Capote (2006)

[oyceter]

I haven't read In Cold Blood, and I really don't know much about Truman Capote at all.

I didn't expect to adore the movie; my co-workers and I occasionally go out to catch a movie, and I think everyone just wanted to go and didn't focus too much on what we were going to see.

But it just had me thinking about the sometimes narrow line between fiction and non-fiction and the role of the writer. I always used to be amused by the fact that everyone in Avonlea was horrified by writers (who knew what they would be taking from your life!), and of course, LM Montgomery is gentle about it. Only here, with Capote, the writer really is a horrifying figure (in the movie! I am not generalizing to all writers).

He does feel something for the killer, I've no doubt of that. But there's so much self-interest in there, so much contradiction. He wants and needs them to die so he can finish his book, even though he likes Perry. He wants to respect Perry's boundaries and not ask about the murder, but he needs it for his book. He lies about the title and how it reflects on the killers. It's so unclear how much is friendship and how much is self-interest; the movie rightly never tries to answer. People are hypocrites, Capote is a hypocrite, but he's also human, and he does hurt.

But Perry is hurt more, and Capote knows that as well.

Of course, even outside of the questionable ethics about using people's lives as fodder for non-fiction, particularly within the realm of friendship, there's the disturbing fact that Capote (and the movie audience) is much closer to the killer than to those killed. He seems to know Perry inside-out, though even that is cast into doubt in the end, but the family is relegated to flashback and still bodies splashed with blood.

I don't really have any conclusions or arguments, but am just thinking over it.

Comments

[thomasyan.livejournal.com]

I was surprised by how much I liked this movie. I was rooting for it on Oscar night.

I think in Ebert's review he says Capote later said he wished he had driven past that town, and that the whole experience destroyed Capote and hastened his death. If so, I think that means Capote ultimately admitted to himself what he had done.

P.S. I recall you said you liked to talk about food, so you might be amused by some of my food posts: http://thomasyan.livejournal.com/tag/eating+guide

[oyceter]

I think Capote (in the movie at least, and from the little "after the events" lines after the movie) did understand what he did, and probably understood even as he was doing it, but could never reconcile himself with it.

And thanks for the link!

[selenak.livejournal.com]

My own review (like you, I hadn't read In Cold Blood before watching the film which I loved for the same reason - it makes you think:

http://selenak.livejournal.com/207589.html

I have read it by now, so one additional point: in the book, Capote does give equal weight to the victims; their last day alive (reconstructed meticulously) makes the first third of the narrative. So for the reader, the Clutters are very much present. However, this film isn't a film version of Capote's book, but tells us about its genesis, so I can see how it would be impossible to give them the same screentime.

[oyceter]

Ooo, thanks!

I'm glad that there is equal weight for the Clutters in the book; the small bit that we get to hear from the book in the film is utterly stunning prose. I love that they have that there because it complicates everything even further. He's doing such disturbing things, and yet... he is making beautiful prose out of it, and probably a very, very good book.

[pinkdormouse.livejournal.com]

I loved Capote too.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

I thought it was very interesting, and extremely well acted; and as a film abouit how far one can legitimately go for art, the thing I want to pair it with is Woody Allen's Bullets over Broadway - have you seen that ?

[oyceter]

I haven't actually seen that; what's it about?

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

A struggling playwright in 1920s New York [ the Woody Allen part, though played by John Cusack ] who finally gets funding for a project of his from some mobsters, one of the conditions being that a truly dreadfully talentless gangster's moll gets to play the lead part. It does not go the directions one would expect from there, thanks largely to Chazz Palminteri's utterly amazing bodyguard character. Do see it.

[oyceter]

Oh interesting! I vaguely remember it being nominated for Oscars a while back, but that's it.