Slow, well made and absorbing portrait of a self-destructive genius

Rating: 8/10 (7 May 2007)

A recreation of how, on a whim, celebrity author Truman Capote found true fame and fortune through his "hands-on" coverage of an ongoing multiple murder investigation: only to find events overtaking and - ultimately - almost destroying his life.
America has many interesting historical tales, but being a new country not as many as, say, England. For such reasons we should be grateful that this fantastic and important moment should be captured with such skill and realistic acting - including an absolutely knockout award winning performance by Philip Seymore Hoffman in the title role. Certainly worth the price of admission by itself.
What do you think of Truman Capote, if anything? An icon, a waster, a con man, one of the best American writers of all time, a social glad fly, a braggart, a substance abuser, an original thinker, a stool pigeon of the jet-set? I think all of the above and more, however his greatest skill was as a self-promoter of his own genius.
The movie clearly doesn't have a lot of money to spend and this reduces where the camera can wander or linger. However this, for once, helps. It is a close-up film, so much so much so that it is sometimes hard to breath.
Nor does the film want to dramatise the back-story of how Capote got semi-famous, a lot of the "great moments" are told in casual boastful reminiscing. His (homo)sexuality is both present and relevant, knowing how to manipulate a man it by patiently getting to know his weaknesses and aspirations. However limited they are in a death-row cell.
How ironic that his assistant - Harper Lee (a far too dull Catherine Keener) - should also have a brush with fame and fortune via her classic book: To Kill a Mocking Bird. Almost viewed here as an annoying interruption in to the central drama. The film doesn't take any view over whether Capote himself had any (secret) role in its creation. A rumour that circulates to this very day.
What is great about the movie is that we (mostly) know the story and the outcome (after all, it has been filmed not once but twice!) I certainly did and I am sure that all the professional reviewers did too, but it doesn't hurt the reviews one little bit. Indeed the decision not to present this as a thriller lets the tone remain even and slow. I liked this approach, although I am sure it is jarring to most watcher of modern cinema.
This film works best at showing the randomness and callousness of life. Where the worst possible scenario for one family becomes the making of another, at least on a temporary basis. Yes, one man's ending really is another's beginning.
The honest, hardworking, welcoming townsfolk of Kansas come off the best in terms of human values, but we are not entertained, intrigued or thrilled by basic honest human values. That is the central sin that we all have to bare and for sensitive types like Capote this home truth can suffocate.
Despite the title there should surely be a film about the full life of Capote - although I would be pushed to say who could play him. Maybe it would be a classic three actor job?