Disgraced former cyclist Lance Armstrong has become prominently mentioned in the sports world after his ESPN documentary aired this past weekend. That has brought back more attention toward Armstrong’s career and his life during and after that time. That has also seen the former seven-time Tour de France winner provide more clarity to what occurred and his decision-making process through the documentary. The director, Marina Zenovich, recently revealed what she had to do to get Armstrong to open up about his past.
Lance Armstrong’s documentary
Lance Armstrong has once again become a prominent figure in the sports world after ESPN’s Lance documentary has aired.
That saw the first part of the series include heavy involvement from the 48-year-old in a more profound sense than ever seen before publicly. Armstrong has his fingerprints all over the documentary, going to some detail about his thought process and decision-making during his illustrious cycling career.
That has shown a more in-depth side of him that provides a clearer picture of who he is as a person beyond what he accomplished on his bicycle. It was a process for Zenovich that she had to go a specific route to get the most out of him during interviews.
What made Lance Armstrong speak his truth
What has stood out from the documentary is that Armstrong has revealed details about his career that he didn’t previously do before.
He has become more of an open book in the documentary that has provided more answers to the questions around his controversial career. Director Marina Zenovich quickly discovered that the only way that Armstrong would talk in greater lengths is if he had gotten a workout in first before any interview. (H/T Yahoo Sports)
In the 18 months director Marina Zenovich spent following Lance Armstrong around for the ESPN documentary “Lance,” there was one truth she found out very quickly: You have to let Armstrong have a good workout before you can expect to get anything out of him in an interview.
“He needed to get it out,” Zenovich told Insider. “If he didn’t he would be antsy to go exercise.”
That’s a strategy that likely made Armstrong more comfortable with the setting and allowed him to get a clearer mind for the interview. That saw Armstrong make some stunning admissions such as starting doping at age 21 and that he didn’t rule out that human growth hormones could have caused his cancer.
It saw another side of Armstrong come out that was more forthcoming with the truth about the many facets of his cycling career beyond his use of performance-enhancing drugs.
Although only the first part of the documentary has been aired, it has given more context to Armstrong’s career and the decisions he made.
There is still an intense hatred toward him for his actions over the years, but it’s a chance for him to voice his feelings and what led him down the path that he took. That alone could lead to more definite disdain toward him, but it also provides him the stage to speak freely about what happened.
Armstrong’s legacy is already forever tainted due to his ties to performance-enhancing drugs. Still, the documentary is a window into his life and how it shaped him into the person he was and has become after his cycling career. The second part of the series should provide a greater perspective on the entire situation.