toddinvestor

Capote comes highly recommended, so I went in with big expectations. I cannot say they were met. Capote moves along slowly taking its time to develop its characters, plot and rhythm. Philip Hoffman is a highlight with a commanding performance lead. His ego, insecurity, ruthlessness, pride and regret all mix together in this complex and believable character. The center of the murders, Clifton Collins Jr, is portrayed with potential. How could such a mild man be a savage killer. Yes, the ingredients are all there. But somehow Capote manages to ring shallow. The inner workings of the accused are never fully explored. The background, motive and capacity to kill all have to be taken for granted. And Capote himself rings scripted. His inner workings are also not deeply revealed. Add to this a really slow pace, and I see a movie laced with dramatic opportunity which never comes around. Worth watching, yes. Disturbing, yes. But acclaimed, no.

With the close of 2004, looking back "The Passion Of The Christ" stands out for me as the best picture of the year. In my opinion, The Passion deserves Oscar nominations for both best director in Mel Gibson and best actor in James Caviezel. It received neither of course being out of the loop of the Hollywood empire. The Passion is also amazingly polarizing. Viewers tend to give it either a 10 or a 1, opposite ends of the scale. Nothing in 2004 gripped me from start to finish, mesmerized me with intense emotion or left such a visual and emotional impact as "The Passion Of The Christ". And this is from someone who was hesitant to see it at all. This is not a typical bible story. Believer or not, the suffering of Christ is a charged event brought to life by Mel Gibson's stellar efforts. If you are not sure whether or not to take this movie in, just see it! Yeah, maybe you will give it a 1, but is it not worth the risk that you might find instead a 10 out of 10? How many movies have that potential? They are few and far between.