The yr is kicking off with what’s turning into a unfastened custom: a documentary a few famend ‘90s athlete that goals to shade in a extra full image. This time round, it’s Tiger, a two-part HBO Sports activities documentary about golf celebrity Tiger Woods. Like The Final Dance, which chronicled Michael Jordan’s ultimate season with the Chicago Bulls whereas reflecting on his total profession, Tiger makes an attempt to complicate the prevailing narrative of a legend outlined by his meteoric rise and equally steep fall.
Even in case you didn’t know golf, you in all probability knew about Tiger Woods. In the event you got here of age within the ‘90s or early aughts, it was unattainable to not know concerning the man who introduced raucous, Michael Jordan-levels of celeb to golf — a sport so historically restrained that Adam Sandler was in a position to make successful comedy the place the one actual joke was “what if a golfer acquired actual pissed off on a regular basis?”
Tiger Woods was a phenomenon. He had the kind of generational expertise that turns into synonymous with a sport whereas concurrently redefining what’s potential — regardless of (or due to) the actual fact he was so totally different from what got here earlier than. It additionally may be why Tiger Woods’ fame as a golfer was equally matched by his notoriety as gossip fodder, as his addictions and indiscretions piled up for a fall as ravenously chronicled as his rise.
All through most of its roughly three-hour runtime, Tiger looks like a Behind the Music particular narrowly targeted on Tiger’s life: administrators Matthew Heineman and Matthew Hamachek are very interested by Woods’ early years as a baby prodigy and the difficult relationship the golfer had together with his controlling father. It’s in opposition to this backdrop that Tiger holds the golfer’s total profession and public life up for scrutiny: it portrays his unprecedented successes as owed partially to the arguably abusive upbringing his father gave him and his descent into painkiller habit and infidelity because the response of a person who was misplaced after his father died.
For probably the most half, Tiger is profitable at humanizing the individual behind the headlines, even when it really works at a take away. Woods himself principally seems in archival footage, except a quick shock look on the finish of the movie. His story is usually informed by the individuals who had been round him on the heights of his renown: pals, rivals, journalists, and lovers type a motley crew of individuals caught up within the hurricane of his fame. It’s a superb exploration of the informal dehumanization that’s half and parcel of contemporary celeb, however on the similar time, the movie is so restricted in scope that it may possibly’t fairly escape the lurid fascination it’s ostensibly critiquing. That is very true in its second half, which veers into sensationalism by treating Woods’ intercourse scandal — the second widest-known factor about him — as a suspense narrative.
Very like The Final Dance, Tiger nearly hits the mark. However the manufacturing is hindered by its topic’s involvement. Woods didn’t let anybody get too near residence, which implies Tiger is lacking the perception you will get with a robust essential lens. Each compensate for this by specializing in the phenomenon of fame over the boys themselves. These are tales much less about individuals and extra about tradition in a means that’s wholly distinctive to skilled sports activities.
Athletes make for a superb measuring stick of our cultural biases as a result of their existence tends to lift sure presumably uncomfortable questions: how a lot company can we afford them? How a lot can we fixate on their perceived ethical failings? How a lot pushback can we give after they don’t stick with sports activities? Race is an inextricable a part of these tales, too. Black athletes make thousands and thousands for executives and entertain followers — which leads each teams to an odd feeling of possession over them. It manifests as a benevolent frenzy when they’re performing, and it may be terrifyingly hostile when they aren’t.
For Woods, that sense of public possession manifested itself within the continuous headlines within the early 2000s about his unhealthy habits. He wasn’t punished by the general public simply due to a salacious tabloid tradition; he was punished as a result of individuals felt like he tarnished the lily-white picture {of professional} golf. He stepped out of line. It’s not arduous to make the leap to different unfairly maligned athletes: Colin Kaepernick overstepped when he protested police brutality; Serena Williams has been raked over the coals for not being “sportsmanlike sufficient,” which is code for, sarcastically, what occurs when a lady behaves like considered one of her male colleagues. Some individuals who just like the Lakers hate that LeBron James is vocal about present occasions. These biases aren’t new, and so they’re not going wherever. They’re part of how we inform our popular culture tales, bad-faith arguments that usually dictate how these tales are framed in our reminiscence.
But the primary draft of a celeb narrative isn’t an correct one. It’s a managed story, fastidiously orchestrated by publicists and company pursuits. Star energy means cash, and cash have to be protected — but celeb additionally dictates that well-known individuals seem relatable, that the broader public be aware of some elements of their private lives. And thus, infamy is sticky. In the event you’re Tiger Woods, the headlines could be arduous to shake.
It’s additionally uncommon that popular culture affords the infamous a cautious reappraisal. These days, the celebrities of ‘90s gossip headlines are getting a greater rap than most, sitting on the confluence of an trade in dire want of content material and an viewers voracious for brand spanking new tales concerning the heroes they grew up with. Although it’s imperfect, Tiger can function a reminder that the simple tales aren’t essentially those we must be telling. In fact, we ought to meet our heroes — and take into consideration who the villains actually are, too.