Read Mixed User Reviews for Capote

4

EonMay 2, 2006

Now that's what i call overrated. Well it is not a complete trash, but nothing special either, and most of the time - very boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DougG.Oct 23, 2007

Excessively slow, unconvincing performance by Hoffmann, I did not feel much sympathy for the main character, who seemed to be mainly self-centered, lying and manipulative.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

dennisOct 2, 2005

Hoffman was very good, but the film makers got a lot of facts wrong. Capote never got to Kansas until 2 weeks after the murders, so he never looked into the Clutters' coffins. He also never nursed Perry Smith back to health (with baby Hoffman was very good, but the film makers got a lot of facts wrong. Capote never got to Kansas until 2 weeks after the murders, so he never looked into the Clutters' coffins. He also never nursed Perry Smith back to health (with baby food or any other food)--at least, not according to Gerald Clarke's biography. And Capote's relationship with Alvin Dewey was apparently much bettor than the movie shows. Capote's life was so interesting, I wondered why they didn't include the 2 decades after "In Cold Blood"--they coulda had a knock-out scene filming the famous "Black & White Ball" at the Plaza.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DWOct 8, 2005

Another film the critics are rating way too high. Nice, but not art. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a very good character actor but, as he showed with "Love Liza," facile tricks don't carry a movie. Catherine Keener again demonstrates how Another film the critics are rating way too high. Nice, but not art. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a very good character actor but, as he showed with "Love Liza," facile tricks don't carry a movie. Catherine Keener again demonstrates how little it takes to maintain a film career when you're in vogue; Cliff Collins as the wimpy killer wastes with generality what could have been a sure Oscar nomination; Chris Cooper does his standard curmugeon and Bob Balaban his unctuous nebbish. Other than that the film is cast with typically bland, faceless Canadians (I'm sorry Canada, you may not let American actors work in your otherwise production friendly country, but you can't legislate fire in the bellies of your native talent). It's all interesting enough, yet I found myself wishing I was watching the great black and white movie of "In Cold Blood" instead.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

robwFeb 28, 2006

it is clear this picture is about the oil industry and the many playesr in it. But for persons world wide who may not have read the book or heard about this guy; it is pretty to hard to follow. that just my opinion. i watched up to the pointit is clear this picture is about the oil industry and the many playesr in it. But for persons world wide who may not have read the book or heard about this guy; it is pretty to hard to follow. that just my opinion. i watched up to the point where the kid dies but i still couldn't grasp the concept.
thereafter i slept through the picture… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

IsabelI.Jun 23, 2007

It was just ok. The first part was better than the second half. I thought the last 20 mins really dragged. It could have been a made-for-TV movie. Don't understand what all the fuss is about.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

OleksaBJan 2, 2009

I couldn't help feeling a heavy bubble of disgust in my throat, hearing the main character speak like an imbecile clown. I know Mr.Hoffman as a real good actor, but this... 'performance' just gave me the willies. Whatever the I couldn't help feeling a heavy bubble of disgust in my throat, hearing the main character speak like an imbecile clown. I know Mr.Hoffman as a real good actor, but this... 'performance' just gave me the willies. Whatever the real Truman Capote was like (well, who knows, maybe he indeed was an infantile pompous moron), the person which Mr.Hoffman is portraying is NOT a writer. And that woman character is not a writer either. The prisoner guy is credible, yes: lost and bitter, after letting the most primitive side of him once take the wrong control of his actions. But the writers... I don't believe them. And as one of the critics here said, the search portrayed in the film is not a search of existential drive that when perversed, makes people do horrid things: it is indeed a search for fame and celebrity status. What I understood after watching this movie is that I'll probably never read anything by Capote. Salinger, too, never finished a book since the 50's, but I don't suppose he died of alcoholism. He was simply looking for something esle in his books.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

NKJan 3, 2009

Hoffman's performance is clearly phenomenal and I can appreciate that this is a very well made film, but I just don't like it. Capote is despicable and the murderers are scum - why do I give a damn about any of this?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

carolinee.Oct 17, 2005

Sluggish, wheezing & repetitive. In spite of PSH's performance, dramatically & narratively underdeveloped. Actor playing the killer gives a weak performance that makes you wonder what Capote sees in him. This critically overpraised film Sluggish, wheezing & repetitive. In spite of PSH's performance, dramatically & narratively underdeveloped. Actor playing the killer gives a weak performance that makes you wonder what Capote sees in him. This critically overpraised film was a big disappointment.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

TonyB.May 13, 2006

"Capote" is among the most overrated films of 2005. There is no question that Philip Seymour Hoffman's tour de force performance as that nasty little man is a memorable achievement. The supporting cast is top notch, and the "Capote" is among the most overrated films of 2005. There is no question that Philip Seymour Hoffman's tour de force performance as that nasty little man is a memorable achievement. The supporting cast is top notch, and the cinematography and production design are superb. The problem here, and it's serious enough to nearly wreck the film, is that it is extremely slow moving too often, the result being a rather boring piece of work.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MaxLOct 12, 2005

Hoffman was decent in the lead role and he was great at times, however, couldn't quite pull if off in the end to prop up this long, sluggish movie. Keener was completely wasted here and so were Cooper and Clifton. This movie is strictly Hoffman was decent in the lead role and he was great at times, however, couldn't quite pull if off in the end to prop up this long, sluggish movie. Keener was completely wasted here and so were Cooper and Clifton. This movie is strictly one man show about narcissism that, well, takes itself too seriously. I'm pretty sure some of the historical facts were discarded to make for a better narrative flow, however, it didn't help the movie much. Too bad, as 'In Cold Blood' was very good.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MartyMDec 20, 2005

If I had not just seen Brokeback Mountain, I may have been more impressed with this movie. In all fairness it may take awhile until a movie thrills me like Brokeback. I had heard some good things about Capote, but it just did not live up to If I had not just seen Brokeback Mountain, I may have been more impressed with this movie. In all fairness it may take awhile until a movie thrills me like Brokeback. I had heard some good things about Capote, but it just did not live up to espectations. Maybe if I had seen it first, I would have been more impressed.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

BeauMDec 15, 2005

I may be the only person to feel this way about this film, but I'm going to flat out say it. This is the most overrated film this year. There are moments of power, most definetely, but the film had moments of unevenness that I could not I may be the only person to feel this way about this film, but I'm going to flat out say it. This is the most overrated film this year. There are moments of power, most definetely, but the film had moments of unevenness that I could not believe. There is one scene, in particular, when Hoffman's Capote is approaching Perry Smith's cell, and we as the audience are tense. We're almost expecting a semi-Hannibal Lecter moment to occur, and be truly introduced to this character. Yet Miller decides to interrupt this with a flashback to an object that Capote obtains for Smith, and it not only kills the scene, but it is a horrible way for us to be introduced to Collin's character. In addition, I did not feel any connection to Collins Jr's performance whatsoever. It's a mediocre job at best, and to be honest, I felt no sympathy for the man. No understanding of him. The film should encapture that point or that moment where he makes sense, but it never does. Thus, the entire script as a whole falters. It may be only me, but Hoffman, who I dearly loved in Almost Famous and Magnolia, is good here. Not great, not suberb, not the second coming of screen acting, but just good. It's not on the part of the actor, I believe, becuase I've seen what this man can do (and the fact that he manages to create any kind of real character here is amazing to me) but on the whole, I dislike Capote. In fact, I loathed him. Hoffman's reach to find the character is slammed down my Futterman's failure to find defining moments for characters. In this, Capote is an obnoxious snob with almost no admirable traits. He's conceited, rude, arrogant, and has an air about him that makes you want to slap him the first time you meet him. To think that so many people, including a death row inmate, would be inclined to share moments and instances with this walking flamboyant stereotype is beyond me. It's always been in my opinion that when you watch a film, and you find no traits in a character that you can connect with, then there's no real point to the film. Why root for the main character, when we can't connect with him? This is my main frustration for a majority of well-loved films as of late, including Napoleon Dynamite and Drumline. When watching both films, I felt nothing for the main characters. Nick Cannon deserved to get run over in the first half hour not for his "rebelliousness", but rather for his lack of decency when talking to anyone. He had a sense of arrogance, not unlike Capote, who felt that he was better and could do anything better than anyone he meets. Napoleon Dynamite, for me, was not as offensive, but rather just unnecessary. I felt more pity for him than anything else, and that's not what you should think of your main character. In this, we're to believe Capote and his lover are in a relationship, yet I see no evidence of this. No love is represented in either's eyes, no hint of romance. These two looked more like distant roommates than anything else. It may seem that I'm going rather harsh on this film, and you know what? I am. It has its admirable qualities, (namely the brilliance of Catherine Keener, who can do no wrong in ANY film she's in, and Chris Cooper, who manages to establish a living, breathing character with only a few scenes) but my frustration with it is that it is being proclaimed as one of the best films of the year, when in fact it is one of the more uneven ones I've seen. Hoffman, for me, will have a capper to the extraordinary career he is having so far, but this is not it. This is his effort to establish a consistent plausible character when the script and the direction does not provide one, and for his partial achievement (where almost everyone else would fail) he should be applauded. Miller and Futterman on the otherhand, should not. I'm only hard on them because there are moments here that show that the both of them have the possiblity to make something great one day... but this is merely their test run. For me, the film does not work, but hopefully they'll view their missteps and acheive greatness with their next films. More power to you men, but this is not one of them in my opinion. Regardless, even if I did happen to miss the essence of the film that is getting you applause, congratulations on your success. At the very least, it's good to see men with partial ideas than ones with none at all.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

Trev29May 31, 2013

It is almost unbelievable how remarkable and convincing Hoffman's performance is, and while the material is dry and drags one too many times, it is an elegant drama about operating in "cold blood" so to speak about the murderers themselvesIt is almost unbelievable how remarkable and convincing Hoffman's performance is, and while the material is dry and drags one too many times, it is an elegant drama about operating in "cold blood" so to speak about the murderers themselves and Capote's tactics of achieving his own agenda.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

LaskeudeungFeb 1, 2017

Genius mind of one sensational writer at the moment. Philips played the character in the best way, changing his tone and mimic. Good one biography but unfortunetely it must be easy to forget.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

amheretojudgeMay 16, 2019

It's a Hoffman show, and it almost made me believe that they dive in deep just to see more of him as this infamous writer.

Capote Miller capes the authenticity of 40s filmmaking. It is informative, yes. Definitely, inspiring. But what hasIt's a Hoffman show, and it almost made me believe that they dive in deep just to see more of him as this infamous writer.

Capote

Miller capes the authenticity of 40s filmmaking. It is informative, yes. Definitely, inspiring. But what has evolved since then in filmmaking is to crowd the film with surprising visits with buffed up but toned content whose priority is to keep the viewers engaging. Swooping in every trick, somehow, Bennett Miller, the director, lost the grasp of the final ingredient that balances the fictional or like here real word. If the world is practically stashed around formal dull government papers, then our host is frankly bedazzling us with his tricks. The profile is scintillating. To a degree that it blurs out the background world that it resides in. Is it the character or the actor?

I am going to lean towards Philip Seymour Hoffman. Not that Truman Capote himself isn't intriguing but if played by someone else maybe he'd have come across a bit reserved and mellow in his language. But not Hoffman. No, sir. He comes from the exotic tales of P.T. Anderson. And also, personally, I have always felt like Hoffman is kind of a bragger. He loves to flaunt his skills. No matter how poised or formal, he is. He enters the frame and you are drawn to him. It is almost like he is dancing, with a straight face and not-so-steady eyes.

The caliber of the cast is impeccable, from Katherine Keener to Chris Cooper and as much as supportive they are, there is barely any place for them to be in charge. I was drawn to almost-like-trash talks occurring in the cell not by screaming but whispering, Hoffman and Clifton Collins Jr. resists an intense war in that cell. But above all, what's captivating is the stillness in that cell, steady and calm was their nature, discussing pivotal points of their life, fighting over the title, he loses, Capote does.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews