Capote VS Infamous
-
chris_marlow40 — 17 years ago(April 01, 2009 04:25 PM)
Capote. I agree with every poster who said Jones's depictation of Capote was overblown and OTT. He isn't in the same league as Hoffman when it comes to this. Hoffman captured every nuance of Capote, while Jones would have been better suited to a film such as Birdcage. Infamous was hardly a bad film, but Capote was much more focused on the psyche of the man and was just a gripping watch from beginning to end.
-
imdb-7644 — 17 years ago(February 17, 2009 09:24 PM)
I liked Infamous way better than Capote. The cast in both movies is brilliant, having not seen Truman Capote in person I can't judge who was better in playing him, but the whole atmosphere, every scene of the Infamous was more vivid (yeah, call it overblown you snobs) than Capote.
But I'd bet that the people who liked Capote better are the people who saw Capote first, and the same goes for Infamous. Everybody else who contributes, please specify which movie did you see first. -
clive-ihd — 17 years ago(March 02, 2009 10:33 AM)
I saw Capote first.
I found Infamous easier to get into. But I saw Capote as the second half of a double bill with Breakfast at Tiffany's which probably made it more heavy going, whereas Infamous I saw on its own.
Infamous starts off with Truman Capote with his witicisms and anecdotes, and later gets on to the writing on In Cold Blood and the details of the murders. Capote starts off with the murders.
Infamous probably would have worked better as part of a double bill with Breakfast at Tiffany's (or even Beat the Devil) than Capote did.
I would like to give Capote another go when I'm in a better frame of mind. -
MoragMacGregor — 12 years ago(October 01, 2013 01:14 AM)
I was just thinking the same thing, that most people will prefer the film they saw first. Just like with Doctor Who. The first Doctor you see will always be
your
Doctor.
I saw
Infamous
first and I like it more than
Capote
. I didn't know that Capote and Harper Lee were childhood friends, or about Capote's relationship with Perry Smith. Of course I preferred the film I saw first. There were no surprises left when I saw
Capote
.
Infamous
made me want to read more about the real Truman Capote. I think George Plimpton's book is a great readnot exactly a biography, but a serious of anecdotes and quotations that draw a compelling picture. I'd say both films portrayed the man accurately. He had all those qualities: he flaunted his sexual preference; he was charismatic; he was self-absorbed; he was manipulative; he was beguiling. Each film chose to highlight particular characteristics.
To me the real question is, why were these two movies were made at practically the same time? That's just bizarre.
Morag -
nobiggie — 16 years ago(May 02, 2009 03:48 PM)
By comparison, Hoffman's Capote is stuck-up and I really don't think the real Capote was like that. Quite the contrary, I think he was this over the top persona, just like Toby portrayed him. And I also think Hoffman is very unhappy because this film was made and another guy has made a better role than him even though he has the Oscar..
I wouldn't want to be in his shoes that's for sure.
"Empire Records, open 'til midnight". -
Harry-Caul — 16 years ago(July 16, 2009 01:43 AM)
I have to give it to "Infamous".
I went into the film knowing very little about Truman Capote and really enjoyed it. It made me want to read "In Cold Blood".
I loved the way "infamous" started out quite light and then just kept on getting darker. All the performances were very compelling, although I could have done without Paltrow singing at the beginning.
I watched "Capote" two nights later and was amazed that two films telling exactly the same story could be made at the same time. "Capote" is not a bad film but I never forgot that I was watching Phillip Seymour Hoffman, which is a shame because he is a great actor.
If I had only watched "Capote" I would not have been interested in reading anything written by the man; the film is very dull. "Infamous" is much more alive and entertaining.
VERDICT: Watch "Infamous" first and then "Capote" and decide which you think is the better film. It all comes down to personal taste in the end. -
SpiraMirabilis — 16 years ago(July 17, 2009 09:57 PM)
Capote is better because it's based on true events. Infamous is pure bull, nice film but pure bull. I'm sorry if the truth bores you and you prefer to see a sensationalistic account of two men kissing instead of what really happened.
I've had it with these monkey-fighting snakes on this Monday-to-Friday plane! -
KyrKyr — 16 years ago(August 15, 2009 03:41 AM)
When i saw this movie for first time i like it so much that i couldnt forget it. It was one of the greatest performances by an actor, very difficult in diracting and very sad.
I saw first Infamous and i didnt like it but when i saw Capote i put it straight in my Top 20 favorite movies. -
DianneBellmont — 13 years ago(January 13, 2013 05:58 PM)
I saw Infamous first, then Capote a half hour later. As much as I adore Hoffman and admire his work as an actor, I preferred Infamous.
Capote was plodding and didn't keep my attention. The script, music and sets were far superior with Infamous.
As a side note, I adore Sandy Bullock, but I think Catherine Keener nailed the part of Nelle Harper Lee in Capote.
*The Manitou is in and will take your calls now. -