[.ca] Infamous

Judged solely on its own merits, an excellent film:
I went into this film with only the most basic knowledge about Truman Capote and his writing. I knew he wrote Breakfast at Tiffany's and In Cold Blood, the latter of which was based on a real crime, I knew he was as exceedingly odd little man, and that's about it. I've never read any of his work, and I haven't seen the film In Cold Blood or 2005's Capote. As I first began watching Infamous, I found myself wondering how I could possibly sit through almost two hours of a film about this dandyish, hopelessly pretentious man smarming his way through New York high society. His incredibly annoying voice didn't help, even though it was nowhere near as bothersome as Sandra Bullock's horrible fake Southern accent in her role as Harper Lee. As the film progressed, though, this strange little man began to grow on me. By the mid-way point, I was pretty much engrossed in the story, and the ending clinched all five of the stars I have to give this film (which is pretty amazing given the fact that it includes three of my least favorite actresses: Gwyneth Paltrow, Sigourney Weaver, and the aforementioned Sandra Bullock). Obviously, Truman Capote is one of the most complex and fascinating of men. I certainly won't define the man by the interpretation on display in Infamous (which is based on Douglas McGrath's 1997 oral biography of the man); after all, this is a fictionalized story of a man known for his own obfuscations with the truth. You can't even look at In Cold Blood with purely objective eyes because Capote relied on memory rather than notes to produce the book. And, from what I gather, 2005's Capote provides a noticeably different perspective on the man as it tells basically the same story as Infamous, focusing on the writing and later publication of In Cold Blood. One thing I am sure of is that Toby Jones turns in an absolutely captivating performance as this most inscrutable of characters. Capote seemed like such a fake in the early scenes, but Toby Jones transformed him into an incredibly human soul long before the end credits began rolling -- sympathetic to a significant degree, as some of the flaws in Capote's character manifest themselves, but not without his own emotionally cold-blooded moment here and there. If nothing else, this Truman Capote is not a man you would want to confide in with your darkest secrets. Infamous gets pretty emotionally complicated once Capote finally gets access to both killers, especially a reluctant Perry Smith (Daniel Craig). It's a bumpy ride, but the relationship that develops between Smith and Capote serves as the lynchpin of this film. Infamous dares call it love, although I imagine that is debatable. Clearly, though, the two men understood one another in ways few others ever did, and that makes the drama of the concluding scenes truly palpable. I find it somewhat ironic that the actual murder that gave rise to In Cold Blood and these two recent films about Truman Capote doesn't seem to generate much interest at all. Capote, both the myth and the man, towers over his subject matter. I certainly don't feel as if I know the real Truman Capote after watching this film, but I'm intrigued enough to go and seek out 2005's Capote and see the story of In Cold Blood told from an alternate viewpoint.

Dying For His Art:
While Capote director Bennett Miller constructs a psychological analysis of the outrageous Breakfast at Tiffanys author Truman Capotes Faustian trail leading to the masterful crafting of the first true crime thriller In Cold Blood, in Infamous, director Douglas McGrath explores Capotes motivation on a more personal level. Both films tell pretty much the same story; both lead actors, Toby Jones in this offering and Philip Seymour Hoffman in Capote submit first rate performances. The difference lies in how each director accounts for Capotes ultimate later dysfunction as a writer and ruin as a human being. Infamous is told as a part docudrama where famous personages like Vogues Diana Vreeland and To Kill a Mockingbirds Harper Lee interject their impressions of Capote to the audience while the actual events leading to the creation of In Cold Blood unfold in a quasi-chronological order. The strength in this version of the In Cold Blood conception story is in the details. Daniel Craig depiction of Perry, one of the murderers, blazes with an internal sexual intensity that leaves little to the imagination as to Capotes dilemma with wanting to have the perfect circular ending to his story and not wanting his relationship with this man to end with his execution. In Capote, actor Hoffman, as the titular lead, speculates that with their similar backgrounds and underpinnings and the absence of his writing as an outlet, he could have become Perry, but in Infamous, the audience needs not Capotes voice to provide an explanation. Director McGrath forces us to watch the chemistry between Perry and Capote; we watch Capote deteriorate as he lies and manipulates to get the best story, all the while loosing his own needy soul to another. Infamous not only recreates that late 50s early 60s period of Manhattan splendor, but allows one entry into the conniving yet thoroughly human mindset of one of Americas great writers. McGrath weaves falsehoods with veracity, twisting Capotes intended creation with the brutal yet less dramatic actuality----his execution scene reeks with an unsentimental matter-of-factness as Capote relates to his society friends his manufactured perfect ending while in reality he runs in pain as Perry is hooded and prepared for death. One of its most poignant and compelling moments occurs when Capote, after Perrys hanging opens up Perrys personal effects and discovers a pencil drawing of himself entitled, Friend Truman. Capote is depicted as friend, lover and conniving user. Bottom Line? This version of the In Cold Blood story is well worth expending the 118 minute playing time. If you enjoyed Capote and want to re-explore the story from another perspective, check this one out. Highly recommended. Diana Faillace Von Behren reneofc

Douglas McGrath's attempt to explain why "In Cold Blood" broke Truman Capote:
There would be an assumption that in the wake of the critical success of "Truman," that another film looking at the story of how Truman Capote came to write his classic non-fiction novel "In Cold Blood" is as unnecessary as was the made for television remake of the 1967 film based on the book that featured the stunning black & white cinematography of Conrad Hall. But director Douglas McGrath ("Company Man," "Nicholas Nickerby") is not exactly covering the same ground. Whereas "In Cold Blood" was the story of the 1959 murders of the Cutter family in Holcomb, Kansas by Dick Hickok and Perry Smith, "Capote" tells the story of how Capote came to write the book. The former ends with the hangings of Hickok and Smith, while the latter ends with Capote having attained the pinnacle of success in American letters only to never come close to such heights ever again. "Capote" finds an obvious connection between the two, but does not really provide a definitive answer to nail down the cause and effect. In "Infamous," McGrath offers a more specific reason for why Capote was never the same after writing "In Cold Blood." One again Truman Capote (Toby Jones) sees an article about the murder of a Kansas farm family, goes off to see how such a horrendous crime affects a small American farm, and decides that he needs to write a book. Despite the fact that he is like nothing they have ever seen in Kansas, Capote is able to ingratiate himself with Alvin Dewey (Jeff Daniels), the lead investigator for the local policy. More importantly, when Hickok (Lee Pace) and Smith (Daniel Craig) are captured, Capote is able to interview them the murderers in prison and attend their execution. Ultimately, it is the relationship between Capote and Smith that McGrath sees as being the key to the mystery of what happened to Truman Capote after writing "In Cold Blood." Of course there is the delicious irony that Capote is being hoisted by his own petard here. McGrath developed his screenplay not from Capote's novel but rather from George Plimpton's book, "Truman Capote: In Which Various Friends, Enemies, Acquaintances and Detractors Recall His Turbulent Career." McGrath's attempt is justified by a couple of key details in the film regarding what is presented as evidence of Capote's creativity in writing "In Cold Blood." The first is the most repeated line from the book, which is Perry Smith's statement: "I didn't want to harm the man. I thought he was a very nice gentleman. Soft-spoken. I thought so right up to the moment I cut his throat." The film makes it clear that while Smith might have made some comment along those lines, the final polished wording of the quotation was the result of Capote's refinement. The second key point is when Smith offers an apology for his crime when he speaks his last words at his execution. Capote is seen in the film urging him to do so, but Alvin Dewey "testifies" in the film that Smith said nothing on his way to the gallows. Your second time through this 2006 film you are strongly urged to listen to the commentary track by McGrath, who shows up to explain and defend his film, and not just to recall anecdotes about making it. I rounded up on the rating of this DVD just because of his first rate commentary. There is another irony in that Capote goes to Kansas with his close childhood friend Nelle Harper Lee (Sandra Bullock), since Lee wrote even less than Capote after the monumental success of "To Kill a Mockingbird." It could easily be argued that neither one was ever going to come close, so living on their laurels made a sort of sense. But if Lee only had one novel in her, Capote had written "Breakfast at Tiffany's" and other works that suggested a long and distinguished literary career should have been his legacy. So while it is too bad that Lee never wrote another great American novel, there is much more of a sense of tragedy that Capote was broken by the experience of writing the book for which he will always be remembered. "Infamous" is more about the celebrity of Capote, and not just because the film includes "interviews" with the likes of Babe Paley (Sigourney Weaver) and Bennett Cerf (Peter Bogdanovich). Jones' Capote speaks a lot more than Philip Seymour Hoffman did in "Capote," but then I felt Hoffman won the Oscar for key moments of silence in that film (e.g., when he sees the bodies of the Clutters at the funeral home). Hoffman is 4 1/2 inches taller than the 5' 5" Jones and this film takes much more advantage of the leading actor's shorter height to emphasize the writer as a strange little man who survives and flourishes in the big world because of the force of his intellect and personality. The idea of seeing one film rather than the other strikes me as silly because they each stand on their own and even after watching not only both of these films but the original "In Cold Blood" (not to mention reading the book), you are still not going to have a full picture of the what really happened and how these people came to be who they were and meet their respective fates. But you will have plenty to think about.