A sangre fría

The true story of two young people who massacre a family of four for a few bucks. Thanks to the black-and-white camera, the story feels like a documentary. The recollection of one of the killers about how the crime happened is extremely compelling. The director avoids direct depictions of violence, making do with hints, but these themselves are frightening. Everything is crowned with the final execution scene. Well, it wasn’t very good for my soul. (24.08.2003)

The film could have come off as a cheap criticism of the society that drove the two men to carry out an act, it could have become a throwaway argument about the need for the ultimate punishment, or it could have been just a bland thriller about a heartless crime. However, if that were the case Richard Brooks would need not to direct it so shakily that his film would not be, like Capote's brilliant book, a "mere" non-participatory reconstruction with documentary authenticity, which also earns points in terms of the formal aspects (camera, editing). However, despite its apparent detachment, the film ultimately comes across as a pretty solid emotional wrench that evokes neither pity nor sympathy, but instead a cold sense of satisfaction, albeit one that is somewhat crippled. (05.04.2007)

Two years after publication of one of the most fundamental works of American literature came its movie adaptation. And Richard Brooks went at it from the right angle. He probably couldn’t have chosen better actors (he really hit the jackpot with Robert Blake) and in formal terms In Cold Blood is the epitome of perfection. Especially the camerawork and inventive cuts between scenes are delicious to watch. The problem is the running time. While I have no problems with the absolute beginning (up and including the scene before the crime itself) and the second half of the movie (as of gathering the “treasure" in the desert), I have problems with the footage in between. But it’s disturbing even after all these years. Although that is probably more due to the timelessness of Capote’s novel that to the movie itself. Which doesn’t mean at all that I would hesitate in recommending this movie to you. (10.04.2008)

A very sparingly made film that relies on the impactful reconstruction of a real, brutal crime. The black and white camera dispassionately captures the perpetrators' narrative, the director uses mere hints where others would exploit the offered possibilities and realistically depict violence to increase attractiveness. It's exactly the kind of film that lingers with the audience for a long time and forces them to contemplate on the subjects of morality, guilt, and punishment. Well cast and acted. Overall impression: 90%. (30.11.2008)

At first, it looks like a chilling, almost documentary thriller, where we will be thoroughly nauseated by the pair of main characters until the end. But it's even more cunning. They're more malicious. Not that I liked Perry or Dick, not that I stopped feeling a chill or that I did not believe their story, but over time I learned enough about these two that their actions became tragic in my eyes, not only for their victims, but for them as well. And the inevitable ending certainly didn't bring any satisfaction, on the contrary, it just underscored all that ugly, sad hopelessness. Brrr. (12.11.2023)

Someone wrote that, despite its thorough psychological level, the film makes almost national heroes of the murderers – I disagree. The main message, in my opinion, lies rather in the very naturalistic way in which we are gradually told that the murdering cold-blooded maniacs are actually quite ordinary people for the most part, and a decent person might feel comfortable dealing with them without noticing the dark stain on their souls. The narrative value is further enhanced by the believable actors and the minimalist construction of each scene, which leads to a very suspenseful, generationally attuned and unusually stylized tale for its time. The critics will be satisfied, the impartial fans of 60s cinema will be delighted, and the American contemporaries will be pissed off, because all this actually happened regularly and often with impunity in their youth. 85% (15.03.2014)

The murderers were cold-blooded and the system doesn't seem to bother with them, but that's not so important. I assume that there have been a greater number of similar cases. Murder for no reason, although it is true that there was a motive here. However, most of the motivation stemmed from the fact that the murderers were twisted in a certain way. It's hard to describe. They are real people, they act like real people, but at the same time, they throw everything away and do something incomprehensible. Why? There is probably only one answer to this question: Why not? It is difficult to find another one. The film is perfect in the sense that it presents the story absolutely raw, impartially, as it happened. We observe people, we observe their destinies, and we don't like either one. The death of the Clutters and the execution of the murderers. The second execution and its slow motion, the way the rope tightens, the body tenses up and then springs up, as if it were bungee jumping with a rope around the neck, is one of the most unpleasant scenes I have ever seen in a movie. By being truly the last scene, it only emphasizes the impression it has on the viewer. You will sit there stunned and surprised. Disgusted, but also with uncertain feelings. Did they truly deserve it? Everyone will find a slightly different answer. If there was to be only one film about someone killing someone else, it should be the film "In Cold Blood". Just as the murderers were cold-blooded and the people at the execution were cold-blooded, the film is cold-blooded as well. The black and white suits it perfectly. (19.11.2013)