Plot
In 1959, Truman Capote is a celebrated author who is enormously popular in New York City society for both his writing achievements as well as for his wit and fashion flair. Openly gay and flamboyant, Capote spends much of his time with "the Swans", a group of aristocratic women including Slim Keith and Babe Paley, who share gossip with him. Unbeknownst to the Swans, Capote plans to use their gossip in a book titled Answered Prayers . However, Capote puts the planned book on hold after reading an article about the murder of a farming family in Holcomb, Kansas, in the back pages of the New York Times .
Curious as to how the residents would react to a brutal massacre in their midst, the author and his friend, Nelle Harper Lee, travel to Holcomb so Capote can interview people for a magazine article. However, once there, he realizes there might be enough material for what he eventually describes as a "nonfiction novel". However, his offbeat behavior both amuses and dismays the locals. The KBI's lead detective on the case, Alvin Dewey, is uncomfortable with Capote's dress and demeanor and refuses to cooperate. Capote eventually wins over the people of Holcomb with personal anecdotes about celebrities like Humphrey Bogart and ultimately gets the information he needs for his book.
Richard Hickock and Perry Smith are arrested for the murders and sentenced to death, but a lengthy period of appeals begins. Permission is given to Capote to interview them in their cells. He is able to convince Hickok to give him information about the murders in exchange for book royalties that could go to his children from a former marriage, but Smith is not interested in the idea of money, as there is no one for him to give it to. Capote repeatedly attempts to gain Smith's trust and fails. He empathizes with the convicted killer's unhappy childhood, and Smith's remorseful manner, genuine sincerity, artistic skills, and obvious intelligence impress him. When Smith learns that both of their mothers committed suicide, he begins to trust Capote.
Having been assured that he would be painted in a sympathetic light, Smith learns that Capote plans to title his book In Cold Blood, violently subdues Capote and threatens to rape him. However, Smith stops, claiming that he wanted Capote to feel betrayed, too. Capote explains that the title has a double meaning, meant to refer to the justice system taking the lives of Smith and Hickok in cold blood. Capote tells Smith that if he does not tell his side of the story, he will simply go back to New York and write whatever he wants, and Smith will have no say. Once Smith reads some of what Capote has written, he realizes that Capote was being honest and finally discusses what transpired the night of the murders.
Smith confides in Capote that he is devastated that now that he has found someone to love, he cannot have him. Capote reciprocates his feelings, and the two share a kiss. The appeals take five years, during which Smith writes two letters a week to Capote. After the appeals are denied, Capote returns to Kansas to be present at their execution on April 14, 1965. Smith kisses Capote on the cheek and says "Adios, amigo". Capote witnesses Hickok's hanging, but is unable to watch Smith's death. He runs out of the building and breaks down crying in the rain.
Smith left all of his belongings to Capote, including the letters and a charcoal sketch of Capote that Smith had drawn. Nelle states her opinion that three men died that night, as Capote was never able to recover from Smith's death. The book is published and is a major success, turning Capote into one of the most wealthy and famous authors in the country, but it is the last book he is able to finish, as he begins a downward spiral of drugs and alcohol. The film ends with a distraught Capote calling Nelle and asking her to go out to celebrate a productive day of writing on his new novel. The camera pans to a notebook titled "Answered Prayers", with the page blank.
Production
Development
The film's original title alternated between Have You Heard? and Every Word Is True, the latter referencing how Capote swore that "every word" of In Cold Blood was true. Ironically, this claim was untrue, as Capote embellished the true story considerably and fabricated some instances for dramatic effect. According to writer and director Douglas McGrath in his DVD commentary, some of the scenes in Infamous were based on McGrath's "imagination" of how they may have happened, most notably a dramatic jail cell kiss between Capote and inmate Perry Smith (played by Craig). This was only based on a rumor, as some of the prison guards believed that Capote paid for privacy so the two could be intimate. McGrath justified these liberties by noting that the tactic is similar to how Capote himself wrote In Cold Blood, using creative liberties with real events for dramatic purposes.
The film was largely overshadowed by Capote , released a year prior. Capote had a darker and more serious tone than Infamous, which focuses more on Capote's extravagant behavior and the reaction of the Kansas residents. However, the film does get darker in tone as it goes on, which is accentuated by Rachel Portman's score. McGrath noted that Capote took similar creative liberties with the story, notably with a subplot that Truman Capote withheld legal assistance from the convicts for the sake of the book's ending. McGrath relates in the audio commentary that he did extensive research to make the film accurate: reading Capote's letters and notebooks, interviewing surviving witnesses from both New York and Kansas and setting the Manhattan scenes in various restaurants that Capote frequented with his friends. In the scenes where Capote goes to Dewey's office, both the outfits that he wears are accurate to what he really wore on those occasions. McGrath claimed that, while the intimate encounters in the jail cell were invented for the film, Smith kissing Capote on the cheek before going up to the gallows really did happen. It is also true that Capote could not bear to witness Smith's execution, which is why there is so little detail about it in the book.
Toby Jones studied Capote's mannerisms extensively and was able to get the voice right after protruding his lower jaw out just slightly, which he noticed Capote did. McGrath claims that he showed the film to a friend of Capote's and she was so struck by Toby Jones's resemblance both in appearance and voice to Capote, that she believed Capote was in the room for the first time since his death. Daniel Craig was a very late addition to the cast, as previous actors for Perry Smith, Mark Wahlberg and Mark Ruffalo, fell through due to scheduling conflicts. Gwyneth Paltrow's performance of "What Is This Thing Called Love" as fictional singer "Kitty Dean" was originally intended to be Peggy Lee. [3] The situation of an audience being held spellbound by a performer falling silent in the middle of a song was based on a real-life nightclub performance by Barbara Cook. [4] McGrath included the performance of the song as foreshadowing for Truman Capote's own love for Perry Smith, and by having the singer stop in the middle of the song, McGrath hoped to indicate that something in the song had moved her into deep thought about her own love life. An instrumental version of the song "Heartaches" plays over the opening credits, further foreshadowing Capote's complex feelings towards Smith.
Reception
Critical reception
The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a 75% approval rating with an average rating of 6.7/10 based on 154 reviews. The website's consensus reads, "Though comparisons with last year's Capote may be inevitable, Infamous takes a different angle in its depiction of the author, and stands up well enough on its own." [5] On Metacritic, the film achieved an average score of 68 out of 100, based on 34 critics, signifying "generally favorable" reviews. [6] Much of the critical discussion of the film focused on comparisons with the previous year's Capote , which had received considerable critical acclaim and for which Philip Seymour Hoffman had won the Academy Award for Best Actor for his performance as Capote. In comparing this film to Capote, David Thomson of The Independent asked, "What does it have that's different? ... [It] has a gallery of Truman Capote's Manhattan friends, people who adored him without ever quite trusting him ... These cameos give a tone-perfect sense of Capote's life before In Cold Blood. He is placed as the phenomenon of culture, celebrity and outrage that he was." [7]
In his review in The New York Times , A. O. Scott called the film "well worth your attention. It is quick-witted, stylish and well acted… warmer and more tender, if also a bit thinner and showier, than Capote… it is in the end more touching than troubling." [8] Rex Reed of The New York Observer opined, "They gave the Oscar to the wrong Truman Capote. I do not begrudge the versatile, popular Philip Seymour Hoffman his Oscar for playing the tiny terror in Capote, but he was doing an impression. In Infamous ... a diminutive actor with a titanic talent named Toby Jones literally becomes the man himself. This is no lisping impersonation learned from watching old Johnny Carson shows: Mr. Jones moves into Truman's skin, heart and brains. Infamous shows you the man's soul. It is a monumental achievement of great artistry and depth. In some ways, the movie is better, too ... [it] is infinitely fascinating, cinematically breathtaking and largely impeccable. It proves that there's more than one way to tell a story and view a life. It is one hell of a beautiful movie to see and savor." [9] Jeff Klemzak penned two articles for the Los Angeles Times on the subject of the two biopics, arguing that Infamous, while covering the same theme as the award-winning Capote, "(a)nd as good as that film was, this one is better". [10]
In Variety , David Rooney felt the film "doesn't measure up to its predecessor and seems unlikely to echo the attention it received ... In the central role, British thesp Toby Jones is a good physical match for Capote, getting his flamboyant mannerisms and creepy, nasal voice down. But unlike Philip Seymour Hoffman's Oscar-winning turn, there's no texture, no under-the-skin sense of the conflict between Capote's ambition for his book and his compassion for, and attraction to, Perry ... Sandra Bullock's understated performance as Capote's friend Lee is a high point here – wrapped in a cardigan and puffing on cigarettes, she creates a bracingly sturdy character of this plain-speaking, unfussy woman amid a cardboard gallery of flashy sophisticates." [11] Mick LaSalle of the San Francisco Chronicle observed, "By the standards of most pictures, this is intelligent, thoughtful filmmaking ... it's only against the exalted benchmark standard set by Capote that Infamous falls short ... It's a worthy film in its own right, with its own virtues ... Either through studying Lee or channeling someone else, Bullock adopts mannerisms and facial expressions that are not her own for this role and then works them into a well-crafted portrait of a highly internal, observant and deep-revolving spirit. It's the performance to take from the movie." [12]
In The Village Voice , Robert Wilonsky stated the film "never comes close to approaching the quiet, devastating brilliance of Capote ... Which is not to say Infamous ... is a far inferior version ... it's just a lesser version, light in weight and absent the ache ... It's good, especially during its first half, just not good enough." [13] Steve Persall of the St. Petersburg Times rated the film B and added, "Infamous might have been viewed as one of this year's better films if Capote hadn't told the same story about the same characters a year ago and done it so well ... Infamous is inferior, although not drastically so, in almost every respect ... The most obvious comparisons are to be made about performances. Jones is a much more accurate physical representation of Capote than Hoffman, his high-pitched voice sounding a little more affected than his Oscar-winning predecessor. However, the relative shallowness of McGrath's screenplay doesn't offer as many emotional land mines for Jones to play. [He] delivers an uncanny impersonation, while Hoffman's portrayal was a studiously researched impression, a likely more challenging task. Call this race nearly a draw, with Hoffman simply crossing the finish line first." [14]
