e-limbo, e-zine de informacion y analasis de modos de vida actual
 
23.11.2017 / Sesión no Iniciada 
_CINE

 _enviar articulo

e-mail emisor
e-mail receptor
Ayúdanos a evitar contactos automáticos
Anti Spam
Texto
 

En estos tiempos de hipercomunicación bastaría la invitación de enviar a un amigo cualquiera de los textos que consideres interesantes algo redundante: demasiada comunicación, demasiados textos y , en general, demasiado de todo.
Es posible que estemos de acuerdo... pero cuando encuentras algo interesante en cualquier sitio, la red, la calle, tu casa, o un lugar escondido y remoto, compartirlo no sólo es un acto (acción, hecho) de amistad o altruismo, también es una manera de ahorrar tiempo a los demás (y de que te lo ahorren a ti (si eres afortunado) a costa del tiempo que tu has podido derrochar (emplear) y el gustazo de mostrar que estuviste ahí (o donde fuera ) un poco antes (el tiempo ya no es más el que era).
Comparte con tus conocidos aquello que encuentras, es evolución.
Philip Seymour Hoffman
03-02-06 Revista de Prensa  

 


The actor talks about Truman Capote's moral ambiguities and supposed lies.

By Meghan O'Rourke
Just nominated for five Oscars—including best picture—Capote, directed by Bennett Miller, written by Dan Futterman, and co-produced by Philip Seymour Hoffman, is one of those rare movies that conveys something of what it is like to be a writer. It does so in part by limiting its scope to the years Truman Capote spent researching and writing In Cold Blood. Forty years after its publication, the legacy of In Cold Blood is still a complicated one. Many people think that Capote not only exploited Perry Smith and Dick Hickock, the two murderers whose story he told, but actually invented scenes wholesale. The other week, I spoke with Hoffman by phone from Los Angeles about the difficulties in capturing as contradictory and ambiguous a figure as Truman Capote.

Slate: In Capote, you captured the moral ambiguity inherent in the relationship between the journalist and his source. But the movie completely sidestepped Capote's other alleged "journalistic" sin, which was to invent details of his story. At a time when many writers are being raked over the coals for their concoctions, why did Capote let Truman Capote off scot-free for his?

Philip Seymour Hoffman: Well, I think the only thing that we know was fabricated was the end, the scene at the Clutters' grave. But Capote didn't hide that—he talked about it himself. It wasn't a fabrication that he was trying to sell as the truth. It's not like what's happening with James Frey. He did profess everything else is factual. I know that there are people in Kansas who say, "There's this, there's that, it's embroidered." But there is nothing I know that is made up. Of course, for the purpose of the writing, what he did have to do is take himself out of the story. In the book, he is never present as a character, only as an author. And so there are people who had to stand in for him, to "hear" conversations that in real life he heard. But he was open about that, too. So, the idea that he fabricated really wasn't a point of interest for us; there wasn't enough to go on. We were more interested in exploring the lies and fabrications he told in real life. The book itself is probably a pretty solid work of truth.

Slate: Do you believe that he could recall conversations with 94 percent accuracy?

Hoffman: It probably wasn't 94 percent. But it was probably 80 percent. Look who we were talking about! This is a guy who lied all the time. But this is also a guy who was indeed bright, complicated. And he was clearly a great listener. He really understood people—when you look at how he captures characters on the page, you see he had an unusual talent. So, I hesitate to say that his braggadocio is false—I bought a lot of it. After all, this wasn't a guy who just talked, talked, and talked, and wrote only one short story. He understood something about human complexity. I don't know about 94 percent, though. Maybe he hit 94 percent accuracy once, and that became his bar—a level he assumed he could always hit.

Slate: The film itself takes some liberties with the real sequence of events. Why? Most notably, William Shawn, the editor of The New Yorker, never accompanied Capote to Kansas.

Hoffman: No, William Shawn and Joseph Fox, the magazine's publisher, were made into one character. Joe Fox did go out with Capote to Kansas. And Capote did want Joe Fox to go in with him when he went to say goodbye to Perry, and it was this awful uncomfortable thing for Fox. Ultimately Danny [Futterman] made these two characters one; you only have an hour and a half. And if you start going off on a tangent, you've got to finish it, or else you have a broken limb, dramatically. But we were open about the changes. And most of them don't affect the larger story.

Slate: You've now played both Lester Bangs and Truman Capote—two larger-than-life cultural figures. Is there a difference between impersonating a real-life person and creating a character?

Hoffman: There is at first. One difference is that you have all these materials at your disposal. There's information right there that can help you—books, tapes, photographs—which you don't have when you're creating a fictional character. But once you get that information, you have to start looking at the character as a fiction. When you're playing someone who really lived, you carry a burden, a burden to be accurate. But it's one that you have to let go of ultimately. Films are always a fiction, not documentary. Even a documentary is a kind of fiction. So, ultimately you have to think about the story you're telling. You want somehow to be able to create the character in such a way that people actually stop thinking about the fact that they're watching a real person—that they're watching "Truman Capote." If you can get them to be more invested in the story they're watching than in the character, then you've succeeded.

Slate: Do you like one kind of acting, inventing a character vs. playing a "real" one, better?

Hoffman: No, because you never know where one's going to lead.

Slate: Capote is a famously complicated character, and you shot the film in 36 days. Did you and the director and screenwriter come up, in advance, with an idea about how you wanted to represent Capote?

Hoffman: One of the things I've heard Danny [Futterman] say is that what intrigued him was not so much Capote himself but the relationship between a journalist and a subject, and Capote was a perfect vessel for exploring that relationship. I knew that was a big part of the story, going in. We all were interested in it, though, for many different reasons, there were many things about the story that spoke to each of us. I was particularly interested in the idea that someone could be at that point in their life, and ultimately that would be the beginning of the end—that interested me very much. That something that could bring you such wealth and such fame could also be your end, your undoing. We loved talking about the things in the film.

Slate: Some people are skeptical of the biopic genre. David Hare wrote, "[T]he orthodox biopic is, at best, a resolutely waxy form of entertainment. The purpose, in a Madame Tussaud's sort of way, is to emulate an original. But as few of the audience have ever encountered the original, the exercise often has a curiously pointless air. … An actor is compelled to, say, scratch her ear, on no other grounds but that, 'Oh, Sylvia always scratched her ear.' Who is in charge here? The artist or the subject?"

Hoffman: If you want to make a film just because you want to make a film about a person, then I think David Hare is right. Whatever he says about being waxy—yes, it's almost like a film chatting, ruminating on the person's life, and being enthusiastic about them. You're watching the film and getting all the highlights of the life. The actor can improvise and do a brilliant job, but the film around him just waxes poetic on the life. You get it, as a viewer—that an artist has a hard time, etc., that they suffer. But it was a very conscious decision on Danny's part that he didn't want to make that movie—the straight biopic. He was much more interested in the themes, and the themes just happened to co-exist with a real person. The whole film took place between 1959 and '65. There's nothing before or after. It's a film about a writer at work during a specific period of his life. It's just not a biopic, Bennett and I always say. I've sat in some of the screenings and there are a lot of people there, I can tell, who don't know who Capote is; at the end, when the quote comes up about Capote's life after this period, I hear an audible reaction. Some people in the audience have forgotten that this is a real person; he's not famous enough to them to remember that he's a real person. And they see the quote at the end and they say, holy s---, this is a real person.

Slate: You've been in 40 or so movies, I think, and you've played what we might call happy or positive characters maybe five times. (Magnolia is the shining example.) Do you have a thing for playing unpleasant people?

Hoffman: Well, I think if you look at any actor who isn't just playing heroes, that's what their résumé looks like. There are characters in movies who I call "film characters." They don't exist in real life. They exist to play out a scenario. They can be in fantastic films, but they are not real characters; what happens to them is not lifelike. But ultimately if you're not the actor playing that hero, that "film character," then you're taking on other roles in other movies, and you're going to be playing characters with a slightly more realistic view of what life is like. Ultimately, all characters have some negative and positive energies. That's just how I see it. I didn't go out looking for negative characters; I went out looking for people who have a struggle and a fight to tackle. That's what interests me.

Slate: The film spends a lot of time on Capote's ultimate desire for Perry and Dick to be sentenced to death. Why do you think that Capote was so obsessed with having them die? Couldn't the book have worked without their death?

Hoffman: It is true he wanted them to die, yes. There are a lot of reasons he wanted them to die. Bennett did a good job letting you see that it was multilayered; you just saw a man in an incredible state of pain, and you think, "What the hell is happening to him?" And you start to theorize, in your own mind. He couldn't bear the burden of having them around anymore. I think that's it. The burden of having them around for five and a half years, of being responsible to them. Then there was the idea that if they were alive and the book came out, he would have to deal with their response to it. There would have been a litany of things he would have to deal with—people going to Perry and Dick for their take, what they thought, their anger at him. But the main reason was the gnawing sense that there needed to be an execution at the end of the book, for the reader. Perry and Dick's dying was a very personal thing for Capote, and it was very painful to him. I think he ultimately couldn't deal with the burden of having them around anymore, and he needed to know what was going to happen to them. He had to get out of the way and let justice take its course.

Slate: But of course, getting out of the way wasn't so simple; it involved turning his back on them, didn't it?

Hoffman: Right. He backed off. He didn't help with the lawyers.

Slate: Capote was both famously disciplined and dissipated. How did you go about figuring out how to portray this? It's obviously harder to represent a writer visually than it is to write about him or her; most films do it by just having a writer at her typewriter, tearing up drafts, or pacing around maniacally.

Hoffman: Well, it seemed to us that if you could actually see him at work in many different ways, ultimately that would suggest to you a lot of what you're saying, both the discipline and the dissipation. You see him alone thinking, you see him interviewing people, you see him watching, you see his different tactics, his manipulations—the movie is about that, about someone in that active state of creating. The least important aspect of that is him at the typewriter. That's what Danny, Bennett, and myself knew was true. It's the same with acting. There's a lot of creating that goes on that takes place before the film is actually being produced. And so in this film he is always in the state of watching someone, of creating something. So, when you do see him at his typewriter a couple of times it isn't tedious; you feel, I know why he is there. He has a s---load of material to get down on the page! And I know it, because I've seen him gathering it.

Slate: So far, Capote has met with tons of critical adulation. Do you think there is anything the movie failed at?

Hoffman: I don't think the movie failed at this, but I think there could always be more room for Perry and Truman's relationship. Again, I don't think the film failed at it—actually I think it did quite well—but their relationship was five and a half years of talking and visiting and writing to one another; there's a lot of terrain there. And we'd probably lose half of our viewership, but you could have put 45 more minutes capturing that, the relationship. I don't think this was a failure, and I say that out of respect to Bennett because I think he was very successful in getting all those things in the film very artfully, with great nuance—almost stroking you with this story. But there's always more you could put in, more you could get.

Meghan O'Rourke is Slate's culture editor.
Photograph of Philip Seymour Hoffman by Robyn Beck/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.





Publicado originalmente en www.slate.com

   
 

Rating: 4 - 1 voto(s).

   
_COMENTARIOS
No existen comentarios.
Comentario / Comment:
  atención: para realizar comentarios tienes que ser usuario registrado.
        

_HistÓrico_Cine

07-04-16_Una nueva IMAGINACIÓN
24-04-16_ The films of Nick Zedd
15-01-12_ Un arte de intervalos. El cine según Jacques Ranciére
15-01-12_ Lies and bonds
24-04-11_ Para una conjetura estética de la maldad
11-12-10_ JEAN-LUC GODARD * FILM SOCIALISME
16-11-10_ Botanica mutante y otras hierbas
21-11-10_ pre-position n. 3: ON
21-11-10_ Restrospectiva en corto
17-10-10_ 9 Postales desde el cine de Ciencia Ficción
03-10-10_ NOTHING LASTS FOREVER
19-04-10_ Alice Through The Lens
10-01-10_ SÉ LO QUE ES CUANDO LO VEO* breve intro a la imagen pornográfica
31-10-09_ Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera
17-09-09_ FILMINUTE
18-09-09_ Captain Celluloid vs the Film Pirates
13-09-09_ Lo no pornográfico
14-06-09_ The Manson Family
14-06-09_ Las paradojas del ARTE
17-09-09_ John Wisniewski interviews Jack Sargeant
24-05-09_Matar al padre
10-05-09_ Autista, bisexual, flaca, pequeña y peligrosa
19-04-09_ CONTROL
09-02-09_ The Archers Manifesto
15-12-08_ El destino del cine como arte * Jacques Rancière
02-01-09_ EL PERFUME, LA MÚSICA Y EL PORNO
26-10-08_ Películas extrañas
01-11-08_ La ética que Hollywood nos dejó
11-10-08_ VERTOV * El hombre y la cámara
18-09-09_ A Walk Into the Sea * Danny Williams and the Warhol Factory
20-09-08_ Derek Jarman * JUBILEE
18-09-09_ Los organos sin cuerpo de Hitchcock
20-07-08_ Stanley Kubrick's Boxes
22-07-08_ Jack Chambers * The hart of London
18-09-09_ 50 AÑOS CON "VÉRTIGO" 1958-2008 (I) * Intro 
15-06-08_ El estúpido ritmo de los demás
22-07-08_ LIQUID SKY ;-)
25-06-08_ TAKESHI KITANO * Master Class + El imprevisible (txt)
15-06-08_ El cine según Slavoj Zizek
15-06-08_ BLAST of SILENCE
06-06-08_ UNSEEN CINEMA
25-05-08_ Koji Wakamatsu
11-05-08_ Tulse Puper !¡ 1...2...3...
23-04-08_ Agitar, protestar, educar
27-04-08_ Leer en la oscuridad
27-04-08_ DIVINE TRASH
13-04-08_ Humildad sublime
24-03-08_ Stan Brakhage * Interview with Pip Chodorov
08-06-08_ The tao of Cristina Ricci
27-02-08_ Las películas de Philip K. Dick
17-03-08_ Crispin Glover * What it is? + The Big Problem (dou pack)
22-02-08_ Christina Ricci * Penelope
24-03-08_ Nobuo Takahashi: Godzilla, al revés
24-03-08_ CREENCIA Y PENSAMIENTO * ética y práctica del cine en la filosofía de Gilles Deleuze
02-03-08_ I'm fucking Matt Damon
24-03-08_ De la verosimilitud a la autenticidad * Atonement, un caso práctico
12-01-08_ BE KIND REWIND
19-12-07_ BitTorrent, A Boom To Independent Filmmakers
26-12-07_ Groupe MEDVEDKINE
02-12-07_ Ernie Gehr y el cine sin argumento
02-12-07_ Documental y Ficción, Masculino/Femenino
11-12-07_ El cinematógrafo como forma artística
30-11-07_ Chris Marker * Ensayo Fílmico ;-)
09-12-07_ Promesas del Este...
24-11-07_Still Life
16-11-07_ The five obstructions
01-01-08_ Montaje del desastre
26-09-07_ Por qué nos gusta tanto "El hombre de los ojos de Rayos X"
10-10-07_ Entrevista * Gyorgy Lukacs (va de cine)
16-09-07_ Entrevista* Orson Wells
25-09-07_Caotica Ana y la cosmogonia
25-09-07_Last minute
11-09-07_ Naomi Klein y Alfonso Cuaron
25-08-07_ Removiendo turbias raices con agua de primavera
10-05-08_ Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock 'N' Roll Generation Saved Hollywood
04-08-07_ "Euphoria", una historia sobre el amor brutal
03-08-07_ 28 osstias te daba yo
25-08-07_ The Pirate Bay Launches Bergmanbits, A Tribute to Ingmar Bergman
05-08-07_ Avant-Garde: Experimental Cinema of the 1920s and '30s
31-07-07_ Después de todo
23-07-07_ Raymond Salvatore Harmon: Secrets & Light
31-07-07_ Lo has visto ya todo, no hay nada más que ver ...
06-07-07_ Beat Takeshi, generación beat, no me digas nada -Takeshi's, Last Days, Carlos Pazos
26-06-07_ X men
26-06-07_ Wanderlust
29-05-07_ The evolution of snuff
23-04-08_ Fay Grim * Hal Hartley
30-05-07_ Shorts and Hal Hartley Interview
26-06-07_ Maya Deren * The complete films
26-08-07_ INLAND EMPIRE * El desierto de lo imaginario
01-01-08_ Two short films by David Lynch
30-03-07_ Grandes diálogos: Marathon Man
30-03-07_ La vida de los otros
30-03-07_ Soviet/Russian Parallel Cinema
09-04-07_ Sátántángo * Bela Tarr
18-03-07_ The fountain * Darren Aronofsky (2006)
14-03-07_ David Cronenberg and the cinema of the extreme (1997)
22-02-07_ The End * Christopher Mclaine
01-08-07_ Clint Talks
08-07-07_¿Qué es el acto de creación? * Gilles Deleuze 
16-02-07_ Akira Kurosawa * Rashomon
09-07-07_ Entrevista * Takeshi Kitano (BEAT TAkeshi)
11-02-07_ Frente a un diluvio de películas. Redescubrir a Kracauer
06-02-07_ Factory Blah
31-05-07_ Jean-Luc Godard por JLG
07-02-07_  Por un cine de exposición * Jean-Christophe Royoux
27-04-08_ Primer * The movie... [actualizado 25_03_08]

25-01-07_ This film is not yet rated
23-01-07_ Mishima: Yukoku - Rite of Love & Death
16-01-07_ NYSUFILMS
30-08-07_ Performance * the movie
08-01-07_ A propósito de "Volver"
07-01-07_ A Pack of Apocalypse. When? Now.
03-01-07_Introduction to "Avant-Garde Film"
03-01-07_ The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things
16-01-08_ Skidoo: Otto Preminger's Unreleased Classic
25-12-06_ Orson Welles: The one-man band
22-12-06_ Plan 9 From Outer Space * Ed Wood
22-12-06_ A Scanner Darkly * PKD
22-12-06_ F is for Fake + Almost true
20-12-06_ Searching for the wrong-eyed Jesus
20-12-06_ Los "vacíos" de Antonioni
10-12-06_ Tarnation * Subjetividades renovadas
24-11-06_ Devenir secular de la simultaneidad en el cine
28-11-06_ Iraq for sale, la nueva película de Robert Greenwald
14-11-06_ Nobody wants your film
01-11-06_A PSA on Piracy
26-10-06_Pequeña Miss Sunshine
22-10-06_Werner Schroeter * The Death of Maria Malibran
22-10-06_Sherlock Holmes y la mujer araña
26-10-06_A Scanner Darkly ****
18-10-06_Temporada de patos
17-10-06_Toshio Matsumoto * Experimental Film Works
08-10-06_Forbidden Zone
08-10-06_Old Joy * Kelly Reichardt
29-09-06_El momento de volver a partir
08-10-06_The Devil and Daniel Johnston
29-09-06_Cine por el morro en Barcelona
28-09-06_The Queen: an elegiac prophecy
19-09-06_Le Grand Bouffe 1973
19-09-06_La Dalia Negra Review: cagada y consenso
17-09-06_Lenny Bruce * Thank You, Mask Man
16-09-06_Paris forever and ever
13-09-06_Film as a Subversive Art: Amos Vogel and Cinema 16
11-09-06_The Cowboy and the Frenchman * David Lynch
08-09-06_If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horses Do?
16-09-06_Man Bites Dog director dies at 38
05-09-06_Spectres & Tribulation
05-09-06_The Fountain * Darren Aronofsky * Venecia
30-08-06_Spike lee * When The Levees Broke
03-09-06_Steal This Film
05-09-06_El coro que llevamos en la cabeza
27-09-09_ Legendary Epics Yarns and Fables: Stan Brakhage
16-04-08_ The Pervert's Guide To Cinema  [actualizado 25_03_08]
13-08-06_dotsub and IMPD
10-08-06_Primer
06-08-06_John Huston, el hombre que no quiso reinar
04-08-06_Going C.R.A.Z.Y.
28-07-06_‘Scoop’: Shades of Nick and Nora, With Woody Allen’s Shtick
22-07-06_I See Good Movies
01-07-06_El señor de la guerra
30-06-06_The Viagra Auteurs
28-06-06_Andy Warhol * A documentary by Kim Evans
28-06-06_The Films of Jack Goldstein
14-10-07_ Cinema of Transgression
08-07-07_¿Audiovisual?
08-06-06_The Net
07-06-06_Lev Manovich * What is Digital Cinema?
04-06-06_Michael Snow * Wavelength
05-06-06_Robert Rauschenberg * Linoleum
05-06-06_ Robert Morris & Stan VanDerBeek
05-06-06_ Gene Youngblood * Expanded Cinema
05-06-06_William S. Burroughs * The Cut-Ups
13-04-08_ The Weather Underground [updated 25_03_'08]
05-06-06_Francis Ford Coppola * The Junky’s Christmas
06-06-06_Alfred Leslie * The Last Clean Shirt
17-05-06_¿Por qué querrá Sam la cabeza de Al?
15-05-06_Agnes Varda: Black Panthers - Huey!
06-06-06_Alternative 3
04-08-06_Rosellini a los 100 * Decálogo de un insurrecto
04-05-06_El amor en los tiempos venideros * Codigo 46
04-05-06_Art is for pussies
21-04-06_A User's Guide to the TriBeCa Film Festival
02-04-06_Kim Ki-duk * El arco
29-03-06_The worst of the worst: 10 bottom films of 2005
27-03-06_A Filmmaking Robot
29-03-06_Horror Show
24-03-06_Young. Beautiful. Deadly revisited
20-03-06_Matthew Barney | The Cremaster Cycle
17-03-06_Thank you for Smoking
19-03-06_Anarchy in the U.K.
08-03-06_Pequeños consejos para cortometrajistas
07-03-06_Cine de ciencia ficción
06-03-06_Entrevista | Jeanne Moreau Actriz [EXP]
05-03-06_Mondovino * Agitación necesaria
05-03-06_Bush da nueva vida al cine político * Siriana
24-02-06_Transamérica / Amor de p/madre
18-02-06_La Mayor pelicula irlandesa: Film, de Samuel Beckett
07-02-06_El miedo al mono en v.o.
07-02-06_James Mangold
05-02-06_Lee Tamahori detenido por prostitución
03-02-06_Philip Seymour Hoffman
29-01-06_Sundance premia 'La ruta natural'
29-01-06_Lírica visual / UNSEEN CINEMA
23-01-06_Borrascas personales
20-01-06_Whither the DIY Auteurs of DV?
17-01-06_007 REGRESARÁ EN UN ASTON MARTIN
17-01-06_Goons of New York
16-01-06_El club de las olas
13-01-06_El lado oscuro de la épica
11-01-06_Coke Classic
11-01-06_La muerte, probablemente
09-01-06_Jon Stewart, Oscar Host
08-01-06_I Like to Watch
07-01-06_Fateless
06-01-06_Brokeback Mountain
23-12-05_A Revenger's Odyssey in Pursuit of Terrorists
12-12-05_Variety 100 años / 100 iconos del cine
06-12-05_Thinking Outside the Box Office / interview with Steven Soderbergh
03-12-05_ Flores Rotas: «Introducing» Ramón, El gato del milenio
01-12-05_Primer » Shane Carruth
08-06-05_Victor Erice » El sol del membrillo
06-06-05_Ivan Zulueta » Arrebato
06-06-05_Ridley Scott » El reino de los cielos (Vaya cruz)

_ORBITAL_Cine

_Servicios

test
Regístrate y disfruta de utilidades de administración y gestión de los contenidos de e-limbo*
Recibe las novedades en tu correo electronico.
El futuro está escrito en las estrellas... Horóscopo creado por J.G. Ballard y dedicado a todos vosotros.
Aplicaciones y herramientas necesarias para navegar y utilizar los contenidos del limbo electrónico e internet (www).
Artículos de e-limbo* en formato PDF preparados para viajar y aportar información allá donde estés. (y seguir salvando árboles)

_e-limbo * apoya

test

_Multimedia

_AUDIO >
Mais uma edição do podcast Música Livre para o Archivo Vivo, do Centro Cultural da Espanha/AECID. ...
_PODCAST >
Ante preguntas de oyentes y amigos, puedo responder ahora que Vía Límite continuará en Radio ...
_VIDEO >
SORPRESA¡!¡! An unreleased version of Talking Heads' "Psycho Killer" with Arthur Russell on cello
Optimizado: Firefox, Safari, Mozilla, Netscape, Konqueror, Explorer. Resolución óptima: 1024x768
ISSN: 1885-5229    Aviso Legal e-limbo.org*