Stream it now Infamous

 

Here it is, to the point: This film is not to be confused with the Oscar winning "Capote". Made a year earlier, "Capote" shows the actual crime up front, in detail and immediately. Infamous shows the crime in scant detail in the last third of the film. Capote was about the writing of his book while Infamous was about the author's personal character and attraction to a prisoner.

Perry, the butcher criminal that he really is, has been brought to the silver screen a victum of his father's neglect, someone he almost killed with a hammer. By the way, Perry is played brilliantly by Daniel Craig and he certainly can act as good as anyone I have seen in years.
But this film has the audacity to suggest that Capote and Perry were, in fact, lovers. This may, in fact, be possible since Perry is said to have wrote Capote for years. But the movie makes no doubt about it.


A title is supposed to reflect, in some way, a movie or book, or so we are told in Literature 101. "Infamous" speaks to what? Seemingly, to me, a virtual nervous breakdown by Capote. He never regained his form after In Cold Blood. But this makes him Infamous?

Perhaps because we see Truman Capote betraying the confidence of anyone during a lunch date. He can't keep a secret. In confidence he swears he will never tell, but the next scene he is blabbering every detail to a lunch date.

The "Famous" Truman Capote, the author of In Cold Blood and Breakfast at Tiffanys among others, ultimately breaks down after years of waiting for two killers to reach the end of the line in a death sentence. Then, he is called upon the prisoners to witness their deaths by hanging, a grizzly and ghastly scene Capote can't watch in the case of his "lover" Perry.

This movie was made a year after the Oscar winning "Capote", which was a far more gripping and graphic portrayl of Truman Capote's search for his novel. However, the two films are most different in the portrayl of the one killer, Perry, and Capote himself.

If you want a great, not just a good film, watch Capote. If you want to see the collapse of the author, watch Infamous.
Decide for yourself what "Infamous" really means.

This film examines Truman Capote, exagerated the gay-ness of him and has Sandra Bullock chain smoking cigarettes through the entire film (so silly and un-needed).

Starts off as a very funny movie with Capote's catty remarks and constant gossiping, but becomes something intense and tragic by the end.

Well not seeing how the other Capote film could be much better, I felt like one of those small towns folk about Capote in the film. Did not care about him, did noot want to know about him, but when you opened yourself up to him you could not pull yourself away. Don't know if that was the filmmakers intention but it is what I felt, oh and btw does Sandra Bullock ever age, man she is still so hot, even in a dressed down almost no make up version, still does it for me.

Excellent movie, based on a true story. There will be those who are not familiar with Truman Capote and wonder if Toby Jones is overacting the part. If you fall into that camp, I highly recommend seeing "Murder by Death" first, which actually stars Truman Capote -- and is an excellent movie in its own right.

It's also supposedly a good idea to see "In Cold Blood" first -- or read the book -- since that's what Infamous is all about. But I must confess, I did not. I wanted to, just happened to get ahold of Infamous first.

Look, I'm Well-Known!

The "real" Truman Capote (here Toby Jones), if there was such a thing, was an inveterate name-dropper. That is one of the things the film does very well. I will note that none of the people whose names are worth dropping in small-town America are characters in the film--while we get Juliet Stevenson as Diana Vreeland, we do not get Humphrey Bogart, no matter how much Truman talks about him. And Truman talks about him a lot. Over and over. Clearly, he does so because he knows that knowing Bogart and Sinatra and Brando will give him a wedge to get into these people's lives. None of them care about Diana Vreeland or Slim Keith (Hope Davis)--come to that, neither do I. On the other hand, I do think that he would have been more likely to drop their names around me in the assumption that I, an educated person, would care. What I don't think he'd be able to understand is that I think less of him for all the name-dropping, not more.

Capote has read an article about murders in a middle-of-nowhere Kansas town, and he thinks that this is a great thing for him to write about. Because he is so into himself, he rapidly comes to the conclusion that he, and he alone, can turn this into a new and exciting form of "reportage." He hauls his childhood friend, Harper Lee (Sandra Bullock, of all people), down to Kansas with him, possibly the best idea he has in the whole story. She is down-to-earth and not at all as bizarre and flamboyant as he, which means people like her and put up with him until he grows on them as well. At any rate, when the killers are actually caught, he decides that he must get to know them so he can write his book properly. Here, I think the movie delves into some unwarranted speculation, indicating that Capote and murderer Perry Smith (Daniel Craig; really) had a relationship more both physical and romantic than I believe the evidence warrants believing happened. Of course, how much of it is the man and how much of it is the character may be considered up for debate as well.

This movie suffered inevitable comparison with the previous year's outstanding Capote, and I think it suffers for the comparison. On the other hand, I just don't think it's very good. I think the conceit of having Capote's New York friends comment on his trip to Kansas and experiences therein is a little cutesy. Honestly, I'm not entirely sure I think that the Capote presented here is all that realistic. Or, come to that, the people of Holcomb. The events may be factually correct; I neither know nor care. In fact, I've little doubt that they are. I believe that Capote and Harper Lee got invited to a local family home for Christmas, and I believe that Capote wormed his way into local society with tales of Ava Gardner and Marilyn Monroe. However, it is my understanding that the people of Holcomb still didn't like him terribly and believed--in my opinion accurately--that he was just using them for his own purposes.

I also didn't need some of the relationship scenes between Capote and Smith. The interactions between the two were complicated, of course, inasmuch as Perry Smith really didn't have certain human aspects and therefore would not have been an easy person to know. And Capote was Capote and therefore almost certainly a pain in the butt. (Especially if you're Gore Vidal.) However, there was at least one scene I really don't think is at all plausible. I know that prison authorities really did let Truman Capote get closer to the killers than he honestly had any right to do, whether they wanted him to or not. But I think the fascination Capote had for Smith was more psychological than sexual, and I think Smith was really more interested in dominating this famous man, this man who had any number of things that he didn't and never would have if he'd lived to be a hundred. To dominate a man who beat Humphrey Bogart at arm-wrestling? Twice? Now, there's a coup not many prisoners can say they had.

The final hypothesis of the movie is that the death of Smith, there in front of Capote's eyes, is what ended Capote's interest in writing. This may well be true, and that's something interesting and worth considering. However, I just don't think this movie really develops the idea as well as it ought. I think the film, like Capote itself, is too interested in being seen as clever, whether it really is or not. It name-drops, too, though it name-drops in a way that I think we're supposed to assume makes us smarter than the hicks in Kansas. I also think it, like Capote himself, kind of looks down on those people. Someone said she'd never read Capote's book, but honestly, who has? I challenge you to even name anything but In Cold Blood that the man has written. If you are very aware of things, you probably know that he wrote "Breakfast at Tiffany's," but other than that, what can you name? The final irony, of course, is that it's based on a book by George Plimpton, who I think was himself name-dropping by mentioning that he knew Truman Capote enough to document the man through interviews with people who knew him. And who cares about George Plimpton, either?

I have now seen both Capote films and this one has an irresistible performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman. It seemed rather slow to me but I did not mind. Great movie 5 stars however I think I actually enjoyed the other Capote movie (Infamous) more because it delved more into the obsessions character Capote and the killer and seemed to have more things "happening". I have been looking at Capote videos on Youtube the past 2 days also and its incredible how well Philip Seymour Hoffman Captured his essence. I mean-- like really-- he was such a bitchy queen in real life!! how could anyone be normal with a middle name like "Strekfus"?? I read his autobiography by Clark and recommend highly that if you have interest in these films that your read it. (The film just presents a short period of his life.)

In 2005, a clear and vivid depiction of eccentric author Truman Capote was presented to us with Capote, a film that follows him through the long and sometimes painful process of creating what would turn out to be critically acclaimed book In Cold Blood.

Another film was released in 2006 with a swayed perception of the author. Infamous once again follows Capote through the process of creating the masterpiece that was In Cold Blood, but even with strong performances from Toby Jones and Daniel Craig, the film falls quite short of its predecessor. Although it follows the same premise as the superior Capote, its facsimile focuses primarily on Capote's sexual feelings and attachment with doomed killer Percy Smith, which leaves it a mediocre reproduction with impractical, uneasy plot development. The inexorable comparison with Capote is what truly hurt Infamous, but Toby Jone's fey, almost uncanny portrayal as T.C. makes Infamous a movie worth seeing.

Flamboyant writer and socialite Truman Capote (Jones) sets out to write a human interest piece about the impact of a brutal murder of a small town in Kansas, but instead ends up on a life-altering journey that leads him to write the best book of his career.

"Infamous" tells the story of how Capote's true-crime novel "In Cold Blood" came to be. When I sat down to watch this movie, I came to it having no idea what to expect, only knowning that I wanted a change of pace from my usual B-movie fare, and knowing that if Sandra Bullock was in it, the film was unlikely to be terrible (this not being a sequel... usually, sequels she's in are pretty bad, but she's a safe bet otherwise).

What I found was a movie far better than I'd anticipated. It's a surprisingly engaging and warm movie about a central character (Truman Capote) who I was convinced I would not be able to stand for a full two hours but who surprised at every turn and who was given depth and diverse humanity by actor Toby Jones. Sandra Bullock, who shared more scenes with Jones than anyone else in the movie also did a great job as Capote's friend since childhood, a character as subdued as Capote is flashy and a great foil for him when one was needed.



Nelle Harper Lee (Sandra Bullock) and Truman Capote (Toby Jones)
arrive for Christmas dinner in a scene from "Infamous"



The rest of the cast also give excellent performances, and all of them are full of a surprising amount of three dimensionality and realism. Daniel Craig shows what a great actor he is in the role of Perry Smith, one of the killers who are the subject of Capote's book--and the man who ends up changing Capote forever--and Jeff Daniels plays the small-twon district attorney who puts Capote in his place be refusing to give him the star treatment he is used to, but who ultimately ends up sharing mutual respect with him because of it. Daniels' character in particular is one of the many elements that makes this movie as good as it is... it comes across as fully realized and three-dimensional as Capote himself. What's more, he is shown to be as intelligent and insightful as he would have to be as a lawyer, even in a small town. Although it's clear he's not comfortable with Capote's obvious homosexuality, he is not bigoted or hateful toward him. (Nor is anyone else in the small Kansas town that Capote and Nell spend time in... everyone there are portrayed as the decent sort of people that most Americans are. It's actually refreshing to see this sort of realism in a movie.)

With a cast of very talented actors who are working from a finely crafted, meaty script, "Infamous" is a movie worth seeking out if you want a break from your usual movie diet of shallow political screeds, zombie attacks, mad slashers, and assassins blowing things to hell. It's a very human story, full of well-acted, well-presented, very human characters. (The only thing that keeps it from getting a perfect 10 is that it doesn't so much end as peter out. I don't know how I would have improved upon the ending, but it didn't quite live up to the excellence that brought us to it.)


Infamous
Starring: Toby Jones, Sandra Bullock, Daniel Craig, Jeff Daniels, and Sigourney Weaver
Director: Douglas McGrath

(2nd viewing, first time review)
In terms of silliness and B-movie type special effects, Black Sheep has a similar manner of Peter Jackson's Dead Alive. There are some beeeely laughs administered in this scatterbrained premise of turning sheeps and people to raging zombies due to a scientific experiment. The gore and special effects,including from-human-to-sheep-transformations are more than run-of the-mill, which will appeal to the fans of this genre. On a downside, the characters are average at best (especially the typically expected attractions between the two protagonists -- Henry and Experience -- yes, that's HER name in the movie). The highest peak of the film is idiotically hilarious that you have to see it to believe it; wish that it should have been constructed more imaginatively, instead of crudely offensive. Overall, Black Sheep will please, to some extent, fans of the horror-comedy genre.

Funny Quote:
"I'm not a tree. I'm a fucking sheep!"

(*** 1/2):

I'll come out and say it: I found this to be a better film than the Oscar-winning Capote. Toby Jones is fantastic in his role and this could arguably be Sandra Bullock's best film yet. Craig is also great in his role and I found this film to just be better a written and directed effort than Capote (which I liked too).