Capote (2005) User Reviews

Phillip Seymour Hoffman Shines in a Chilling, Cold Blooded Performance

[Tony-Kiss-Castillo · 8/10 · 26 December 2021]

Phillip Seymour Hoffman was the kind of actor who, because of his physical appearance and demeanor, rarely was given the opportunity to take on a title role. Here, at last, was a stand out exception to that rule! In Capote, Hoffman was able to show us his true artistic ability. The Result: A well- deserved Oscar as best actor.

It is quite a veritable shame that we will never again be able to see him in any new portrayals! CAPOTE, of course, is a true story, on this occasion, set in the 60's, Truman Capote, an author and human being who was truly extremely unique and most out of the ordinary, albeit, at times, highly conflicted! Characteristics that Hoffman very clearly transmits to us, as viewers, in this truly outstanding biopic!

(8********)...ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!

In cold blood

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 7 October 2005]

Director Bennet Miller's "Capote" is a film that shows great intelligence in the way it captured the essence of Truman Capote, a man who achieved fame and notoriety with most of the fiction he wrote. This film concentrates in the period of his life in which he got obsessed by a notorious murder case of the fifties about the murder of a family in Kansas.

Dan Futterman has written the screen play based on the book by Gerald Clarke. The film is an account about the writing of the novel "In Cold Blood" that showed how the two young men who committed the heinous crime are caught, processed and hanged for their actions.

If you haven't watched the film, perhaps you would like to stop here.

When the film opens we get a vision of a lonely house in the distance. This being the Midwest, we are given a flat expanse devoid of elevations anywhere. The camera takes us to that lonely house as a young woman comes calling for her friend that lives in there. Not getting any response, she goes in to a room upstairs where she discovers her friend has been killed. The colors are dark, as is the tone of the film.

Truman Capote, who had been connected to the New Yorker magazine, sees the article in the N.Y. Times and gets interested. This case that shocked the country, at the time, shows a promise for the writer. The next time we meet him, he is in the small town in Kansas accompanied by his good friend and steadying influence, Nell Harper Lee, a writer.

By becoming friendly with the sheriff's wife, Mr. Capote gets a privilege by having access to the two murderers. Truman is clearly deeply affected by his relationship with Perry Smith, a handsome dark man who shows a lot of intensity. By gaining their trust, Capote is able to put together his best selling book "In Cold Blood", which will revolutionize American letters in the way the two criminals are portrayed.

Truman Capote, while pursuing the completion of his book, doesn't come clean to Perry Smith. In fact, when questioned about things he has learned, Capote gives evasive answers because he is not prepared to share with his main subject things that clearly should have been clarified from the start.

Watching the brilliant take of Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote on the screen, brought to mind another great actor, Meryl Streep, who like Mr. Hoffman is a chameleon in the interpretation of a character. Mr. Hoffman is perfect as the writer because he has captured every mannerism and the speech inflection of Truman Capote. Catherine Keener is perfect as Nelle, the true friend and companion. Bruce Greenwood plays Truman Capote's companion Jack Dunphy. Chris Cooper is totally wasted as Sheriff Dewey.

Adam Kimmel excellent cinematography contributes to the atmosphere the director gave the film because of the use of muted colors in what appear to be the bleak winter of the Midwest.

provocative, stark, and powerful

[samseescinema · 8/10 · 7 September 2005]

Capote Reviewed by Sam Osborn

Rating: 3.5 out of 4

Director: Bennett Miller Cast: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Chris Cooper Screenplay: Dan Futterman MPAA Classification: R (some violent images and brief strong language)

It seems that once a year we're treated to a performance so staggeringly magnificent that it seems as if the actor's a shoe-in for the Academy's Best Actor prize. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is just that actor for 2005. His portrayal of Truman Capote was best described by Telluride Film Festival's Galaxy Theater host as a "resurrection". Like Jamie Foxx's Ray, Charlize Theron's Monster, and Nicole Kidman's Virginia Wolfe, Hoffman's Capote is simply devastating. He stated at Telluride that after first accepting the role and watching a recording of Truman Capote he frankly thought he was in over his head. But throughout pre-production he gathered and compiled all of Capote's mannerisms and began practicing them, slowly and truly becoming Truman Capote. And from the first line of Hoffman's dialogue, with his squinched high voice, and self-absorbed tone we know he's succeeded. The actual film is nearly eclipsed by Hoffman's performance. But Director Bennett Miller and an impressive supporting cast manage to keep up with Hoffman's breakneck achievement. Shot in monochromatic, nearly black and white starkness, the film inherits a raw power that builds to its stunning climactic sequence. And although the film drags some in the middle, it finishes strong and leaves us with much to discuss. It's provocative, stark, and powerful.

Capote opens with the discovery of a family of four murdered in the small town of Hokum, Kansas in 1953 (don't quote me on the date, please). Coming off his second novel, Truman Capote (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) is searching for his next project. Intrigued by the murders, he takes the investigation, agreeing on authoring an article for The New Yorker. Meeting with the town's Sheriff, Alvin Dewey (Chris Cooper), he's met with opposition in the town for his peculiar manner. But his companion on the investigation, Harper Lee (Catherine Keener), offsets his homosexuality with terse, homegrown professionalism.

Months later the two killers, Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.) and Richard Hickcock (Mark Pellegrino) are apprehended by Sheriff Dewey and soon sentenced to death. Finding himself increasingly drawn to the story by the sentence, Truman begins personally interviewing the murderers, particularly Perry Smith, at their maximum security prison. Avoiding discussion of the murders themselves, Capote learns more about their lives outside of crime, finding a humanity never put into print before and causing him to extend his article for The New Yorker into the full-length novel, In Cold Blood. It would be the first True Crime novel ever written. His extensive interviews with Smith lead to a strange relationship open to many terms of controversial interpretation. He feels compelled to assist the men and lead the world's opinion away from demonizing headlines. Capote even goes to lengths to find them a decent lawyer for their Supreme Court appeal.

The screenplay deals with this controversy between Capote and Smith with beautiful ambiguity. Screenwriter Dan Futterman leaves it to Capote's character to interpret their relationship for the audience, instead of the story doing so in a ham-handed way. And with Hoffman's performance so obsessively complete, the result is magnificent. We oddly understand Capote's pain and his unique love for Perry Smith. He obviously sees the monster inside, but realizes the human entirely. Some even speculated around the festival that Capote fell in love with Smith. It's incredibly profound.

But at the same time, Futterman's screenplay relies too much on Capote's obsession with Smith. Audience's in the 50's were terrified by Capote's humanistic realization of the murderer, but now, that sort of True Crime journalism is accepted, and even expected, from murder investigations. This reliance causes the film to linger too long on Capote's build-up interviews before the shocking, twisting confession he needs to finish the novel. Also, audiences have recently grown tired of the biopic, probably because of the last year's heaping pile of them. This mutes the typical drama that occurs in all dramatic biopics, with the character's slow deterioration.

Despite these flaws, Capote is still an arresting portrait of a murder. And to go along with this portrait is the complete resurrection of Truman Capote in Phillip Seymour Hoffman. The film works to succeed beyond a simple biopic. It also hits on the difficult topic of true crime, delving into the imagination and conscience of a man that killed in cold blood.

Hoffman's Terrific Performance

[Lechuguilla · 15 May 2006]

This is a fine character study of Truman Capote whose professional desires collide with his personal desires, as he researches and writes about the 1959 murders of a Kansas family. The film examines how these conflicting desires arose, and how Capote, the person, handled the ordeal once he realized that these desires were mutually exclusive.

Hoffman mimics Capote's posture, voice, facial expressions, and overall mannerisms quite well. It's a great impersonation. But, towards the film's end when Capote has to say goodbye for the last time, Hoffman's portrayal of Capote's grief and helplessness goes well beyond parody. It's an example of genuine acting ability.

Other performances are also good, especially Chris Cooper as Prosecutor Alvin Dewey, and Catherine Keener as Capote's friend, Nelle Harper Lee. In addition to the fine acting, the story itself is gripping, because it is a true story. It's been told before, most convincingly in 1967's "In Cold Blood", from the POV of the killers. That film was photographed in B&W. "Capote", by contrast, is in color. But the colors are all muted, reassuringly so, in view of the subject matter. The tone of "Capote" is solemn and earnest, almost funereal. The pace is slow and deliberate. Music is restrained.

Viewers with little or no interest in the central character may find the first half of the film slow going. It plods along without a lot of tension or suspense. But as the writer bonds with the convicted killer, tension picks up, and then further builds en route to a profound destiny.

My only critique, beyond a slow beginning, pertains to the minimal attention given to era atmosphere. Given that the story takes place in the late 1950s and early to mid-1960s, I would have preferred more cinematic cues of that time period, especially with regard to music, decor, and cultural themes which are curiously absent, aside from obvious props like cars and telephones.

The Clutter killings were, and still are, unsettling and haunting, even after all these years. "Capote" is a high quality film that describes Truman Capote's research into the case, especially as regards the mindset and motivations of the killers, and further examines the effects that Capote's investigation had on him, both as a writer and as a human being with feelings. Though the story is good, Hoffman's wonderful performance is the real reason to see this film.

Some what disjointed

[Davidon80 · 6/10 · 12 August 2006]

Prior to watching Capote I had very little exposure to the actual works of the writer, I have read Breakfast at Tiffanys and was not bowled over. However I approached the movie with optimism, I liked Philip Seymour Hoffman in movies like The Big Lebowski and was curious to see how a leading role would suit him. My feelings now having seen this movie is that he is and still remains a good supporting actor.

I understand that many feel his portrayal of Truman Capote was spot on and true to every nuance of Truman himself, but there is something about the movie which I feel doesn't do justice to the themes and the man who is being portrayed. The movie hinges on whether you can tolerate Truman Capote as a personality and it is my opinion that this is where the movie fails. Philip Sermour Hoffman portrays Capote as cold and career driven but has the emotional sensitivity to cry at his subjects execution. This alone is not enough to convince me that Capote is as complex and intelligent and perhaps scheming as the movie makes out.

Here is the main conflict of interest in the movie, at no point in the movie did the director sympathise with the murderers, neither did we feel Capote truly sympathise with the two men on death row, yet we are made to believe that Capote was battling with his conscience and by the end of the movie was eventually destroyed as a writer by his inability to come to terms with his actions towards these culprits. I have assumed this was the intended message of the movie but at no point is this battle of wills, or guilt ever portrayed on the screen. What we have is a very physical transformation of an actor into a Capote character that acts in a way that we assume reminds us of the great writer. There is no exploration of the theme of capital punishment, no reflection on the content of his novel 'In cold blood', no volley of ideas between subject and writer, but only a by numbers recount of events and perhaps a feeling of irritation towards Capote as a cowardly, egotistical, lime light hugging snob of the New York elite.

This is not award winning material, this is an average account of an interesting figure during an integral time in his career. Perhaps reading In Cold Blood would add some clarity to the subject but for a movie which seemed to promise so much in premise, it is disheartening that we have to go back to the source to make up our minds.

Cold Manipulation

[aharmas · 9/10 · 9 October 2005]

Every action has a reaction, and watching "Capote", we can't help but wonder how it ever got made. "Capote" is entrancing, dark, depressing, and quite satisfying. It benefits from Hoffman's perfect performance. He embodies the physical and psychological make up of a man who was the toast of the nation before and after the publication of its classic novel, "In Cold Blood". As a human being, he appeared to be an intelligent, fascinating, and manipulative creature. He could have gotten away with almost anything. Then he found the two criminals behind one of the most heinous crimes of the century and might have gotten to the realization he could also be trapped by their own dark existences.

It is difficult to ascertain what happened to Capote after he developed a relationship with Smith. He grows attracted to the actions and revelations behind this killer, and we never really know what is exactly going on. There are displays of guilt and detachment at different parts in the film. What we do see is that something really affected the man, and it changed his life for good.

The film moves slowly but never loses its audience. Along with Hoffman, a remarkable supporting cast keeps us interests going, and enough is presented to make us want to know more. That will probably be the film's only flaw. It fails to deliver everything it promises. It is a big satisfying tease, but after all, we are left with an endless number of questions. Keener is wonderful as Capote's supporting friend, and in his lover's role, Bruce Greenwood intrigues us as well, with the dubious character that never gives enough information to explain his attraction to a total opposite.

"Capote" is a really good film and should be admire for it achieves. For those who want to explore more in depth what lies behind the protagonists of the movie, there are several books that will give you a more detailed background on their nature. The truth, will however, remain, a big mystery.

Well done, moving account of Capote's life during the writing of 'In Cold Blood'

[the_entropist · 7/10 · 7 September 2005]

I saw a press screening of this film recently, and was highly impressed by its moving account of the period in Truman Capote's life during which he wrote 'In Cold Blood'. The direction by the relatively unknown Bennett Miller is personal, evocative and affecting, but without being over-dramatic or saccharine. This is helped immensely by Philip Seymour Hoffmann's incredible performance as Capote, as well as solid acting from Catherine Keener, Clifton Collins Jr., and Chris Cooper. Cooper plays K.B.I. Agent Alvin Dewey with perhaps a bit too much intensity, given his relatively small amount of screen time, but the portrayal nonetheless comes off as heart-felt.

The cinematography by Adam Kimmel is suitably gray and moody, with many evocative views of the flat Kansas plains, but most of the screen time is spent with the camera focused on Hoffmann - all of it time well spent.

While I haven't read the biography by Gerald Clarke on which it's based, the script seems to hit enough salient details to evoke Capote's frame of mind, without inundating the audience with more than would fit in a feature-length film. I suppose one of my only complaints about the film would be that at times the conversations take on a sheen of Hollywood, saying things for dramatic impact that perhaps might not have been said in real life. But then again, I never met Capote, so who knows for sure.

All in all, this was a deeply engrossing film, and one I would highly recommend, especially if you're a fan of Truman Capote.

Mr. Hoffman, you are Truman Capote.

[mklein-4 · 9/10 · 27 September 2005]

The easiest role for an actor to play is a historical figure - we have no idea how Julius Caesar really sounded, how he moved his body, punctuated his speech, bit his lip, walked into a room, held his cigarette. The hardest role is the living, or recently deceased, celebrity whom we watched, heard, studied, mimicked and thought we understood. JFK, Martin Luther King, Ray Charles, and, above all, the inventor of self referential celebrity, Truman Capote (with apology to Andy Warhol and, of course, Noel Coward)..

After exploding to meteoric fame with his novella Breakfast at Tiffany's, Capote became the New York café society's darling, heir to Coward's gay-man-child-bon-vivant. He drank and held court with the best of New York, which just also happened to be the nexus of television in the early 60s. Before long Capote was the quintessential modern celebrity, famous for being famous. And he did it all before our eyes.

Philip Seymour Hoffman does not so much play Capote as become him. And not just in mannerism, no mean feat, but in personality, because we are convinced that Hoffman feels what Capote felt, cries over the lies, accepts his moral failings. For a short story writer-raconteur from New Orleans, Capote found himself at the center of a nationally enthralling multiple homicide, facing the ultimate journalist's Faustian dilemma: if he perpetrates a lie for the sake of exposing the truth, is he ever worthy of redemption? Capote, in the end, concluded that he wasn't; he never wrote another book. He descended into drunkenness and died a lonely soul. This is not the stuff of Holly Golightly.

I saw this picture at the Toronto Film Festival with Hoffman, Catherine Keener and director Bennett Miller in attendance. Though they had seen it many many times before, it was obvious even they were moved by it and by our reaction. As we stood and applauded them, we turned to one another, glowing in the realization that we had witnessed an amazing performance.

We knew Truman Capote. We watched him live on television. Truman Capote was (we imagined) our friend. Mr. Hoffman, you are Truman Capote.

A good film about a bad person

[mls4182 · 6/10 · 17 April 2023]

Capote was an opportunist, a graverobber, a disloyal friend and an alcoholic sleaze. He was also over rated.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman did an amazing job of capturing this annoying, repulsive and self loathing person.

I laughed so hard reading the one and two star reviews. Yes, Capote did sound like that.

Capote resented beauty, love and talent since he was devoid of all those characteristics.

He exploited the Cutter tragedy for his own fame, then he focused the book on the two killers and not the victims. He then refused to give Harper Lee proper credit for all her hard work.

Later in life, when he had nothing else going for him, he wrote an expose of his friends using information told to him in confidence.

Mesmerizing Performance in Complex, Contradictory Film

[dglink · 10/10 · 28 October 2005]

Like the non-fiction novel and the Richard Brooks film that was made from it, "In Cold Blood," "Capote" focuses on and sympathizes with two killers at the expense of the four murdered members of the Clutter family. Once the viewer gets beyond this sticking point, however, all three works are outstanding, unforgettable experiences. Unlike the book and the original movie, "Capote" does explore the contradictory feelings that author Truman Capote wrestles with as he researches and writes "In Cold Blood." His feelings for Perry Smith, the more "sensitive" of the two killers, are particularly problematic as Capote becomes emotionally close to Smith and helps the men with legal aide that postpones the executions, while at the same time Capote cannot finish his book until Smith and Hickcock are hanged. Praise for Philip Seymour Hoffman's uncanny performance as Truman Capote cannot be overstated and, come awards time, if he does not collect enough accolades to fill his mantel, indictments for film critics and Academy voters would be in order. Hoffman not only captures the mannerisms and voice of Capote, he inhabits the man's soul and expresses his feelings and emotions without histrionics or the type of caricature that mimics often have made of the notoriously fey writer in the past.

Fortunately, Hoffman's performance is only the jewel in a gilded crown of fine writing, excellent direction, and solid supporting performances. "Capote" will send viewers back to their bookshelves to re-read the book and to their video libraries to re-view the 1967 film. Considering the time that Capote spent with the two convicted murderers, questions arise as to why the Richard Brooks film did not have Truman Capote as a character, but rather presented a bland, nameless investigative writer, who wanders through the proceedings without much purpose. The film is so good and so intriguing that questions such as that, and what happened to the writer that Capote lived with? and did Harper Lee write anything beyond "To Kill a Mockingbird?" and did Capote's presence at the execution lead to his alcoholism, his lack of further writing, and eventually his death, and other questions will send viewers to Google as soon as they get home. "Capote" is an outstanding film and possibly the first of the year to be assured of a place on the "10 Best" lists for 2005.

Outstanding performance, witty dialog but visually unimaginative -- it will play better on TV

[debblyst · 6/10 · 27 February 2006]

"Capote" is a film with undeniable assets: it's got the best performance by an American actor in the last decade and some of the wittiest dialog in an American film in recent years. Philip Seymour Hoffman's once-in-a-lifetime performance is simply jaw-dropping (and he's aware of it): it's a triumph of vocal and body work, with a huge range (mentally and emotionally), but above all it sparkles with supremely intelligent acting in portraying the lizard man with the 215-point I.Q. and the 1,000,000-point ego.

The film focuses entirely on the circumstances concerning the genesis of Truman Capote's masterpiece "In Cold Blood" (the title that had, of course, a double meaning, as it described both the set of mind of the 1959 Kansas harrowing criminals and of Capote himself in his Machiavellian saga to finally complete his book). The film concentrates on Capote's transformation from lightweight literary wunderkind and jet-set wit to trend-setting, seriously talented writer, depicting the Faustian/Mephistophelian process he goes through as he realizes that, in order to produce his ground-breaking "non-fiction novel" -- which helped consolidate American media's fascination with violence, death and crime -- he has to sink deeply in muddy waters of manipulation, adulation, mendacity, bribery, omission, ultimately having to face the ugliest side of himself, like a modern Dorian Gray. In "Capote", the horrifying Kansas crime, the murderers and the circumstances that led to their execution are the background scenery allowing the filmmakers to question the author's autistic egotism, gargantuan ambition and tortuous, perverse morality (just in case anyone forgets: Capote's novel benefited who, again?)

If "Capote" ultimately impacts less than it could/should, director Bennett Miller is probably to blame. Visually, it's bland and unexciting: it's a real shame to see such an unimaginative handling of such potentially thrilling material. "Capote" has some of the dullest courtroom scenes in movie history (and the competition is high, as we know). And what about those gigantic, paralyzed close-ups? And that static, lifeless camera? The audience goes to see the film pretty much aware that Capote's (and the screenwriter's) wit and Hoffman's performance are the core of it, and no one was asking for an action movie, but did it have to look so bland? Maybe Miller just lacks mileage (this is only his second film); or maybe he's simply not visually oriented, maybe he's an actors' director. Despite the fascinating subject, a great performance and above-average dialog, Miller's "Capote" disappointingly looks like a TV movie.

Apart from those (not trifle) objections, "Capote" is recommended for all of us who thought wit, subtlety and acting excellence had all but disappeared from American films. PS: Richard Brooks' irregular but visually striking 1967 version of "In Cold Blood" is a complementary companion to this one.

He Is Capote!

[Hitchcoc · 10/10 · 23 April 2007]

I saw Truman Capote dozens of times; he was a staple of the talk show circuit. One of the greatest TV moments was when he called Wilbur Mills a racist in the most subtle way that the Georgia governor took about half a minute to realize what had happened. This man was a firebrand. He never backed down from anything, despite his effeminate ways and small stature. Unfortunately, he word his celebrity on his sleeve and was often overly harsh and full of himself. This is a great movie. The subtle methods he uses to draw out the story from the murderer shows that he would do anything to get a story, even lie to a person with whom he had begun to fall in love. He pictures himself as compassionate at times, but he is often unwilling to go that final mile. It's surprising he was in attendance at the hangings, the events that probably contributed to his death. What a complex man. His canon of American literature is small but he was a master stylist and commentator. See this movie for Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance. It is one of the greatest in cinematic history. We remember Capote. He is Capote!

Spellbinding performances

[mstomaso · 7/10 · 25 February 2006]

This is not a biography of Truman Capote, but rather a biography of his last complete major work "In Cold Blood." I read this book as a teenager and thought it brilliant and disturbing. This film does a wonderful job of depicting the moral ambiguity of Capote's work, his egotism, and the life history and inner conflicts which allowed him to create this great work. All the same, the subject matter here is really not explored in the depths it deserves, and the film sometimes loses its focus in the depth and quality of its performances.

Hoffman has already won a number of awards for his performance. I have no qualms about this - he's a great actor and this is a challenging and powerful role played to the hilt. However, I also want to point out the tremendous supporting cast. Catherine Keener and Clifton Collins are both deserving of recognition for their intense portrayals of Harper Lee and Perry Smith.

If you're a fan of Capote, or a fan of In Cold Blood, you will enjoy this, though it isn't really going to show you anything that you were not aware of. If you are the sort who goes to movies you're not necessarily that interested in just because a great performance is involved (like me in this case), you will likely enjoy Capote.

Hated it

[Chicho1982 · 1/10 · 22 July 2018]

Hated this movie Saw it because of the high rating in the paper (5 stars) thought must be an awesome movie. In actual fact I hated this drab, hated the story, hated everything about it and wish I had never seen it The acting on the other hand is superb Still hated it

A good film that is dominated by Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance in the title role

[roger-pettit1 · 6/10 · 21 May 2012]

"Capote" is a curate's egg of a film: it is very good in some parts, not so good in others. It is a complex movie that is somewhat unbalanced by the unquestionably excellent performance of Philip Seymour Hoffman. Hoffman dominates proceedings to such an extent that his performance tends to detract from other aspects of the film.

The film covers a period of 6 years from the very end of the 1950s to the early years of the 1960s. Writer Truman Capote (Hoffman) has already gained literary success and prestige with his book "Breakfast at Tiffany's". Basking in the adulation that has come his way as a result of that work, he becomes interested in a violent murder that has occurred in Kansas in which two young men have seemingly killed an entire family. One of them, Perry Smith (played by Clifton Collins Jr.), is a thoughtful person who is reticent about the precise details of the crime. Capote travels to Kansas with childhood friend, Nelle Harper Lee (Catherine Keener), the writer of the Pulitzer prizewinning novel "To Kill a Mockingbird". They begin research on a book that Capote is planning to write on the murder. (The book is subsequently published under the title "In Cold Blood".) As part of this research, Capote is granted personal access to the two men, who are imprisoned while the court process is under way. His relationship with Smith becomes a very close one as a result of his interviews with him. The film examines the conflict of interests that Capote has to confront: his burgeoning loyalty to, and friendship with, Smith; and his desire to complete his book at all costs and the impact that that has on their relationship and on Capote himself.

The crisis of conscience that Capote faces is portrayed very effectively. The conclusion of the film is extremely moving. And, although Hoffman is undoubtedly the star, the other leading actors are all excellent. There are, however, some problems with the film. In particular, it is at times turgid and very slow-moving. I was extremely bored on a number of occasions. The film also labours its main point, which is that an artist may have to trade humanity for ruthlessness if he or she is ever to get their job done satisfactorily.

So, "Capote" is a reasonably good film, but is certainly not a great one. It has given me the urge to read "In Cold Blood", which I suspect is rather better than this film is. 6/10.

Conjuring Capote

[ilene · 10/10 · 2 October 2005]

Brilliant portrayals are chilling. Philip Seymour Hoffman's invocation of the essence of Truman Capote is mesmerizing. I suspect that most of the readers on websites such as these may not have stored memories of Capote in the 60's. An unlikely media darling, I vividly recall his flaunting gay affectations and cosmopolitan barbs. Hoffman's detailed and incisive performance implores, "And the Oscar goes to........"

Beyond his performance is a riveting and eerie story directed with flawless craft and impressive restraint. It is a film that left me sitting and discussing its nuances and its depth, until the theater's lights flickered to oust me. The film surrounds the time when Capote wrote "In Cold Blood," a book nearly everyone read in the late 60's, its title seeming obvious. This latest movie inserts Capote into the original crimes that inspired "In Cold Blood" and challenges us to revisit that title.

An absolutely first class performance

[harry_tk_yung · 4 March 2006]

The summary line is essentially what one local critic asserts. I'll try to answer that at the end of my comments.

But first to the performance. Until recently, most people recognize Philip Seymour Hoffman, if at all, from his supporting roles in "The talented Mr. Ripley", "Almost famous", "Red Dragon", "Cold Mountain" etc. I have been fortunate to see his almost flawless performance as a compulsive gambler in "Owning Mahowny" (2003), for which he should have got at least an Oscar nomination. That excellent movie, unfortunately, went almost unnoticed, attracting only 61 user comments in IMDb.

In a recent "60 Minutes" interview, Hoffman (or some called "the other Hoffman") intimated that he does not want to be a celebrity because that takes something away from his ability to be whatever the character he happens to be portraying. He quoted a very convincing case: his close friends watching his performance will not see the same thing as a member of the general audience sees. We only have to think about Tom Cruise to realise how true this is - have you ever seen a Tom Cruise movie in which you don't remember that it's Cruise who is on the screen. There may be some exceptions when you have an actor in the calibre of the other Tom. Hoffman may well be an actor of such a calibre but what he said in the interview shows how much of a professional he is.

I won't say anything more about Hoffman because if you are in the least interested in movies, you would have already been tired of reading comments on how he inhibits Trueman Capote, even when it's all so true. I'd rather look at the movie itself instead.

Its premises alone makes this movie intriguingly fascinating. When was the last time you saw an eccentric but brilliant writer pitched against a to-be-convicted murderer, each trying to use the other? This is almost like watching the struggle in the baseball pit, with the pitcher and the batter maneuvering to outsmart each other. Capote wants to get Perry Smith to tell him about that fateful night when Smith and Hickock (who received little attention in this movie) murdered a family in Kansas in cold blood during a robbery. Smith clings on to Capote as his savior. The subtle battle is on.

Despite a pitiable childhood, Smith is a cold blooded killer. Even his own sister warns Capote that under the sensitive and sympathy-winning appearance, his brother is not to be trusted and can kill any one without blinking. Capote, on the other hand, dangles the carrot of getting the best lawyer while all the time aims straight at getting Smith to tell him first-hand what happened on the fateful night. Then, as we are almost ready to believe his tearful plead (to himself essentially) that he couldn't have done anything to save the life of the murderers, his best friend, honest, sensible (and almost just as good a write in her own right) Harper Lee (Catherine Keener) tells him, quietly and calmly "But the truth is, you didn't want to", because only the execution will allow Capote to complete his book.

The beauty of the movie is that it retains the ambiguity. We do not know for sure, one way or the other, whether the two had indeed developed a genuine friendship over the six years from the arrest to the execution. We do see a dissymmetry. During his six years in prison, Smith's only real meaningful connection with the outside world is Capote. To Capote, however, Smith is only a part (albeit a very important part) of his life. The movie makers make sure that we remember this, by showing intervening scenes of Capote being the centre of attention, as he always is, to a crowd of admirers, monopolising a self-indulging conversation, always "in love with himself", as Lee once put it. At the end of one of these scene, after another round of roaring laughters, Capote turns to one of the loyal listeners and quipped "And what have you been doing lately?" More roaring laughters in approval of his sense of humour. There's our man. And yet, in the end, we are left wondering if Capote had really been touch by this whole incident and the eventual death of Smith, thanks to the superb portrayal by Hoffman.

While most of the scenes are indoors, there are, well placed throughout the movie, beautiful shots of the expansive heartland, often with a tiny object (because of the distance), a car or a train, moving slowing across the horizon, accentuating a sense of loneliness.

So, Hoffman aside, is this a good movie? You bet.

The Dark Within the Author

[thinker1691 · 7/10 · 23 April 2006]

Selecting the final segment in the life of author Truman Capote, the film "Capote", delves into the inner and certainly troubled soul of the American Novelist. The film itself, is a somber reflection of the price Capote paid to write what appears to be his most poignant work. The introduction of the book and the movie itself invites the audience into the real life drama of the Kansas family who were brutally murdered by two killers named Richard Hickock (Mark Pellegrino) and Perry Smith (Clifton Collins) in 1963. Along the way, one observes how adroitly, the writer is able to weave his tapestry between truth and fiction to achieve his ultimate goal. With the help of an assortment of great actors, such as Bruce Greenwood (Jack Dunphy) and Chris Cooper, Alvin Dewey) the film exhibits the enormous talent, and human flaws which made Capote a household word. Like an excellent novel, the movie is slow to build, but eventually achieves a touching tribute to the man.

Humanizing Capote

[madbeast · 10/10 · 11 September 2005]

This moving film lives and breathes on the powerful shoulders of Phillip Seymour Hoffman's stunning performance in the title role. Hoffman captures all of the unique physical characteristics that made Capote such a familiar public figure in his lifetime and invests them with a humanity that is almost unbearably poignant. The film focuses on Capote's research on the book "In Cold Blood" and the personal journey that his relationship and identification with killer Perry Smith became (Capote says at one point that it was like they grew up in the same house, and he went out the front door while Perry went out the back), a compelling and complicated relationship that this uncompromising film presents in moving detail. But what truly makes it a unique work of art is the brilliant work of Hoffman - always an interesting actor - whose performance as Truman Capote should elevate him to the pantheon of film giants.

The movie about the book about the murders.

[dunmore_ego · 7/10 · 14 July 2011]

CAPOTE, first of all, is not a biopic. It covers a short period in writer Truman Capote's life when he immersed himself in his classic True Crime novel "In Cold Blood," the first "non-fiction novel" of its kind. Published in 1965, this revolutionary book would make Capote the most famous writer in America. And it would suck his soul bone dry, as he never completed another novel before his death in 1984.

Directed by Bennett Miller, CAPOTE follows Truman Capote (a trimmer Philip Seymour Hoffman, putting on that outrageous accent and playing fruitier than even his drag queen in FLAWLESS) as he interviews the two killers of the Clutter family in Holcomb Texas in 1959, Richard Hickok (Mark Pellegrino) and Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.).

He lightbulbed on the idea of a book which would reveal their psyches, as well as the reactions of the townsfolk and the detectives who eventually caught the two killers, led by Alvin Dewey (Chris Cooper), but didn't bargain on the research being a heartsickening exercise that would take nearly six years of his life, test his skill as an author and his very humanity.

This movie is not taken from Capote's book "In Cold Blood," but rather from a section of the book by Gerald Clarke, "Capote: A Biography," written for the screen by Dan Futterman.

Viewing CAPOTE or reading "In Cold Blood" reminds us of that scientific precept that states you cannot observe a system without becoming a PART OF that system and thereby affecting the outcome of your observations.

Upon inserting himself into the story, by becoming so close to the killers that he actually hired powerful lawyers to appeal their cases to the Supreme Court, Capote affected the outcome of his novel; a tale that would keep stretching into the future with no end in sight, because he envisioned the hanging of the killers as closure.

Capote (author of "Breakfast at Tiffany's" 1958) was completely stymied on how to psychologically deal with this new form of fiction he was pioneering; he found himself split into two mental halves - one half empathizing somberly with the quadruple-murderers, while the mercenary side of him surreptitiously picked their brains for book material. Though he admitted a kinship with Perry Smith ("It was like we were raised in the same house, and one day he got up and walked out the back door, and I walked out the front") he would continually lie to him about the book's details.

After four years of stays of execution, it was Capote who was having nervous breakdowns because the killers were not being executed. Ergo, his book was in limbo, remaining unfinished. When Smith pleads with him to acquire another lawyer, Capote writes back tersely that he cannot find one. It's a morbid conundrum, as Capote finally wants them dead and so must remove himself from the equation.

Catherine Keener plays Capote's childhood friend and confidante, Nelle Harper Lee, whose own book, To Kill a Mockingbird, is published during this period. Only she can tell him truths about himself with impunity.

One of the best features of this movie is that, while Capote was openly gay, he is never turned into a punchline - not by the high society depicted in the movie or by the makers of the movie. He lived with his gay lover (Bruce Greenwood) with no ostracism from the entertainment world. Though he was renowned as the life of any party, we only see snippets of his gregarious night life in CAPOTE.

Movie is slow-moving but not boring, rather, introspective and disturbing. When Perry is eventually hanged, Capote's tears are not so much for the loss of the man whom he had grown close to, but for the fact that Capote himself could have stayed that man's execution indefinitely if he had chosen to invest in more lawyers; his tears are rage against his own selfish agenda in wanting to complete his book.

Capote expressed no joy at the publication of "In Cold Blood," feeling like his soul was sold for its research.

We feel just as soul-spent by the end of this dark, somber film.

The Manipulation Of A Master Manipulator

[marcosaguado · 10/10 · 23 November 2005]

Beautifully told, masterfully performed, harrowing, amusing, cruel, moving. A sensational achievement. I sat there disturbed and transfixed. Witnessing the impossible. Truman Capote with the mask, without the mask. The same man, different men, all men, no man. The creature at work, thinking of work, planning his work, working his work, wheeling an dealing. Living his life, life as work, work as life. An ego bigger than his talent and all talent and no ego. Feeling without feeling. Cunning, innocent, blasphemous, a child, a monumental son of a bitch. Philip Seymour Hoffman surprising us again. Charles Laughton I thought. What a thought! Charles Laughton 2005. That kind of talent that kind of boldness and brains. Everything and everyone in "Capote" seem to be. To be totally. I've never seen a photograph of Harper Lee but I imagine her just like Catherine Keener. The film is a miracle of sorts. I can't wait to see it again.

great performances

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 22 August 2015]

It's 1959. New Yorker writer Truman Capote (Philip Seymour Hoffman) hears about the horrifying murders in Kansas. He and his research assistant Nelle Harper Lee (Catherine Keener) go to write about the crime. Harper Lee gets published. They befriend lead detective Alvin Dewey (Chris Cooper). Then Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.) and Dick Hickock (Mark Pellegrino) are arrested. As Truman digs into the story, he decides to write a new kind of book "In Cold Blood".

It's an amazing performance from PSH which is only rivaled by a close second from CCJ. Catherine Keener is solid and it's a bit of a shock for novices like me to find Harper Lee working for Capote at that time. It's not a terribly dramatic story but it is a great showcase for the actors. It's worthy Oscar win for PSH.

very likely the best film I will see this year- harrowing, intense, a view so cruel

[imaginarytruths · 10/10 · 1 October 2005]

What PSH has pulled off here simply cannot be overpraised. First he accomplishes a perfect imitation- the voice, the gestures, the walk. Then, within this caricature, he delivers a startlingly complex and subtle performance. First he's the preening bon vivant, indulged by friends and lovers, intimately tied to the world of the rich and famous. Then during some of his self-absorbed monologues he becomes something else, genuinely penetrating on the subject of the human condition. Then you see how cynically he uses that ability to get what he wants. So much sincere emotion demonstrated in the service of lies. His cruelty is such that one feels indignation for the murderous sociopath who becomes his muse. But at the same time, his ambition to do something great is totally understandable, and the cost to his psyche so visibly demonstrated, that he remains a sympathetic character.

Catherine Keener plays Nelle as the perfect foil, warm and caring but so perceptive and cruelly honest. Clifton Collins Jr.'s Perry is mesmerizing, a vulnerable and sensitive and desperately yearning young man who knows he's no good. His confession is breathtaking, cold, devastating. Chris Cooper and Bruce Greenwood are also excellent in smaller roles.

In a film with acting this sublime, it would be easy top overlook the technical accomplishments of evocative cinematography and measured, confident editing. The rhythm of the film is slow, with spaces provided for the viewer to fully absorb what's happening, and the accumulated effect was such that I had a difficult time stopping myself from shaking as I left the theatre.

This is it, the real deal. It is difficult to imagine a more powerful film being released this year.

No doubt about the Hoffman ... ah I mean Oscar!

[kosmasp · 7/10 · 23 April 2007]

Of course the Oscar for P.S. Hoffman was more than well deserved. If you had the chance watching this movie, before the academy awards were held, you kind of "knew" that he would get it. Why? Because the first time he speaks (and if you've seen him act or in an interview before) you realise that he had become Truman Capote, this wasn't P.S. Hoffman anymore!

And even if I didn't know much about Truman, I'm pretty sure this is as accurate as it could get to a depiction of this man. The struggle in him is displayed with such genius by Hoffman, that you can't imagine anybody else playing this role (although I've read that there is a comedy about Truman out, but I haven't watched that one yet).

But there are other fantastic actors on display here too, as you can see in the cast list. I'm only going to mention Clifton Collins Jr.. He could have a break-out in the next few years (a big one I mean), he would've deserved one. First movies I watched with him, he called himself Clifton Gonzalez Gonzalez (another stand out role, is his turn in One Eight Seven - 187).

This movie is "quiet" and long at places, so that is a let's say final warning for people who are not into this kind of movies! ;o)

One of the worst and most boring films I've ever seen.

[your_only_belle · 1/10 · 5 February 2006]

First of all, I was expecting wonders with this film. I spent my ten dollars happily and expected a film better than Brokeback Mountain. I expected to be dazzled by Philip Seymour Hoffman because I was blown away by Heath Ledger, and so many critics seem to have chosen Hoffman over Ledger's amazing performance in Brokeback Mountain. I think my first mistake was allowing myself to have expectations. In no way did this film move or amaze me. I have just finished a film class and every aspect I had studied shone through (terribly) in this movie. The cinematography was, at times, completely flawed and fake, the music was simply awful, the plot was overly presented, and Hoffman annoyed me instead of capturing me. The movie is a little over 2 hours, but I felt it was five. The film is supposed to take place over a period of five years (they even skipped a year) but it seemed to drag on and on. Less than halfway through the film, I found myself bored and wondered when in the world it would end. The worst thing about the film was the extremely short scenes that would begin to offer a sparkle of good information about Capote's life, but instead stopped and left the viewer wondering what in the world just happened and why the scene even existed. Yes, Capote was a show-off and often a liar, but this was shown extremely poorly. Hoffman's effeminate voice and lisp were annoying, but I could look past it as this was Capote's real voice, but also, he over acted at times. Instead of being amazed, I was horrified. For some reason, the critics are in love with this man's performance, while I saw little that qualified this as "the performance of his career".

Truman Capote was one of the greatest writers of the 20th century and also one of my favorites. I was so excited when this film finally entered our theaters, but right now, I just want my money back. I'm sorry, Truman Capote, that such an important part of your life was cut to absolutely terrible dribble.