Truman Capote

Just watched "Capote" and found it to be a very good film. I can understand why Phillip Seymour Hoffman won the Oscar, although I still prefer Heath Ledger from "Brokeback Mountain" as the year's best actor. But the real performance in this movie belongs to Clifton Collins, Jr. as Perry Smith. Mr. Collins's performance is what made the movie work for me. He was fantastic!! Too bad that he did not get a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, as he deserved it. They could have nominated him instead of Paul Giamatti or William Hurt. The scenes between Hoffman and Collins are very touching, and the scenes where Capote is seeing Smith for the final time are heartbreaking. You can just tell that Capote wants to tell Smith how he really feels, but with others in the room, he cannot do it. I gave this film a 10 out of 10.

CAPOTE, first of all, is a well written film by the talented Dan Futterman, whose performance in URBANIA we will always remember, and for Philip Seymour Hoffman, this is his "Golden Globe and Oscar Award" all in one. From the first scene, Hoffman creates the essence of the acid tongued, tremendously talented, yet damaged, Truman Capote.

Having read IN COLD BLOOD when it first came out, CAPOTE really captures on the screen the horror of what took place on that Kansas farm and the cinematography, costumes and locations are wonderful to behold. Miss Keener's performance is such a subtle and intelligent contrast to the hysteria of Capote, and his perfect foil.

In the scenes with Perry Smith, they are haunting and disturbing, as if it feels like two cobras are circling one another, waiting for the first one to strike. And in this context, I ask, "2 Capote, or NOT 2 Capote?, that is the question", because both are on the take-Smith to use Capote for obtaining a pardon, Capote, to nail the story that will gain him the adulation he so adores. And then, Capote slides downhill, while Perry rots in prison.

CAPOTE captures the essence of the 1950's, the horror of a brutal killing in the vast farmlands of Kansas, and delivers a knock out performance from Philip Seymour Hoffman. If only IN COLD BLOOD had not seemed like a manipulation by a writer out for glory at the expense of a prisoner who believed in him.

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!

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.

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.