Everywhere I look nowadays, whether it be on a poster or during the opening credits, films wear with pride a slogan most of the time reading "Based on a true story". What's more, everywhere I look people seem to actually believe that is an important factor for the film. Whether the actual film be good or bad, they seem to most of the time justify the film with "But it was based on a true story". This epidemic has spread to all films, where a common question after the credits roll is "Was it based on a true story?"

I personally feel that this is a grave flaw in the world of films right now. My belief is that a film should be able to speak for itself; not with any outside information about the making of the film or the origins of the story. What this "Based on a true story" flu is causing is for people, both making and watching films, to make believe that the actual film is not nearly as important as whether it originated from the real world or the writer's head.

Just take a look at a recent example: Clint Eastwood's "Changeling". The film tracks a single mother's search for her lost child and her ordeals with the corrupt police force. The film has received some criticism (which I agree with) on its simplicity in dealing with its characters. However, the film still received a decent amount of positive reviews. A common justification: "It was based on a true story", thus making the film better than if it were pure fiction.

But if you think about it, the film most likely would have been better had the writer not labeled his tale as nonfiction. If they were not restricted to all of the factual information available to them, they would have been granted more liberty in creating their characters and story. All it would have taken is a little thing called imagination, which I once believed was a key tool for a writer.

One last reason against the label of nonfiction: it is simply ridiculous believing that the tag is true. The perfect example: The Coen brothers' "Fargo". Even before the credits appear, a large statement appears saying that the events portrayed in the film actually took place. However, years later the Coens revealed that they had bluffed and the film was pure fiction. Had this never been discovered, many people might have continued to believe that a pregnant police officer discovered someone being fed to a wood cutter.

All I pray for is that filmgoers judge a film not for how truthful it is to the real world but to how good the film is. For screenwriters, I ask that they refrain from constricting themselves with factual information and at the most label their script "INSPIRED by a true story", thus giving them liberty to actually contribute to the story. There is a reason "Fargo" has endured as a classic over a decade from its release. I can assure you that its "Based on a true story" title card is not the reason but simply because it is a great film in its own right.