Will the films about Lance Armstrong have to pay Armstrong something to tell his fall from grace?

Two major studios are planning Armstrong films about his doping scandal. Chances are only one will actually produce a film but I am curious about the legal process if the story is told without some input or permission. Armstrong is notoriously touchy of his reputation (even tarnished) and unashamedly litigious.... would he have a case for slander if they portray him as a bully or a outright jerk?

I think his vanity will suck up any portrayal, even a bad one, just so he can continue to be in the news and would love any opportunity to be interviewed by entertainment shows to talk about such a product. And demanding a fee for any film product throws him into that world again (which I think he desperately wants) and he is probably desperate for any income during a time when retaining his fortune is questionable.

I think about all those serial killer movies and TV productions. I am certain Charles Manson does not get paid for any portrayal (not sure though)..... or I wonder about the recent movies about the founder of Facebook or the disgraced executives from Enron. Would they have reasons to sue for any reason?

I don't think those portrayals mentioned above caused law suits but the people portrayed maybe have not been quite as narcissistic as Armstrong. I don't think Armstrong feels real shame. He is also a control freak and allowing such films to exist without his input and/or consent with pay might just be unbearable to the guy without pushing for something.

Could such a case be feasible and acceptable by a court? And do any of you think such a case would have some merit? Thanks.