Capote VS Infamous
-
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. -
mimosa_mirabella — 15 years ago(September 12, 2010 06:42 AM)
Infamous is the better movie. Toby Jones was amazing.
http://vincentandmorticiasspeakeasy14846.yuku.com/directory] -
Bozo275 — 15 years ago(February 03, 2011 10:15 PM)
You know what Hoffman thought Truman Capote should be? And you know for a fact that Toby Jones what was Capote was like?
The ideas presented in In Cold Blood and the book Capote both present this idea that Capote, as an idea is fluid, open to interpretation. Capote, by most records, was not an overwhelming evil man. Phillip Seymour Hoffman does not portray him as an evil man, just unfeeling, and disconnected.
Capote was far more darker than Infamous, and for this I give it the thumbs up. The filming is elegant, dark and yet minimalist. A great piece of cinematography, and I think Bennet Miller, the director is owed far more credit than he recieves. Capote's tone far better suits the tone of In Cold Blood, and this is why Infamous did not strike me as a particularly suitable tone.
Both Jones and Bullock are far too light for such a subject.
Capote all the way! -
Nightrider2 — 14 years ago(November 26, 2011 09:51 AM)
I liked Capote much better. While Toby Jones resembled real author there was something unpleasant about his portrayal. Hoffman seemed more genuine. Clifton Collins Jr. also did a terrific job as Perry Smith. Daniel Craig was all wrong as Smith, plus Infamous was overstuffed with famous actors which was extremely distracting.It was like big show piece. On the other hand Capote was a quiet, stylish character study. It was simply a better film.
http://www.youtube.com/user/viclis11?feature=mhee -
brahma-3 — 13 years ago(May 15, 2012 06:02 AM)
Disregarding the factor of which one you've seen first - affecting the view of the second - preference may come down to a simple thing: what were you sit down for.
Capote is the more well-rounded, better executed Hollywood drama with a more filmic delivery and an outstanding Seymour Hoffman, those who went in for the cinematic experience as a whole, will prefer the 2005 version. Infamous on the other hand is smaller scale, more personal and more analysis than tell-of-tale with an equally impressive Toby Jones, those who went in for the Truman Capote story, will prefer the 2006 version.
I'm in the latter category. I thought Jones was the slightly more convincing Capote but much better was Craig's Perry over Collins Jr's, mostly because of the more personal take on their relationship. The side-characters aren't standout in either film although Infamous gave Alvin a little more time since In Cold Blood is a tale of two. Again up to preference, but I found the character humor of Jones quite fitting as Capote was probably just as absurd upon arrival, and the gossip scenes gave me a better idea just how much his personal and social life was mixed. I also didn't mind Infamous being more 'TV' than 'cinema', after all the novel itself is more about the horrific reality than literature itself - but then again, I agree with those who say Capote is the better executed movie, I just prefer Infamous for the more personal story. -
Ambrosia-I — 13 years ago(September 09, 2012 12:36 PM)
I have to say that Toby Jones's portrayal seemed more natural to me. When I listen to Hoffman, the voice seems put on. He's worked hard to get Capote's voice and mannerisms, but I can see the wheels turning. I was entirely convinced by Toby Jones. The timbre of his voice and his effeminacy seemed unforced and completely natural. It was a tour de force performance laced with tragedy and humour.
I was also impressed by Sandra Bullock in a way I never have been before. I thought Daniel Craig was excellent as Perry. "Infamous" may not have been better on an intellectual level, but it affected me a great deal more emotionally. -
digitalbookworm5678 — 13 years ago(January 17, 2013 10:21 PM)
Just watched both back to back. Both great films
Toby Jones played the flamboyant Capote that I remember seeing on talk shows when I was growing up.
P. Seymour Hoffman played a more sedate, serious Capote except for a couple of short scenes.
Katherine Keener (Love her) played a more outspoken Harper Lee than I remember ever seeing in documentaries.
Sandra Bullock played the stern, always composed Harper Lee (she was asked to play Harper Lee in Capote also).
Capote was made to be a PSH vehicle. Better Cinematography.
Infamous had a well rounded cast. Much more characterization.
Infamous 8 / Capote 7
What decided me on Infamous being better? The huge list of goofs listed for Capote.(shot in 36 days)
Can't buy underwear balls don't fit. -
-
CCRider01 — 12 years ago(April 25, 2013 04:54 PM)
Hands down Capote. The only redeeming aspect of Infamous was the lead role played by Toby Jones, which was more a great impression than acting performance. Capote had better acting, dialogue, cinematography, direction, not only was it better crafted but more enjoyable to watch. Infamous by contrast seemed like a made for TV movie, more frivolous and with less depth.
-
AlFabrizio — 12 years ago(February 13, 2014 05:53 AM)
I didn't actually think his PSH's Capote was that great. He seemed throughout to have a single emotional tone, which got a little boring in the end, as if there were only one note and he played it for the duration. The art direction was maybe a little more austere; a little more disciplined in Capote and that it mirrored PSHs performance - which frankly made it feel more like hollywood might have us imagine the moment, more funereal than it really was. I think the dual austerity of direction and acting turned into a somewhat dulling affair. Overall I though Infamous more enjoyable and Toby Jones portrayal much more diverse and emotionally honest. I thought it considerably better.
-
degree7 — 12 years ago(February 18, 2014 03:41 AM)
Infamous? Is everyone on crack?
Let's see: Infamous had entirely the wrong tone for the story of a man investigating murders. It was like some sensationalized, garbage tabloid article in People magazine. It was entirely miscast, with Daniel Craig as Perry? Most of the events were made up. Their relationship wasn't believable at all. It treats it's material too flippantly, and has to hammer home each of its story and plot too obviously.
Capote, on the other hand, is much more subtle, in depth, and explores the psychology of Capote. It creates a bigger visual medium as a film, and doesn't feel the need to over explain or emphasize everything. It has a subtext which the viewer can build upon their own conclusions. It's darker, meatier, more fascinating.
Tobey Jones physically resembled and sound more like Truman, but he was only able to offer a one note mimicry of the man. Hoffman actually went places with the character, and understood that less is more. Brevity is the soul of wit, after all.
Capote is the harder, more fine tuned piece of cinema. It has more to offer as an art form. It says more about the human condition.
It's like comparing LA Confidential to Chinatown.
Limit of the Willing Suspension of Disbelief: directly proportional to its awesomeness.