The Armstrong Lie - A Review

In a rare moment (cough, cough) of downtime last night I went to catch the documentary chronicling Lance Armstrong's unraveling at the hands of USADA and subsequent stripping of all his Tour de France wins. While taking the film in, an idea popped into my head of reviewing the film for other people to read and to hopefully make them decide if they too want to view it or not. This also came off the back of people telling me to go into the movie reviewing business after complaining loudly in the New Year that there were "so many films I have to go and see". So, here's my first stab at one. If you're looking for a star rating, there is none. I'm sorry but my rating would probably be wildly different from someone else's, and this is purely my take on what I thought of the film. Therefore I deemed it unfair that I should have too much of a decisive say, one way or the other. So here we go, enjoy reading and let me know what you think!

The Armstrong Lie – A Review.

In 2009, seven time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong announced his return to competitive cycling with the sole aim of taking part in that year’s edition of the famous road race and, ultimately, winning it. One man who followed him every step of the way was film director Alex Gibney, who was intrigued by this man's “miraculous” return to the sport he had previously dominated for the better part of a decade. What was going to be a positive appraisal of Armstrong’s comeback, indeed the working title of the documentary was called “The Road Back”, quickly turned on its head when the doping revelations and subsequent confessions sent the legendary cyclist’s reputation into free-fall. Gibney went back to face Armstrong in 2012 to demand answers as to why he kept up his lie for so long.

Gibney mixes his original footage from the 2009 season, starting with Armstrong’s comeback announcement in the January right through to the culmination of the Tour de France, with interviews of Armstrong pre and post confession, along with interviews from a host of other names within cycling who either worked with, pursued or testified against the Texan. Most specifically, he speaks to George Hincapie, former teammate of Armstrong and the Andreu’s, Frankie and Betsy, who were pivotal in Armstrong’s eventual downfall. However, the most interesting (to cycling fans at least) of the interviewees is Dr Michele Ferrari, a man with a notorious reputation with being hard to get a word out of. Though the interviews take place in a time where Armstrong’s name isn’t being dragged through the mud, you can tell why Ferrari avoided media attention whenever he could. Maybe it’s just the cynic in me who holds him partially responsible for cycling’s inherent problem with doping, this is the man that taught Armstrong how to do it after all, but he just gives off an air of shadiness, like there was something more he knew about but didn’t want to let on.

Michele Ferrari - Armstrong's doctor and doping mastermind

The documentary builds Armstrong up purely to tear him down with consistent ease. He goes from all conquering cancer survivor to doper extraordinaire, from a charitable, good intentioned patron to a meticulous and malicious bully. But herein lies the fundamental problem with the film. It doesn’t know what it’s trying to be. It’s obvious that Gibney, like many others, was a huge Armstrong fan and like many of us, he’s also probably struggling to comprehend the web of lies that he spun. But in constantly flipping from good to bad Lance, you are torn between empathy and disgust for him. The film’s title, the interviews, all of them point at you hating Armstrong, but the film just doesn’t allow you to do that.

Armstrong donning his foundations' colours

As a cycling fan, I was also disappointed by the lack of revelations that the film exposed. Besides one part referring to his climb up Mount Ventoux on his comeback, there was nothing ground breaking regarding his confession or “lies” about his return. Though I will admit that I may be being harsh as I’ve kept as close an eye as anyone on this story and know my research, I was still surprised that a man who spent such an extended period of time in close quarters with someone like Armstrong, and with all the interviews he sought, didn’t rumble anything new. That said, if you were just a casual observer or not a die-hard fan of the sport, then this film does actually offer quite a well-rounded view of how Armstrong’s lie “unraveled”. 2009 also happened to be Bradley Wiggins’ “break out” Tour de France, so there’s a fair smattering of him in the documentary too, for the British observer.

In the end, The Armstrong Lie offers viewers a 129 minute look at a man’s legacy that spans nearly 20 years, from the moment he races professionally for the first time, to his legacy’s peak and reign on top of the cycling world, and to ultimately, the demise of that legacy with the USADA findings in August 2012. Gibney does a great job in making the documentary accessible and engaging throughout and by keeping a constant thread, no mean feat considering this was going to be an entirely different film to begin with. Though lacking the hard hitting punch that some fans are craving, it’s still a good biopic of a man who, as the film puts it, “simply wanted to win too many times.