MovieChat Forums > F for Fake (1973) Discussion > Why is this movie not listed as 'F for F...

Why is this movie not listed as 'F for Fake' here on IMDB?

If an administrator from IMDB is reading this, why is this movie listed as "?: About Fakes"? While this movie had many different working titles before its release, it was Welles' actor and companion Oja Kodar who finally suggested calling it "F for Fake", which was the release name. Here are links which show the correct title of this movie as proof:

I could continue, but I believe you get the point. Please change the name of this listing to "F for Fake" if you please.


Here, read this. And then read it again. From the IMDb help pages:

"How are titles formatted? How do you choose the year shown in the title?

When we store titles in the database, we use the original title of a movie/show in its original language as it appears on screen in the opening credits at the time of its first public release or screening (including festival premieres). If a film is subsequently retitled, we will list the new title as an alternative title."

Note especially the phrase: ON SCREEN. There are many, many examples of the listed IMDb title being different from what is listed on a DVD release, posters, reviews, because the sole critertion for the listed title is what appears on the screen:

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) as opposed to Sunrise:

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience, and Observation of David Copperfield, the Younger (1935) as opposed to David Copperfield:

X2 (2003) as opposed to X² or X2: X-Men United

A Matter of Life and Death (1946) as opposed to Stairway to Heaven:

Intolerance: Love's Struggle Throughout the Ages (1916) as opposed to Intolerance:

The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with His Battell Fought at Agincourt in France (1944) as opposed to Henry V:

I could go on, but I hope you get the idea.

The IMDb is not Leonard Maltin TV Movies: a movie is not listed by the way it is most commonly known, but by what appears in the movie itself. This rule is very strict, and is not to be overriden even by Oja Kodar or Welles himself. In the cases of Cukor's David Copperfield and Olivier's Henry V, the title are alphabetized under "p" and "c" resepectively.

Do please stop your efforts to "change the title back" because F For Fake is FINALLY and CORRECTLY listed as what it is: a "promotional title."



It also possibly reflects where the financing for the film came from.


Uh oh, somebody screwed up and changed it, i see it listed as F for fake,

Blablablabl bah beba bla bla bla. Blegh. Baba blaghedabobo.


IMDB always does this. They have to be showoffs.

One day they will translate every great film.


Rkjdauiop KJkdjfeirpoe Dioijkejrs



and so on.


IMDB's rule makes sense to me. It's called being consistant. If typing in F for Fake takes you to the right place, which it does, why should you be upset about it?


plus it translates to "truth and lies" and not F for fake?



I agree. the movie was not presented with the french title at the first screening and, if you go by what is shown ON SCREEN then you should have the title starting with ?: about fakes

(and yes the movie is called F for fake everywhere else other than France and Germany apparently..)


Ever since when are Wikipedia, Amazon, CNN, Hollywood Reporter, etc., etc., "proof" of anything?


The on screen title of the film in its current DVD release is ? About Fakes.


My favourite one is "4: Rise of the Silver Surfer"

If I have to tell you again, we're gonna take it outside and I'm gonna show you what it's like!


If the IMDb criteria is what appears on screen then Vérités et mensonges is NOT the title. Nowhere does that title appear on screen.


Yes, the on-screen title is '? About Fakes'. If IMDB wants to follow their own logic, the main title should be changed--that's the bottom line. IMDB looks hypocritical and stubborn for not changing it.

Personally, I like 'Vérités et mensonges' better, but it makes little sense to say that is the main title of this movie. For what it's worth, the movie was known as 'F for Fake' while it was being shot--'F for Fake' was the on-set title, appearing on papers and charts and such (this according to the Criterion DVD commentary).

Just because Welles shot the framing sequences of this in France does not mean that a French title should be used. If in a sense this is more a "French" movie than any other NATIONALITY, it is still an English-LANGUAGE film. Based on the logic IMDB is using for this movie, however, they may as well retitle 'The Third Man' to 'Der dritte Mann', because, after all, that film was shot primarily in Austria.

Sometimes I think IMDB just tries to be obscure in hopes of seeming more knowledgeable, worldly and sophisticated. It helps to counteract the fact that meanwhile, a few sub-pages over, you'll see most every new comic book movie getting ratings of 8.0 and above.


All you morons haven't read or understood what fultoncharlie has quoted - that it is what the film was called ON IT'S first theatrical screening that matters - for the sake of consistency. None of you have any proof whatever that the name was F for Fake on that screening. It doesn't MATTER what it's called on all the DVDs in the world or all the screenings AFTER that first one. It's because if you're serious you need RULES - even though in some cases the result is a bit unsatisfactory. How hard is it to understand? And if you confuse the facts on this site with USER ratings, that you and me can influence, then you really haven't got anything right.

This message has not yet been deleted by an administrator


Hmn. IMDb DID change the main title to "?: About Fakes" some years back per my request, and called "F for Fake" a "promotional title". Looks like the administrators caved in to all the complaints and changed it back.



I guess the Star Wars whiners are appropriately loud - that one is listed as "Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope" even though the original on-screen title was merely "Star Wars".



That would be too much of a give away.