Directed by: Alex Gibney
In a sport like pro cycling, where doping controversies and positive drug tests are commonplace, does it surprise anyone that Lance Armstrong would also be caught doping? His story is mythic, as is his downfall. Surviving a near-fatal bout with cancer, Armstrong won 7 straight Tour De France titles between 1999-2005. He was an inspiration to millions and raised hundreds of millions of dollars through Livestrong to support cancer research. For years, Armstrong was the center of doping rumors, yet no one really wanted to believe them until the evidence became overwhelming. Armstrong would not only deny the rumors and the stories, but sue anyone who dared to tell the truth. "He would spend money and years bankrupting you if you said anything about him doping," said Betsy Andreu, the wife of Armstrong's former teammate Frankie Andreu.
Armstrong is depicted as a rich bully with a vindictive streak. He approaches life the way he approaches racing, "I love to win, but I hate to lose even more." Lawsuits, threats, and intimidation are some of the ways Armstrong won. He also avoided accountability for cheating because his millions of fans did not want to believe the truth. That would destroy a great story and why let truth get in the way of a great story? He also buddied up to those who would be able to help him the most, mainly Italian doctor Michele Ferrari and the then-head of the UCI, cycling's governing body. Ferrari was able to keep his client just ahead of the testing, while UCI realized banning Armstrong would mean less revenue. Others helped, while even more turned a blind eye.
Alex Gibney's The Armstrong Lie started out as a documentary of Armstrong's 2009 Tour De France comeback. At the time, Armstrong was four years away from admitting during an interview with Oprah Winfrey that he doped. He wanted to shut up the naysayers once and for all by winning the Tour De France after a four-year layoff. Armstrong placed third, but the documentary wasn't released. Once Armstrong publicly admitted his complicity, then Gibney decided to film a different ending and a different perspective. Armstrong himself granted Gibney an interview to explain things. Gibney believes Armstrong's insistence on returning to cycling instead of walking away when he should have contributed to his demise.
Armstrong's demise means being stripped of his 7 Tour De France championships and millions of dollars in fines and money owed the U.S. Postal Service (which sponsored him during his Tour De France runs). Yet, despite having to admit cheating and the blow to his personal reputation, Armstrong is not exactly destitute. Those whose lives he ruined through litigation even though they were telling the truth were not so fortunate.
The Armstrong Lie is almost a film within a film in its structure. To Armstrong's credit, he faces the music in his own documentary which was originally supposed to glorify him further. Why Gibney, whose other credits include Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room and Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence In the House of God, would be drawn to such a piece is also mystifying. I suppose documentarians need work like anyone else. Gibney himself almost seems to want to finish the film because he felt betrayed by his subject much like millions of others did. Armstrong comes clean about EPO use, blood doping, and every other advantage he used to thrive in a grueling sport. His decision to cheat came because in the late 1990's, he was riding clean and getting nowhere. Because of his ultra-competitive nature, he chose to keep up with and even surpass the Joneses.
Gibney's film isn't quite as heartbreaking as some of his other films because The Armstrong Lie shows us a man who isn't sorry he cheated, but sorry he was caught. Lance Armstrong may not have the fortune he once did, but he isn't crying poor anytime soon. Armstrong is a cog in a corrupt sport where doping is almost a prerequisite if you want to win anything. The Tour De France is as grueling a competition as there is. Armstrong chose to ride in it and also chose to try and outcheat the other cheaters. He did so with more arrogance and hubris than others did, but at the time, very few wanted to spoil the happy ending. Soon enough, the amount of evidence against him became overwhelming. Are people more upset that he doped and lied, or that he ruined their fantasy of a clean champion in a dirty sport?
No comments:
Post a Comment