Hey, everyone. Capone in Chicago here. I'm not going to lie to you: I'm up to my nutsack in Chicago Film Festival screenings, interviews, you name it. And shortly, I'll be unleashing comprehensive reports and a bunch of cool interviews. The Festival is also my excuse for being a little lax on submitting my usual round of reviews for the last couple of weeks. But there was one film I did think warranted a special mention, a film that probably won't do well at the box office, which in no way justifies you not going to see it. And I'm glad to see a couple other reviews of this film on AICN. But here's my look at INFAMOUS...

It’s certainly not the first time in recent years that two films have been made about the same subject matter. United 93 and World Trade Center certainly prove that you can produce two movies about the same moment in time with strong results. Of course, a few years back, Deep Impact and Armageddon coming out in the same summer proved that you could make two shitty movies about the same thing as well. You can even make two killer films based on the exact same source material, as Dangerous Liaisons and Valmont proved. Usually the first released of the two films gets the most attention and makes the most money, and that’s not always the best thing. But I cannot remember a time when two biographical films did such an astute job covering the exact same time period in a person’s life with such remarkable results. Last year, Capote did a sensitive and disquieting job capturing Truman Capote’s life while researching and writing "In Cold Blood," a book that not only changed his life but also changed the face of nonfiction writing. The work rightfully earned its star Philip Seymour Hoffman an Oscar and the film much acclaim.

Almost a year to the date, we get INFAMOUS, which addresses the same key figures as CAPOTE in the same years, but does it better. And thank the moviemaking gods, we don’t have to pick which one we get to see. If you think you fulfilled your art film quota for the year with Capote, and don’t feel like seeing the same story again a year later, please reconsider. INFAMOUS is as different a film compared to CAPOTE as it is similar. It places Truman’s role in history and society a little more gracefully and accurately, and features a centerpiece performance by relative unknown Toby Jones that may actually make you forget Hoffman’s name for a few short hours.

More a stage star than movie star, Jones (maybe best known as the voice of Dobby the House Elf in HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS, but also featured in FINDING NEVERLAND, MRS. HENDERSON PRESENTS, and HBO’s ELIZABETH I) is a mighty force in a small package. This version of the story does a better job of showing us Capote’s place in the social circles of New York City prior to reading about the small-town Kansas murders that changed his life. He lunches and dines and drinks with Manhattan’s elite wives club (represented here by the likes of Hope David, Isabella Rossellini, Juliet Stevenson, Sigourney Weaver, and Gwyneth Paltrow as Peggy Lee). He is the king of collecting and distributing society gossip, so when he hears about the gruesome murders, he looks upon the story as a source of fresh entertainment for his friends.

He and Harper Lee (Sandra Bullock, who will NOT make you forget Catherine Keener’s rich take on the To Kill a Mockingbird author) travel to Kansas to mix and mingle with the isolated members of the community. Capote and Lee eventually to endear themselves to the guarded citizens thanks in large part to Truman’s endless stories about his associations with celebrities like Bogart and Brando. These tales particularly impress the local sheriff (Jeff Daniels) and his family. When the killers are caught, Truman is right there at the courthouse steps, and he is given unprecedented access to both men, particularly Perry Smith (here played by soon-to-be James Bond, Daniel Craig). Much will be made about a particular scene in INFAMOUS, in which Capote and Smith kiss in Smith’s jail cell. I have no idea whether this actually happened, but the scene adds such a new level of intimacy to their relationship that you start to understand how painful the killer's eventual death was for Truman.

Another improvement upon CAPOTE is a stronger focus on Truman’s writing style. He essentially birthed the idea that it was okay for a nonfiction writer to change a quote as long as the sentiment was left intact. In one sequence, we see Truman struggling to decide between five or six versions of the essentially the same statement from Perry. He picks the one that drives home the narrative drama and not the one that presents the most accurate wording.

I think Capote does a better job of showing the complete and utter depression that Truman sunk into after Perry was executed, but this takes nothing away from Jones’s astonishing performance, which is equally worthy of Oscar consideration. If this film had come out first, I think Jones would have stood an equal chance of winning a statue as Hoffman. Director Douglas McGrath (NICHOLAS NICKLEBY; EMMA) takes a remarkably similar approach to his visual style as Bennett Miller did with CAPOTE. The barren landscapes of Kansas, the vibrant New York nightclub scene, and the way Capote seemed to clash in some circles as easily as he fits right In with others.

INFAMOUS is at least as good as CAPOTE; I think better. And if you’re still struggling with the idea of seeing two versions of this captivating story, consider this like two equally riveting versions of a Shakespeare play (and no, I’m not comparing either of these films to Shakespeare). I’ve probably seen 10 stage and screen versions of HAMLET, but it never stops being a great experience each time. A great film is a great film, and a great story is a great story, no matter how many different ways you see or hear it. Give INFAMOUS its well-deserved chance.

Capone