The simple "based on a true story" disclaimer at the start of the film is supposed to make me suspend my disbelieve to crazy levels? And "based" on a true story means just that. "based". Its not a documentary. In real life, the fake child came out and admitted he was lying after a week, and THAT is what released the mother from the psycho ward. In real life, the killer's mother testified to killing Walter Collins, was herself convicted, and later tried to recant.

In real life, the OJ Simpson-sized story was the murder of the 20 kids, not the story of Ms Collins. Eastwood chose to make that the subject of the film, so he had to fictionalize her story. I thought choices, actions, and reactions of Jolie's character to be totally unbelievable, and borderline absurd. Jolie and Eastwood did the best they could with a whack script.

And since when does putting "based on a true story" at the beginning of a movie change the rules? The plot doesn't have to make sense as long as there is a 5 word phrase on the screen at the beginning of the movie? And sometimes that technique is used as creative device. Think Fargo and Blair Witch Project, two movies that used that claim falsely on purpose to elicit a different response from the audience than they would have gotten otherwise.

----