisiting and commemorating the 50-year anniversary for the last couple of months, and, so, the film came in the context of -- it didn't come out of the blue, it came in the context of that and, obviously, everybody knows there's a lot going on in detroit right now in terms of attempts to revitalize it. but for the -- and kathryn is absolutely right, for the detroiters who lived through '67 and for their children who are incredibly loyal to the city, who stayed through thick and thin and incredibly proud of their town, looking back at this really dark period in history, i don't think it's been easy for the city, but there's a lot of pride and place that comes with the commemoration. that's what i felt. >> rose: so there is also a sense it's our history, and you want to own your history, whether bad or good. you want to understand it because you feel the deepness of the roots in a place that shapes you. yes? >> yeah, and there was a little bit of -- i mean, i'm from new york city, so i'm not from detroit, and there was a little bit, i think -- i didn't encounter this when i was working. but definitely when the movie came out, there was a little bit of a sense of, okay, you guys are really not from here. but -- and there's lots of sort of reactions that fall in that category, but i think once people saw the movie, the quality of the film kind of speaks for itself, or lack of quality. there's no way you can see this movie and not feel people are trying to do something serious, whether we succeeded or not. but it's not the emoji movie. ( laughter ) >> rose: a long way from the emoji movie. you said, kathryn, "boston globe," humanizing the conflict and tragedy of the algiers creates empty. empathy is a more active engagement, from that comes dialogue and out of that comes maybe the start of justice. thank you for making this film, all of you. >> thank you. >> rose: thank you for writing it. great to have you at this table. >> thank you. >> rose: we'll be right back. stay with us. >> rose: icarus, the new film opening on netflix and in theaters august 4 explores russia's long-running state-sponsored doping program. it began however with a very different premise. vogel -- fogel's original intention was to expose athletes taking drugs and trying to avoid detection when participating in an amateur cycling race. he performed under russia's anti-doping center. it took a turn as details of russia's doping program began to emerge. here's a look at the trailer. >> i was thinking i would start by asking questions and you answer yes or. no were yoyou the mastermind tht cheated the olympics? >> yes. today, the world anti-doping agency suspended russia's ports drug testing lab. >> 90% of russian athletes are guilty of doping! >> it's worse than we thought. f this is true, it's an unimaginable level of criminality. >> facilitate one of the most elaborate doping price in history. >> this goes back to 1968, riff sport. >> was putin aware of the existence of a russian doping system? >> yes. this if this can be proved, it's mind blowing. >> the "new york times" is breaking tomorrow. >> tomorrow! it has the potential of affecting the credibility of all sport. why would i watch an event that's fixed? o. >> are you in any danger? yes, i need to escape. they will kill me. holy (bleep). putin calls the claims the slander of a turn coat. >> two people connected with the russian doping program are already dead. >> there never was anti-doping in russia, ever. ( cheering ) >> rose: as i said earlier, icarus appears on netflix august 4. joining me is director bryan fogel, producers dan cogan and david. good to have them at the table. what did you intend to do? >> i was interested because i had been a life-long cyclist. i was intrigued by the lance armstrong scandal because i looked at a guy who still to this day passed 500 anti-doping controls clean and the only way they get him is through a criminal investigation. i started looking at what was wrong with the anti-doping system that they couldn't catch the most tested athlete on plan et earth and decide id i'd embark on this investigative mission first to explore the flaws in the anti-doping system and, second, to says what do you feed to finish the move? that began another three years between that conversation and us sitting here. >> rose: and david, how did you get involved? >> dan called me and said this is a great story. this is a guy trying to show the doping system doesn't work. it's really interesting, you should watch the races, how they go. when we went to europe and saw how he did racing, what we realized is this is really interesting, but the more interesting piece is how so many people had evaded doping for so long and created this dynamic wherein bryan said let's figure out how the russians are doing it and that was super fascinating. >> rose: how did you find you had a massive program by the russians with accusations that president vladimir putin knew? >> it was a slow burn and then a very fast burn. there was a period from december 2014 to november 2015. during this time, i'm working with gregory. he's advising me huh to. dr. gregory is at the time running the third largest anti-doping in the world and overseeing the soichi olympics and overseeing russian and international athletes coming to russia to compete. so i began working with gregory and shortly thereafter there's an investigation launched based on the television documentary and during this year gregory is under investigation but i keep going on with my film and gregory is helping to advise me. november 2015, a report comes out based on this investigation, and it's now alleging that gregory is essentially the master mind of the state-sponsored doping program, but at the time still mandated, the investigation's only on the track and field, but this creates a series of events, the lab is shut down, gregory is forced to shut down, russia is suspended from world track and field and gregory is basically telling me that he's going to be killed by the russian government and i helped facilitate his escape from moscow to los angeles, and then over the next few months, i learned the full size and scope. >> rose: once he was in los angeles, he was free to tell you. >> yes, and that's when i learned the size and scope of this spectacular conspiracy to cheat the olympics that had been placed for essentially all of modern sport, but specifically what they did at the soichi games, which was an unimaginable fraud. >> rose: and the accusation against the president of russia? >> well, when you look at how russian sport is set up, right, unlike the u.s. where it's all private, in russia it's actually controlled by the ministry, and all russian athletes -- >> rose: the sports ministry? yes, the sports ministry in russia. so all russian athletes across all sports are essentially being paid by the russian government. so everything under russia is under the country umbrella and gregory is running the anti-doping lab which is really the anti-anti-doping lab, and the guy who is his boss, his russian ministry, vitali who is then the sports minister of russia, his best friend is vladimir putin, who he grew up with. so gregory, the chain of command was essentially gregory to muko, muko to putin. this is two degrees of separation, not six degrees of separation. >> rose: what happened to ninester of sport? >> the minister of sport, when this entire scandal gets revealed, putin elevates him to the deputy prime minister of russia, essentially the vice president of russia and has never accepted any responsibility for the state-sponsored doping program and the guy below him, the deputy vice minister is forced to resign and now under criminal investigation. >> rose: what is it that makes this so compelling? >> this film started as one thing that was interesting enough, which is bryan thought the anti-dopin system was not working and was, in fact, a fraud, and he set out to test that by taking the drugs himself and seeing if he could get through all the tests looking clean. it grew to be 100 times bigger than we imagined when, not only was all of that true, but he became friends with dr. rochenkov and through saving him and bringing him to russia when his life was in danger we learned what the russians had been doing which was gaming the system for 40 years and reaching a crescendo at soichi at which they collected clean urine from every russian athlete in soichi before the game, kept it in a secret k.g.b. vault, and when any of those athletes got a medal and would be drug tested, found a way to break an unbreakable system and dump dirty urine so it could never be tested and replace it with clean urine. it was an incredibly brazen thawed that said not only can you get by the system in small ways but you can crack it open in a gigantic way. >> rose: who has confirmed the story of gregory about what happened? >> after we go to the "new york times," and this is may 2016, a lot of world anti-doping agency is forced to launch another investigation into the claims put forward in the "new york times." i helped to facilitate a meeting and richard mclaren was the head of that investigation independently, and this information went on between may of 2016 all the way through december of this year, and the investigation found-year-old that every single thing gregory said and put forward is true, it corroborated all the evidence scientifically, through interpol, et cetera. >> rose: this is an investigation by the "new york times"? >> no. the "new york times" broke the story based on all the evidence we brought to them. then the world anti-doping agency led an investigation to actually get the samples from soichi being held by the olympic committee and test them to see if they had been tampered with. between that process and plus what was 1666 documents of evidence that led straight back to the ministry, this report found, without a out the,-year-old, that not only was this true, that -- but the extent of this fraud goes back further than they can even imagine. we brought forward evidence in beijing 2008, of london in 2012, of multiple championships that were held since that time and then, of course, soichi where they went and examined the bottles and found scratches of how the k.g.b., the f.s.b. broke into the bottles and found spectacular levels of salt content in the urine samples because gregory was adding salt into the clean urine samples to match the gravity, which is a scientific question, but essentially they corroborated everything gregory brought forth as undeniable truth. >> rose: so where is the russian sports program now. >> right now what has happened, to start with, there was a little bit about starting to make a movie about bryan doping and could he beat the system, then through the relationship of prochinkov, we learned about the russians. and then putin's popularity was pumped up which, two weeks after soichi, ended up attacking ukraine. so this was a political motive to use the sports system as a way to enhance russia's political agenda. >> that's right, and where the russians are now is there are two separate investigations from the i.o.c. of the russians to determine whether or not they should be allow to participate in the february winter olympics in south korea. >> rose: so there is a serious question whether they will be allowed to participate? >> we dill do not know, although i have to say one thing that has been very clear through this process is that the i.o.c. does not want anything to happen to russia here. the i.o.c. has made very clear that if they could they'd sweep this under the rug. >> rose: how? the world anti-doping situation is their arm that punishes these things and countries and athletes if they're doping. when we expose all this in the "new york times," president thomas bach of the i.o.c. said we'll let w.a.d.a. decide what happens to the russians. w.a.d.a. said the entire russian team should be banned from the olympics because of what russia did and the i.o.c. said, sorry, no, we're not going to do that. only the track and field athletes were banned. the truth is nobody wants to expose doping in sports. why? because it's bad for business. if you're the i.o.c., you don't want audiences to think all these athletes are competing on an uneven level. so, what they really want is spectacular athletic feats supported by doping with a system that looks like they're fighting doping but doesn't catch anyone. this is not in anyone's interests. it is in the interests of audiences and those everywhere who want a level playing field. >> rose: what do you hope the consequence of the film is? >> a couple of thoughts. up with is from a story-telling point, the courage that bryan and his team did by exposing an international incident to be around sports and ended up leading to pretty nasty politics including a country being attacked and people being murdered, and that story, it takes courage to tell that story. this started out with a story about sports and ended up being about the manipulation of politics and that's a story that has to be told and we got lucky this happens to be geopolitically very live right now. the movie, ironically, played on january 20th at sundance. at the time we were playing the movie, literally within an hour of the movie being played at sundance, our current president was sworn in and we've seen over the last six months how the relationship with russia led to an enormous amount of consequences in the united states. so bryan telling the story led to something relevant to how we handle the world now. >> you asked a question, charlie, what's most interesting about this, right now in america what's most interesting about this movie to the extent to which the russians are willing to go to project just soft power in the world, the way they're willing to manipulate, to lie, to deceive and to create a fraud in the world of international sports. that's soft power. imagine what they're willing to do on issues of hard power. >> rose: so why did ron chinkov do this? >> to and that story, first, you have to look at the bravery he put forward to tell this story. when he came to the united states, he could have kept his mouth shut, but instead took extraordinary risks to bring this story forward and had he not none of this would have come forward. he knew he would be a dead man in russia, but he could have come to the united states and probably stayed quiet, figured out a way to get asylum, went to canada, whatever, but he decided he was going to bring this story forward, and the reason why is that soichi for him broke his back because his career was actually as a scientist and part of that work was to figure out how to get around the doping test. what they did at soichi for him was no longer about science, i was outright fraud. he was upset at the ministry, he told them this had to stop. after soichi, it not only didn't stop, it continued. it continued into the swimming world championship, into the junior athletics world championship, collegiate athletes and the sports being held in moscow. this was going to continue. gregory said it reached its logical conclusion and he wanted to bring the story to the world. >> rose: this is clip thurm two where bryan and the doctor discussed the growing concerns about russian knowledge. here it is. >> there he is there. this is who i am. and big boss putin saying show the best result, we must show others. hoorah! >> hoorah, hoorah! we could make it in one month but it was decided to use bad urine. >> through the competition so that they could be at their very top level. >> right, right. vladimir putin -- so instead of using the science, the science that you developed to get around the system, you abandoned the science? >> yes. the most important yes. >> ladies and gentlemen, let me be clear, 126 sessions of the international olympic committee. thank you. >> rose: talk to me about what you did in terms of wanting to go through this experiment yourself. >> i wanted to go through it for many reasons. one is, as an athlete, and i competed as a cyclist from the time i was 13 until the time i was 20 and wanted to be a pro, i had this curiosity my whole life of what exactly do these drugs do, would they make me a better athlete, would i possibly be a champion, so i had that curiosity. the second part of that curiosity is what decision does an athlete competing on a world level at the best of the sport have to make whether or not they're going to use the substance or not use the substance if the system itself doesn't work. so that was the driving force behind my desire to want to do what i did. >> rose: you ever talk to lance armstrong? >> i met him about two and a half years ago before my movie took this pivot and, at the time, i showed him the same 25-minute piece i showed dan, and lance was very excited about it because it was showing that he was a needle in the hay tack rather than the haystack itself. >> rose: that was in his self-interest. >> and i always viewed lance as essentially a needle in the hay stack rather than the haystack but he had been put up as that. >> rose: what do you want to say the film accomplished? >> the major piece this will show is what dan touched on before which is russia's manipulation of a system that started out with athletes internally and now the potential to how they can open our eyes. >> rose: how a government can use this to enhance political strategy. >> yes, and sports is just an analogies of orthoparts of our lives. so in and of itself the story of sports is interesting. the reason why the story has become such a phenomenon is it leads us to re-think how russian or other countries can manipulate our political system and how easy it was to play the political game by using soichi as a way the attack another country and try to justify it and the second example how it's played over the last six months with the impact on the united states government. and that story has to get told, dhearl. >> there are two important impacts i think the film can have, one is to show what the russian government is willing to do simply on soft power to manipulate and undercut international systems, and if you think you're willing to do that just in sports, imagine what they're willing to do in politics. >> boldly. and not only that, january 7, when the c.i.a., n.s.a. and f.b.i. released their declassified report into the election hacking, they listed seven reasons. reason number three is what they perceived athas putin's revenge for america's involvement in the doping scandal and release of the panama papers. what they meant is putin thought because recherchgov came to the united states,, because the story broke in names and because the department of justice launched an investigation into the scandal and the u.s. is behind this, they listed this as one of the seven reasons the elections got hacked and consequencely the "new york times" broke on may 12, and the hack of the d.n.c. and clinton was a month later, almost 30 days to the date. >> so the other impact significantly is in the world of sports is that the only way to have integrity in the world of sports is for athletes, clean athletes to get up and say, we will not accept an olympics that has so much doping, and we hope that the film shows exactly how corrupt the system is and serves as a rallying cry for athletes to change it. most athletes are clean, and there's an organization now called fair sport started by one of our fellow producers that wants to support whistle blowers coming out and telling the truth about doping in sports, and if clean athletes stand up, we think that can make a change and the film with help inspire that. >> rose: thank you dan, bryan, david. icarus opens on netflix and in theaters august 4. thank you for joining us. see you next time. for more about this program and earlier episodes, visit us online at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. man: it's like holy mother of comfort food.ion. kastner: throw it down. it's noodle crack. patel: you have to be ready for the heart attack on a platter. crowell: okay, i'm the bacon guy. man: oh, i just did a jig every time i dipped into it. man #2: it just completely blew my mind. woman: it felt like i had a mouthful of raw vegetables and dry dough. sbrocco: oh, please. i want the dessert first! [ laughs ] i told him he had to wait.