My video on the Netflix show Ripley is now uploaded! Link in the description (sad to say I didn't love it)

4:24 "A mix of Call my by your name and American Psycho." Had to think about it a little, was at first flabbergasted when I heard that, but yeah, kinda makes sense haha. Perhaps throw a little 'Catch Me If You Can' in there too! 😆

The movie definitely features my favorite Matt Damon performance! And, how can you go wrong with Cate Blanchet, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow and Phillip Seymour Hoffmann? It definitely was a stacked cast who all delivered. Minghella certainly knows how to get a good performance from his casts, if you watch any of his movies. And he certainly wrote a fantastic adaptation, based on what you said when comparing the book and movie. I do believe it to be the thinking person's serial killer movie. That being said, I had never read the book. I have been considering reading it (it is on my to-do book list), but now I will hold off for a rainy day, thank you, another good video!

This is one where I like both book and movie. Highsmith created a fascinating world for Tom Ripley to exist in and the movie does a good job at translating the book’s events with relative accuracy. And using the charisma of Matt Damon to play a sociopath like Tom Ripley was a smart one given his good boy image from “Good Will Hunting” 2 years earlier

Jude Law does a great impression of an American. I forgot that he was British at the end of the movie.

Agree: Matt definitely should have been nominated for an Oscar. I thought his performance here was as good if not better than his in Good Will Hunting.

The book is completely in Tom's perspective and it's not a stretch to see him as a unreliable narrator. So maybe the other characters weren't that gullible after all. His narration often talks about how other people are totally buying his act, how he sees through everyone and adjusts his body language accordingly and so on. Just has very unreliable narrator vibes to me. The aprupt ending of the book, where the inheritence just goes through, I really liked that. Stylisticly it perfectly conveys how baffled Tom must be. Also just as a piece of historical fiction I found the book very interesting. How travel and mail and banking worked back then. You can't really get the same vibe as a modern writer working with a bygone era, you can only really do that as a person back then writing about the now.

When Meredith sees Dickie (well, Tom) on the boat, there is mention of police searching for Miles' murderer and so Tom (as Dickie) says he's in hiding until they snuff out the murderer and that the trip/him being in hiding was orchestrated by police. So there was definitely police mentioned also and Meredith was aware of SOMETHING happening (Miles' murder), but I think in this movie the body of Dickie is never found (in contrast to Plein Soleil) so people just assume he went in hiding. So him randomly being on that boat with her actually makes perfect sense to her in that context (esp. With the whole 'traveling under R' Spiel).

Minghella said he had no interest in a story about a murderer who kills people and doesn't feel anything about it, which explains his massive changes to the characters. I think it's an improvement on the book, turning it from a simple character study about a man who is an animalistic, Bateman-esque empty quantity into an allegory for the cost of desperately trying and succeeding to be someone you're not, only to end up in the same place emotionally as where you started even if the content of your circumstances has changed. His lie to Meredith at the start of the film is an off-the-cuff expression of his desire to be someone other than himself (a working-class closeted homosexual in the 50s who is unable to live in the world of the classical arts he enjoys) and demonstrates his impulsive lack of control, a self-centredness that is his undoing. Almost as if he's testing the waters, after experiencing the opportunity lent to him by being mistaken for a Princeton graduate, to see what effect pretending to be someone of a higher class *intentionally* has on how he feels / how others feel about him / his environment and the situation generally. In addition, anyone who has known a pathological liar will know this sort of pointless on-the-spot lie is entirely true to life for such a sort of person. If I have an issue with the film it's that it would benefit from a few more mins of Tom's life in New York to nail down his situation at the start of the movie to make the contrast with Dickie's life clearer; the screenplay had 40 pages of New York lopped off the start, turning the beginning into this very choppy abridged set-up, before filming, so as to satisfy 90s cinema audiences who would have balked at making a 2 hr 15 min film even longer compared to today's regularly 3+ hr runtimes. I think this capitulation is a mistake and harms the pacing of the whole movie. Still, a rare case for me where the film outdoes the book. The humanity with which Minghella treats the emotional weight of violence and in particular the dignity with which he treats the character of Marge are the clearest examples of this. [EDIT: This is not to say I prefer the film because it fits my own sense of morals better. I mean rather that Minghella's depiction of the emotional weight of the violence is more true-to-life than the detached character study of the novel - and in my opinion, this requires a higher degree of artistic invention to effectively emulate and opens up the story to greater synthesis with its audience. This appears to be central to the work of another director, Martin McDonagh, though with a more expressive black humour added] Book and movie are trying to do quite different things, so perhaps it's unfair to compare them directly, yet I think the story the movie is interested in telling is more compelling than just a story of a bad person doing bad things with a lavish setting and little conflict. Highsmith's Ripley is a monster because he's nothing like us. Minghella's Ripley is a more terrifying monster because he's so much like so many of us, just with a malign trait or two ratcheted up a couple of notches more.

This is one of the best movie adaptations ever made. This is in my opinion Matt Damon's best career performance. He should of got an oscar nomination for this role. Also you should review The Two Faces of January movie which is another Patricia Highsmith book.

Yes, a very good movie indeed. Sort of forgotten, it seems. And YES on The English Patient! That book is almost hypnotic.

excellent review!

11:16 "Just for no particular reason he says he's Dickie Greenleaf." I agree. There was no reason whatsoever to say that he was Dickie, at that point, when just arriving in Italy. A little TOO convenient, plotwise, maybe? 🤔 Or perhaps this was Minghella's way of showing the audience he definitely was up to no good and had premeditated taking Dickie's place, eventually.

Such a great review and comparison, thank you. I’m with you - Matt should’ve won an Oscar for this. Just amazing.

I'm doing a coursework comparison between The Talented Mr. Ripley and A Streetcar Named Desire for English, and found this video very helpful, thank you!

That scene with the detective and Dickie's father: does that simply end with them thinking Dickie indeed took his life, or do they think he went in hiding somewhere and they just decided not to go look for him? That wasn't so clear imo. 😅

The English Patient I've only seen once, but remember loving it. It's also the main theme of one of Seinfeld's funniest episodes.

Another great review. It's been a few years since I've seen the film. But I do remember liking the score, the Mediterranean scenery. and Damon's chilling performance. I think Damon plays a conflicted killer very well. There's another film called Ripley's Game (2002) that has John Malkovich as Ripley. He's essentially playing an older version of Ripley that's far more calculating and devoid of guilt. I must have watched that film back in my college days. But, I do remember liking that film. Anyway I digress, take care.😀

What I don't get is how Peter remains so calm and unaware when he sees Tom kissing Meredith on the boat. Is that really just 'love is/makes blind' and he's just hurt but wants to glance over it? Also, he kills Peter. Wth does he do then? How does he dispose of the body?

The movie is SO good. Probably Damon's best performance. I haven't seen the sequel with John Malkovich, but it did not look very good.

See Purple noon!!! ;)

You should do Fallen by Lauren Kate vs its 2016 movie adaptation

can you do a Book Vs Movie for Call me by your name!.. thanks !!

Great job. I tried to read the book. But couldn't get into it. I liked the movie though.

Culminates 😁

2:01 2:01 🎉

❤❤❤❤❤

You should have compared the book to the movie Plein Soleil who is a better movie

Book is better. Damon looks nothing like Ripley. I walked out on the Damon movie and prefer Delon as Tom. I am rereading the books again which are great. Love all her books and her books are dark.

Clearly you have little literary background but as the Netflix series proves, everybody has an opinion.

25:30 I didnt really interpret that as Dickie being into him. Or stringing him along. On the contrary even, I feel Dickie was growing more and more uncomfortable with how infatuated Tom was with him, and he doesn't reciprocate at all. To me, he just looked perplexed when Tom posited joining in the bath, and grew suspicious, even more so when he catches him looking at him when he's getting dressed. Which is why he even says he's glad Tom is leaving and saying how he 'can be a leech' sometimes. Not once in the film, to me, at least, does Dickie (Jude law's Dickie that is 😅), come off as being remotely homo or bisexual, in juxtaposition to Tom and Peter who clearly give off that vibe. Dickie's just close with his male friends, sure, but to call that being homo or bisexual is quite the leap imo. 😊

You mixed up some of your information. When explaining the plot you kept mistakingly saying it was the book, when you meant the movie and vice versa. You seemed out of breath at points lol maybe slow down a little because It was very confusing.