1959 Manhattan was a party, and none of the glitterati glittered brighter than Truman Capote. Then he saw a story in The New York Times: "Wealthy Farmer, 3 of Family Slain," and the party ended for Capote. He plunged into the murder case that inspired his great "nonfiction novel" In Cold Blood and led him into a fevered .. Read more
| Starring | Jeff Daniels, Daniel Craig, Gwyneth Paltrow, Isabella Rossellini |
|---|---|
| Director | Douglas McGrath |
| Genres | Drama |
loading...
Last year we saw how the feted gay novelist Truman Capote (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) played on the trust of killer Perry Smith to write his masterpiece, In Cold Blood . Infamous, which was... read more »
Its less than fortunate and maybe disastrous for its makers that Infamous is the second film on Truman Capote... read more on Time Out
Infamous is about the American author Truman Capote and his obsession with the murder of a farming family in Kansas in 1959 which became the inspiration for his masterpiece In Cold Blood. Does this sound familiar? It was also the subject-matter of the 2005 film Capote.
It is impossible to watch one without comparing it to the other, but there are differences between the two which make Infamous worth watching. Capote was realistic and wholly believable. Based on Gerald Clarkes acclaimed biography, it portrayed Truman Capote as a self-centred and determined man manipulating the killers to gain their trust and therefore the material necessary to write his book. Infamous is an altogether lighter and more glamorous affair. It is based on Truman Capote by George Plimpton and contains fictional scenes and characters and a sprinkling of humour. Truman is portrayed as a softer and more likeable character who becomes emotionally drawn to one of the killers (Daniel Craig) - including a lingering kiss in his jail cell. Toby Jones gives a strong performance as Capote, complete with high-pitched voice, but the film doesnt allow him to bring quite the depth of character to the role as Philip Seymour Hoffman was allowed in Capote. Sandra Bullock is a suitably restrained Nelle Harper Lee, but if you are a Gwynneth Paltrow fan be warned that all she does is sing a song.
I started watching every Daniel Craig film he ever made, after seeing him in Casino Royale, just because he was so good looking but after each film I have become more and more impressed with him as an actor. In every role you believe he is that person and this film is no different. It takes a little while to kick in, giving the background to Trumans life, but it is still very interesting and you are captivated throughout. The relationship between Truman and Perry is very powerful, the kiss touching and believable. You find yourself torn, Perry deserves to be punished but you want him to live. The last few scences are emotive, I was moved to tears. Superbly acted by the whole cast but especially Craig, Jones and Bullock. A must see film. I will be watching it again and again.
With an amazing cast like that - I truly expected something different but what a waste of time!! I normally enjoy movies like this...but certainly wouldnt recommend this one!!!! YAWN...
Even better than Capote, yet didn't receive the distribution it deserved just because it came afterwards. Superlative acting and thought-provoking story of moral ambiguity
I started watching every Daniel Craig film he ever made, after seeing him in Casino Royale, just because he was so good looking but after each film I have become more and more impressed with him as an actor. In every role you believe he is that person and this film is no different. It takes a little while to kick in, giving the background to Trumans life, but it is still very interesting and you are captivated throughout. The relationship between Truman and Perry is very powerful, the kiss touching and believable. You find yourself torn, Perry deserves to be punished but you want him to live. The last few scences are emotive, I was moved to tears. Superbly acted by the whole cast but especially Craig, Jones and Bullock. A must see film. I will be watching it again and again.
Infamous is about the American author Truman Capote and his obsession with the murder of a farming family in Kansas in 1959 which became the inspiration for his masterpiece In Cold Blood. Does this sound familiar? It was also the subject-matter of the 2005 film Capote.
It is impossible to watch one without comparing it to the other, but there are differences between the two which make Infamous worth watching. Capote was realistic and wholly believable. Based on Gerald Clarkes acclaimed biography, it portrayed Truman Capote as a self-centred and determined man manipulating the killers to gain their trust and therefore the material necessary to write his book. Infamous is an altogether lighter and more glamorous affair. It is based on Truman Capote by George Plimpton and contains fictional scenes and characters and a sprinkling of humour. Truman is portrayed as a softer and more likeable character who becomes emotionally drawn to one of the killers (Daniel Craig) - including a lingering kiss in his jail cell. Toby Jones gives a strong performance as Capote, complete with high-pitched voice, but the film doesnt allow him to bring quite the depth of character to the role as Philip Seymour Hoffman was allowed in Capote. Sandra Bullock is a suitably restrained Nelle Harper Lee, but if you are a Gwynneth Paltrow fan be warned that all she does is sing a song.
I started watching every Daniel Craig film he ever made, after seeing him in Casino Royale, just because he was so good looking but after each film I have become more and more impressed with him as an actor. In every role you believe he is that person and this film is no different. It takes a little while to kick in, giving the background to Trumans life, but it is still very interesting and you are captivated throughout. The relationship between Truman and Perry is very powerful, the kiss touching and believable. You find yourself torn, Perry deserves to be punished but you want him to live. The last few scences are emotive, I was moved to tears. Superbly acted by the whole cast but especially Craig, Jones and Bullock. A must see film. I will be watching it again and again.
With an amazing cast like that - I truly expected something different but what a waste of time!! I normally enjoy movies like this...but certainly wouldnt recommend this one!!!! YAWN...
On its own account, this is a pretty good, impressionistic jog through the critical years of Truman Capote's life, when his immense talent and lambent prose became atrophied and his ego (and the booze) took over. The details of the Clutter killings, and Capote reaction to them are well presented, done with a surprising, sprightly sense of the absurd, while perhaps not quite emphasizing the human aspect as much as one might have wished.
But, of course, it's nearly impossible to take this film simply 'on its own account'. Because, although more starrily cast than Bennett Miller's 'Capote', 'Infamous' had the misfortune to come out six months after the Oscar-winner, and must now live and die by comparisons. Oddly, the two films are so similar that neither really suffers - although Toby Jones' excellent central performance rather shows Philip Seymour Hoffman's turn up as the hollow little impersonation it always was. Conversely, Sandra Bullock's sentimental performance is no match for Catherine Keener's version of Harper Lee. Swings and roundabouts, then.
I tried to act interested when my husband went to bed during the first half hour, but eventually, had to wake myself up to turn it off!!!
A well acted and scripted film, but I wasn't completely convinced by this second in the telling of the events surrounding Capote's 'In Cold Blood'. Having already watched Capote I was hoping this film would bring something else to this story. It seemed more colourful but lacked the depth of Bennett Miller's version.
The interviews to camera seemed a little too staged and subtracted from the weight of this film.
A most worthy watch but couldn't see the point of another version of this story that seemed very similar and didn't add anything to what was already out there.
Didn't like Capote either , well acted, well filmed just couldn't warm to it at all .
Even better than Capote, yet didn't receive the distribution it deserved just because it came afterwards. Superlative acting and thought-provoking story of moral ambiguity
Incredible that two films should be made at the same time about the same subject, but now having seen them both, I must say that I enjoyed Infamous much more than Capote.
The story was more rounded, the timeline easier to follow and the perfomances impressive. Recommended
Having already seen the other film about the book 'In Cold Blood' (i.e. 'Capote'), I actually found that this version starring Toby Jones as the zealous author Truman Capote, Sandra Bullock as his childhood friend Nelle Harper Lee and Daniel Craig as the condemned Perry Smith were much more memorable than their 'Capote' counterparts.
Indeed the whole cast were much more vibrant and the story was well shot and beautifully edited.
Those who have seen both versions will have drawn their own conclusions, but like so many witness statements there are always different versions of the same story.
I felt that this story flowed better, had more impact and was overall more entertaining.
The cast and crew earned their money and it is a pity that the film did not receive more awards than it did.
A story well told and well worth the money!
Last year we saw how the feted gay novelist Truman Capote (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) played on the trust of killer Perry Smith to write his masterpiece, In Cold Blood . Infamous, which was... read more »
Its less than fortunate and maybe disastrous for its makers that Infamous is the second film on Truman Capote... read more on Time Out