Movie Review: Truman Capote's In Cold Blood

Two ex-cons break into a Kansas farm in 1959 and murder the family living there. Why? That’s what Truman Capote was asking when he decided to commit six years to following the case and published In Cold Blood. Capote’s work is considered the originator of the non-fiction novel and attempts to document the mindset of the perpetrators, the lives of the victims and the effect on their community.

Released in 1967, Richard Brooks’ (producer, director and screenplay) black and white movie version is considered to be a classic adaptation of the classic novel. The film takes on a documentary like feel and is reasonably true to the novel with the most notable changes being the lesser emphasis on the community and heightened focus on the two murders. In a way it’s ironic that the movie was released in the same year as Bonnie & Clyde. Treading on new ground at the time, the themes are much more commonplace in today’s movie industry. In Cold Blood was nominated for four Oscars: Best Director, Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography and Original Score.

The screenplay tracks the movements of two parolees, Perry Smith (Robert Blake) and Dick Hickock (Scott Wilson) both before and after the heinous, coldblooded murders. Their plan is to break into the Clutter family home, clean out the contents of a safe they’ve been told about and kill all potential witnesses. There’s no safe but they commit the murders anyway. On the run they’re pursued by a team led by inspector Alvin Dewey (John Forsythe). All the while Capote’s novel and Brooks’ screenplay try to explore the motives of the killers. We’re drawn into the psychology of each of these marauders and the third entity that seems to be their combined personalities, suggesting that they weren’t capable of such an act without each other. It’s chilling and eerie stuff as we briefly explore the better intentions of the perpetrators, their naivety and hear the comments of the families they left behind. Simultaneously we’re left in shock at their brutality and indifference to their actions. Wilson and Blake deliver fine performances and are excellent in their one-on-ones speaking as much in their tacit eye contact as they do in dialogue.

While Brooks’ screenplay is an extremely interesting and insightful biography and character study, it’s also a creative and artistic composition. It contains many golden moments of directorship. The opening montage is electrifying and gripping stuff. Mixed in with the opening credits we witness a flurry of fast paced short scenes. A stranger sits in the dark, faceless on a bus journey, finally revealing his face as he lights his cigarette. The camera closes in on the outside of the bus and zooming back out again reveals a seamless cut to a moving train. Quincy Jones’ score delivers tones of impending danger. It’s one of the best movie openings I can recall.

The movie effortlessly fades from real time to flashbacks while scene cuts are creatively intertwined. One man shaves, bends down, then returns upright to show a different man in a different scene. It’s almost magical. There’s a fantastic scene towards the end where Smith speaks sorrowfully about his past. As the rain beats against a nearby window, shadows cast upon his face create the illusion of tears. It looks like amazing trickery but according to the director it was completely unintentional. The black and white photography is a piece of art in itself and cinematographer Conrad Hall deserves great credit. He was nominated for an Oscar on this one but lost out to Bonnie and Clyde. It was one of ten nominations, 3 of which were wins. Modern audiences will recognize his efforts in American Beauty and Road to Perdition – a posthumous Oscar win for Hall.

This movie is 40 years old now and I could name at least a dozen movies that have since imitated its subject themes and style. However it has certainly stood the test of time, and is not only a pioneer for its genre but still among the greatest true crime movies ever made. My only complaint would be the last 30 minutes (it’s 134 minutes) where it seems to lose pace and seems to stand as a moral debate on the appropriateness of capital punishment. A reporter (a fictional character) is introduced, certainly used to reference Capote but this character seems to add very little purpose. His running commentary is at odds to everything we’ve seen before. I understood the idea of introducing this character but wasn’t the Life magazine cover of Truman Capote tribute enough? Still, just when I was believing the movie lacked pace, there’s nothing more convincing and chilling than its final shot.

Verdict: 4 ½ Stars Essential Viewing