RSS 2.0
Tom Ripley (John Malkovic), is an art dealer, among other things. He’s wealthy, successful in many ways, and resides in a small Italian village. But his past catches up with him. Reeves (Ray Winstone) a former accomplice, wants Ripley to help him get rid of some mafioso. He threatens to take Ripley down with him, if he’s exposed by the mobsters.
That day, Ripley attends his neighbor’s birthday party. Neighbour John (Dougray Scott) insults Ripley, who at first does nothing, but Ripley comes up with a cunning plan … a game.
Based on the third Ripley novel by Patricia Highsmith. This film captures most of the novels features. Sure the storyline deviates somewhat from the original. The books give us the grand tour of Ripleys mind, the film only gives us the fast and superficial version. But we do get to see what Ripley does, what kind of person he is. The scenario is convincing enough for an exciting film. We also get the eerie atmosphere surrounding Ripley. The character is a kind of Nihilist, but not entirely. He does have a drive. He just has a different morale and mentality than most people. To him life is a game. The more stylish the game can be played, the more fullfillment Ripley gets. Winning is not the most important factor. All values and emotions are subject to the game.
Although Malkovich portrays this misfit character brilliantly. You could also say he’s doing his evil sceaming scoundrel routine again. Who cares, it looks good. Winstone wasn’t an entirely convincing poor bugger. Suffered from misplaced over-acting at times. I say ‘misplaced’, because of course everything we see in this film is over-acting. But again, who cares. Ray Winstone was delightful as the obnoxious Reeves. Great performance. Chiara Caselli, having a supporting role as Ripley’s new wife Luisa, seemed to have had instructions to dissapear in the background and only hang around and be pretty at love interest moments. Which is a pity, judging by her filmography on imdb, she must be doing something right. Lena Heady’s strong performance, as Jonathan’s wife Sarah, really completes the film for me. The movie needs a display of emotions to contrast with the almost emotionless Ripley.
I’m curious about the book now. Especially because the film raises questions about a view of life like Ripley has. But it doesn’t answer any of them. The book seems to do just that. I liked the idea that having a different sense of Morale and Values, does not nescessarily need to be a bad thing.
Rated *** 1/2 (out of 5) ,Worthwile, also for Non-Malkovich fans.
reisneus (34 posts)5 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
“The Talented Mr. Ripley” is one of only two movies I turned off half way through. I rented the DVD, but hated every minute of it. I’m reluctant to go see another Ripley movie since… Is this one better avoided by people who, like me, didn’t like that movie?
Comment by weefselkweekje — Mon July 28, 2003 @ 8:36Hard to tell. I haven’t seen ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’. And I haven’t read any of the Ripley novels. I just knew about the character in the novels.
Comment by reisneus — Mon July 28, 2003 @ 23:46Very good review!
I thought this movie was very different from The Talented Mr. Ripley. This movie has a much more estranged feel to it; indeed, nihilistic. The detached playing of Malkovic comes across a rountinely, but serves the atmosphere well. A much as the story goed, there is less of it than in the first movie.
I also was confused about the Ripley-character. I thought I was sure to see Ripley as a self-repressed homosexual in the first fil, or at least someone who was very ambiguous about his sexuality. In this movie it was apparently sorted out, as Ripley is married to a woman. Is this another example of Hollywood’s uptight attitude towards depicting homosexuality? Is Ripley gay? Or did he feel something for John? There is a reference to Ripley being gay in this movie, just like Ray Winstone’s character (and a hint of the two having been lovers).
That could’ve done with some more clarity.
Comment by Paco — Wed May 26, 2004 @ 11:44Have to get that keyboard fixed… :S
Comment by Paco — Fri May 28, 2004 @ 0:16“The Talented Mr. Ripley” is the worst Ripley film and Matt Damon is the worst Ripley. Like every slick Hollywood version of a dark thriller, the filmmakers couldn’t resist the urge to “humanize” a character who’s interesting because of his lack of humanity. It’s 45 minutes too long, pretentious, and overproduced.
To me, the best Ripley film is “The American Friend,” also based on “Ripley’s Game,” and Dennis Hopper is my favorite Ripley. It’s not entirely faithful to the book, but I’ll take quality over fidelity any day, and it’s got better acting, writing, style, and atmosphere than any other film featuring the character. “Purple Noon,” the earlier version of “The Talented Mr. Ripley” with Alain Delon as Ripley, is also terrific, despite a cop-out ending.
“Ripley’s Game” with John Malkovich is very good and more faithful to the book, which I’m sure purists enjoy, but it feels too stale and lacking in style for me. Malkovich never seems to show more than one emotion, and he’s upstaged in every scene by Ray Winstone. Still, it manages to be entertaining enough, better than the sum of its parts.
Regarding the sexuality of Ripley, he’s only gay in the Matt Damon film. In the novels and other films, he’s technically bisexual, since he’s clearly attracted to both genders, but he can more accurately be described as asexual, since sex of any kind rarely interests him.
Comment by Craig D. — Thu April 22, 2010 @ 2:02