Capote
Uch! I know! What kind of crappy boring review is this going to be for some boringly snooty literary type highbrow Oscar bait flick! How friggin exciting is it to read a review about a movie... about the writing of a book? Not very I bet! Friggin yawn! Couldn't I have gone to see Jarhead or Saw II or something that kicked some ass! Instead of seeing some actorial showoffy 'respectable' crap with Phil Seymour Hoffburger? What the hell! Capote? In terms of fun factor... more like Crapote! Dags!
Yeah you have a point. But I was curious about this movie. Years ago, when I actually read books, I read In Cold Blood and I thought it was awesome. I don't really read books anymore because they're soooo 1997 (apparently) but whatever. I like being prepared for the Oscars and I heard Hoffburger was definitely going to get a nomination (and after seeing the movie- it's a definite win for Best Actor.) It was sort of fun watching him do his thing and I guess he nailed Capote pretty well (even though honestly I sort of always saw Hoffburger underneath all the mannerisms and stuff. It wasn't a complete disappearance for me.) But whatever. It beats David Cock Arquette acting like a camp counselor shmuck or something.
Anyway, I thought this movie was good. In the same way Seabiscuit and that ilk was good. I watched the whole thing and felt like what I was watching was quality stuff. Yeah yeah, I was entertained in a general sense. I enjoyed the acting and the story. Blah blah. But there was a distance between me and it. I didn't feel like I was in the room with Capote hanging out. And frankly, after a while he got to be an annoying bore anyway. I wanted the storybook story of In Cold Blood not the story of the book story. It seemed a little like an dead elephant in the room that was just skipped around the whole time.
And yadda blah, at the 3/4 mark I was definitely bored. This movie was under two hours but it felt like 2:20. I realize would probably have preferred Hoffburger doing a two-hour reading of In Cold Blood straight through. Cause this was like a teaser within the movie. I realize that the movie was about Capote and not really the actions in In Cold Blood. But if that was the case, it being contained solely within the time-period of In Cold Blood just felt like a distraction the whole time. I'd rather have seen a wider view of Capote and just go with the life-story thing. Truman never wrote another book after In Cold Blood and he boozed his way into the grave. Good stuff! Let's see it! Because the only take away for me from hanging around the In Cold Blood world for two hours... was making me feel like I should go read a book.
Three Good Things About this Movie
- I liked the scenes where Capote was all sweet innocent nice guy but totally
forcing the hand of the other.
- The guy who played the murderer guy did a nice job. He had a good murdery
stare at one point.
- The cocktail scenes did stink up the whole theater with the smell of scotch
and cigarettes.
Three Bad Things About this Movie
- It was so quiet I couldn't eat my potato chips without them sounding super
loud.
- It was too cold. Totally kind of repetitive at times.
- Most side characters fluttered around but didn't stick.
All in all, if you're an Oscar junkie this thing will probably be on video before then- And it's a movie worth seeing. Especially if you're a fan of the book. But if you haven't read it and you read books, you'd probably be happier reading the friggin book and forgetting the movie. It's can't avoid being a disappointment by comparison.... even though I know its unfair to compare... I swear... by the bear in his underwear lair.... eating a pear...on a double dare... without a care... so pull up a chair.... and lets all stare!
So there.