Capote Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
On the night of 14 November 1959, in Holcomb, Kansas, a farmhouse is broken into by the criminals Perry Smith and Dick Hickock that expect to get US$ 10,000.00. With the policy of "no witness", the murderers kill the entire family. The homosexual writer Truman Capote travels to the small town with his friend Nelle Harper Lee and decide to use the topic to write a book. When the killers are arrested, he becomes friend of Perry for his own interest and then he falls in love for him, and gets a new lawyer for them, postponing their execution until 14 April 1965.
| Allie Mickelson | Laura Kinney |
| Kelci Stephenson | Nancy Clutter |
| Philip Seymour Hoffman | Truman Capote |
| Craig Archibald | Christopher |
| Bronwen Coleman | Barbara |
| Kate Shindle | Rose |
| David Wilson Barnes | Grayson |
| Michael J. Burg | Williams |
| Catherine Keener | Nelle Harper Lee |
| Kwesi Ameyaw | Porter |
| Andrew Farago | Car Rental Agent |
| Ken Krotowich | Courthouse Guard |
| Chris Cooper | Alvin Dewey |
| R.D. Reid | Roy Church |
| Rob McLaughlin | Harold Nye |
| Bennett Miller |
7.60 out of 10 (32471 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Performance amazing, movie terribly boring
posted on 28 Aug 2009I finally got to see Capote to bank in on its recent Oscar success.And well, I was disappointed tremendously.It's not that Capote is a bad movie by any stretch. The filmmakers clearly know how to make a movie, and the acting and writing is topnotch. It's just that...the movie is boring. It drags out for what seems like hours, but are only painful minutes. It harps on some plot points, but misses others or just pokes at them.It seems like they were going for a real arty feel, and just ended up forgetting to add any invigoration to it. While being topnotch in many categories, it just doesn't have the uplifting, or movement needed to make a film be enjoyable on all counts. I wanted to fall asleep for much of the movie, it just was too boring for my liking.The story itself is tremendously interesting, but the movie just lacks the life force and power to make the entire thing work. If they chopped a bit out, and added some more interesting elements to it, then it would have been a whole lot better.Of course, Hoffman is fabulous as Capote himself. The mannerisms he inhibits are excellent, and you can really almost see the real man he's portraying. Whereas Charlize just wanted glory for Monster, and Jamie Foxx faltered in more than a handful of areas in Ray, Phillip Seymour Hoffman is perfect as Capote. He chews up every scene he's in, and completely blows all the other actors in the film into the wind. Catherine Keener may have got an Oscar nod, but she completely lost out on making any sort of impression, because Hoffman stole it from everybody.The movie may be lacking, but he is not. He deserves the award hands down. It's a boring film with a astonishing Oscar worthy performance. If you have to see it, see it for Hoffman, and nothing else.7.5/10.
Brilliant Film About A Brilliant Man
posted on 26 Aug 2009I watched this movie last night and find that I'm still processing what I saw. Current accolades aside, I firmly believe this film will go down in history as perhaps the best biopic of all time.***spoilers** The movie traces the four-five years that Capote spent writing "In Cold Blood," and how writing his most important creation also served to be his undoing.Capote, the toast of literary writing circles after his first few novels are published, decides to write about the murder of the Clutter family in Kansas. Manipulating his way into unrestricted access to all sides of the crime, the victims, the killers, the investigators and the "collateral damage (the family and friends of both victims and killers)," he goes about writing the masterpiece that will not only change him, but will invent an entire new genre of writing: the true crime novel. In doing so, he paves the way for such modern writers as Ann Rule and other similar authors.However, unlike most other true crime writers, who generally begin their careers in law enforcement and are trained to deal with the emotional impact of their work, Capote comes to this work wholly unprepared for the impact it will have on his psyche. The proof of his gift as a writer is evidenced by the fact that he finished the work at all.While Capote is a master manipulator, he is also an extremely caring person. As he is drawn deeper into the facts of the crime, and the lives of the people affected by it, he is also drawn into caring about all of persons about whom he writes, especially Perry Smith, with whom he shares a certain commonality of background. While he is repulsed by what Smith and Hickock have done, he is also digging for an answer as to "why?"Phillip Seymour Hoffman's brilliant and nuanced portrayal of Capote carries the film, which is supported by a superb screenplay, supporting actors and cinematography; all of which combine to document the story of a brilliant writer who was destroyed by his groundbreaking masterpiece.10/10
One of the best so far this year
posted on 24 Aug 2009It's of course Philip Seymour Hoffman's movie. Brilliant isn't enough. There is some overplaying in some places, but still, this interpretation is to be remembered.Capote is the New York party prince in the beginning, and he remains so in the end, but with a very dark shadow around him. He has met real life and the most important line in the script, which changes him completely, is the girl who says about a boy, that he has never been into anything terrible before. That's the key to "In Cold Blood" and that's what makes Capote interested; the real life, which is infected by evil. And he makes a journey into that real evil, which he hasn't known much about before. Or has he? Much to think about here. Is life stronger than art? Definitely, according to this movie.
The ugly side of aesthetics
posted on 14 Aug 2009On one level the film is about the true story of a highly intelligent author who decides to write about a murder case.One of several sub themes of the film is "the aesthetic vs. society". It is an old theme: The artist is so fixated on his aesthetics that his activities come into conflict with morality and norms that "normal" people follow. In this film we see how Capote ends up selling his soul.What makes this film so good is the way this is done. The almost dreadful process is displayed with tender, sensitivity and a sensation of dire awareness.The film is kind of slow, which will put some people off. This is not a weakness, it is fundamental to convey the unique feeling of the film, which is what I remember second best. What I remember best is Hoffmann's brilliant acting. It should be the other way around, and this is why I can't give the film a top score.
Conceited artist :Truman Capote's homo antics might get on people's nerves.
posted on 14 Aug 2009It was after having watched "In cold blood", I embarked upon a viewing session of this film. While I watched the former to ascertain what made so much of hue and cry upon its release, the latter gave me a helpful insight about the writer who decided to write one of the most controversial books of American literature indeed English literature. Although "Capote" is a weak film,to my mind it has its pros and cons. Pros are related to the technical side. It is a fact that Bennet Miller's style is rather sedate there are many technical issues which have been deftly handled. To quote a few, most of the viewers would be amazed to discover how Winnipeg has become a good substitute for Kansas. Much of the 1950s rural American landscape especially the Kansas landscape was found in that place. The cons of this film are related to P S Hoffman's portrayal of Capote.He has given a good performance but sometimes it can drive people nuts who are not used to Capote's homo antics. The best thing about this film or one should say that the real scene stealer is Chris Cooper as Dewey. He is the sole reason for watching Capote.
IF you are not a Capote fan- this crap is unwatchable.
posted on 12 Aug 2009While I must give honors to the lead for acting his character with due diligence and doing a hoffmanesque transformation, the movie itself is a DOG. This is the sort of movie no one really enjoys watching but everyone feels they are supposed to applaud and recommend because so much work obviously went into creating this.Well- with all that work I wish they had covered some one more interesting and less annoyingly feminine. Capote's voice is an abrasive annoyance throughout and even though it seems historically accurate- it's a detail like snorting when you laugh- it's an annoying detail.IF you are a Capote fan you will be enthralled I'm sure. Anyone else will be bored to death, annoyed by his wittle gay voice and wishing people would not continually applaud movies because everyone else told them to. This movie sucks- sorry. Possibly historically accurate, a fantastic performance by the lead actor and yet.. thoroughly not entertaining or interesting.
exceptional acting, weak story
posted on 12 Aug 2009I think I need to stop reading books which movies are based on prior to seeing them, because I am almost always disappointed. In this case I read the classic "In Cold Blood" not Capote's biography, so I don't have an exact comparison. However, while In Cold Blood is engaging and very creepy and disturbing, I didn't feel quite the same about this movie. Again lack of character development and detail weaken this movie. It is so much easier to empathize with the criminals, clutter family, friends and locals in Halcomb in In Cold Blood, which is why it is a classic. Since this movie focuses on that time period in Capote's life, I feel many of those involved in the writing of his novel were left out. Also, Perry as described in the novel (having a personality disorder) and Perry depicted in the movie(somewhat sane) seem like two different people. Ironically, Dick who is described as sane yet malicious in the novel seems crazy. I left this movie not really feeling much about anyone. Although Huffman's acting was exceptional, as well as the acting of the supporting actors, I didn't really feel I understood Capote. When comparing it to the book, it doesn't quite answer what the process of writing the book was like. By this I mean mentally. For example, why does he continually lie to Perry about the book? Why is In Cold Blood written differently than what is depicted in this movie?? In a sense, is the movie saying that Capote lied not only to Perry and those he loved, but also his audience? More detail about that would be quite interesting, and maybe show the magnitude of his self absorbency and greed. So I feel if I hadn't read In Cold Blood I probably would have really enjoyed this movie (since I don't know much about Truman Capote himself). Therefore, the best advice is to enter the movie completely ignorant and it's good. However, now I'm only left with questions. So 5 stars for acting -5 stars for depth.
Hoffman is great but his character is so difficult to like that it cries out for a wider focus in the material, which it has but not as strong as I would've liked
posted on 08 Aug 2009Truman Capote is an author and journalist who spies his next project among the stories in the paper – the apparent motiveless murder of a family of four in Kansas. He goes to the town along with Harper Lee to try and do an article about how the callous crime has affected the town but realises that there is more to this story than just an article and decides to write a book. When two men are captured and quickly convicted for the crime, Truman helps to get them better lawyers for their appeal in return for unlimited visitation rights with the two – specifically Perry Smith. While Truman wins the total trust and friendship of Smith, he also knows that for his own good he must get all he can from Perry to make his book as good as possible.With all the Oscar hype over Hoffman's performance and all the awards he is up for I decided to go and see this for myself despite not having read any of Capote's work or indeed knowing more than the documentary I watch a week prior had taught me (which wasn't much). The film opens with the aftermath of a cold and cruel murder and sets the coldly detached air that the film carries consistently really well. It is as much a presence as Capote himself and indeed the two compliment each other as they overlap. However this also backfired a it on me because the film never shirked from highlighting how mercenary and exploitative Capote was towards Smith; it may have made out he couldn't forgive himself at the end but by the standards of the Hollywood biopic redemption, that was very small beer. But by nature of Capote being so hard to like I found myself looking for a hook to the film; the story itself is good but as Truman is the focus he undermines it by repelling the audience. To counter it I thought the film would make more of the theme rather than the man by looking at the role of journalism generally in terms of being able to coldly report on subjects while also getting close to them, however although it did do this through Truman, I didn't think that it did it as well as it could have done.So for this reason I felt oddly detached from the film and like it wasn't sure how to totally engage the audience. That said it was still very strong because the repellent nature of its subject (the person and the crime) easily held my interest even with the cold approach it took. Hoffman's Capote is fantastic of course. Yes he has the voice down pretty well but his performance is more impressive because he gives a convincingly selfish and horrible little character that is still interesting. He plays him with such layering and conviction that I think he deserves the praise he is being given. Keener has perhaps a smaller role but she is as reliable as ever; as indeed are turns from Cooper, Greenwood and others. Collins Jr is oft-typecast in banger roles so it was good to see him in a better character and he does well despite not really being given the time to get to the heart of his character – which is fair enough I suppose as he is not the focus of the film.Overall this was a worthy if not easy film to watch. The performances are good and the subject matter intelligent and interesting. The nature of the main character makes it hard to emotionally get into the film but generally the interesting material makes it easy to get into even if I do think more could have been done with the interesting theme of journalists getting too close to their subjects and their motivations for doing so.
In the Belly of the Beast
posted on 08 Aug 2009In a nutshell, "Famed author Truman Capote befriends two murderers while researching his celebrated book 'In Cold Blood' - and finds himself changed to the core." Having relatives who knew Mr. Capote makes me want to disagree, slightly, with this film's closing theme. The film portends Capote "never finished another book" due to an emotional attachment formed with killer Perry Smith. But the real reason for Capote's writer's block was that he was never again really sober long enough to call upon Clio, or any of the other muses which fueled his creativity.My grandmother told me some amusing stories about Capote, including how he'd order: "Vodka on the rocks," and, after a pause Jack Benny would appreciate, add, "…hold the rocks." This was in a Sag Harbor, NY bar; Capote "held court" in many watering holes around the world, and was always the life of the party. Grandmother enjoyed this film, but not more than either "In Cold Blood" or the real Truman Capote (when he wasn't being too sardonic).Capote might have appreciated this film (while trashing it in public), as it could be described as the dramatization (by Dan Futterman) of a speculative biography (by Gerald Clarke) about a nonfiction novel (by Capote). Secondary sources rule. And, for a 2005 film, there is a surprising lack of intimacy shown. Capote and companion Bruce Greenwood (as Jack Dunphy) are like brothers, his much-heralded "love" for Smith is debatable, and only once does Capote try to hook up (don't blink) with a potential sex partner.The production is first rate, with director Bennett Miller guiding an excellent cast. Philip Seymour Hoffman's portrayal doesn't inhale, but it's the best Truman Capote since "Murder by Death" (1976); and, it provided Mr. Hoffman with a mother-lode of "Best Actor" awards. "To Kill a Mockingbird" writer Catherine Keener (as Nelle Harper Lee) and aspirin-chewing Clifton Collins Jr. (as Perry Smith) are among the many notable "Best Supporting" players.******* Capote (9/2/05) Bennett Miller ~ Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Clifton Collins Jr.
Blakespot ReviewsL Capote
posted on 06 Aug 2009Capote, 2005 Yes, Phillup Seymour Hoffman deserved the Oscar for this movie. This was a very well made movie, the best feature of which was the acting which was great all around, and inspired by Hoffman. The reason that it didn't do better was that in parts it was a little slow. The movie is a great character study looking at the morals and motives of booth Truman Capote himself, and the killer he is interviewing. However, there's just some scenes in this movie that I don't really feel need to be there. When I got to the movie I kind of was glad it was very because I was beginning to get bored, I can say that about good movies, but not great ones.7/10, 18th out of 42 movies for 2005, 140th best of 2000s, 432nd best all time
mediocre
posted on 04 Aug 2009Although I have heard of Capote, he was before my time and I knew little to nothing about him before seeing this film. Overall, I wasn't impressed. Phillip Seymour Hoffman was the redeeming quality; I always enjoy watching him work, and he did a phenomenal acting job. The movie kept my attention for the most part, and gave me a few laughs, but it failed to move me. Once I left the theater, I ceased thinking about the movie, which is never a good sign. Although I don't regret seeing this movie, I probably won't watch it again. I did like the actor Clifton Collins, Jr, who played Perry Smith. His acting was mesmerizing, and I wasn't sure what opinion to have of his character. He was this cold-blooded killer, but you couldn't help but sympathize with him at times, with his sad eyes and enigmatic motive.
Difficult to watch but still an excellent film
posted on 04 Aug 2009In the years between 1960 and 1965, author Truman Capote (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) formed an unlikely friendship with Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.), a killer on death row accused of murdering a family of four in Kansas. His conversations with Perry and research into the murders would form the basis of his greatest literary work, "In Cold Blood." Capote is a terrific film that succeeds on every level. It was difficult to watch at times but it was still an emotionally engaging experience. Capote himself was an interesting person even if he did act a bit pretentious. In the film, he did have a few annoying moments like when he said "I have 94 percent recall of all conversation. I tested it myself." That line sounded like he was bragging and he was very much in love with himself, as other characters pointed out. At the same time, I felt sorry for him when he was talking about his childhood since people would make fun of him. He said, "Ever since I was a child, folks have thought they had me pegged, because of the way I am, the way I talk. And they're always wrong." As an adult though, he got the respect of most people. I think Philip Seymour Hoffman did a fantastic job as Capote and he deserved the Oscar. Some people called his performance an imitation but I think he did more than just talk like him. He actually became Capote.The main thing the film focused on was the relationship between Capote and Perry. At first, it was hard to tell if Capote was just using him for his book or if he actually cared for him. As they continued to meet, a friendship developed and Capote was looking past his book. He didn't want to portray Perry as a monster despite his crimes. He actually wanted to portray Perry correctly. The scenes between Capote and Perry were interesting to watch and they were done very well. The ending was particularly memorable and I think it was the best scene. I have to give credit to Clifton Collins Jr since he gave a very good performance as Perry. It was a shame that he wasn't nominated. I also have to give credit to director Bennett Miller because he managed to capture Capote's research and relationships pretty well.There were a few other people in Capote's life that were portrayed in the film. Harper Lee accompanied Truman to Kansas to help him with his research. Their relationship together was nice to watch but I think Catherine Keener should have gotten more screen time. Her performance was fine but it wasn't really Oscar worthy. I don't think there was enough of the character to really warrant a nomination. Alvin Dewey was portrayed by Chris Cooper and he did a decent job, nothing special though. Jack Dunphy was Capote's boyfriend and he was portrayed by Bruce Greenwood, who did a decent job. I didn't really find this relationship very interesting. Their conversations were kind of dull but Greenwood didn't get a lot of screen time so it didn't hurt the quality of the film. In the end, Capote is an excellent film and it's worth checking out. Rating 10/10
should have more insight for non-fictional novel
posted on 04 Aug 2009As an investigative reporter for several years before, i find echo from the movie. Movie is well made with wonderful acting performance from Hoffman and all the sidecast, esp Catherine Keener.But what fascinate me is how Mr. Capote dealing with the fact( the criminals) and his non-fictional novel( the book). There is is no doubt that Capote created the genre of non-fictional novel which affect the development on journalism. I am sure he experienced the paradox and dilemma of writing a non-fictional novel. To know what i really mean, you can simply ask him how a conclusion or judgment on the criminal can be made? Did you find any difficulty in it? I believe there are bunch of it.Non fictional novel is written with bias and judgment in no doubt, that why it's so fascinating to read. Mr Capote in the movie obviously experienced the moral struggle it brought. That's why he is not willing to let the criminals get to know the name of the book , coz he feels "guilty" of having that book name and the novel details in it.So i think the movie can be better by elaborate or explore more humanity on the blurred line between the truth and the novel side and how Mr. Capote dealing with his inner struggle.PS. Nowaday, Modern journalism is leaning to the non friction novel style, I experienced a lot of consequence from that which Capota did. For example, the way he made "friend" with the interviewee is the usual practice of an investigative reporter. Sometimes, what you did for the job is like being in a social party. And, what's more? you will get cold-blooded finally if u get used to that kind of life. (luckily i escape it at the very last minute :))
Capote Down Cold
posted on 04 Aug 2009Truman Capote revolutionized modern American literature with his non-fiction novel "In Cold Blood." "In Cold Blood" told the story of the heinous murder of the Cutter family in Halcomb, Kansas. The book and its author seem to be a paradox as depicted in Director Bennett Miller's "Capote" which follows the writing of "In Cold Blood". "In Cold Blood" would be Capote's last completed novel before his death years later. Capote was defined by his powerful words which at times seem incongruous with the witty, flamboyant, alcoholic, openly gay author. As stunningly portrayed by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Capote is a peculiar talented man with great vision, and completely selfish. Dan Futterman's screenplay based on the book by Gerald Clarke is captivating and compelling as a character study of a tragic crime and tragic author.In 1959 Capote (Hoffman) tells "The New Yorker" editor that he wants to go to Kansas to research the brutal murder of the Cutter family. He travels to Kansas with his partner Nelle Lee Harper (amazing Catherine Keener), author of the soon to be published "To Kill a Mockingbird." Nelle is Truman's "pass" into the conventional world of the Midwest to conduct his research of the murders. Truman and Nelle befriend police chief Alvin Dewey (Chris Cooper) during their stay in Kansas. Eventually the murderers are apprehended—Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.) and Richard Hickok (Mark Pellegrino). Truman is strangely attracted to Perry, who is apparently intelligent and artistic. Truman sees him as a spiritual brother, burdened by a similarly painful past. Smith and Hickok are convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death by hanging. In the meantime, Truman rejoins his lover Jack (strong Bruce Greenwood) in Spain to begin the arduous process of writing "In Cold Blood". However, Truman desperately needs a completed Third Act—a confession from Perry. Also the longer Perry and Hickok remain alive, the further the book release delays. Hoffman is compelling in drawing our compassion for Capote as this sad man who is alien anywhere outside of New York City, deceiving himself of his own self interests. In a great scene near the end when Truman cries that he tried everything to save Perry, Nelle (Keener) reminds him, "But the truth is; you didn't want to.""Capote" is defined by its compelling performances. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is awesome as Capote. He will probably win an Oscar for his performance. Hoffman nails the Capote voice, and is completely authentic in his portrayal. His is not mimicry. He balances tragic and pathetic. Hoffman inhabits Capote as the lone outsider, who is only powerful when he is writing or creating worlds in his mind. Hoffman also charms as Truman with a biting sense of humor. Truman boasts that he has 94% retention of conversations and he knows this "because I tested myself." Catherine Keener is amazing as Nelle Harper. She commands a natural intelligence, strength, and compassion. Jack tells Truman that Nelle is "even more man than" he is. She and Hoffman have great chemistry. As Nelle she provides a touching relationship for Truman which humanizes him, and punctuates Truman's isolation. The touching exchange between the two when she leaves Spain is subtle and heart felt. Director Miller's "Capote" captures Truman Capote at the peak of his talent and prowess, before his gradual and tragic decline with drugs and alcohol. What stays with you is that Capote was a gifted writer who was most alive and powerful through his words, but his own voice reflected a sad man, who people never really truly got.
Incredible film
posted on 27 Jul 2009I've been a fan of Truman Capote from way back, introduced to him first by "Breakfast at Tiffany's" and culminating in the groundbreaking work of his non-fiction novel "In Cold Blood" which had me captivated from the first page to the last. Throughout the years since the publication of that book, 1965, I could be wrong on the date, to 1985 when Truman died of alcoholism, I always enjoyed his guest appearances on all the talk shows. He was quick-witted, caustic and nobody's fool.I've just come from seeing Phillip Seymour Hoffman starring in a movie about a few years in the life of Capote while he was working on "In Cold Blood" and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that his performance sent chills through me. It is as if Capote has taken over Hoffman's mind and body, more of a channeling than a performance. He lives walks, talks and breathes as if he is Truman Capote. The film is beautifully made, the sepia, almost b & w tones at times, brings us back to the late fifties/early sixties when all the action took place. Bennett Miller, who is still under forty, does an admirable job in directing such marvelous actors as the above-mentioned Hoffman, and also Catherine Keener and Chris Cooper to mention just a few of the outstanding cast.On the surface the story is straightforward wherein Capote writes an article (a preamble to the eventual novel) for the New Yorker magazine about a dreadful multiple homicide in the town of Hokum in Kansas. A whole family is murdered in their beds for a pitiful few dollars by a pair of thugs who hear the farmer has a large stash hidden away.Through his riveting powers of persuasion (in spite of his lisp and his feyness) Capote gains access to just about everybody involved in this homicide, the detective, the friends and finally the perpetrators themselves, who are behind bars.He goes behind the scenes and into the psyches of all involved and puts the story together.Much in the movie is left open for speculation, principally the relationship between Perry Smith (played by Clifton Collins Jr.) and Capote. Harper Lee is the conscience of Capote. She is the author of "To Kill a Mockingbird" another fine book and movie and has been lifelong friends with him. She gently calls him to task for his self-centredness but most of the time behaves like a very indulgent older sister.The movie's focus is on the interviews conducted by Capote on Perry Smith, digging ever deeper into Perry's mind and emotions. The peripherals show Capote entertaining, ad wonderful nauseum, cocktail party sycophants and some slices of his relationship with Jack Dunphy. Up to its horrific climax, a series of insinuating, troublesome, ethical questions would not let me go. (1) In view of the cold-blooded nature of the crime how does one feel about capital punishment? (2) Was Capote in love with Smith and vice versa? (3) Is it ethically OK to lie continuously to a murderer on death row to get your story? (4) Should there be a more humane way of dealing with criminals who come from bleak, oppressive and abusive childhoods? And on.Capote, in a memorable quote says at one point that he and Smith were raised in the same house, the only difference was that he went out the front door while Smith went out the back door.Why do some make it on the sunny side of the street while others hide in the alleys coming from the same type of background. Will we ever know?An unforgettable film. This is what movies are all about. Oscar material. Philip: you have to get the Oscar nod for this.10 out of 10. Stunning on every level.
Slow-moving, superficial, plot less
posted on 25 Jul 2009Having read In Cold Blood and most of Capote's other novels (as well as a good deal of biographical material), I'd have to say that this movie DIDN'T COME CLOSE to penetrating the psychological depths of this historical/literary event. Suggesting that Phillip Seymour Hoffman is going to be nominated for various awards for his performance in this movie is probably correct, but this fact doesn't necessarily warrant such a bestowal. Oftentimes, especially in Hollywood, mistakes are made when it comes to such things. Aside from affecting a Capote-like lisp and beholding people with an aloof, yet studious gaze, Hoffman neglected a lot of other Capote-isms, like his excessive squirming, and the sheer drunkenness of his person, etc. In my point of view, although Hoffman held a drink as a prop in every scene, the level of intoxication wasn't captured. nor, when PSH claims to feel a close connection with perry smith, does the claim appear to be based on any events or actions that had preceded. in other words, the "connection", or bond, between the two was never fully established.the only indication that a bond was forged was when Capote-Hoffman says so (paraphrase) "i feel so close to him." this doesn't cut it for me. the viewer should be able to intuit certain bonds long before they are voiced or spoken by piecing together subtle clues that in this flick, were entirely absent.aside from showing perry smith biting his lip (which was intended to make him seem less-than-killer like, exposed, humane) they never really delved into his character, showed other instances of his humanity or lack thereof. in short, i was BORED STIFF by the superficiality of the rendering. boo.
Underwhelming Film Despite Stellar Hoffman Performance
posted on 23 Jul 2009Phillip Seymour Hoffman's performance as Truman Capote will undoubtedly earn him best actor candidacy. So poignant was Hoffman's acting in the last moments of the film that no one in the audience rose or spoke for several moments into the credits. Hoffman's achievement notwithstanding, Capote was laborious and plodding and the supporting cast was lackluster at best. Katherine Keener was badly miscast. I loved her sexy quirkiness in Being John Malkovich and The 40 Year Old Virgin. As the matronly Nelle Harper Lee, she was no-frills plain vanilla. Clifton Collins Jr. was unconvincing as the sociopath Percy Smith. Bob Balaban deserves bigger roles.I give the film a 6, with 5 of those points being credited to Hoffman.
A movie about nothing...
posted on 09 Jul 2009I'm glad I only rented this movie, instead of spending ten dollars to see it in the theater. Once again, Hollywood managed to fool me into renting a useless and shallow film with limited artistic value and negligible intellectual challenge. The movie paralyzed me emotionally and intellectually, leaving me not caring about any of its characters or content. I kept waiting for it to heat up and develop into some kind of ethical or legal controversy, but to no avail. Half way through it, I found myself checking the counter on my DVD player to find out how much longer I have to endure this torturous peace of work. I never understood the significance of Capote's personal life, nor his bonding/fascination with this cold blooded killer. I didn't really care about Hoffman's performance and could care less about his skills in imitating or looking like the real Capote. For some reason, it seems that Hollywood, and the so called critics, are discovering new standards for arts. They have been building whole movies around the ability of certain actors to imitate some famous persons from the past such as Capote, Ed Murrow and others. Who cares if they can mimic the actors look and sound?!? You need a story first, not last. They are building shallow stories around actors' talents, not the other way around. Why did someone felt the need to make a film about Capote and a half century old murder!? What is the significance of such an annoying person? Just because they found someone who can imitate him! The movie did not entertain me, engage me emotionally or intellectually, or provoke me. It just bored the hell out of me.
A haunting and none too obvious true story with an outstanding performance from its lead actor
posted on 25 Jun 2009To put it lightly, the nominations for the 2005 'Best Picture' Oscar are very weak indeed. The Academy has decided to go with politics rather than films with merit, and as a result we just have a list of films that handle current events - and if you ask me, it's a bit of a joke. Capote was the last Best Picture nominee that I saw and I set my hopes pretty low after the other four fell massively short of expectations. I am surprised, therefore, to report that Capote is actually a damn good film - and although it's not the best of the year, it definitely deserves to have that statuette to it's name come March 5th. The film is still somewhat politically orientated, as it handles themes of violence; but these are wrapped up in the involving story of Truman Capote and the events that lead to him writing his masterpiece, In Cold Blood. We follow him as he researches the brutal murder of a Kansas family. The story really lifts off when he comes into contact with Perry Smith; a death row inmate, and one of the murderers. We follow the writer as he develops a friendship with this man, in order to write his book. But the relationship may have grown beyond professional reasons only.The main stand-out thing about this film is most definitely the lead performance. For years now, Philip Seymour Hoffman has been one of the most talented, yet underrated actors around; and with his portrayal of the famous novelist here - he's finally getting the roles that allow him to reach his full potential. Hoffman holds the screen with a performance that is as intricate as it is absurd, and any success that this film gets is owed more than in part to this great performer. The story itself is intriguing, and the way that the writer builds a friendship with the murderer is both haunting and absurdly touching. This film shows that no matter what men do, there is always a deeper and more complex side that is often ignored. The tone of the film is downbeat and saddening, and inexperienced director Bennett Miller does an excellent job at ensuring the film always feels right. Capote himself isn't too well known outside of literature fans; so this film can be thanked for bringing a true story that is none too obvious to the big screen. As mentioned, this isn't the best film of the year; but it's easily the best on the list of nominees, and while its chances don't look too rosy; it will be a huge shame if it doesn't win the award.
Clifton Collins Jr. for Best Supporting Actor
posted on 30 Aug 2009Everybody is talking about Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance as Truman Capote. Yes, it is a masterful piece of work.But the actor who really (unsuspectingly and surprisingly) blew me away was Clifton Collins Jr. as the killer Perry. His performance is heartbreaking. I've only seen one other picture of his ("Traffic"). But I've gotta tell all you people, this guy should be MAJOR, MAJOR movie star material. I truly hope the Academy members will award Mr. Collins with a Best Supporting Actor nomination. A bravura piece of acting like this from a relatively unknown actor needs to be recognized by the Academy. Mr. Collins, I salute your performance.