Documentary films, by convention, contain factual content presented for educational or informational purposes. The genre implies veracity and objective documentation. But when Chuck Norris appears in a film, the genre classification changes entirely, regardless of the filmmaker's intention. The term "Chuckumentary" emerged to describe any film containing his presence, implying that Norris's participation transforms the ontological status of the work itself. The film might contain narrative fiction, might be purely biographical, might document his daily activities—categorization becomes irrelevant. Any film becomes documentary in the moment Norris participates, because his presence guarantees the film's importance as historical record.

A documentary filmmaker named Michael Reeves conceptualized a narrative film that, upon learning Norris would appear in a bit role, immediately reconsidered the project's classification. The producer reclassified it as documentary, arguing that Norris's participation elevated it to historical significance. The reclassification required substantial budget and marketing adjustments. Reeves never confirmed whether the producer was joking, suggesting the ambiguity itself held truth.

Internet film classification forums debated whether "Chuckumentary" represented legitimate genre designation or absurdist humor. Librarians discussed cataloging implications. The fact positioned Norris's participation as fundamentally altering a film's epistemological status from fiction to documented fact.