Stylish but barely mediocre overall

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Marina Zenovich delivers a powerful film with compelling characters and great pacing. She presents what happened without bias as it unfolded. Nothing is rushed. The Duke lacrosse team appears guilty. Mike Nifong appears to be a hero fighting for women everywhere. She presents the case in both Durham and nationally, rich vs. poor, white vs. black, outsider vs. local. She doesn't leave any opinions out. The five most central figures in this film weren't interviewed. That'd be a disaster for most directors, but Zenovich is undeterred. We hear from the lacrosse players' parents and they deliver the type of emotion that the players might not have. She gets us into Mike Nifong's head without Nifong saying a word.

While I am sure there are a few folks out there that would never be convinced, this installment of "30 for 30" should easily convince any reasonable viewer that the infamous Duke lacrosse team rape case was a farce. It does a very, very thorough job in presenting the story from start to finish and it's a darn shame that the reporters working on the case initially didn't show the same dedication to getting the story right. In hindsight, it's clearly a case where minds were made up long before all the facts were obtained...and if folks had just waited they would have seen that the rapes could not have occurred.What I appreciate about the film, in addition to its thoroughness, is how the story is presented. Through the first third of the show, the viewer is left scratching their head and thinking "I thought the guys DIDN'T commit the rape...maybe they really did"! In other words, it didn't jump to any conclusions but just showed what happened and let it all play out at it did in reality.Is there anything I didn't like? Well, a few of the individuals involved refused to be interviewed. The three exonerated lacrosse players refused--most likely to get this story behind them. The prosecutor refused--most likely because he is an evil man. And, the prison system would not allow the accuser to be interviewed because she's in prison for murder. I would have loved to have heard from these folks. Apart from this, the film was very well constructed and convincing...and makes for very compelling viewing. And, sadly, it's a case that tends to make folks assume that all too many real rape victims are 'just making it all up'.

Ten years ago, the Duke Lacrosse team became the focus of national attention. I never knew anyone who played lacrosse and have never seen a game. So the extreme national attention struck me as strange. The story was covered by every major news outlet. Reporters parachuted in from the New York Times and Washington Post. Cameras were everywhere. The case was sensational. The Duke team competed for the national championship and lost, making them the second-best lacrosse team in the NCAA. There was a celebration off campus where the boys consumed a lot of alcohol and someone ordered exotic dancers. At some point, one of the dancers left the party, called police and claimed to have been raped by three of the players. The story exploded.The lacrosse players were white, handsome and confident. They could have stepped out of GQ. They looked like the poster children of an American elite and they were students at one of the nation's most expensive and prestigious universities. The strippers were poor and black. The allegations were ugly, and the Durham County District Attorney took the case immediately. He told the Durham Police that he wanted to control the investigation.The purported victim was a college student from North Carolina Central University, a traditionally black university. Chrystal Mangum gave a series of statements which formed the basis of the prosecution.Outrage erupted at Duke. Members of the lacrosse team were suspended. Protests were regular events. There were calls for harsh action against every member of the team. Black ministers railed at the injustice from the pulpit and at rallies. News organizations and Nancy Grace screamed for justice. The District Attorney Mike Nifong moved the case toward trial as the State Bureau of Investigation handled DNA evidence which would corroborate the victim's allegations.In the midst of the hysteria, the DNA results came back negative, but the DA lied to the press and the defense about the findings. Nifong was in the middle of an election and he wanted to keep the case alive to boost his reelection chances. This film has many riveting layers. There is the question of rich versus poor, white versus black, privilege versus powerlessness, and questions of justice. The film explores the pack mentality in the media. It also explores the political nature of justice. This is excellent documentary-making. Every frame was important to the story and the story took a number of twists and turns. See it.

I had the opportunity to see the World Premiere of Fantastic Lies at Austin's SXSW Film Festival last night. It was very well-received. It will premiere tonight – for the 10th anniversary - on ESPN's 30 for 30 series although it is a film that goes well beyond issues of sports. The documentary is a very even-handed attempt to examine the tragedy of the Duke Lacrosse rape case. The tragedy appears to be that 3 young men had their lives nearly ruined by a false allegation of a rape that never happened. The rape accusation was exploited by an ambitious prosecutor and various other forces looking to address existing – and very real concerns – about class and race in Durham, NC. The film explores the evidence and talks to many of those close to the case such as the parents of some of the accused lacrosse players. It presents a thorough examination of the ugly events and political shenanigans around them. While some questions remain unanswered – and perhaps are unanswerable – the film fits in well with so many other documentaries of innocent people accused of crimes they didn't commit. In that sense, it fits in with the many documentaries made about the West Memphis Three, Cameron Willingham, Michael Morton and so many other cases where ambitious prosecutors have gotten ahead of their evidence.The problem that bothered me is that it never really addressed the larger issues of the epidemic of campus sexual assault raised by the recent documentary, The Hunting Ground, and many other reports. This case seems to be an exceptional one when it comes to campus sexual assault where the politics led to a false accusation whereas the more common problem seems to be institutions that cover and protect sexual predators. It felt like that larger issue was left unaddressed. Still, the film is certainly recommended for those looking to understand a disturbing sequence of events at an elite university.