Alright, so here's one I'm trying to figure out. In the last few days Capote has swept the guilds, shocking just about everyone who had counted it out a long time ago (well, except for at least one user who boldly predicted it would completely outshine Memoirs of a Geisha for Sony ). I'll be the first to admit that like every single major respected critic, Capote hugely impressed me for good reason. If it's only the second best film I've witnessed all year, it's still the only one that I could call with no inhibitions flawless. Now up until a few days ago, Capote had most of it's hype in the performances, and for increrdible reason at that. Phillip Seymour Hoffman delivers what I'd honestly call the single best performance of the decade, both for how he virtually becomes Truman Capote down to every last mannerism and also how simply devastating he is in the prison scenes between him and Clifton Collins Jr, who himself is an amazing discovery. However, while Hoffman may be the flagship of the marketing campaign, it's an amazing film for so many other reasons beyond the amazing acting. Despite a tiny budget, the film subtly captures the period and immerses you in it, largely in part to the moody and precise cinematography. Most of all though I believe it's the direction, Bennett Miller's gifted use of silence and minimalism which makes the film so great. Capote unflinchingly looks at the difficulty of making art, the horror of bloody crime, the nature of literary celebrity, and the depths to which Capote had to descend to learn what he needed and to write as he did. So all that said, I'm confounded as to why nearly every member of this forum seems so opposed to Capote. Just because it doesn't have a 60+ million budget doesn't mean that it wasn't just as hard to make as King Kong or The New World. I think people forget just how hard it can be to pull off a project of small scope on a shoestring budget rather than when a production company gives the filmmakers an endless sum of money. That aside, the only logical reason I can see for people's refusal to acknowledge the film would be that it's simply been such a shock to the system for them. Nonetheless this still strikes me as farfetched, which brings me back to the film itself. Aside from Libs (whose thoughts on the film mystify me, but I digress ), who here has seen the film and honestly thought there wasn't a reason for it to get all the acclaim it has been? If it does get a nomination for Best Picture or Best Director (or both), it would stand as a testament to a form of selling a contender that has grown rarer and rarer in the days of 50+ million budgets: Letting the movie's quality speak for itself.

For me, it's selfish reasons, in that Capote is making it much harder for Munich to get into best picture . But I will definitely seek out the film *cough....download......cough* and see what all the fuss is about. If it kicks my ass then I'll have no qualms about admitting it.

Now, I think any hate should be directed to the film that truly does not deserve any kind of a whiff of best picture and that is Walk the Line.

Seriously, this is a lame name for a topic! "Do some peyote with Capote" is better.

The nominations piss me off because they seem to be very narrow, one exception being Walk the Line (which doesn't belong there to begin with).

I haven't seen Capote so I can't really respond. Crash, Brokeback and Walk the Line are what I'm most responding too. I am worried that I will only end up liking 1/5 nominees.


I watched part of Last Action Hero last night. The idea that the blockbusters are generally getting worse I think is false, I think you can say something generally positive about anything in the top 10 (even the accursed Narnia). Not that this belongs in this thread but...

Heh see I actually agree that it's annoying how only the small independent films are getting only love, although I still have a feeling they might hurt each other simply because each person can only select one film for best of year, and I think most of the people who saw these films overlap. Still, it doesn't solve anything as far as Walk the Line goes. But it gives me hope that Munich will still get a BP/BD combo, which is all I'm really going for at this point (having not seen Brokeback Mountain, that's in a few minutes).

It's not like I didn't value Capote at all (I gave it a B-), I just don't feel it's deserving of the praise it's getting. Hoffman certainly is, but not the film.

That's true, B- is more indicative of thinking it kept your interest but was pretty flawed. Thing is, I just don't see where those imperfections lie, especially to the extent that you'd put it next to The Exorcism of Emily Rose and *shudder* Monster-in-Law

I dunno. Haven't seen it. I just don't much like the trailer (or don't now that I've seen it 60 times) and can't see it ending up one of my favorites...

To be honest, though, I'm just afraid, like andaroo said, come 2006 July I'm only gonna have to say "GNAGL is the only BP nom I liked." :/ (Yes, that's premature having not seen BBM (Sat, prolly) and having the Noms not even out...but...)

Same feeling as Libs had. Thumb way up for Hoffman, but very much underwhelmed as a film. And I gave a B- as well.

I haven't seen it, but the idea of it just bugs me. It seems so...ordinary. When movies like Munich, Kong and WTL are also in the ring, and they have the possibility of being knocked out by something like this, it also downplays the cards in my mind.

Actaully I'd think B- is quite low. I don't get how you can so love Hoffman's performance but give the film as low a mark as that, even though it's not that low!

I mean, after the second half, the film and the performance kinda mesh. [mild spoilers follow] The script completely revolves around his unravelling, which is where Hoffman shines.[/spoilers]

I definitely didn't think the film itself is awad worthy but it was still better than ALOT of stuff this year. I gave it a borderline B+/A-

I gave it an A- at first but then lowered it to a B+, Hoffman elevates what could have been a good, but nothing to write home about, biopic and develops a character who simply becomes disturbing by the end of the picture. You see all of Capote's nuances and many of his deepest thoughts vividly portrayed on screen, but with almost everyone (minus Harper Lee perhaps) he puts on a certain face that hides some truths he's not willing to admit. Despite this great characterization by Hoffman, the film felt distant...like there was a disconnect between the audience and the characters. I didn't care what happened to Capote by the end of the film, and while the ambiguity about his intentions strengthens the film in some ways, it also weakens the film in that the true character is partly hidden from us. That would be my guess as to why I felt that disconnect. Another reason would be that we never really understand why Capote is attracted to Perry Smith...there's no history given that I remember, and while he was quite eccentric and odd the attraction still seems bizarre and a bit out-of-the-blue. And the other characters, yes even Harper Lee, were not nearly as well-developed as Capote. Perry Smith got close by the end, but still not all the way there. And I love Catherine Keener, but she didn't wow me at all. I think it's the movie's fault more than hers though as she didn't have much to work with other than basically acting as Capote's conscience. The movie itself operates as a sort of dark indie thriller that's very effective, but I think it would have been vastly improved had they given us more time on Capote's life prior to this incident perhaps, maybe more time with Harper, and less time in the prison. Hard to say though if that would have worked. It's still very good but overall I think Hoffman is better than the film, and that's why I'd rather it be left out of BP. But I'd definitely rather see it nominated than Munich & Walk the Line.

Oh, I just hate it out of principle. So much, by now, that I am actually supporting Brokeback Mountain against it (and that says a lot). The movie doesn't look bad, just terribly "unspecial" (not to mention the annoying accent, but that's besides the point). I simply do not like to see what it is getting because I think that for the kind of a movie that it is, it simply does not deserve all that. The end.

I gave Capote an A.

But it's not worthy of a Best Picture nomination and certainly not a win.

A film that you graded as an A isn't worthy of a Best Picture nomination?

In Her Shoes, Wallace and Gromit, 40 Year Old Virgin, Layer Cake, Sith, Kung Fu Hustle, amoung others, all were graded A.

And I would cry if any of them won Best Picture. Not happy tears.

A movie can be just OK with a fantastic performance.

I'm not really sure Monster would have been anything special without Charlize Theron, for instance.

The Hurricane with Denzel Washington is another example.

That's a good example.

Another one for me would be (even though on a smaller scale) The Village with Bryce Dallas Howard's outstanding turn.

Great movie which gives a rare intimate examination of the relationship of the artist to his material - I would surely pick this over other seriously flawed works which are in the running this year - for example it is in another whole league of biopics compared to the artificial confection that is Walk the Line...

B- is too generous for this film.

Capote is a really good movie. Only Brokeback is higher on my list for BP nominees. (And I was a even a bit underwhelmed by Hoffman, I still feel he's 4th best of the Best Actor nominees behind Howard, Ledger, and Straithairn.)

I thought the hanging scene at the end was one of the most powerful of the year easily, I can't get that image out of my head.