Capote

ExtremeSleuth

ExtremeSleuth

Veteran
Has anyone else seen this? I saw it yesterday.... I liked the film but I also disliked the film... Phillip Seymour Hoffman's acting was superb. He played Capote greatly. That's basically all that I liked about the film. I didn't like how it was shot though... the camera i think actually moved about 10 times during the film... it was basically all static shots and i really disliked that... the camera work was just boring... I think Hoffman's acting makes up for it a little though.
 
I saw it the other night and liked it a lot. I think the director used the camera in a way that was appropriate for the time(50-60s) or at least gave you a feel that you were back in that era. The movie doesn't call for 'fancy' or 'extreme' camera movements.

It's refreshing to see a movie that doesn't insult your intelligence or pander to the lowest denominator. Great movie.
 
dat5150 said:
The movie doesn't call for 'fancy' or 'extreme' camera movements.
Click to expand...

no, but there has to be SOME camera movement... i mean there were barely any movements in the movie.... i don't even think there were pans at all just a few tracking shots....
 
Hoffman disappeared into the role. He did a great job. And Chris Cooper is always good. That's the good news. Now for the bad...the movie bored the living **** out of me. I found myself not caring what was happening.

In Cold Blood was a far better movie. How he wrote the story didn't really have an impact for me.
 
I dont think I could sit through this with the way his voice sounds. Just the few seconds I've seen of it have annoyed me.

His voice is like when someone scratches a chalkboard with their nails.
 
I had somewhat mixed feelings about this film. Truman Capote is one of my favorite writers and Philip Seymour Hoffman is one of my favorite actors, so I was pretty psyched about it. The acting didn't disappoint at all -- he was phenomenal and the supporting cast was good, too. But I've read Capote's bio, I've read In Cold Blood and I own the movie... so, I didn't feel like I gained any new insights and I didn't feel swept away by it -- which I wanted to be. If I hadn't had such high expectations and didn't know as much about Capote and the book, I might have been more swept away. As it was, I enjoyed it but felt a tad let down.

One thing I liked as far as the cinematography were the opening establishing shots of the NYC skyline and how it looked like 1950s New York even though it was shot in current times.
 
I wasn't originally going to see this in the theatres, not because of anything big other than it was playing at the local art's theatre which is cool but really a sucky theatre, that and I didn't know that much about it until after it expanded wider after the golden globes, then it came out at a couple of the bigger theatres in the city so I took it up for a matinee and was blown away by hoffman's performance, an amazing film that I mean to pick up on DVD one of these day.s
 
Filmjunkie677 said:
I dont think I could sit through this with the way his voice sounds. Just the few seconds I've seen of it have annoyed me.

His voice is like when someone scratches a chalkboard with their nails.
Click to expand...

Well, that is how the real Capote talked.
 
ravinesedge said:
no, but there has to be SOME camera movement... i mean there were barely any movements in the movie.... i don't even think there were pans at all just a few tracking shots....
Click to expand...

I thought it was a strong movie with an amazing lead performance...indeed, all the actors were superb, but its obviously PSH's show.
 
Hmmm...I think the lack of camera movement was a choice, and a good one. I loved those static shots. As filmmakers it may be hard not to get bored, but it just made me forget about camera work AND the editing, and really focus on the storytelling in terms of the near perfect work by the actors. I dont know...just because it was static doesn't mean every shot wasnt beautiful.
 
abraham said:
Hmmm...I think the lack of camera movement was a choice, and a good one. I loved those static shots. As filmmakers it may be hard not to get bored, but it just made me forget about camera work AND the editing, and really focus on the storytelling in terms of the near perfect work by the actors. I dont know...just because it was static doesn't mean every shot wasnt beautiful.
Click to expand...

Very well said. And despite the fact that I wasn't "swept away" on my first viewing, when I went in with such high expectations, I plan to see it again and definitely want to add it to my collection.
 
I thought this was a great film. I reallly loved the cinematography, great static choices to play into the claustrophobia of the film. Adam Kimmel has a great eye. Super 35 looks fantastic, I hope they eventually release this in an HD format.
 
Capote also happened to shoot principal photography up here in Winnipeg. We've been able to double as NYC and Chicago because of all the great period architecture that has remained.

The movie wouldn't have been made were it not for the nasty tax credits Hollywood dislikes so much...oh wait, it's the producers who make the decisions to come up here and take advantage of them...why wouldn't you? Notwithstanding the exchange rate, you get close to 30% of a financial structure made up from the combination of provincial and federal tax credits.

Anyway, getting back to the film, many of the crew and extras for Capote ended up working on my feature; one of my actors happened to be the stand in for Hoffman and was blown away how 'in character' he was at all times.

We've got some talented and committed people up here.
 
Just watched this last night and I was very impressed. It draws you into the story, not necessarily by the events, but the depth of Hoffman's portrayal of Capote. That is where the strength of the movie lies. He deep performance grabs you and lets your mind get involved into what his story is. It definately left me thinking about the dichotomy of his situation.

In regards to the cinematography, I thought it was very well executed. It's nice to see someone who is not afraid to give you something very simple, yet beautiful. All the wide shots in the film are amazing to view, and lend a very powerful impact to the movie. They set up the location and the feel of that location perfectly.

Maybe some people didn't notice, but there are some handheld shots scattered through key parts of the movie. They were used mostly when Truman was in New York at the social parties. Also, at the end when he meets with the killers the last time it was handheld as well. This gave me the feeling that something was out of place, kind of a frantic, off balance shift in the story. That juxtaposed with the static shots shows where Capote in comfortable the most, IMO.

All in all, great movie, I'll have to watch it again to truly take in, and I'm looking forward to see what the special features are like.
 
oneinfiniteloop said:
Maybe some people didn't notice, but there are some handheld shots scattered through key parts of the movie. They were used mostly when Truman was in New York at the social parties. Also, at the end when he meets with the killers the last time it was handheld as well. This gave me the feeling that something was out of place, kind of a frantic, off balance shift in the story. That juxtaposed with the static shots shows where Capote in comfortable the most, IMO.
Click to expand...

Every time Capote was at a party I was dying. He's so damn good. Those scenes cracked me up. I had to post in here after just posting about him in the MI:3 forum...he's the most pure character actor in the field right now, and probably up on a list somewhere for all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top