Armstrong Lie

feelgoodlost

Not sure if this is the 'definitive' version but there's a stream here - http://putlocker.bz/watch-the-armstrong ... ocker.html

ad_snow

I've got a 480p version that I could probably share somehow

rick_chasey

Just watched this.

Thoughts:

Daniel Coyle - unappealing. Selling it far harder than he had to.

Surprised with everyone's thoughts on Hincape. Seems exactly how I expected. And not in a bad way.

Forgot how engaging Armstrong is to watch. He is endlessly fascinating.

I wish there'd been more Ferrari. I get the feeling that he felt Armstrong was still a genuinely unusual athlete.

Reminded me how mentally strong Contador is.

It was veery american which was a bit of a shame.

I also don't really like Gibney's style - I didn't enjoy the enron film either - the book was much better and I feel both films were rounding off the edges a bit too much to keep it punchy for the film.

There was too much moralising going on. For a documentary maker whose two films he's know for which focus on the extreme ends or products of systemic and structural 'cheating' (enron & this), he never really leaves the (fallacy of) moral absolutism and doesn't really get stuck into nitty gritty of the structure/system and leave the morality behind. That kind of attitude turns the contrast up too high between the various characters and it leaves me feeling a little un-sated. It's too two dimensional.

Enjoyed all the old footage though - as ever.

Loved the on-bike camera when Popyvic was making his way back from the cars, dodging this that and the other. Put my 'good' bike handling skills into the shade somewhat!

RichN95.

Emile Vrijman looks like I did when I had my wisdom teeth pulled out.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Emile Vrijman looks like I did when I had my wisdom teeth pulled out.

Bahahaha.

ddraver

It's an interesting point Rick - I watched another one of his - The Last Gladiators - which is about one of the Ice Hockey "Enforcers" (Something Nilan). I really enjoyed that and becasue it's a less Black & White topic (to Hockey fans anyway...) there was much less than that

Search it out (it's on Netflix), if you re a sports fan it's a good watch...

rick_chasey

ddraver wrote:

It's an interesting point Rick - I watched another one of his - The Last Gladiators - which is about one of the Ice Hockey "Enforcers" (Something Nilan). I really enjoyed that and becasue it's a less Black & White topic (to Hockey fans anyway...) there was much less than that

Search it out (it's on Netflix), if you re a sports fan it's a good watch...

That's my point really - it shouldn't be black and white here or with enron either because, as most interesting things in life, it just isn't.

Sure you can take some moralistic narrow take where it is - 'either you cross the line or you don't' but that's so reductive it's pointless - both from an entertainment perspective when making a documentary, and as an approach for reconciling the past and understanding it.

rick_chasey

By the way, - if you have even the remotest interest in finance / business / trading - the smartest guys in the room is an excellent read. Really good stuff. Kept me entertained for lonely days in the sun in NYC.

dougzz

RichN95 wrote:

Emile Vrijman looks like I did when I had my wisdom teeth pulled out.

He looked like one of those deliberately distorted smart phone pictures, really odd.

joelsim

Cheers for that, enjoyed it.

joelsim

dougzz wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Emile Vrijman looks like I did when I had my wisdom teeth pulled out.

He looked like one of those deliberately distorted smart phone pictures, really odd.

A fatbooth walrus.

blazing_saddles

Finally ploughed my way through it.
Thought the last third better than the rest for the reason
Rich intimated: the Contador/Armstrong/Bruyneel dynamic.
No doubt Bruyneel's bread was still spread with Texan butter.
An interesting film there, in it's own right.

As for the rest, it was like watching a repeat of a repeat.
If anything, Lance still portrayed with a touch too much fanboyism
for my taste.

cyclingspenny

The less coverage all round this is given the better for me. That is all.

Crankbrother

cyclingspenny wrote:

The less coverage all round this is given the better for me. That is all.

He said, bumping the thread to the top of the page ... Doh!

Richmond Racer

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Finally ploughed my way through it.
Thought the last third better than the rest for the reason
Rich intimated: the Contador/Armstrong/Bruyneel dynamic.
No doubt Bruyneel's bread was still spread with Texan butter.
An interesting film there, in it's own right.

As for the rest, it was like watching a repeat of a repeat.
If anything, Lance still portrayed with a touch too much fanboyism
for my taste.

Gibney fell under his spell, and has stayed under it post-revelation. Mind you, many many people did - I just expected a little more of Gibney. Saw a tweet from him a few days ago in a Twitter discussion, asking someone if they were naive enough to think the current peloton is clean (his exact words) - which gave me the feeling that he's trying to justify things for Lance. Very bizzarre.

above_the_cows

Rick Chasey wrote:

There was too much moralising going on. For a documentary maker whose two films he's know for which focus on the extreme ends or products of systemic and structural 'cheating' (enron & this), he never really leaves the (fallacy of) moral absolutism and doesn't really get stuck into nitty gritty of the structure/system and leave the morality behind. That kind of attitude turns the contrast up too high between the various characters and it leaves me feeling a little un-sated. It's too two dimensional.

Good point, I agree that's a documentary I'd like to see, but is it a documentary other people would want to see? Non-cycling fans? Sadly moralising sells. Also is it a documentary that Alex Gibney could have made? Probably not. Having said that it goes someway to maintaining the goodies versus badies narrative, OK the number of badies is hinted at being more than just Lance at least, but it would have been interesting to really explore the systemic reasons behind as well as the processes that facilitated such actions. The brush off - doping for the carnival or sport and money thing while no doubt part of the story doesn't fill out the who, why, where and how of said story.

dennisn

Richmond Racer wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Finally ploughed my way through it.
Thought the last third better than the rest for the reason
Rich intimated: the Contador/Armstrong/Bruyneel dynamic.
No doubt Bruyneel's bread was still spread with Texan butter.
An interesting film there, in it's own right.

As for the rest, it was like watching a repeat of a repeat.
If anything, Lance still portrayed with a touch too much fanboyism
for my taste.

Gibney fell under his spell, and has stayed under it post-revelation. Mind you, many many people did - I just expected a little more of Gibney. Saw a tweet from him a few days ago in a Twitter discussion, asking someone if they were naive enough to think the current peloton is clean (his exact words) - which gave me the feeling that he's trying to justify things for Lance. Very bizzarre.

And then again maybe it was "just a question". Maybe you make more of it than it was? :?

mike6

Richmond Racer wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Finally ploughed my way through it.
Thought the last third better than the rest for the reason
Rich intimated: the Contador/Armstrong/Bruyneel dynamic.
No doubt Bruyneel's bread was still spread with Texan butter.
An interesting film there, in it's own right.

As for the rest, it was like watching a repeat of a repeat.
If anything, Lance still portrayed with a touch too much fanboyism
for my taste.

Gibney fell under his spell, and has stayed under it post-revelation. Mind you, many many people did - I just expected a little more of Gibney. Saw a tweet from him a few days ago in a Twitter discussion, asking someone if they were naive enough to think the current peloton is clean (his exact words) - which gave me the feeling that he's trying to justify things for Lance. Very bizzarre.

Yes, I think you are probably right there. Sounds like a fanboi reaction from Gibney.

Richmond Racer

dennisn wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Finally ploughed my way through it.
Thought the last third better than the rest for the reason
Rich intimated: the Contador/Armstrong/Bruyneel dynamic.
No doubt Bruyneel's bread was still spread with Texan butter.
An interesting film there, in it's own right.

As for the rest, it was like watching a repeat of a repeat.
If anything, Lance still portrayed with a touch too much fanboyism
for my taste.

Gibney fell under his spell, and has stayed under it post-revelation. Mind you, many many people did - I just expected a little more of Gibney. Saw a tweet from him a few days ago in a Twitter discussion, asking someone if they were naive enough to think the current peloton is clean (his exact words) - which gave me the feeling that he's trying to justify things for Lance. Very bizzarre.

And then again maybe it was "just a question". Maybe you make more of it than it was? :?

As with anything, dennis, you read something in the context of what has been discussed in the conversation leading up to that point

ddraver

I think you re being a tad harsh RR, I thought there was enough "pro and Cons" from the talking heads - maybe not from Gibney or Larry themselves, but the Guys from Bicycling who wasnt Bill Strickland usually got the last word and gave the "xyz may have been the case but it doesnt absolve him" viewpoint of most cycling fans

iainf72

I think it's difficult for Gibney to have produced anything other than what he did. His starting position was that of being a mug for being taken in by Lance. And it's probably difficult for him to admit he was awfully wrong.

I think he could've made a better film if he could've hooked up with Floyd before he sent the letter to USADA and followed that story.

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

I think it's difficult for Gibney to have produced anything other than what he did. His starting position was that of being a mug for being taken in by Lance. And it's probably difficult for him to admit he was awfully wrong.

I think he could've made a better film if he could've hooked up with Floyd before he sent the letter to USADA and followed that story.

I have the same criticism for his enron film.

thomthom

It was the National Geographic broadcast from last year with a few add ons. Disappointing for the cycling fan.

Yellow Peril

Watched this yesterday. Verbruggen needs to be taken to task.