Just watched Infamous, which had the great misfortune of being the Second Annual Film About Truman Capote Writing In Cold Blood. I wanted to see it in the theater, but those whom I’d ordinarily be able to persuade to see such a movie with me had all seen Capote the year before, so I ended up waiting till it came out on DVD.
What did I think? Thanks for asking.
Toby Jones has the advantage over Phillip Seymour Hoffman of being closer to Capote’s actual size, but he slid into caricature once or twice (which, admittedly, must be hard not to do, playing Capote), which I don’t think PSH ever did. Overall, though, the cast of Infamous was better – I enjoyed the star power of the women who played TC’s various “swans.” And Daniel Craig was quite amazing as Perry Smith – hard to believe his other role last year was as Bond.
I thought Infamous had a better opening scene (in a nightclub, with Gwyneth Paltrow singing “What Is This Thing Called Love”) and a better closing scene.
In between, though – a damn good film, but not *quite *as good as Capote. All in all, a damned shame it had to come out when it did.
I just don’t understand why there needs to be another film about this period in Capote’s life; his tenure as an enfant terrible after the publication of Other Voices, Other Rooms is twenty times as interesting as the In Cold Blood period.
There doesn’t “need to be.” These two movies were made at about the same time, by different people. Infamous’s release was delayed so that they wouldn’t both be in theaters at the same time.
FWIW, I thought the performances in *Infamous * were pretty good, but I couldn’t shake the gloss of hypocrisy, somehow: a movie tsk-tsking Capote’s exploitation of real human beings in the service of his art, while doing essentially the same thing. For some reason, I didn’t feel this as strongly in Capote.
Thanks for the link, EH – I should have checked before starting a new thread.
Lissener – I’m interested in your “hypocrisy” reaction, and would love to hear a little more about that. James Berardinelli summarized what he saw as the difference between the two thusly:
Is that where you’re coming from? Or is it that the attraction between Capote and Smith was far more explicit in Infamous? Who do you see being exploited in Infamous?
I can’t speak for lissener, and I have not yet seen Infamous, but just from the trailers, I got the impression that it has a lot to do with the glitz and glamor of Capote’s social circles, with scandal and gossip – and less to do with the tragedy of four decent people being senselessly slaughtered.
Capote was a bleak film, with nearly every frame washed of color. The flamboyant enfant terrible is portrayed as haunted by the case, and clearly troubled by the disparity between the savageness of the crime and the artistic soul of Perry Smith.
Returning to the trailer of Infamous, I’m struck by the sense (which may be entirely the fault of the marketing campaign rather than the filmmakers) that Hollywood (and with it the moviegoing public) is jaded to the horrors of the Clutter case, but is happy to see it as the backdrop for a juicy Kitty Kelly-esque romp.
Both films contrast Capote’s life in Manhattan to what was going on in Kansas. I think “tragedy” is a sadly overused word – but the tragedy of Capote’s life is that he was unable to (chose not to?) escape from the superficiality of his Manhattan life, despite realizing how profoundly superficial it was – and that, ensnared there, it was all downhill for him after the publication of In Cold Blood. I think that’s equally the point of both films.
I think that’s part of it; *Infamous *was much more personal, more speculative about the “juicy details,” all of course for the audience’s benefit, if not outright titillation. Again, well acted, etc., but the overall approach struck me as more exploitive, more voyeuristic. And the fact that the underlying theme, if you take the whole thing as a kind of morality play, is explicitly critical of such exploitation, the fact that this is done without any sense of irony left me with a whiff of hypocrisy. YMMV, of course.
I wasn’t disagreeing with you – in fact, now that you’ve expanded on the point, I definitely agree. I was just curious to hear a little more about what you meant as I tried to sort out my own reactions to the two movies.
No, I know; the YMMV was broadcast generally. (I’m tired of getting piled on every time I express a negative opinion in this forum, so more and more lately I reflexively and repeatedly remind everyone that an opinion expressed here is just an opinion; too many people seem to need reminders of that. I was not thinking of you in particular, twix.)