Truman Capote (2000), Penguin Books, 352 pages
What a fantastic book. It certainly deserves its status as the classic that it is. I simply could not put it down and found that it could as easily have been written last year as opposed to 40 odd years ago. Much has been written about the writing style of Capote already, and this was the first work of his that I have read. But it truly is a masterpiece and inspires one to try and be able to write such a quality 'non-fiction novel'.
Gerald Clarke (2005), Avalon Publishing Group, 635 pages
This is must have been an enormous undertaking for Clarke - Capote's life is literally 'larger than life'. It is a shame that the recent film of the same name focused merely on the time surrounding the publication of "In Cold Blood". The rest of his life is also fascinating. Clarke goes into great detail about all aspects of Capote's life and the stories of his adventures and dalliances with the rich and powerful in America make it a hard book to put down. I thoroughly recommend this book to anyone with even a passing interest in Truman Capote.
Let me say this right from the start - I loved this musical!! I am sure I am like most women my age in that I have seen the movie a number of times and know most of the lines and nuances off by heart. And thankfully the musical version of the film does not disappoint. The two leads are incredible and the dancing throughout is spectacular. The music is the real highlight and by the famous last scene as we wait for Baby to jump into Johnny's arms, people really were standing up singing along and cheering. It was a fabulous night out and I thoroughly recommend it, whether you have seen the film version or not.
JB Priestley (1946), Directed by Stephen Daldry
I was expecting big things from this play because it has won countless theatrical awards around the world. That may have been the problem - my expectations were very high. I was quite disappointed by the end but also thankful it was only a one act play. It did have relatively amazing sets and special effects (the constant mist was very good), but in terms of the actors involved, it was nothing too special. Even taking into account the predictability of the ending, the actors seemed to just be going through the motions - hysteria, shock, tantrums etc. It all became a little tedious as each of the central characters had their turn.
Salley Vickers (2006), Fourth Estate, 304 pages
At the heart of Salley Vickers new novel, The Other Side of You, are central questions for all of us – issues of love, salvation, forgiveness and redemption. Vickers’ fourth novel is a beautifully written tale which unfolds through the eyes of David, a psychiatrist who spends his time helping the ‘suicidally disposed’. David is a proponent for talking rather than medication and throughout the book we travel with David between London and Rome as he uses art, philosophy and poetry to understand the lives of his patients, and also to understand himself. David is nursing deep feelings of loss and guilt from a childhood tragedy that he has never managed to overcome, despite his tireless work to help others do so. Through his patient Elizabeth Cruikshank, David comes to understand both the depths of his own bereavement and unhappiness, whilst also helping Elizabeth to understand the value for her to continue with her own life. The novel delicately unveils that side of all of us which we are so reticent to share with others yet as David explains, it is this ‘invisible self’ which constitutes our real identity. Central to the story is the artwork of Caravaggio which is delicately presented by Vickers to demonstrate similar inadequacies and regrets which were shared by the Italian artist, and also to reveal how art can so often correspond with our own fears. In a spectacular case of life imitating art, throughout the book there is speculation that a particular Caravaggio painting which has been missing for to the art world for centuries, exists somewhere in France. Vickers herself was amazed when a mere two days after the novel went to print; the missing painting was discovered in the organ loft of a church in central France.
Anthony Hopkins (Burt Munro)
I really wanted to like this film, and also Anthony Hopkins performance, but try as I might, I just couldn't. I found the Burt character irritating to watch throughout most of the movie (he redeems himself when on the bike breaking records and is unable to converse). I think my problem stemmed from the start of the movie when I did not think his character was well developed. If you are like me, you start the movie with no knowledge about Burt Munro and the film introduces you to him as a virtual hermit fixing up an old bike in a dilapidated old shed. Yet all of a sudden there is a group of bikies out to pick a fight with him at a large birthday bash in his honour. I just could not reconcile that scene in my mind with the character we had just been introduced to. I thought Anthony Hopkins accent was a strange mix of Kiwi, Irish and even American and all in all, I really did not like the role although I suspect the real Burt Munro would have been much more likeable. The story itself was such an inspiring one that I think it could have been treated with much more skill so it is a shame that did not occur in this case.
Viggo Mortensen (Tom)
For some reason this performance reminded me of Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain - possibly because there was not copious amounts of dialogue yet Viggo still managed to convey the stress, panic and desperation of unfolding events on this characters life. I loved that the film started with such a sense of calm and ended on that note as well while the audience knows perfectly well that the violence in the title is just below the surface on both occasions. Viggo's character carries that calmness and facade throughout the movie, releasing it only in during periods of violence and sex. Whilst the subject matter could have been over the top, I think Viggo ensured that it was much deeper than that.
Maria Bello (Edie)
I really like Maria Bello (although I can't get her ER days out of my mind). I thought she did a good job (and she was very brave in the two graphic sex scenes) but I did not feel that her reaction to what has happening with her husband was convincing. Surely having 3 men shot dead on your front line would have caused a little more concern about staying in the home. Nevertheless, I thought she was great.
William Hurt (Richie)
I have never really liked William Hurt but I did like him in this film. It is not often you can laugh at a mob scene where 6 or so guys are killed, the mob boss locks himself out of his own house and he then gets shot in the forehead - but nevertheless, William Hurt manages to make it a really memorable and amusing scene.
Jonathan Rhys Meyers (Chris)
I thought Jonathan was wonderful in this role. He managed to nail the slide into obsession perfectly, while always maintaining a facade of respectability and pretence. He truly comes into his own in the final quarter of the film and while at times I felt the storyline surrounding the murders was bordering on melodrama, the character still managed to convince the audience (along with himself) that it was the only option he had. I thought he gave a very thought provoking and convincing performance.
Scarlett Johansson (Nola)
This was the best acting I have seen Scarlett do. She too descends into obsession and desperation, and she does so with sympathy from the audience for her predicament. She is beautiful and tragic and she manages to keep the tension in her performance throughout the film.
Matthew Goode (Tom) and Emily Mortimer (Chloe)
I have listed these two actors together because for me their performances were almost identical in the film. It is difficult to think of one without considering the other. They are merely unsuspecting puppets in the drama that is unfolding between Nola and Chris and they both perform that role very, very well.
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Truman Capote)
Having just finished reading Gerald Clarke's biography, Capote, as well as In Cold Blood, on both of which the film is based, I was most excited to see Hoffman's portrayal of Capote. As his Oscar win has shown, he was brilliant. Hoffman truly captures the essence of Capote - his mannerisms, his arrogance and his insecurities. I simply loved the film, although I wonder how much it will mean to people who do not know the surrounding history of Capote. His life was so incredibly amazing yet the film only covers the critical 6 years or so surrounding the publication of In Cold Blood. Regardless, Hoffman deserves his Oscar and the performance is outstanding.
Catherine Keener (Harper Lee)
I thought Catherine also did a stellar job in this film, but it was difficult for anyone to shine other than Hoffman.
Tom Cruise (Vincent)
It took me a while to get used to Tom playing a bad guy yet he did a fantastic job of it - by the end I was relieved when he dies. At times I kept thinking he was becoming the handsome, debonair hero in his other films - yet that was the beauty of this film. The ending of the movie is appropriate and I think generally it was one of Tom's finer movies.
Jamie Foxx (Max)
Jamie is clearly the star of the film. He is brilliant, engaging and thoroughly convincing. Despite some plot developments that stretch credibility, Jamie is superb and holds the film together. I wish the film had not developed the inevitable love interest storyline - unfortunately it meant that Jamie's character descended into a run of the mill action hero. Until that time, Max was just an everyman caught up in a situation out of his control.
Jada Pinkett Smith (Annie)
I loved Jada in her initial taxi scenes with Jamie. They were the strongest in the film and she did a marvellous job. As with Jamie Foxx, once the film included the love interest angle it became your average action flick with Jada playing the helpless woman who needs to be saved. I think she could have done much more.
Piper Perabo (Rachel)
I don't think I have seen Piper in anything previously and I wanted to like her in this film but it was just that she was altogether too bland and boring. The movie is weak for a number of reasons, not least because we don't really come to love the characters. That was certainly the case for Rachel. There was little complexity offered by Piper for her situation, and little compassion shown towards her father's many outbursts of honesty.
Lena Headey (Luce)
I had not seen Lena in anything previously either yet she was far more impressive in this film than Piper. Although Luce's character also lacked depth, Lena appeared to have more fun with the role and generally provided a little more substance.
Matthew Goode (Heck)
Gorgeous, handsome, dashing..... but also very boring in this film. He and Rachel are pefectly matched although by the end of the film I am sure he too is glad to see the back of her! I am looking forward to see Matthew in Match Point soon.
Anthony Head (Ned)
Anthony is the star of the film - his performance as the long suffering, unhappy father and husband is wonderful. I think he does a marvellous job in his role and I wish he had been on screen longer.
Nicole Kidman (Isabel / Samantha)
This movie was a first for me - I have never before fallen asleep in a Nicole Kidman movie. I am sorry, but the film is just utterly dreadful. Nicole is OK, but it is hard to look past how bad the plot, the lines and Will Ferrell are. I have no idea why Nicole would agree to do a film as stupid as this. But I suppose she did also agree to Practical Magic.
Will Ferrell (Jack / Darrin)
I was never a fan of Will Ferrell's slapstick style of humour before this film and I can assure you, I am definetely not know. I thought he was dreadful in this movie. His character was unlikeable, the lines he delivered were appalling and his acting made the whole film unbearable.
Shirley Maclaine (Iris /Endora)
Shirley was the only interesting part in this film. At least she seemed to know how stupid a film it was an made fun at it throughout. Thank goodness she was in the movie.
Michael Caine (Nigel)
He must be desperate to be paid to agree to go in such a film. Michael is such a fine actor - I actually felt sorry that he had to stoop to these kinds of roles. Fortunately he did a good job with what he was given but all in all, a real letdown.
Reese Witherspoon (Elizabeth)
I thought that poor old Reese was given a dud role in this film. The whole premise is so ridiculous that it is very hard to take her seriously. And compared to Mark Ruffalo, Reese seemed to pale in comparison. It was almost as though in every scene, and with every line, Reese knew how stupid this film was as well. And to think she just won an Oscar.....
Mark Ruffalo (David)
At least Mark's character thought the premise for this movie was as stupid as the audience. Perhaps that is what makes him endearing. It also helps that he looks fantastic! I think ultimately Mark benefitted from acting alongside Reese who just did not seem to want to be there.
Sarah Jessica Parker (Meredith)
Given Meredith is a fairly unlikeable character, Sarah Jessica seemed to do a pretty good job - I still did not like her by the end of the film. I think it was pretty tough for her to shine though since she was always going to be closely compared to her sister's character in the film (who you can not help but like). All in all, a fairly average and ultimately predictable role for Sarah Jessica.
Claire Danes (Julie)
It was a shame that there was not more of Claire Danes in this film. She was terrific and I think saved the movie from complete failure. I am sure however that she would never have fallen for her sister's fiancee - just too tacky.
Diane Keaton (Sybil)
I pretty much love Diane Keaton in any film she is in, even in such a cliched role as this one. But having the Sybil character die in the end (sorry for anyone who has not seen this film!) was just a little too predictable and ruined what would otherwise have been a fairly satisfactory ending.
Dermot Mulroney (Everett)
Boring, boring, boring. I am at a loss to write anything more than that.
Luke Wilson (Ben)
Luke benefitted from the same sort of thing that Claire Danes did - the contrasting character, in this case Everett, was so bland and boring that he could not help but look fantastic. And it helps that he is gorgeous!
