In 1959, Truman Capote learns of the murder of a Kansas family and decides to write a book about the case. While researching for his novel In Cold Blood, Capote forms a relationship with one of the killers, Perry Smith, who is on death row. Even with Phillip Seymour Hoffman in it 'Capote' feels like a movie that could have been really good but unfortunately was not that good or memorable as i expected and the whole cast was pretty much disappointing and wasted in a movie that feels like a novel but a bad, boring and mediocre one tho. (0/10)

Philip Seymour Hoffman does a wonderful job as Truman Capote in this film, so much so that he carries it from start to finish and is the sole reason the movie has received such positive reviews from critics and audiences. Hoffman is difficult to fault, but the film as a whole is far from perfect.'Capote' is supposed to be a biography of novelist Truman Capote, yet offers very little background on the man himself. People going into this film with little knowledge of Capote will be disappointed when the credits roll and find they don't know much more than they did 2 hours ago. Surely that's not what you would expect from a so- called 'biographical film'?For all it positive aspects, including an outstanding lead acting performance, 'Capote' is let down by its narrow approach. I wanted and expected so much more from this film.

'In Cold Blood', Truman Capote's most famous book, was a thinly fictionalised account of some real life murders; which he befriended the killers to write. 'Capote' tells the story of the book's gestation. At its dramatic core is the tension between Capote the professional, to whom his subjects are just material, and Capote the human being; to be a writer, of course, he needs to function on both levels. But nonetheless, the film presents him as someone so fundamentally self-centred that it's hard to see why we should care about his ethical unease - there's little doubt that ultimately he's going to resolve it in his own favour anyway. Philip Seymour Hoffman is very good in the title role but there really doesn't seem to be too much purpose to this movie, except to genuflect in reverence of the "artist".

Rather than getting carried away by the acting performances, I was disappointed to learn so little about the life of Capote! In this film the 'Cold Blood' incident, be it a key and turning point in his life and career or not, gets in focus to the point of Capote becoming replaceable by any of those (self-) dedicated 'new journalists' who pursue their career by picking up on some crime case, simply because nobody else cares to... (To what extent it is morally justifiable to turn a murder case into a literary art form, and violating the most fundamental journalist ethos of 'stick to the facts' in the process, is another question...) For these reasons, the film should be titled 'Capote in Cold Blood' instead, and leave a chance for subsequent biopics to one day tell the story of 'Capote' (if there is one to tell) - such as: What was his personal background, and what made him ultimately fall victim to drugs? Instead, what we get is nearly a case of self-justice: "Don't kill them before I did my book, but don't wait too long as I might get bored"... All writers, fact or fiction, should be warned to follow this example! A message this film fails to deliver.