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

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? =

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.

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?

"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.

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.

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.

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?

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?)

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.

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.

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

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.

A failed 2011 Academy Award hopeful, "Client 9. . ." offers an out-of-balance, sanitized portrait of former NY Governor and current CNN Commentator Elliot Spitzer.

Full disclosure: Mr. Spitzer was my otherwise brilliant Governor.

Nearly half of this love letter to Spitzer surrounds his White Knight efforts to curb Wall Street greed and malfeasance. According to the Doc, this crusade (and ruffling lots of feathers in the NYS Legislature) allegedly led a nameless enemy to turn him in to the Fed for prosecution. The re-creation of this alleged conspiracy does track and seems possible, but it's beside the point. Mr. Spitzer, in the height of hypocrisy, busted prostitution rings while being serviced by 'Escorts'. When pressed about this aspect of the story, Spitzer sputters and avoids with (paraphrasing) "I'm not going there." Conversely, Spitzer crows effusively about his prosecutorial efforts.

Strongly inferred is a theory Spitzer was taken down just prior to the financial collapse and that his continued pressure on Wall Street (particularly against former AIG CEO Hank Greenburg) could have avoided the crash.

It's surprising the fallen Gov appeared in this Doc; usually a coup. However, the filmmakers not only handle him with kid gloves, they drift into creating a mildly flattering portrait of a victim of angry enemies bent on his destruction out of a sleazebag who smeared New York's highest office by breaking public trust, spying on and falsely accusing fellow politicians.

A comedic high point is the clueless bimbo Cecil Suwal (co-owner of the Emperor's Club Prostitution Ring) who seems unable to grasp the concept of cash for favors and why it's illegal. Joseph Bruno of the NYS Legislature is also unintentionally funny.

In several cases actors sit in and mouth the words of the actual parties interviewed off-camera. A novel approach, but why would filmmakers make such a deal? Have the creators never heard of hiding faces and altering voices when someone desires anonymity?

Technically, the film, at nearly two hours, is too long by half an hour.

"Client 9. . ." is reprehensible as journalism. It's cowardly point of view too steeped in avoiding hard questions and treating the subject with undeserved deference. Thus is created a pulpit for Spitzer from which to pontificate. That makes "Client 9. . ." a creamy and soft, uninteresting puff piece instead of a documentary.

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.

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.

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.

After watching Mora Stephens' Zipper,a movie about a politician who's got a sexual addiction towards escorts,it referred me to this documentary - Client 9:The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer - from where the main character of the film - Sam Ellis - was based from.

This documentary was directed by Alex Gibney and worked together with Eliot Spitzer,the former Governor of New York who was involved in sex scandals that involved high class prostitutes working in escort firms.It tries to focus on his political career as well as the sex scandals that Spitzer got involved in.The interviews conducted in it involves the political friends and opponents of Spitzer as well as the people working in the escort services.Interestingly,the interview made on Angela Dupre,who happens to be Spitzer's regular client was portrayed by an actress.

Apparently,it was both thought-provoking and informative as we get to realize how great Spitzer could have been politically as he was definitely great in acting as a "police" of Wall Street.Despite of his temper,he could have had a great future ahead as he could have been a possibly the "first Jewish President" of the United States.Both his friends and foes attested to his capabilities.Too bad that his inability to resist women led to a sex scandal and unfortunately the so-called "poster boy" for politicians involved in it despite having more popular ones involved such as the likes of Bill Clinton,John Edwards and even Newt Gingrich.It was also interesting to see how the so-called beautiful women work as escorts despite the fact that they are probably the ones who are less likely to be due to the fact that they are going to have the talent to succeed in the real world.One would definitely be bothered how much the United States has ingrained the attitude of materialism in its culture.Overall,this is one complex documentary that is more about Spitzer himself.

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.

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.

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.

If Eliot Spitzer hadn't been born into a wealthy family. If he hadn't become a lawyer, or appointed District Attorney, and then Attorney General for New York State, and finally, New York's 54th. Governor, but, instead, was just your average Joe, then Alex Gibney would have no reason in making this documentary. But Eliot Spitzer was not your "average Joe." As a man who had spent around seven years fighting crime, both criminal and White Collar, and his elevation to the most powerful position in New York State, Eliot Spitzer (a committed Democrat, whose vote would have helped Hillary Clinton in her failed run for the Presidency), could, if he had wanted, eventually become President himself. But Eliot Spitzer stumbled. Heavily. After a year as Governor, Eliot Spitzer resigned, when it was revealed he had been using the services of an 'escort agency' for sex. His enemies, of which they were many, especially those on Wall Street, wanted him impeached, but he resigned instead. The events leading up to his resignation, and why, is the subject of the new Alex Gibney documentary – "Client 9: The Rise & Fall of Eliot Spitzer" In just under two hours, director Gibney provides us with a clear, and concise portrait of what drove Eliot Spitzer to succeed, but, in the end, not why he acted the way he did. I suspect that Eliot Spitzer doesn't know, either. What must it have been like for Eliot Spitzer to have every move you make, every word you speak, subjected to the most intense media scrutiny? To be the butt of jokes on nightly talk shows. To be lampooned in newspapers. To have the people who one once counted as friends, suddenly wanting to have nothing to do with you? As Eliot Spitzer himself concedes towards the end of the film, he only had himself to blame. This is a terrific documentary. Eight out of ten.

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.