This movie is fantastic. I'm not sure the story is interesting enough to hold most people's attention but, for me, the style and plot themes were enough to stay sucked in. For example, the film explores the experience of being a writer and how life experiences slowly make their way onto the written page. In Capote's case, at least according to the movie, this process sometimes took weeks or even years. And it's not just a matter of being a journalist who is covering a murder story -- there is much more to it. The examination of this process and how a story is generated probably holds meaning for anyone who has ever written anything. One of the main stories also seems to be the threads that tie Capote and Perry's lives together, their common experiences and feelings. How much do they really share, and in the end, who is it that ends up feeling sympathy for whom?
-
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Film & Television
Welcome Guest
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat Recently Watched Best Documentaries ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak
Film: Capote
- Thread starter Banquo
- Start date
Chaos Butterfly
Bluelight Crew
I gave it 5 stars purely for Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
Fantastic performance, very very interesting film.
CB
Fantastic performance, very very interesting film.
CB
Dtergent
Bluelight Crew
This is one of the best films I've seen in awhile.
It made me think about how ambiguous human life is, how we FEEL like it shouldn't be so inconclusive. But this uncertainty is pervasive and inherent in our existence. It is something humans have dealt with poorly since time immemorial.
We allow people to be complex and "inconsistent" only when it comes to supposedly benign feelings, we even find excuses for them. Beyond this, especially when their emotions, actions, and principles swing to extreme ends, we can only (1) judge them (2) cry about them-- not with them (3) develop morbid fascinations. Even what seems like "sympathizing" is self-serving.
It also made me realize how much human thought is peppered with romanticism. As the world accumulates stories (from oral of our ancestors to the vast repository from all media today), we are able to romanticize our situation-- the tortured artist, for example-- and really, people tend to imagine themselves in movies or stories. Sometimes the poignancy of something is so derived. But are we to say this makes it real or inauthentic? If it gives someone strength, why shouldn't it be valid? Is it an epedemic of delusion or just social evolution?
I had many preconceptions from a Capote bio I read years ago. Not that I have new conclusions now. Rather, I have no conclusions at all, and I think this is the most accurate semblance I will ever have on the man.
It made me think about how ambiguous human life is, how we FEEL like it shouldn't be so inconclusive. But this uncertainty is pervasive and inherent in our existence. It is something humans have dealt with poorly since time immemorial.
We allow people to be complex and "inconsistent" only when it comes to supposedly benign feelings, we even find excuses for them. Beyond this, especially when their emotions, actions, and principles swing to extreme ends, we can only (1) judge them (2) cry about them-- not with them (3) develop morbid fascinations. Even what seems like "sympathizing" is self-serving.
It also made me realize how much human thought is peppered with romanticism. As the world accumulates stories (from oral of our ancestors to the vast repository from all media today), we are able to romanticize our situation-- the tortured artist, for example-- and really, people tend to imagine themselves in movies or stories. Sometimes the poignancy of something is so derived. But are we to say this makes it real or inauthentic? If it gives someone strength, why shouldn't it be valid? Is it an epedemic of delusion or just social evolution?
I had many preconceptions from a Capote bio I read years ago. Not that I have new conclusions now. Rather, I have no conclusions at all, and I think this is the most accurate semblance I will ever have on the man.
SA
Bluelight Crew
Benefit
Bluelighter
It was well-made and well-acted. I wasn't blown away by the visual composition or anything, but it was better than a lot of stuff out there.
However, I don't think the content made for a good movie. There's just too much material to cover and it couldn't possibly be adequately condensed into 2 hours without losing a lot of stuff. Normally this wouldn't bother me, as one of the main functions of cinema is to condense. But why not just read In Cold Blood and then some biographical stuff on Capote to contextualize it? That is essentially what the movie does, but with some added cinematic flair which I found unnecessary. You'll get a more complete understanding of Capote if you read him, instead of using the film as a shortcut.
However, I don't think the content made for a good movie. There's just too much material to cover and it couldn't possibly be adequately condensed into 2 hours without losing a lot of stuff. Normally this wouldn't bother me, as one of the main functions of cinema is to condense. But why not just read In Cold Blood and then some biographical stuff on Capote to contextualize it? That is essentially what the movie does, but with some added cinematic flair which I found unnecessary. You'll get a more complete understanding of Capote if you read him, instead of using the film as a shortcut.
fengtau
Bluelight Crew
Kudos to Phillip Seymour Hoffman!
But I am not sure what the story is about. Was it to show that Capote is a good man or was it to show that Capote never cared for that Smith dude and is out to only write a hit book?
But I am not sure what the story is about. Was it to show that Capote is a good man or was it to show that Capote never cared for that Smith dude and is out to only write a hit book?
Benefit
Bluelighter
It was much more complex than that fengtau. Capote was a complicated dude. He did care for Smith, but he also had a book to write and there was obviously an irreconcilable chasm separating them in terms of social class, life experience, etc. The movie does a decent job of exploring Truman Capote, but I just think you'd be better served reading up on this particular subject. Capote was almost too complex to be explored via film.
sn0wburt0n
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
- Messages
- 891
interesting movie. i gave it 4 stars. i saw the movie in cold blood before i saw this and didnt know that that's what this movie was baout, til he said the title.