Alex Gibney: what about your Lie? The Gibney Lie?

[blackcat]

Any person with a brain would have known Armstrong was lying through his back teeth.

So what about The First Film.

I wanna see The First Film. The one in the can, aka: The Gibney Lie.

Why are we pursuing a film on Armstrong called The Armstrong Lie, when the one all the more fascinating is the first one, that Gibney allowed himself to be the filter through which Armstrong took his PR show on the road.

I wanna see the Gibney lie.

 

[Stingray34]

That's a good point. If he knew LA was lying before the merde hit the fan, what was his film actually like first time around?

 

[blackcat]

You're no Errol Morris Gibney.

Phillip Glass would not p!ss over your film to arrange the score

 

[BroDeal]

I wanna see the Gibney lie.

It will be titled the Glibney Lie.

But seriously, after it was announced in 2005 that EPO was found in six of Armstrong's 1999 urine samples how could anyone have known that Armstrong was doping? It was not possible. Certainly so after Armstrong used the hard hitting and peer reviewed media outlet of Larry King to refute the scientific evidence by blaming the French. It was a difficult time for those seeking the truth. Even the esteemed periodical Nature nearly shut down publication because talk shows on CNN were doing a much better job of finding scientific truths. Gibney cannot be blamed for being tricked by all those renowned scientists and researchers that work for the cable news networks.

 

[High Octane]

When he began to make the film, the doping allegations appeared like a settled issue. It's not surprising that a Hollywood director wouldn't want to get into all that.

 

[Benotti69]

Gibney is an Armstrong fan.

 

[thehog]

When he began to make the film, the doping allegations appeared like a settled issue. It's not surprising that a Hollywood director wouldn't want to get into all that.

The brief for the doco was that Armstrong would win the 2009 Tour.

The route was watered down to suit, the cameras were in place, the doping was geared up.

Except he didn't bank on Contador doping just as much and that he'd go against team orders to let Armstrong win.

So ok. Take 2. RadioShack.

Would have been the perfect movie. Darn!

 

[blackcat]

Gibney is an Armstrong fan.

ohhh so that was Gibney in the bathroom.

 

[Benotti69]

ohhh so that was Gibney in the bathroom.

How else does someone get a gig with Armstrong

 

[frenchfry]

It would be so much easier to assume that everything that comes out of Lancey-poo's mouth is a big fat self-serving lie.

Maybe a truth slips out by accident from time to time.

I can't believe that some are still playing the "did he or didn't he in 2009" game.

 

[The Hitch]

This to me is the greatest tragedy of how the Armstrong saga played out. All those who stood with Armstrong, were wrong and made life hell for those who stood for the truth, got off. Ligget, Wiggins, Kirby, Horner, spineless journalists, bloggers such as blazin saddles etc, all get to now pretend they were anti Armstrong all along

This Gibney person isn't neccesarily the same, but still, it leaves a sour taste in the mouth that someone who knows nothing about our sport and us a result of this ignorance was willing to use his privelaged position to give more popularity and credence to the bad guy, gets to just turn around and make money of this. Make money of our sport having proving himself totally unqualified to do so.

Its very similar (though nowhere near as bad) to how in 1989-1991 behid the iron curtain, all the communists who were behind the oppression and murders and torture, made a deal with the sellout leaders of freedom movements, that they could keep all the riches they had stolen from the people, and pretend they had been good guys all along.

 

[LaFlorecita]

http://m.rollingstone.com/movies/news/10-truths-from-the-armstrong-lie-20131107

I like this

3. Alberto Contador is a badass.

 

[blackcat]

This to me is the greatest tragedy of how the Armstrong saga played out. All those who stood with Armstrong, were wrong and made life hell for those who stood for the truth, got off. Ligget, Wiggins, Kirby, Horner, spineless journalists, bloggers such as blazin saddles etc, all get to now pretend they were anti Armstrong all along

This Gibney person isn't neccesarily the same, but still, it leaves a sour taste in the mouth that someone who knows nothing about our sport and us a result of this ignorance was willing to use his privelaged position to give more popularity and credence to the bad guy, gets to just turn around and make money of this. Make money of our sport having proving himself totally unqualified to do so.

Its very similar (though nowhere near as bad) to how in 1989-1991 behid the iron curtain, all the communists who were behind the oppression and murders and torture, made a deal with the sellout leaders of freedom movements, that they could keep all the riches they had stolen from the people, and pretend they had been good guys all along.

I dont mind Gibney getting paid, it is his job.

BUT, what i will call him on is the hypocrisy. in my conception, he made two films. on a meta level, both were lies. The first one, the most egregious and that is the one i wish to see, that will prolly never be seen by the public. if anyone is a producer inside the tent do you wanna leak it to wikileaks or put it on the pirate bay?

Everyone knows Armstrong lied and was full of sh!t, now, and most did before. Certainly when he made the film, the first one, Gibney knew he was engaging the fable to further exploit the public. That makes, in my eyes, Gibney a carnt.

I wanna see The First Film.

and it should be called just that.

The First Film.

colloquially, like BroDeal coined, the Glibney lie.

 

[thehog]

The movie is a total let down.

I guess it maybe better in a few more years time once Lance is released from jail.

And a lot more pieces of the puzzle are in the public domain.

You can tell Gibney really wanted Armstrong to win. But at the same time you can tell Armstrong was using Gibney as well.

 

[martinvickers]

The movie is a total let down.

I guess it maybe better in a few more years time once Lance is released from jail.

And a lot more pieces of the puzzle are in the public domain.

You can tell Gibney really wanted Armstrong to win. But at the same time you can tell Armstrong was using Gibney as well.

Hog, genuine question.

Do you ever get tired of trying to fix a past that can't be fixed? I do.

Once upon a time I was all for T&R, desperate to draw a line, make a change, flush out the stables...But for a while now, I just don't think justice is going to be possible - and I sometimes wonder if resources might be better pushed towards stopping present or future doping, rather than policing the past - and don't get me wrong, it stick's in my craw.

Maybe it's just my reaction to other historic wrong-doing inquiries, both child abuse and financial corruption in this country, that seem, really to solve nothing.

But then, what's the alternative?

Ah well, just musing....

 

[RownhamHill]

Really interesting interview in the Guardain by Paul Kimmage with Alex Gibney from a month or two ago:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/oct/20/lance-armstrong-drugs-in-sport

Here's what he's got to say on whether the original cut will ever see the light of day (Kimmage in bold, Gibney in non-bold):

I was going to ask about the two cuts later, but I'll ask you now: Clint Eastwood did something fantastic with Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima, when he told the same story from two different perspectives and put them side by side. Would it be fantastic to see The Road Back and The Armstrong Lie side by side?

I think it would be, and we're talking about it now, but it's a rights problem.

What's the problem?

Because the Tour de France [organisers] exact a pretty heavy levy on, not only the footage that you might licence from the past, but any time you photograph the race. But we're trying to work it out. I do think it would be fascinating. I'm OK with that.

I was going to ask that.

No, I'm OK with that … Look, obviously I didn't feel that I could release The Road Back once all of this detail became known, but it wasn't utterly naïve. There were some odd things that happened in the course of following his 2009 year that ended up being very valuable later on. And some of them, like the interview with Ferrari [Armstrong's doctor, Michele Ferrari] were in the original cut. And I shot the interview with Simeoni [the former Italian rider, Filippo Simeoni, who was bullied by Armstrong in 2004] and the interview with Walsh in 2009.

Make of that what you will.

 

[thehog]

Hog, genuine question.

Do you ever get tired of trying to fix a past that can't be fixed? I do.

Once upon a time I was all for T&R, desperate to draw a line, make a change, flush out the stables...But for a while now, I just don't think justice is going to be possible - and I sometimes wonder if resources might be better pushed towards stopping present or future doping, rather than policing the past - and don't get me wrong, it stick's in my craw.

Maybe it's just my reaction to other historic wrong-doing inquiries, both child abuse and financial corruption in this country, that seem, really to solve nothing.

But then, what's the alternative?

Ah well, just musing....

To the movie first up. It was made for the Comeback. What unfolded in 2010 spoilt the script for Gibney. You can tell that. Also its clear Armstrong is playing the narrative for this documentary to that front. Forcing his anti-doping drug tests to be filmed etc.

Then then story changed. Sadly the movie misses the events of 2010 and how it all unfolded. It really is all about 2009 which Gibney had the footage to. Which of course was all BS.

Nevertheless there are some interesting parts. The way you're able to see Armstrong from his early years to 2009 and drawing parallels on the sort of person he is. What struck me was he his sinister laugh. It was almost redneck after shootin' some buffalo type laugh. It actually scared me. Whenever he did someone over or reminisced about it he'd laugh with that awful giggle.

Hncapie is a total let down. Just reading the auto cue written by Lance. He and Lance kept up with the "We doped conservatively" BS.

Armstrong claims he rode clean in 2000 on Hautacam after he decimated Pantani. Said no EPO and the one transfusions for the entire race came later. You just sit there and go riiiiiiighhhhht.

I found the most interesting character was Ferrari. He's the sorta guy you would want to invite home to meet the family. There a nice shot of him at home in 2009 watching the Ventoux stage with 1980's handheld stopwatch in hand.

Of the footage of 2009, Contador is a badass as has been said before. Bruyneel tells him in Spanish not to attack. So Contador just goes and forces Kloden to be dropped. It was brilliant.

The other part is Armstrong is on the whole a truly bad person. You just see it in his eyes. Even now he's plotting. He's not sorry in the slightest. You can see he still believes in time he'll be remembered at a 7 time winner.

Per Armstrong, jail etc. That's another story. I think he missed the memo that the world has changed. Enron, Wall St etc. - trying to crush people to win doesn't work anymore.

Let's see.

 

[DirtyWorks]

It's the Movie Business

Gibney is very likely not losing any sleep at all over versions 1 and 2. In both cases he got to be "a filmmaker." The best part for him and his backers is it's a completed project going to distribution.

He got financing for the initial project and whoever financed him was surely furious the wheels came off the Armstrong myth. That was the extent of that discussion.

The project was salvaged with reworking it (probably more money into the budget) and it has an audience. It's treated like a business. If the investor gets a return above their investment, then it's all good.

 

[thehog]

Gibney is very likely not losing any sleep at all over versions 1 and 2. In both cases he got to be "a filmmaker." The best part for him and his backers is it's a completed project going to distribution.

He got financing for the initial project and whoever financed him was surely furious the wheels came off the Armstrong myth. That was the extent of that discussion.

The project was salvaged with reworking it (probably more money into the budget) and it has an audience. It's treated like a business. If the investor gets a return above their investment, then it's all good.

Correct. That was my point also. The downfall in 2010 was truly a remarkable story. But he had no footage or access to Hamilton, Landis or TT so he went with what he had. He mashed together the 2009 footage with the one interview Armstrong gave him in 2012.

It was a mess. And Gibney I think is still in love with Lance.

 

[Eric67]

Gibney is an Armstrong fan.

Actually, in interviews he said that prior to making this film, he "didn't know anything about cycling", and that after making several very dark documentaries, he was looking to do somewhat lighter fare.

So, I'm not sure that he was an Armstrong fan. I think he was just looking for an interesting story to film.

 

[Benotti69]

Actually, in interviews he said that prior to making this film, he "didn't know anything about cycling", and that after making several very dark documentaries, he was looking to do somewhat lighter fare.

So, I'm not sure that he was an Armstrong fan. I think he was just looking for an interesting story to film.

Gibney said that he was looking around for a positive story.

Well he did no research on Armstrong then or he lied about 'positive story'. Becuase there was plenty that pointed to Armstrong being a cheat and fraud.

The guys who financed this film were big fans of Armstrongs. Gibney could've made a harder hitting film, once the 'reasoned decision' came down, but he didn't. Fan.

 

[skidmark]

Gibney is an Armstrong fan.

Yes, and the sh!t hit the Armstrong fan pretty hard about a year ago. At least Gibney quite literally is in control of his narrative, so he had more opportunities for backtracking than Lance.

 

[Benotti69]

Yes, and the sh!t hit the Armstrong fan pretty hard about a year ago. At least Gibney quite literally is in control of his narrative, so he had more opportunities for backtracking than Lance.

Gibney is not stupid, but he definitely could have really gone much harder on Armstrong, but he cut him some slack.

But 'the Gibney lie' would be a much better film as it would truly show the depth to which Armstrong and his masters were pulling the strings and lying.

 

[thehog]

Gibney is not stupid, but he definitely could have really gone much harder on Armstrong, but he cut him some slack.

But 'the Gibney lie' would be a much better film as it would truly show the depth to which Armstrong and his masters were pulling the strings and lying.

LeMomd (apparently) hired his own film crew to follow Gibney around.

Wonder what happened to that footage?

 

[blackcat]

It would be so much easier to assume that everything that comes out of Lancey-poo's mouth is a big fat self-serving lie.

Maybe a truth slips out by accident from time to time.

by coincidence. when it serves his wallet

I can't believe that some are still playing the "did he or didn't he in 2009" game.