Capote VS Infamous
-
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. -
-
rdeschene — 16 years ago(March 22, 2010 07:06 AM)
Having watched "Capote" again last night, and "Infamous" a week ago, I feel that "Capote" is the better film, from an artistic standpoint. Nearly every aspect of it is perfect. But I also felt that, as brilliant as Philip Seymour Hoffman was in this role, and as much as he completely transformed himself, I didn't find it completely believable that people would have been as enthralled by him as they were. I thought that Toby Jones did a better job of getting that charisma across.
But, having said that, I think the respective points of boths films were different. "Capote" seemed to be about showing the inner downward spiral created by Capote's decision to manipulate Perry to get his story, and to pretend that he'd done all he could to keep them from being executed, when in reality he'd done nothing of the sort. It appears that decision was, in the end, Capote's own undoing. On the other hand, "Infamous" seemed more about the craft of writing, and what a writer like Capote did in his relationships with people to tweak and bend the truth to suit his own desired narrative. He seemed to be more of a compulsive liar here than the master manipulator "Capote" made him out to be. "Infamous"'s telling of the story, too, had disastrous consequences for Capote, as he found himself caught in a relationship with Perry over which he seemed to have very little control (very different from how "Capote" presented it).
After watching "Infamous" last week, my initial feeling was that I liked it better, if only because the performances were a bit more accessible, the writing had more of a natural (if predictable) narrative flow. It's hard not to contrast the two films, given how closely together they came, but they are two remarkably different presentations of essentially the same story . . . just as two different eyewitnesses will often present two very different recollections of what they saw.
As amazing an actor as he is, Hoffman has a way of making his characters seem insular and emotionally isolated from others, whereas Jones was more convincing to me in his interactions with others. He seemed far more emotionally engaged, and engaging . . . even if half of what he said was pure fiction. But I found myself believing more that people could fall for what he said, than I did with Hoffman's portrayal.
It's hard not to contrast the two performances of Nelle Harper Lee. Again, very different takes on the same character. Catherine Keener is more hard as nails; she has a quiet dignity, yet also has a wild streak of humor and fierce determination that give her the most moral authority of anyone in the film. Sandra Bullock, on the other hand, was a pleasant surprise. For once, I didn't feel like I was watching Sandra Bullock, but a character. Through her character, she perfectly articulates the anguish that comes with being a writer. It's a side of the craft that few understand . . . even those who have been there. Her deft sensitivity also shines through in her attempts to understand and explain her friendship with Capote. Interesting echo from the story: I found myself wishing she could have been my friend.
Daniel Craig's portrayal of Perry Smith was absolutely riveting (as was that of Clifton Collins, though in a much quieter, more subtle way). I found Perry's growing trust in Capote quite believable in "Infamous" because the foundation for it was more compelling, somehow. It made sense to me, again, even if the details presented are complete fiction. I guess that's the point of trying to understand Truman Capote; how much of what we know of the man is fact, how much fiction? How much of his writing is truth, how much of it spun from his imagination? I doubt that there will ever be a definitive answer to that question. Both films have a different take on that. In "Infamous," it's the developing relationship, and how that forces Capote to change his game plan, that is the focus, whereas in "Capote," it's how Capote manipulates Perry to get what he wants.
In the end, both films are superb wonderings of what drove Capote to be the way he was. -
Vergilya — 15 years ago(July 07, 2010 05:48 AM)
I still say it's Infamous. I don't know which one is closer to the truth or which one better represents Truman for who he really was. From the way the story is told Infamous is more enjoyable and the development of the characters are beautifully captured. Capote is a little more bland and dry and doesn't really get into the heart and soul of the characters. I would have preferred Toby Jones to win the Oscar, but then again - That's Hollywood.
-
gioconda — 15 years ago(August 07, 2010 11:54 PM)
I hung out w/Truman Capote several times.
Nearly impossible to describe. So over the top, brilliant, brave, unacceptably intoxicated, outspoken, ruthlessly witty & hilarious. Loved his special cache & "in" w/wives of the uber rich & famous, as he dragged a grizzly butch Irishman around everywhere, whom he adored, hard-drinking married truck driver & father of 7 kids. What a couple. Truman wore huge white and pastel women's straw hats w/giant sashes & gigantic sunglasses. At 4' 11" the impression was an elfish insect in drag.
Toby Jones' portrayal of him is more like the actual person than PSH.
Both "Infamous" & Capote" are worth a look. Both lead actors are brilliant. I was disappointed in the female leads. Sandra Bullock & Catherine Keener were both so-so, particularly Sandra's attempt at a Southern accent. Both sets of killers in the two films were very good. Daniel Craig stood out as Perry.
However, the most spine-tingling portrayal of Perry is Robert Blake in the original "In Cold Blood". Mindboggling & indelible. Check it out.