This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

ridiculous rating

Highly Overrated But Still Good

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

"No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson" is a fascinating film because it can be interpreted various ways by the viewer. I noticed one of the reviewers felt it was a great film about race, whereas I saw it from a different point of view---how pro sports (particularly basketball) have driven away many fans like myself. BOTH interpretations are easy to make based on this film.The film begins with a discussion of the childhood of Allen Iverson in Hampton, Virginia. He was an amazing talent in both football and basketball--an All-American and hot pro prospect. But, he also came from 'the wrong side of the streets' and his family life, though VAGUE in the film, was terrible--with no father and a 15 year-old mother. In light of this upbringing, it's easy to see how Allen grew up angry--ready to fight the world. And to me, this is a key to the story--the anger. Here is where it gets interesting. Just before Allen was to graduate high school and go on to a wonderful college career, a crazy incident occurred. While the facts are VERY difficult to tease out, there was a brawl in a bowling alley and Allen and two of his black friends were arrested. Eventually, Allen was convicted of instigating a riot (or some such charge) and the city exploded with various cries of racism and theories about why Iverson was prosecuted (many of which, frankly, just sounded crazy and stupid). I am not sure who did what--but this CLEARLY is a case where Iverson and many others acted stupidly. Whether the sentence was fair or not, I have no idea--but if they had just walked away, none of this would have happened--and it's weird how NO ONE in the film said this! JUST WALK AWAY!! Duh.Much of the next half hour of the film showed the HUGE racial divide in the city. Blacks in the film interpreted the incidents as racism and whites saw it more as a legal matter. A few did feel the prosecution was warranted but the system's strong reaction was too strong--after all, he was a kid with promise and it was a one-time incident. None of this controversy surprised me--there is STILL a huge racial divide in this country and this case, like the OJ case, just brings all of this to light and it's all rather sad--whatever your ethnic background.Eventually, Iverson ended up serving a rather short sentence and made it to college and eventually to the NBA where he became a mega-star. Overall, it's a very well-constructed and VERY compelling film that everyone can appreciate and enjoy. I've seen many of the "30 for 30" films and all are excellent--and this one is among the best of these. It also had a hopeful portion near the end where Allen was helped by a nice white lady to graduate and make something of himself--a very positive thing. But it also briefly went over his VERY controversial and angry pro career and further brushes with the law--which is sad, as it overshadows his greatness. Think about it--6'0" and one of the best players EVER in the game--but many folks will just see him as an angry punk and it's hard to blame them.

I started laying basketball in 1995, having never really been exposed to the sport prior to that. As a result the first time I heard the name Allen Iverson was when he was the star point guard on the 76'ers, covered in tattoos, arrogant, selfish but full of heart when it came to playing; I certainly knew nothing of the subject covered by this documentary. The majority of the film is covering the incident, the subsequent case and the impact it had on the community in terms of splitting it down racial lines. In this regard I found the film interesting because it was about an incident I knew nothing of and in this way it held my attention.James does struggle with the telling though because he does have a limited number of directly involved people who are willing to talk to him. Of these they can only really say how things were from their perspective, there isn't really much in the way of light shed upon it. That said I did still find it interesting even if it wasn't a film that really managed to be about more. At times it does try to go above this incident and be about race and sports but it never quite manages to use the Iverson incident as a microcosm for a bigger issue – which is really what it should have been doing in my opinion. It doesn't manage it though, partly because beyond the feelings, there isn't a lot concrete to build on. There clearly was racist motivations behind some of the decisions made and things done, but the film doesn't capture these particularly well when it comes to specifics.What James does do well is to provide balance to the telling; while the film makes strong feelings (and extremes) on both sides, he manages to walk the middle line and provide a fair summary of the incident. Iverson was probably there and (given how he plays and talks) probably didn't calmly walk away from a fight so he didn't deserve to be hushed up or escape any questions, but at the same time it was certainly treated harsher than it should have been and the only clear reason is that somebody somewhere decided this rising star deserved to be taken down a peg or two.Others have praised this documentary here and I'm afraid I don't totally see it that way. I found the introduction to, and summary of, the incident to be engaging but it never got beyond that level, never really made significant points at a higher level. This limited it to one viewing for me and I do suspect that I may not have been so engaged in the film if I had been aware of the details before viewing it.

30 for 30: No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson (2010) *** 1/2 (out of 4) Near perfect documentary takes a look at the 1993 incident at a bowling alley where a fight broke out and in the end four black men, including Allen Iverson, were charged with crimes. The troubled Iverson ended up being convicted and sentenced to five years in prison, which started hot debate and many racial issues. Director James is best known for HOOP DREAMS and this one here is yet another impressive documentary. One really has to take their hats off to ESPN for allowing a subject matter like this to make it onto the air waves. This 30 for 30 series promised to be something special and it's turned out to be and allowing the subject matter of race to be looked at so openly is certainly a brave mood. It should go without saying but there were two sides of the incident and various sides as to why Iverson was charged. Many felt it was because he was black. Some felt it was because he was a thug who had already gotten away with so much. Others felt it was a political move and yet other conspiracy theories are given time including one that it was a conspiracy to keep major colleges away from him so that he could attend a local, small school and in return bring more money back to the community. I'm sure both sides watching this thing will have their blood boiling but at least James is honest and open on all issues. He digs deep into the racial issues of 1993 as well as the impact they have on current times. James admits that many people refused to be interviewed for this film and that includes Iverson, although we get plenty of video footage from him and earlier interviews. I don't think there's a soul alive that has said Iverson doesn't have talent. At the same time I don't think anyone has said that he was an angel. Seeing how opposite sides fought their battles makes for some riveting drama but at least we get an honest look at the subject.

Steve James emerged as a legend in the world of documentary film-making with Hoop Dreams and No Crossover picks up with some of the same themes. No Crossover received its world premiere at the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX ahead of its scheduled airing on ESPN's 30 for 30 series on April 13. No Crossover uses the events of the 1993 Trial of emerging basketball star Allen Iverson in James' hometown of Hampton, VA, as a microcosm for examining issues of race in American society. The documentary is unflinchingly honest and the film captures the double-standards around race that are rarely brought to the surface. A fight in a bowling alley becomes a means for telling a powerful and compelling story about racial injustice. The complex social picture and the still-present tensions more than a decade-and-a-half later are fascinating and edifying.James raises fascinating questions about racial double-standards in the judicial system that are often difficult to document. In that sense, this film is also picking up on the themes that he has raised in films like Stevie (about a young juvenile) and At the Death House Door (about the death penalty in Texas). This documentary is one that should lead many Americans to reconsider the events of the Iverson trial, but more importantly to reconsider their ideas about race and justice in America. James has given us an opportunity to look at ourselves in the mirror and for that we owe him a debt of gratitude – again!