As I saw disgraced Governor Spitzer conduct a CNN program with Kathleen Parker, I thought: He must have very thick skin. Yes, he must have but I watched the program and couldn't help but being hit by his brilliance. Clarity, courage, directness. I couldn't wait to see "Client 9" Now, 24 hours later I feel a sense of loss. Spitzer could have been a great American president. The kind of leader that the world needs. One who won't shy away from confront corruption from any side of the aisle. What a terrible pit for all of us that a man like that could fall in such a common trap. His enemies, which by the way, they all look as if from the cast of The Sopranos used what HE gave them to destroy him. Damn shame! Sex, sex, sex. How many great men have fallen in the trap of their own needs. The documentary does a great job in allowing us to go into Spizer's personal and public jungle and come out with enormous amounts of food for thought. Sad, frustrating and very, very good
28 Reviews
Great story, soft documentary
paul2001sw-130 November 2011
The story of Eliot Spitzer is certainly interesting: an abrasive man who fought the demigods of Wall Street; a moral crusader brought down by his own lusts. The tale also provides insights into high-class prostitution and raises the idea that a conspiracy existed against a man who made a career of making enemies. But the problem with this documentary is that is doesn't ask hard enough questions. Spitzer is allowed to brush off charges of his own monstrous behaviour; his enemies likewise side-step the charges of conspiracy; while the call-girls are allowed to simper their way through the program unchallenged. And some stories are silly - Spitzer implies his father was ruthless because he beat his son at 'Monopoly'! One is tempted to feel that all of them deserve each other; but the ordinary people of New York lost a highly flawed champion when Spitzer fell - you may not like him, but the financial services industry suffers little authority gladly, and arguably we are all now living with the consequences.
another winner from Alex Gibney asks, what 's lost and what's gained?
alerter10 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I don't go to any movie as a first attempt to "learn" about "current events" or history. I make it an ongoing point to learn about the evolution of facts on any topic that interests me through multiple sources, all of which I try to double-check and cross-reference, until my doubts about veracity are reasonably satisfied. That can still leave matters unresolved, especially when compelling evidence is stacked up on the sides of both thesis and antithesis.
When I see "documentaries," it's part of challenging my current take on which way I believe the weight of truths and contradictions are tipping. The interpretative and editorial spin of any given documentary becomes a strength, and not a weakness, in this context. Many times, I come away with my own understanding of things further honed. Sometimes, I find myself completely reversed.
I thought long and hard before I went to see C9. I've much respect for Alex Gibney's previous work; but I wondered whether or not seeing C9 could further inform and/or change anything I knew and opined about Spitzer.
I was, and still am, deeply disappointed over the personal failings of the disgraced former Governor. I know that White Collar crime exists and that the pervasiveness of it, especially today, is not strictly a matter of a handful of Machiavellian masterminds. Broken assumptions, broken systems and failures of regulation (on many levels) are also necessary for the few to be able to relentlessly plunder the many. It is a cancer that must be fought.
Eliot Spitzer's fall from grace was unforgivable, in my mind, not just because of the damage he wreaked upon himself and his family, but because of the huge setbacks that we have all suffered in the "war" against White Collar crime in the US. Spitzer was the hard-and-fast hitting Sheriff of Wall Street and a Crusader for Main Street. He never took a bribe, but he still managed to find a spectacular way to violate the public's trust while in office. Spitzer took one huge measure of personal responsibility by resigning from office; but he also created a huge political vacuum for the sorely needed fight against ongoing crimes in high places.
I also knew that outrage toward Spitzer was the largest part of what I felt, going in, and that outrage creates its own blindspots.
So, I stood under an umbrella, in light rain, for an hour, to see this film and I am very glad that I did.
The facts presented in C9 pertaining to Spitzer's record of public service were well presented and jibed with what I already knew. But there is still special value in actually seeing the major adversarial players as they tell their own stories.
Gibney pulls off a number of compelling interviews, not just with Spitzer (who was interviewed on four different occasions), but also with some former aides. Spitzer is allowed to evade specifically answering certain questions (including campaign finances), but the expression on his face and in his eyes, in those same moments, still spoke volumes to me.
There's also a rogues gallery of the powerful enemies, in finance and in government (state and Federal), that Spitzer made over the course of his career in office. Several of these players get as much individual talk time as Spitzer.
The middle part of the film is a whodunit-style look at how the sexual scandal came into fruition. Here's where the tag line, "You don't know the real story," comes into play. The net effect of this is to desensationalize just about everything that print and television "news" got (mostly) wrong, which is no small order.
The infamous Ashley Dupree never participates in an interview for Gibney, although she still manages to get some screen/blab time in. It turns out that she very likely only had a one night stand with Spitzer.
The ongoing liaison that Spitzer came to seek out through the Emperors' Club was with an entirely different "escort." While "Angelina" does not consent to be filmed (she's now a day trader and no longer in her former line of work), Angelina does agree to be interviewed. Gibney uses an actress to read/interpret Ashley's portion of the transcript. (The only thing that I disagree with about the execution of this is that Gibney does not make it clear, from the onset, that it's an actress standing in for Ashley on camera.)
C9 created a new context for me, in which to re-think much of what I already knew.
Spitzer is by no means let off-the-hook for literally screwing around, but the media creation is brought several notches down from shining knight and a few notches up from pariah.
I was once again reminded of all of the good that Eliot Spitzer and his assembled associates managed to accomplish while in office. Some of the strategic and tactical mistakes were made clearer, too.
Important questions are raised about the scandal, itself. How did the FBI come to investigate the Emperor's Club? How did a prostitution and money laundering investigation come to focus on the Mann Act and the interstate transport of women (who were of majority age and not by any stretch of the imagination "white slaves") to provide prostitution services? Who were the other clients of the Emperors' Club? Why were there so many investigative leaks to the press pointing specifically in the direction of Spitzer? Why not anyone else?
As a result of seeing C9, my own view of Spitzer has become better tempered and from that improved vantage point useful new questions arise.
If we set aside the sex scandal, can we say that Spitzer's official conduct in office, as AG and governor, was ends-and-means right or wrong? A handful of BadGuys(TM) were brought down, but there are many more undaunted. Has anyone else picked up Spitzer's mantle? Where are his replacements?
When I see "documentaries," it's part of challenging my current take on which way I believe the weight of truths and contradictions are tipping. The interpretative and editorial spin of any given documentary becomes a strength, and not a weakness, in this context. Many times, I come away with my own understanding of things further honed. Sometimes, I find myself completely reversed.
I thought long and hard before I went to see C9. I've much respect for Alex Gibney's previous work; but I wondered whether or not seeing C9 could further inform and/or change anything I knew and opined about Spitzer.
I was, and still am, deeply disappointed over the personal failings of the disgraced former Governor. I know that White Collar crime exists and that the pervasiveness of it, especially today, is not strictly a matter of a handful of Machiavellian masterminds. Broken assumptions, broken systems and failures of regulation (on many levels) are also necessary for the few to be able to relentlessly plunder the many. It is a cancer that must be fought.
Eliot Spitzer's fall from grace was unforgivable, in my mind, not just because of the damage he wreaked upon himself and his family, but because of the huge setbacks that we have all suffered in the "war" against White Collar crime in the US. Spitzer was the hard-and-fast hitting Sheriff of Wall Street and a Crusader for Main Street. He never took a bribe, but he still managed to find a spectacular way to violate the public's trust while in office. Spitzer took one huge measure of personal responsibility by resigning from office; but he also created a huge political vacuum for the sorely needed fight against ongoing crimes in high places.
I also knew that outrage toward Spitzer was the largest part of what I felt, going in, and that outrage creates its own blindspots.
So, I stood under an umbrella, in light rain, for an hour, to see this film and I am very glad that I did.
The facts presented in C9 pertaining to Spitzer's record of public service were well presented and jibed with what I already knew. But there is still special value in actually seeing the major adversarial players as they tell their own stories.
Gibney pulls off a number of compelling interviews, not just with Spitzer (who was interviewed on four different occasions), but also with some former aides. Spitzer is allowed to evade specifically answering certain questions (including campaign finances), but the expression on his face and in his eyes, in those same moments, still spoke volumes to me.
There's also a rogues gallery of the powerful enemies, in finance and in government (state and Federal), that Spitzer made over the course of his career in office. Several of these players get as much individual talk time as Spitzer.
The middle part of the film is a whodunit-style look at how the sexual scandal came into fruition. Here's where the tag line, "You don't know the real story," comes into play. The net effect of this is to desensationalize just about everything that print and television "news" got (mostly) wrong, which is no small order.
The infamous Ashley Dupree never participates in an interview for Gibney, although she still manages to get some screen/blab time in. It turns out that she very likely only had a one night stand with Spitzer.
The ongoing liaison that Spitzer came to seek out through the Emperors' Club was with an entirely different "escort." While "Angelina" does not consent to be filmed (she's now a day trader and no longer in her former line of work), Angelina does agree to be interviewed. Gibney uses an actress to read/interpret Ashley's portion of the transcript. (The only thing that I disagree with about the execution of this is that Gibney does not make it clear, from the onset, that it's an actress standing in for Ashley on camera.)
C9 created a new context for me, in which to re-think much of what I already knew.
Spitzer is by no means let off-the-hook for literally screwing around, but the media creation is brought several notches down from shining knight and a few notches up from pariah.
I was once again reminded of all of the good that Eliot Spitzer and his assembled associates managed to accomplish while in office. Some of the strategic and tactical mistakes were made clearer, too.
Important questions are raised about the scandal, itself. How did the FBI come to investigate the Emperor's Club? How did a prostitution and money laundering investigation come to focus on the Mann Act and the interstate transport of women (who were of majority age and not by any stretch of the imagination "white slaves") to provide prostitution services? Who were the other clients of the Emperors' Club? Why were there so many investigative leaks to the press pointing specifically in the direction of Spitzer? Why not anyone else?
As a result of seeing C9, my own view of Spitzer has become better tempered and from that improved vantage point useful new questions arise.
If we set aside the sex scandal, can we say that Spitzer's official conduct in office, as AG and governor, was ends-and-means right or wrong? A handful of BadGuys(TM) were brought down, but there are many more undaunted. Has anyone else picked up Spitzer's mantle? Where are his replacements?
The stuff of thriller fiction
JohnDeSando24 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
"Pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes." John Ruskin.
Rarely outside of Morgan Spurlock or Michael Moore have I enjoyed a documentary as much as I have Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer. Filled with sex and power, it presents the gamut of intrigues worthy of tragedy or soap opera--never dull, almost always entertaining. Cheesy and improbable, it is the story of the New York State attorney general who rose in the early years of the first decade to become governor and after a year to resign because he was caught using a call-girl service.
Having sex with a prostitute is hardly worthy of Sophocles' plays, but it is richly ironic when the governor prosecuted the very services he used.
Writer/director Alex Gibney has fashioned this doc as a low-key support for the theory that Eliot Spitzer's enemies helped bring him down. To Spitzer's credit, he attributes his fall to himself with a hubris befitting Greek tragedy. Gibney's interview of Spitzer is first-rate journalism with a willing subject and reasonable questions.
Irony abounds: Gibney does an admirable job showing how Spitzer could have been the first Jewish president—he's that gifted as a hard-charging, ethical avatar until Gibney explores his fatal decision to cheat on one of the loveliest political wives this side of Elizabeth Edwards. As always, unanswered questions remain about the marital circumstances that could drive him to pay for attractive hookers. However, the off-center idea of the FBI probing into Spitzer's private life is absurd anyway when terrorists and corrupt bankers are bringing the world down.
Until the overly-long disquisition on the call-girl industry and lurid shots of the young women, the treatment of Spitzer's "war" with Wall Street and giants like AIG is the stuff of thriller fiction, except it's real. In that part of the doc, Gibney is historically spot on about the beginnings of the Great Recession.
Irony again reigns when the very knight to fight these corrupt forces is neutered by the most common failing of all mortals—hubris.
Rarely outside of Morgan Spurlock or Michael Moore have I enjoyed a documentary as much as I have Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer. Filled with sex and power, it presents the gamut of intrigues worthy of tragedy or soap opera--never dull, almost always entertaining. Cheesy and improbable, it is the story of the New York State attorney general who rose in the early years of the first decade to become governor and after a year to resign because he was caught using a call-girl service.
Having sex with a prostitute is hardly worthy of Sophocles' plays, but it is richly ironic when the governor prosecuted the very services he used.
Writer/director Alex Gibney has fashioned this doc as a low-key support for the theory that Eliot Spitzer's enemies helped bring him down. To Spitzer's credit, he attributes his fall to himself with a hubris befitting Greek tragedy. Gibney's interview of Spitzer is first-rate journalism with a willing subject and reasonable questions.
Irony abounds: Gibney does an admirable job showing how Spitzer could have been the first Jewish president—he's that gifted as a hard-charging, ethical avatar until Gibney explores his fatal decision to cheat on one of the loveliest political wives this side of Elizabeth Edwards. As always, unanswered questions remain about the marital circumstances that could drive him to pay for attractive hookers. However, the off-center idea of the FBI probing into Spitzer's private life is absurd anyway when terrorists and corrupt bankers are bringing the world down.
Until the overly-long disquisition on the call-girl industry and lurid shots of the young women, the treatment of Spitzer's "war" with Wall Street and giants like AIG is the stuff of thriller fiction, except it's real. In that part of the doc, Gibney is historically spot on about the beginnings of the Great Recession.
Irony again reigns when the very knight to fight these corrupt forces is neutered by the most common failing of all mortals—hubris.
informative and pushing a narrative
SnoopyStyle4 May 2016
Eliot Spitzer is elected Governor of New York in 2006. He had been Attorney General for 8 years taking on everybody including the masters of the universe on Wall Street. He had enemies at the highest levels. He struggled to take down the labyrinthine corrupt politics of Albany. Then in 2008, he is taken down by a sex scandal. He has been seeing high price escorts. Jersey girl Ashley Dupré would promote herself as his call girl. However, it's only the surface of how he was singled out in the prosecution and the public shame of his secret life.
This is informative and has a slant to the story. It's part bio and part investigation. His cases as AG are interesting but may need some simpler expositions. My biggest complaint is that there is an effort to minimize prostitution and its inherit corrupting nature. It is no doubt that his outing is part of a political campaign but it could never excuse his weakness.
This is informative and has a slant to the story. It's part bio and part investigation. His cases as AG are interesting but may need some simpler expositions. My biggest complaint is that there is an effort to minimize prostitution and its inherit corrupting nature. It is no doubt that his outing is part of a political campaign but it could never excuse his weakness.
Terrific movie, though mistitled
clg23824 November 2010
This is not a movie about a client of prostitution, the title notwithstanding. Obviously the title was chosen to "sell" the documentary, and my guess is that it has failed in its purpose. This is a truly terrific film about power politics. If you don't know much about the inner workings of government at the highest levels, this movie will go a long way to educate you. If you do know, this will likely confirm your experience. It is also hugely instructive about the brilliant Eliot Spitzer who was and is clearly dedicated to furthering the public good. The loss of his public service is a huge loss for American consumers. His responses to questions about his foolish indiscretions are forthright; that doesn't mean he fully understands why he did what he did-- who can? People are imperfect. They goof up at the worst possible times. The important questions that the film raises and that go unanswered have to do with how, in a country that processes millions of checks and money orders each month, were his (for $10,000 or maybe less) "singled out" for investigation? =
A doc trying to make Eliot Spitzer into a hero while he is not
JurijFedorov18 November 2022
It's a weird doc. If you remember the 2010's you will remember this creepy personal style being super popular. Digital cameras made it possible to record everything you saw and it made many creative people try this extremely personal style where close up shots of people were normal.
Alex Gibney is a documentary maker who makes 2 kind of docs: anti-Republican and pro-Democrat. This one is both of course which makes it so much more weird. In his many anti-Trump docs you at least understand what he is complaining about. Most of the complaints are very overblown and often unfair, but you see where Trump screwed up or didn't take charge. There is a logic to the claims made.
Here Alex Gibney has his usual left-wing bias with Eliot Spitzer the Democrat being the hero. Hopefully the first Jewish president ever! A New York hero who was fighting corruption while the evil GOPs tried to stop him at every step. That's the main issue with the doc. I'm kinda sold on some of these points and do feel it can be true in some way. Unfortunately for Alex Gibney Eliot Spitzer is not quite the hero he thinks he is. He looks and sounds sleazy even in this doc. Every time someone besides himself has to describe him he is clearly made out to be sleazy, aggressive, sex addicted, creepy. The doc tries to present a witch hunt on a heroic Democrat. Instead it presents a witch hunt on a giant creep who cheated on his wife.
It reminds me of another Jewish Democrat New York politician who was supposed to become president too, Anthony Weiner. There is an interesting doc about him too. He too was "fighting corruption" and "being a good guy". But to me, as someone who hates both parties, he too is just an arrogant power-hungry, sex addict creep.
Understand what you get here. All Alex Gibney docs are very anti-Republican. In this one this biased message is forced so you may feel it's too eerie a doc trying to manipulate you. True enough, but to me it's just still a fun doc. Alex Gibney may not be smart or fair. But he is damn good at entertaining viewers. This is a ton of fun even though you do feel like the doc is taking you for a fool.
Alex Gibney is a documentary maker who makes 2 kind of docs: anti-Republican and pro-Democrat. This one is both of course which makes it so much more weird. In his many anti-Trump docs you at least understand what he is complaining about. Most of the complaints are very overblown and often unfair, but you see where Trump screwed up or didn't take charge. There is a logic to the claims made.
Here Alex Gibney has his usual left-wing bias with Eliot Spitzer the Democrat being the hero. Hopefully the first Jewish president ever! A New York hero who was fighting corruption while the evil GOPs tried to stop him at every step. That's the main issue with the doc. I'm kinda sold on some of these points and do feel it can be true in some way. Unfortunately for Alex Gibney Eliot Spitzer is not quite the hero he thinks he is. He looks and sounds sleazy even in this doc. Every time someone besides himself has to describe him he is clearly made out to be sleazy, aggressive, sex addicted, creepy. The doc tries to present a witch hunt on a heroic Democrat. Instead it presents a witch hunt on a giant creep who cheated on his wife.
It reminds me of another Jewish Democrat New York politician who was supposed to become president too, Anthony Weiner. There is an interesting doc about him too. He too was "fighting corruption" and "being a good guy". But to me, as someone who hates both parties, he too is just an arrogant power-hungry, sex addict creep.
Understand what you get here. All Alex Gibney docs are very anti-Republican. In this one this biased message is forced so you may feel it's too eerie a doc trying to manipulate you. True enough, but to me it's just still a fun doc. Alex Gibney may not be smart or fair. But he is damn good at entertaining viewers. This is a ton of fun even though you do feel like the doc is taking you for a fool.
An unexpectedly interesting documentary
hjart624 October 2010
The title of this documentary pretty much explains what it is all about. It sums up the story of how Eliot Spitzer, governor of New York (2007-2008), went from fighting the corruption on Wall Street to resigning after the embarrassing media scandal that took place when Spitzer was revealed to have been using an escort service.
The documentary goes back and forth in time while interviewing earlier colleagues, sworn enemies, people from the escort business, and of course: Eliot Spitzer. Who all contribute with interesting interviews that are often enlightening in covering the story from more than one angle.
Client 9 is an entertaining documentary that rarely neglects the necessity of the cinematic aspect of filmmaking. In fact it is filled with interesting shots of the city, and manages to capture the passion of its subject as well as it reveals his faults. This documentary is also sure to entertain those who barely know who Eliot Spitzer is, as it takes on a number of heated issues that are sometimes explored philosophically. It also tells the tale of a politician, fighting for what he believes is right and what he has to deal with as a consequence, while not being devoid of the occasional laugh.
The documentary goes back and forth in time while interviewing earlier colleagues, sworn enemies, people from the escort business, and of course: Eliot Spitzer. Who all contribute with interesting interviews that are often enlightening in covering the story from more than one angle.
Client 9 is an entertaining documentary that rarely neglects the necessity of the cinematic aspect of filmmaking. In fact it is filled with interesting shots of the city, and manages to capture the passion of its subject as well as it reveals his faults. This documentary is also sure to entertain those who barely know who Eliot Spitzer is, as it takes on a number of heated issues that are sometimes explored philosophically. It also tells the tale of a politician, fighting for what he believes is right and what he has to deal with as a consequence, while not being devoid of the occasional laugh.
Big Egos + Public Power Struggle x Old Rich Dudes = Interesting Movie!
BrianMemphis4 March 2011
Thanks to Netflix, I happened to see three of Gibney's documentaries in quick succession (Enron, Casino Jack, and Client 9) and of these I believe Client 9 is the most polished and best executed.
Although it doesn't deal with anything nearly as weighty or historical, watching this reminded me of the excellent 2003 documentary on Robert McNamara by Errol Morris (The Fog of War). The director here uses a similar style, returning continually to interview the title character by interjecting quiet off-camera remarks.
While the agenda was not as "in your face" as say, a Michael Moore documentary with its prodding use of juxtaposition, the film clearly has a left-leaning and pro-Spitzer point of view. But even so, it's an entertaining and engaging story.
Although it doesn't deal with anything nearly as weighty or historical, watching this reminded me of the excellent 2003 documentary on Robert McNamara by Errol Morris (The Fog of War). The director here uses a similar style, returning continually to interview the title character by interjecting quiet off-camera remarks.
While the agenda was not as "in your face" as say, a Michael Moore documentary with its prodding use of juxtaposition, the film clearly has a left-leaning and pro-Spitzer point of view. But even so, it's an entertaining and engaging story.
He could have been a great contender!
jotix1003 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Eliot Spitzer, the disgraced former governor of New York, is a man of great integrity who made a lot of enemies while he was the only one with enough guts to bring to justice men in higher positions of the financial world. Mr. Spitzer had one of the brightest futures in American politics had he still been in charge as New York's attorney general, or even as governor of the state. His victory was one of the most short lived, perhaps, in the history of politics.
This powerful man was winning every possible battle against the corruption that is so prevalent in those higher spheres. Eliot Spitzer went after powerful figures, notably the case against Maurice Greenberg, who profited handsomely from his tenure at AIG, one of the firms the US government had to rescue from collapsing. Kenneth Langone, the co-founder of Home Depot, and good friend of Mr. Greenberg, had a beef against Mr. Spitzer, who also dared to question the 139 million package given to Richard Grasso, former head of the New York Stock Exchange.
It was Mr. Langone who vowed revenge from his arch enemy and the people in his circle that were being questioned by Eliot Spitzer. It was not too hard for this rich wheeler dealer to find the right man to begin tailing the governor. What the investigator found was a side of Mr. Spitzer that was contrary to the public image he projected of rectitude and honesty. Mr. Spitzer's weakness was for highly paid prostitutes. One in particular, caught his fancy and that proved to be the beginning of his own downfall. Unfortunately, the higher ups that were so corrupt, won. The day of his resignation several of the figures that were investigated by Mr. Spitzer toasted merrily about the fall of their avowed enemy at "21", a place where all these influential men gather to socialize.
The documentary is a lesson in dirty politics. Directed by Alex Gibney, the man that has given us many interesting and informative documents in which recent history about wrongdoing by the rich and powerful go unpunished because of their access to powerful lawyers that are able to get them out of their jams with impunity. Sadly, Mr. Spitzer did not have to have resigned. After all, have we not seen other men in similar situations go on without batting an eyelash? A former American president included?
This powerful man was winning every possible battle against the corruption that is so prevalent in those higher spheres. Eliot Spitzer went after powerful figures, notably the case against Maurice Greenberg, who profited handsomely from his tenure at AIG, one of the firms the US government had to rescue from collapsing. Kenneth Langone, the co-founder of Home Depot, and good friend of Mr. Greenberg, had a beef against Mr. Spitzer, who also dared to question the 139 million package given to Richard Grasso, former head of the New York Stock Exchange.
It was Mr. Langone who vowed revenge from his arch enemy and the people in his circle that were being questioned by Eliot Spitzer. It was not too hard for this rich wheeler dealer to find the right man to begin tailing the governor. What the investigator found was a side of Mr. Spitzer that was contrary to the public image he projected of rectitude and honesty. Mr. Spitzer's weakness was for highly paid prostitutes. One in particular, caught his fancy and that proved to be the beginning of his own downfall. Unfortunately, the higher ups that were so corrupt, won. The day of his resignation several of the figures that were investigated by Mr. Spitzer toasted merrily about the fall of their avowed enemy at "21", a place where all these influential men gather to socialize.
The documentary is a lesson in dirty politics. Directed by Alex Gibney, the man that has given us many interesting and informative documents in which recent history about wrongdoing by the rich and powerful go unpunished because of their access to powerful lawyers that are able to get them out of their jams with impunity. Sadly, Mr. Spitzer did not have to have resigned. After all, have we not seen other men in similar situations go on without batting an eyelash? A former American president included?
Good Documentary For Political Junkies
ldquinn21 December 2011
An interesting take on a potential "other side" to the well known story of the NY Governor and the call girl.
With one exception (a stand in for a hooker), all the people are real and the film is unscripted. It's a very good portrayal of NY politics. Most of the people are certainly putting a bit of their own spin on what they say (it is politics, after all); but, some, like Joe Bruno, tell it like it is with no punches pulled.
I am originally from upstate NY and can tell you that the Albany political scene is much the same as it is portrayed in the film. Lots of politicians, mostly followers; but, there are a few leaders who shake up the ship as Joe Bruno does in the film.
Well worth seeing, especially if you're a political junkie.
With one exception (a stand in for a hooker), all the people are real and the film is unscripted. It's a very good portrayal of NY politics. Most of the people are certainly putting a bit of their own spin on what they say (it is politics, after all); but, some, like Joe Bruno, tell it like it is with no punches pulled.
I am originally from upstate NY and can tell you that the Albany political scene is much the same as it is portrayed in the film. Lots of politicians, mostly followers; but, there are a few leaders who shake up the ship as Joe Bruno does in the film.
Well worth seeing, especially if you're a political junkie.
Astounding
imdb-896-99157613 November 2010
First of all, this documentary is so well done that I have to say that it raises the bar.
This director has "got it down". Awesome.
Second, and just as important, is that this story will astound you. The level of corruption is worse and more systemized that i had even imagined, and unlike many conspiracy-style documentaries, this one is a fact and that is what makes it so powerful. Not to be missed.
This movie is tremendously insightful to all Americans who want to take an inside look into what is really going on out there in the world. The level of corruption that this movie hints at is so enormous that it boggles the mind.
Elliot for president.
This director has "got it down". Awesome.
Second, and just as important, is that this story will astound you. The level of corruption is worse and more systemized that i had even imagined, and unlike many conspiracy-style documentaries, this one is a fact and that is what makes it so powerful. Not to be missed.
This movie is tremendously insightful to all Americans who want to take an inside look into what is really going on out there in the world. The level of corruption that this movie hints at is so enormous that it boggles the mind.
Elliot for president.
"They Pray and Pray for My Downfall"
view_and_review3 March 2022
New Yorker Notorious B. I. G. Had the rap song with the hook:
"That's not all, MC's have the gall
to pray and pray for my downfall."
Eliot Spitzer's downfall was ardently prayed for and delighted many; especially the criminal fat cats on Wall Street. In my opinion it's unfortunate that Spitzer went out like he did only because so few are able to fight Wall Street and win. In this documentary Eliot Spitzer was not even close to the most despicable person interviewed. Roger Stone was in this documentary for God's sake. You remember Roger Stone? He was sentenced for seven felonies and had his sentence commuted by former President Trump.
I could barely look at or listen to most of the enemies of Spitzer: Hank Greenberg, Ken Langone, Roger Stone, and others. All of them are greedy old farts who would love nothing more than to take everyone's money in the name of capitalism. Then there was Cecil Suwal the ex-CEO of The Emperors Club. A nervous-giggly spaz of a woman who sounded like she was auditioning for the role of an airhead. I don't think she said two intelligent words.
The documentary's biggest flaws were the interviewees, otherwise Alex Gibney did another solid job. After John Pilger, he's my favorite documentarian. He's the mind behind "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," "Who Killed the Electric Car?," "Taxi to the Dark Side," "Casino Jack and the United States of Money," and "Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God"--all wonderful documentaries.
Even though I largely despise the interviewees, he could not have done the documentary without them. "Client 9" goes from Spitzer's effectiveness as New York's attorney general to his landslide victory as governor, then to his political and social demise. While discussing Spitzer's rise and fall, we were reminded of Wall Street's rise and fall, and some of the puppeteers who masterminded it. While Spitzer was the impetus for the film, it really informs us all that his downfall was a blow to all of us non-wealthy folks who don't get to bend the rules.
HBO Max.
"That's not all, MC's have the gall
to pray and pray for my downfall."
Eliot Spitzer's downfall was ardently prayed for and delighted many; especially the criminal fat cats on Wall Street. In my opinion it's unfortunate that Spitzer went out like he did only because so few are able to fight Wall Street and win. In this documentary Eliot Spitzer was not even close to the most despicable person interviewed. Roger Stone was in this documentary for God's sake. You remember Roger Stone? He was sentenced for seven felonies and had his sentence commuted by former President Trump.
I could barely look at or listen to most of the enemies of Spitzer: Hank Greenberg, Ken Langone, Roger Stone, and others. All of them are greedy old farts who would love nothing more than to take everyone's money in the name of capitalism. Then there was Cecil Suwal the ex-CEO of The Emperors Club. A nervous-giggly spaz of a woman who sounded like she was auditioning for the role of an airhead. I don't think she said two intelligent words.
The documentary's biggest flaws were the interviewees, otherwise Alex Gibney did another solid job. After John Pilger, he's my favorite documentarian. He's the mind behind "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," "Who Killed the Electric Car?," "Taxi to the Dark Side," "Casino Jack and the United States of Money," and "Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God"--all wonderful documentaries.
Even though I largely despise the interviewees, he could not have done the documentary without them. "Client 9" goes from Spitzer's effectiveness as New York's attorney general to his landslide victory as governor, then to his political and social demise. While discussing Spitzer's rise and fall, we were reminded of Wall Street's rise and fall, and some of the puppeteers who masterminded it. While Spitzer was the impetus for the film, it really informs us all that his downfall was a blow to all of us non-wealthy folks who don't get to bend the rules.
HBO Max.
Surprisingly holds your attention---but i'm not sure what the point was
mbs3 December 2010
Film manages to maintain interest without seeming overtly like a propaganda piece which is what i honestly thought it would be going in. *honestly why else would the ex governor have even participated if it wasn't for the opportunity to rehabilitate his image went my logic--an idea i'm sure many other people have thought when wondering if they should bother checking this one out. I can't really say whether you should check it out or not---it will help if you have a tolerance for smirking, and self justification (and yet somehow Spitzer doesn't indulge in the latter--remaining completely on point that he had no one to blame but himself for his own actions...what can i say? i was hoping for someone who sees conspiracy theories everywhere.)
Can't help but wonder how this is going to hold up in the coming decade or two. Will it hold together as a film? will it hold as a narrative that years from now people whom have never heard of Spitzer will be able to watch this and have interest in it?, sadly i think it probably will to a certain extent---not so much because of Spitzer's fall from grace (that will inevitably repeat itself in another high ranking politician and this will if anything just seem like business as usual.) but because of the various people--wall streeters, and gov. officials interviewed throughout who take delight in seeing Spitzer smeared. Its all kinds of creepy to see these guys and gals taking such glee in being interviewed about Spitzer as well as defending themselves from Spitzer's previous accusations against them when he was a crusading governor/state attorney---you kind of start to wonder what kind of documentary these guys thought they were being interviewed for exactly.
I mean in what capacity did these guys rationalize themselves into being interviewed for this doc? Was it this same rationality that led to Spitzer thinking he could continue seeing these prostitutes indefinitely without any ramifications? Why do such high ranking guys of both the governmental kind and the wall street kind think they can rationalize every action they take away as if they had a perfectly logical reason for doing what they do?) If anything can be taken away from this documentary, its not that you should be careful how you conduct yourself, its not that you should be careful whose feathers you ruffle (in the metaphorical sense of course), its not even that you shouldn't have sex with prostitutes if you're a government official (you especially shouldn't have sex with prostitutes who recognize you from the news)---its that very successful high ranking people of all professions can sell themselves on anything, especially when they really shouldn't. Throughout the film the director keeps coming back to an interview with the giggling young woman who ran the prostitution ring in the first place...and she still so obviously thinks that she did nothing wrong running such a business and making a lot of money doing so. Perhaps that's even why these people are so successful in the first place. That they're such good salesmen, that they can even fool themselves into thinking they can do anything and get away with anything because they'll always be able to rationalize it away. That they're such good salesmen that even after getting caught, they can still feel like they didn't do anything wrong at all. Overconfidence kills. (also a potential question---why are all the super successful people in this movie all seem to be sociopaths as well? and what is that supposed to mean?)
Can't help but wonder how this is going to hold up in the coming decade or two. Will it hold together as a film? will it hold as a narrative that years from now people whom have never heard of Spitzer will be able to watch this and have interest in it?, sadly i think it probably will to a certain extent---not so much because of Spitzer's fall from grace (that will inevitably repeat itself in another high ranking politician and this will if anything just seem like business as usual.) but because of the various people--wall streeters, and gov. officials interviewed throughout who take delight in seeing Spitzer smeared. Its all kinds of creepy to see these guys and gals taking such glee in being interviewed about Spitzer as well as defending themselves from Spitzer's previous accusations against them when he was a crusading governor/state attorney---you kind of start to wonder what kind of documentary these guys thought they were being interviewed for exactly.
I mean in what capacity did these guys rationalize themselves into being interviewed for this doc? Was it this same rationality that led to Spitzer thinking he could continue seeing these prostitutes indefinitely without any ramifications? Why do such high ranking guys of both the governmental kind and the wall street kind think they can rationalize every action they take away as if they had a perfectly logical reason for doing what they do?) If anything can be taken away from this documentary, its not that you should be careful how you conduct yourself, its not that you should be careful whose feathers you ruffle (in the metaphorical sense of course), its not even that you shouldn't have sex with prostitutes if you're a government official (you especially shouldn't have sex with prostitutes who recognize you from the news)---its that very successful high ranking people of all professions can sell themselves on anything, especially when they really shouldn't. Throughout the film the director keeps coming back to an interview with the giggling young woman who ran the prostitution ring in the first place...and she still so obviously thinks that she did nothing wrong running such a business and making a lot of money doing so. Perhaps that's even why these people are so successful in the first place. That they're such good salesmen, that they can even fool themselves into thinking they can do anything and get away with anything because they'll always be able to rationalize it away. That they're such good salesmen that even after getting caught, they can still feel like they didn't do anything wrong at all. Overconfidence kills. (also a potential question---why are all the super successful people in this movie all seem to be sociopaths as well? and what is that supposed to mean?)
Wall Street Wins Again
honyltd14 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
They say life is stranger than fiction, and no place is that more evident than in New York City, the greed capital of the World.
New York City, as one who has just left after 14 years may be a great place to visit, but you would never want to live there. For those who walked out of "The Matrix", when it was cutting edge and told a story of a world where people lived in a fiction, and couldn't distinguish reality, it seemed a mere conceit, a great means of storytelling. For those of us who have never lost our objectivity, which means we came to NYC with minds open, impervious to the assault on logic and normality that makes this city the real life Matrix, this Morality tale in which a well-intentioned and flawed man is run out of town by the bankers and the money marketeers, is business as usual.
And make no mistake about that that. New York City is a corporate state and corporate town. It is Corporate Central, and if you think the people that wreaked havoc with the average American with AIG , which is New York based, and the home of greed and financial control by CORPORATISTS, will shuffle off gently into that good night, then you don't understand corporate politics.
It is difficult to look at a calendar and note it is 2010, not 1692. You would think the sexual peccadilloes of a government official, compared to lying to the public, or initiating a war to benefit the Corporate elite, would pale in comparison, but this movie makes it clear that Wall Street , the true power of this Country, will not be muted or restrained or bullied by any person with the integrity to conduct that fight. Eliot Spitzer isn't Michael Moore, but he did crack down on those who were extracting money from the middle class, and tried to stop the power elite.
For the most part I think Spitzer was 80% candid, which is more than enough to understand him in complete context. More clear were his adversaries, and the political gain they would receive by removing this pesky governor who was raining on the usual business as usual Wall Street Way.
Unless you are some sort of theological hypocrite, this movie frames clearly the singular unimportance of and sexcapades that have existed in politics as far back as Washington, documented with Lincoln, and certainly contemporaries in FDR, JFK, and Clinton. I don't care what my elected officials do in the bedroom, and think the hypocrisy of the rabid right is on full display here, with their almost laughable preoccupation with legislating morality, all the while being the true authors of wars, pain, and misery, and looking to take down anyone or thing which threatens their domination and control.
In that sense, this movie is a cautionary, once again, in which an inspired documentary maker tries to get the public to look beyond the facts as Fox would report it, and THINK about the MOTIVES of the people who were so intent on bringing this person down.
Why is this important? People need to regain their equilibrium and see the reality hiding in plain site. Wake up before you're just like the New Yorkers who see no problem with paying $2800 for a one bedroom apartment, on a street with no trees, $3.50 for a thimble of orange juice, and believe it is normal. I think having lived there, and come back from Oz, this story is a sad one, not only because it shows the strength of corporate power, but the idiocy of a manipulated and malleable people, who are but lambs and sheep to be led to slaughter.
Wake up everyone, especially New Yorkers.
New York City, as one who has just left after 14 years may be a great place to visit, but you would never want to live there. For those who walked out of "The Matrix", when it was cutting edge and told a story of a world where people lived in a fiction, and couldn't distinguish reality, it seemed a mere conceit, a great means of storytelling. For those of us who have never lost our objectivity, which means we came to NYC with minds open, impervious to the assault on logic and normality that makes this city the real life Matrix, this Morality tale in which a well-intentioned and flawed man is run out of town by the bankers and the money marketeers, is business as usual.
And make no mistake about that that. New York City is a corporate state and corporate town. It is Corporate Central, and if you think the people that wreaked havoc with the average American with AIG , which is New York based, and the home of greed and financial control by CORPORATISTS, will shuffle off gently into that good night, then you don't understand corporate politics.
It is difficult to look at a calendar and note it is 2010, not 1692. You would think the sexual peccadilloes of a government official, compared to lying to the public, or initiating a war to benefit the Corporate elite, would pale in comparison, but this movie makes it clear that Wall Street , the true power of this Country, will not be muted or restrained or bullied by any person with the integrity to conduct that fight. Eliot Spitzer isn't Michael Moore, but he did crack down on those who were extracting money from the middle class, and tried to stop the power elite.
For the most part I think Spitzer was 80% candid, which is more than enough to understand him in complete context. More clear were his adversaries, and the political gain they would receive by removing this pesky governor who was raining on the usual business as usual Wall Street Way.
Unless you are some sort of theological hypocrite, this movie frames clearly the singular unimportance of and sexcapades that have existed in politics as far back as Washington, documented with Lincoln, and certainly contemporaries in FDR, JFK, and Clinton. I don't care what my elected officials do in the bedroom, and think the hypocrisy of the rabid right is on full display here, with their almost laughable preoccupation with legislating morality, all the while being the true authors of wars, pain, and misery, and looking to take down anyone or thing which threatens their domination and control.
In that sense, this movie is a cautionary, once again, in which an inspired documentary maker tries to get the public to look beyond the facts as Fox would report it, and THINK about the MOTIVES of the people who were so intent on bringing this person down.
Why is this important? People need to regain their equilibrium and see the reality hiding in plain site. Wake up before you're just like the New Yorkers who see no problem with paying $2800 for a one bedroom apartment, on a street with no trees, $3.50 for a thimble of orange juice, and believe it is normal. I think having lived there, and come back from Oz, this story is a sad one, not only because it shows the strength of corporate power, but the idiocy of a manipulated and malleable people, who are but lambs and sheep to be led to slaughter.
Wake up everyone, especially New Yorkers.
What can you say?
thejdrage21 August 2022
This shows everything that's wrong with America today - and it was filmed 12 years ago.
Nothing changes.
There's no point in pointing out the crooked business men (It's worth nothing now, $100 MILLION. YOU FOUL OLD MAN!). Sorry. But that lip-less old fart pissed me off the second he came on the screen.
What saddened me about Spitzer is that his need to be with girls his daughters' ages, cost him (and us) all the good that he did do originally! And he has three daughters!! That's disgusting.
This was a very depressing documentary. On sooooooo many levels.
It's a cautionary tail.
Nothing changes.
There's no point in pointing out the crooked business men (It's worth nothing now, $100 MILLION. YOU FOUL OLD MAN!). Sorry. But that lip-less old fart pissed me off the second he came on the screen.
What saddened me about Spitzer is that his need to be with girls his daughters' ages, cost him (and us) all the good that he did do originally! And he has three daughters!! That's disgusting.
This was a very depressing documentary. On sooooooo many levels.
It's a cautionary tail.
Informative and revealing doc of political pricks, scandal, greed, corruption, and abuse of powers.
blanbrn29 January 2011
As it's become so common with most political figures it's one scandal after another. You name it bribes, payoffs, abuse of power and corruption. But most of all the sex scandal is what the public loves. As in this case the sex scandal brought down a hard working and likable politician New York governor Eliot Spizer. Director Alex Gibney paints the film as two sides as the interviews revealing from staff members, political rivals, and even Spitzer himself prove he had affairs with hookers that being New York's elite escorts and call girls.
Aside from that it begins with Eliot's days as attorney general in the Empire state when he took on the big boys of wall street and dirty investment companies who were defrauding millions. Eliot was the new political golden boy who seemed to do right and fight for the common man! This would later propel him to be elected New York governor only along the way he made many business world and political grudges in the New York statehouse which would later bite him as investigations were launched.
Spitzer like all political pricks in my opinion felt he was above the law and as is so common gives into the oldest vice around sex with a hooker. Really no big deal yet Eliot showed he was a hypocrite as he once prosecuted the big time New York city call girl rings now he's a John! Still it's not the worst thing as Spitzer will still be remembered for some good by taking on the corrupt companies of wall street.
Gibney's doc is refreshing, informative, and revealing it shows the political and business world is so intersected with scandals of sex and greed with political pricks from both sides. Still Spitzer will be remembered yet his story is a tragic and Gothic one a real rise and fall of a good leader. As the vices of sex, money, and power abuse will always dominate society especially the political world it's just too bad that a hard working politician like Eliot Spitzer got to be the showcase for a dramatic fall. Clearly this is one social and political doc that's not to be missed.
Aside from that it begins with Eliot's days as attorney general in the Empire state when he took on the big boys of wall street and dirty investment companies who were defrauding millions. Eliot was the new political golden boy who seemed to do right and fight for the common man! This would later propel him to be elected New York governor only along the way he made many business world and political grudges in the New York statehouse which would later bite him as investigations were launched.
Spitzer like all political pricks in my opinion felt he was above the law and as is so common gives into the oldest vice around sex with a hooker. Really no big deal yet Eliot showed he was a hypocrite as he once prosecuted the big time New York city call girl rings now he's a John! Still it's not the worst thing as Spitzer will still be remembered for some good by taking on the corrupt companies of wall street.
Gibney's doc is refreshing, informative, and revealing it shows the political and business world is so intersected with scandals of sex and greed with political pricks from both sides. Still Spitzer will be remembered yet his story is a tragic and Gothic one a real rise and fall of a good leader. As the vices of sex, money, and power abuse will always dominate society especially the political world it's just too bad that a hard working politician like Eliot Spitzer got to be the showcase for a dramatic fall. Clearly this is one social and political doc that's not to be missed.
Well Done Doc
DavoZed5 September 2021
Thorough review of the events of Spitzer's rise and fall. Could have been shorter and that might have made it more entertaining.
Fascinating that at the very end, Spitzer is VERY clear that his spectacular fall is all on him. He blames no one else.
If he were a Republican politician, he would be still denying everything and insisting it was fake news. Claiming that someone else was at fault.
Fascinating that at the very end, Spitzer is VERY clear that his spectacular fall is all on him. He blames no one else.
If he were a Republican politician, he would be still denying everything and insisting it was fake news. Claiming that someone else was at fault.
Deserving of a mass viewer clientele
meeza16 April 2011
I am going to be your escort to my review of the documentary "Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer". OK, maybe wrong choice of words, and I probably won't rise to the documentary movie review occasion; please don't say "you called it". Anyways, Alex Gibney's documentary is a provoking look at the former New York Governor whose scandal of being a preferred customer of "The Emperors Club" escort service cost him an uprising political career that could have landed him a future presidential seat in the White House as this country's first Jewish President. This documentary could have been easily called "The Last Emperor" but I am sure Oscar-winning Director Bernardo Bertolucci would have taken issue. "Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer" shows many facets of the scandal and its underlying pants, I mean parts, that sure do not defend Spitzer's whorish actions but do reveal that he was a marked man by several Republican political enemies. Gibney excels in revealing Spitzer's shining political moments in bringing down Wall Street corruption geezers. However, he does not glamorize Spitzer at all; even the former Governor speaks and presents himself in the documentary with a remorseful demeanor by not externalizing his downfall on others. The documentary does showcase that other elected officials have been in similar scandals and are still in their political seat, and Spitzer is not. Gibney also reveals the fact that the "15 minutes of fame" Spitzer Emperess gal was not so much Ashley Dupre (he only traveled Ashley's waters one night at the Mayflower Hotel), but it was another Emperor escort named Angelina who was requested by Spitzer several times. Angelina does not appear in the documentary but does reveal info to Gibney; an actress was used in representing to reveal what Angelina had to say about their Elliot & Angelina jolly close encounters of the $10,000 a night kind. The most colorful character of this documentary is not Spitzer, not the call girls, not the Wall Street geezers; but it was a political consultant named Roger Stone who was hired by one of Spitzer's main enemies to help bring Eliot down. The flamboyant Stone is not a bit stone-faced in boldly revealing his swinger lifestyle and his large tattoo of Richard Nixon. Alex Gibney is an Oscar-winning documentarian, and he continues to prove his worth by fully revealing issues and subjects as he does in this engaging documentary. Spitzer did have sexual relations with "that woman, and that other woman, and that other woman", but at least Spitzer spits out his regrets with earnest humility in this insightful documentary. So yes, call it in and book it as a must-see documentary. **** Good
Taking on The Dark Side:
merrywood14 July 2011
Eliot Spitzer is a marvelous human being. He is exceptionally brilliant, literate, intellectual, and on the side of light. What he is not, according to the known record and this documentary, an exceptional piece of filmmaking, is a great chess player. In 2006, he began to associate with a "call girl ring", a term that, for me, currently, feels and sounds ludicrous. The idea that consensual sex between adults is still illegal, even as a trade, in this day of comparative enlightenment is to me rather bizarre. A man who "cheats on his wife" --- This is no one's business since the relationship and contract is with his wife and not the public.
Before becoming Governor of New York, Spitzer had taken on Wall Street and The Dark Side, and did it with such success and gusto that only Alfred E. Newman could not have known that the Dark Side would not begin to gather around a knife sharpening ceremony.
The Dark Side used our basic American hang-up and continuous obsession with sex against Spitzer because they could. Indeed, I agree with the Governor that he is fundamentally to blame, after all, it was Spitzer who created this vulnerability.
Ultimately, however, it was our immaturity as people obsessed with sex and infidelity that has probably ended Spitzer's sure climb to the presidency. We have all placed that nonsense over every good, productive and constructive thing the man had ever done and he did it for us, the public.
Before becoming Governor of New York, Spitzer had taken on Wall Street and The Dark Side, and did it with such success and gusto that only Alfred E. Newman could not have known that the Dark Side would not begin to gather around a knife sharpening ceremony.
The Dark Side used our basic American hang-up and continuous obsession with sex against Spitzer because they could. Indeed, I agree with the Governor that he is fundamentally to blame, after all, it was Spitzer who created this vulnerability.
Ultimately, however, it was our immaturity as people obsessed with sex and infidelity that has probably ended Spitzer's sure climb to the presidency. We have all placed that nonsense over every good, productive and constructive thing the man had ever done and he did it for us, the public.
"Angelina" Wrenn Schmidt
wvfempwolford14 April 2021
I wonder how she landed these cushy acting roles, including a major role in The Looming Tower. She did a fine job in her role in that series, but here we see her talking about being a prostitute. How did that happen. Beyond that, Client 9 is a powerful expose of a political official who wanted to expose corruption, but fell due to his own weakness and being targeted by powerful men.
A whitewash of a true hypocrite
lufts7 July 2011
If I could give this a zero, I would. I was a fan of Spitzer's early in his purported campaign against Wall Street. As a New Yorker, I had followed his silk purse career from the beginning.
What the writer director does here is imply, use innuendo and ultimately avoid the bottom line single issue. Eliot Spitzer hired prostitutes and flew them all over the country, nay, the world, all the while prosecuting the same behavior in others. Worse, he was hiring young women, the same age as his own daughters. A truly sleazy individual.
But it goes much farther than that. It totally ignores all of the financial shenanigans of Eliot and his father, which would have derailed any national run for office. His father, one of the largest real estate developers in NY, gifted Eliot numerous apartments which provided most of his multimillion dollar income. His father even paid the gift tax on it.
Bernard also loaned Spitzer's campaigns millions of dollars, $5Million +, and worse, made enormous donations to the campaigns of those who were his son's "allies".
That is almost unimportant next to the real issues. Spitzer's supposed campaign against Wall Street. In most of the cases that he made sure to hold press conferences when issuing subpoenas, he ended up settling for virtually nothing, or never even pursuing in court.
Worse, he lost the most high profile prosecutions he pursued, including the one showcased in the movie against Dick Grasso of the NYSE (never mentioned in the movie that Grasso was vindicated in Federal Court) and was shown to have been nothing more than a personally vindictive, wildly undisciplined attorney general.
By his own admission in the film, again, brushed over by the filmmaker, he admits to telephone calls to the people he was pursuing telling them they were 'dead' or going to be 'steamrolled' or "at war". What kind of prosecutor does such things? Ultimately, the director through innuendo and editing, implies that there was a conspiracy to bring Spitzer down. He even uses pro Spitzer talking heads to imply that Spitzer would be the only "John" to be prosecuted under the Mann Act (I guess he never heard of heavyweight champion Jack Johnson) and then immediately quickly brushes past the fact that Spitzer, in fact, was NOT prosecuted. He then again uses a talking head to claim that the entire investigation was a set up simply to leak Spitzer's involvement with the Emperor's Club prostitution service to the NY Times. Huh? The most liberal newspaper in the country, which almost singlehandedly had made his career was now the demon of his destruction? What he completely ignores are the simple facts of the case. There was not a single notice of an illegal transaction noticed by the Feds, but many transactions designed to specifically skirt the federal law that requires ANY cash transaction of $10K or more to be reported (some reports said dozens of such transactions). Spitzer repeatedly made transactions of $5K at a time to pay his $10K/day hooker. The law that was designed primarily to ensnare money launderers as a result of the cocaine wars of the 1980's is what caught him.
The size of the this ring, whose owners were sent to federal prison, is demonstrated by the fact that when they were arrested in their apartment, they had more than $1 Million in cash in a safe in their bedroom. This was no small time hooker service, but a major international escort service which included members of the royal family as clients - oh yeah, I guess since THAT came out, it wasn't really an attack just on Spitzer - another fact noted, and whitewashed by the director.
Did Spitzer make enemies? Of course. But the idea that Hank Greenberg or Ken Langone brought him down is not only foolish, it's insulting. Were they the ones hiring the hookers? The director also compares Spitzer to fallen pols like Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich and others who engaged in extramarital affairs. As bad as they were, they were NOT committing crimes and certainly NOT at the same time they were specifically empowered to prosecute the very crimes they were committing.
That Spitzer has any credibility is a sad reflection of the current state of the body politic.
Spitzer is a brilliant individual with an extreme case of narcissistic personality disorder.
Had the filmmaker used the forum to dissect the hubris that ultimately brings down so many of these types, he might have added to the conversation.
Instead, this film looks like it was bankrolled, as Eliot's whole career was, by his father.
What the writer director does here is imply, use innuendo and ultimately avoid the bottom line single issue. Eliot Spitzer hired prostitutes and flew them all over the country, nay, the world, all the while prosecuting the same behavior in others. Worse, he was hiring young women, the same age as his own daughters. A truly sleazy individual.
But it goes much farther than that. It totally ignores all of the financial shenanigans of Eliot and his father, which would have derailed any national run for office. His father, one of the largest real estate developers in NY, gifted Eliot numerous apartments which provided most of his multimillion dollar income. His father even paid the gift tax on it.
Bernard also loaned Spitzer's campaigns millions of dollars, $5Million +, and worse, made enormous donations to the campaigns of those who were his son's "allies".
That is almost unimportant next to the real issues. Spitzer's supposed campaign against Wall Street. In most of the cases that he made sure to hold press conferences when issuing subpoenas, he ended up settling for virtually nothing, or never even pursuing in court.
Worse, he lost the most high profile prosecutions he pursued, including the one showcased in the movie against Dick Grasso of the NYSE (never mentioned in the movie that Grasso was vindicated in Federal Court) and was shown to have been nothing more than a personally vindictive, wildly undisciplined attorney general.
By his own admission in the film, again, brushed over by the filmmaker, he admits to telephone calls to the people he was pursuing telling them they were 'dead' or going to be 'steamrolled' or "at war". What kind of prosecutor does such things? Ultimately, the director through innuendo and editing, implies that there was a conspiracy to bring Spitzer down. He even uses pro Spitzer talking heads to imply that Spitzer would be the only "John" to be prosecuted under the Mann Act (I guess he never heard of heavyweight champion Jack Johnson) and then immediately quickly brushes past the fact that Spitzer, in fact, was NOT prosecuted. He then again uses a talking head to claim that the entire investigation was a set up simply to leak Spitzer's involvement with the Emperor's Club prostitution service to the NY Times. Huh? The most liberal newspaper in the country, which almost singlehandedly had made his career was now the demon of his destruction? What he completely ignores are the simple facts of the case. There was not a single notice of an illegal transaction noticed by the Feds, but many transactions designed to specifically skirt the federal law that requires ANY cash transaction of $10K or more to be reported (some reports said dozens of such transactions). Spitzer repeatedly made transactions of $5K at a time to pay his $10K/day hooker. The law that was designed primarily to ensnare money launderers as a result of the cocaine wars of the 1980's is what caught him.
The size of the this ring, whose owners were sent to federal prison, is demonstrated by the fact that when they were arrested in their apartment, they had more than $1 Million in cash in a safe in their bedroom. This was no small time hooker service, but a major international escort service which included members of the royal family as clients - oh yeah, I guess since THAT came out, it wasn't really an attack just on Spitzer - another fact noted, and whitewashed by the director.
Did Spitzer make enemies? Of course. But the idea that Hank Greenberg or Ken Langone brought him down is not only foolish, it's insulting. Were they the ones hiring the hookers? The director also compares Spitzer to fallen pols like Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich and others who engaged in extramarital affairs. As bad as they were, they were NOT committing crimes and certainly NOT at the same time they were specifically empowered to prosecute the very crimes they were committing.
That Spitzer has any credibility is a sad reflection of the current state of the body politic.
Spitzer is a brilliant individual with an extreme case of narcissistic personality disorder.
Had the filmmaker used the forum to dissect the hubris that ultimately brings down so many of these types, he might have added to the conversation.
Instead, this film looks like it was bankrolled, as Eliot's whole career was, by his father.
Flawed but worthwhile, and unabashedly sympathetic.
kayaker367 September 2011
This two hour depiction of the rise and sudden fall of a dedicated public servant is built around two interviews: one with Eliot Spitzer himself, post-resignation, the other with a young actress playing the part of one "Angelina", a high class prostitute. Angelina claims to have had many "appointments" with Gov. Spitzer in many cities, while it was a mere one night stand with "Kristin" who got all the publicity.
Here we see the first of several, perhaps unavoidable, flaws in the documentary: reliance on weak sources whose statements cannot be independently verified. As no one is talking, not the FBI, the federal prosecutors nor Spitzer himself, you cannot know if "Angelina" is making the whole story up. However, her account does not defame the ex-Governor, paint him as sexually perverted or even ungentlemanly. She also voices harsh skepticism of "Kristin" and other girls in the life who claim victimhood currently or in the past.
The format is the standard Talking Heads with some news footage thrown in. Documentarian Gibney cannot resist resorting to lurid shots of scantily dressed women and a hip hop soundtrack when exploring the half-world of high end prostitution. Guess he felt he needed to sex it up in order to sell the film but to me this seemed cheap and frivolous.
With its evident bias in favor of its subject, the film mentions only in passing how Elliott Spitzer's own self-righteousness and abrasive behavior during his year as Governor may have left him without a friend in Albany when he badly needed friends. Admittedly, the State capital was a sinkhole of corruption and waste, but Spitzer's demeanor, like Christ come to cleanse the Temple, was probably the wrong way to go about reforming it.
There is an ample cast of villains -- though why these agreed to be interviewed for this documentary remains a mystery -- including former chairman and c.e.o. of insurance giant A.I.G., Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, Joseph Bruno, former Majority Leader of the New York State Senate (later convicted on federal corruption charges) and even a few words from Wall Street mega-millionaires Ralph Langone and Richard Grasso, bitter and powerful enemies from when Spitzer as Attorney General tried to rein in their insatiable GREED.
The film implies that the current fiscal crisis might have been averted had former Sheriff of Wall Street Spitzer remained in the Governor's mansion. This is doubtful, as doubtful as the claim by Hank Greenberg that A.I.G. would be a solvent company today instead of in federal receivership had he not been kicked out by his own board of directors following revelations by Attorney General Spitzer of accounting irregularities. The abuses Spitzer went after, such as executive compensation and price fixing, were not what caused the fiscal crisis of 2008. That was a result of risky loans and overvalued real estate which, ironically, was what the Spitzer family money was based on.
The ex-governor is shown to be repentant, chastened, fit to return to public service even if the White House now is out of reach. His vices, the documentary seems to say, are only those natural to a man. That Eliot Spitzer can be arraigned for hypocrisy, having himself prosecuted prostitution rings, gets perhaps twenty words in the whole film.
Here we see the first of several, perhaps unavoidable, flaws in the documentary: reliance on weak sources whose statements cannot be independently verified. As no one is talking, not the FBI, the federal prosecutors nor Spitzer himself, you cannot know if "Angelina" is making the whole story up. However, her account does not defame the ex-Governor, paint him as sexually perverted or even ungentlemanly. She also voices harsh skepticism of "Kristin" and other girls in the life who claim victimhood currently or in the past.
The format is the standard Talking Heads with some news footage thrown in. Documentarian Gibney cannot resist resorting to lurid shots of scantily dressed women and a hip hop soundtrack when exploring the half-world of high end prostitution. Guess he felt he needed to sex it up in order to sell the film but to me this seemed cheap and frivolous.
With its evident bias in favor of its subject, the film mentions only in passing how Elliott Spitzer's own self-righteousness and abrasive behavior during his year as Governor may have left him without a friend in Albany when he badly needed friends. Admittedly, the State capital was a sinkhole of corruption and waste, but Spitzer's demeanor, like Christ come to cleanse the Temple, was probably the wrong way to go about reforming it.
There is an ample cast of villains -- though why these agreed to be interviewed for this documentary remains a mystery -- including former chairman and c.e.o. of insurance giant A.I.G., Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, Joseph Bruno, former Majority Leader of the New York State Senate (later convicted on federal corruption charges) and even a few words from Wall Street mega-millionaires Ralph Langone and Richard Grasso, bitter and powerful enemies from when Spitzer as Attorney General tried to rein in their insatiable GREED.
The film implies that the current fiscal crisis might have been averted had former Sheriff of Wall Street Spitzer remained in the Governor's mansion. This is doubtful, as doubtful as the claim by Hank Greenberg that A.I.G. would be a solvent company today instead of in federal receivership had he not been kicked out by his own board of directors following revelations by Attorney General Spitzer of accounting irregularities. The abuses Spitzer went after, such as executive compensation and price fixing, were not what caused the fiscal crisis of 2008. That was a result of risky loans and overvalued real estate which, ironically, was what the Spitzer family money was based on.
The ex-governor is shown to be repentant, chastened, fit to return to public service even if the White House now is out of reach. His vices, the documentary seems to say, are only those natural to a man. That Eliot Spitzer can be arraigned for hypocrisy, having himself prosecuted prostitution rings, gets perhaps twenty words in the whole film.
Political Gold
gavin694225 March 2015
An in-depth look at the rise and fall of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, including interviews with the scandalized, former politician.
This is just about the greatest political documentary ever made. Rarely do I give a film more than a 7, but this is pure 10 all the way. Not just covering the sex scandal, this film gives a broader look at Spitzer's career, even touching on his childhood and upbringing. There is plenty on Wall Street, and we get to learn a bit about the call girl industry.
Should Spitzer have been taken down? Of course. Having an affair may be excusable, but engaging in a relationship with a prostitute is a crime, and we need to hold attorneys and politicians in higher standing than that. But just because he made this mistake, it should not subtract from the good things he did to help clean up corruption.
This is just about the greatest political documentary ever made. Rarely do I give a film more than a 7, but this is pure 10 all the way. Not just covering the sex scandal, this film gives a broader look at Spitzer's career, even touching on his childhood and upbringing. There is plenty on Wall Street, and we get to learn a bit about the call girl industry.
Should Spitzer have been taken down? Of course. Having an affair may be excusable, but engaging in a relationship with a prostitute is a crime, and we need to hold attorneys and politicians in higher standing than that. But just because he made this mistake, it should not subtract from the good things he did to help clean up corruption.
Americans need to really reconsider what they want out of leaders.
madshy-848-4411257 July 2011
Elliot Spitzer looks dead pan into the camera and says that 'God gives all the power to the men he chooses to destroy'. If you believe in God then by now you know that he is white, rich, a WASP and more than likely a Republican. Because the lengths Spitzers enemies all rich, white, powerful republicans went to destroy Elliot is not humanly possible. The vile and contempt they have for him is only matched by the anger they unleashed on Bill Clinton. While countless Republicans are caught cheating with prostitutes, women, men, interns they seem to walk away with far less damage than there Democratic counterparts. And the simple reason is that Republicans have mastered the art of making morality an issue for Democratic leaders when they barely have any of their own. And the reason for that is the American public. We are such gullible fools that we are willing to crucify Spitzer for his sexual transgression while the rich powerful Republicans plunder, loot and rape our banks and our whole financial system. But we average Americans are so stupid and ignorant that we are more concerned where Spitzers dick has been instead of all his actions of bringing all these wall street crooks to justice. Long before AIG failed Spitzer warned and prosecuted AIG for cooking books. The CEO Greenberg resigned when much like Kenneth Lay of Enron claimed that he had no idea what was going on in his company. He then said to Charlie Rose that his stock was worthless and now only valued at 100 million. These people will never care about the common man. And they will bury any man who takes up the cause of the common man. SPITZER IS TODAY"S ROBINHOOD. So what if he is an outlaw because he banged prostitutes. Let his wife Judge him for that, not some vile greedy rich white men who think they are gods.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
