Capote tells one character in this film that people tend to make
assumptions about him - perhaps based on his distinctive dress, his
strange high-pitched voice, and his flamboyant manner. He says they
are almost always wrong.

The camera spends much of the film scrutinising Capote, trying to
comprehend him. The audience too is faced with its own assumptions,
and having these periodically undercut. The strength of this
cinematic portrait is that it never comes to a definitive
conclusion. Indeed, how could it, when Capote himself never fully
seems to reconcile the different facets of his personality: the
overwhelming egotism; the fascination with others; his ability to
believe his own fabrications; the kindnesses; the callous self-
absorption?

Cinema is often said to be the lesser art to literature, because it
cannot explicitly explore the internal machinery of the
personality. I think Capote is an example of how this so-called
weakness is in fact a strength. At its best, cinema can observe and
contextualise, and then leave the viewer to actively engage and come
to their own conclusions. Above all, it must obligate the viewer
to connect emotionally. The viewer cannot fail to be intrigued by
the contradictions in Capote; to perhaps understand and be repelled
by the narcissistic tendencies that underpin much of his character
and much of humanity; and to find a rich truth in the ambiguities.

Solutions do not always enlighten.