|Page 5 of 70:||              |
|Index||698 reviews in total|
I, too, cannot understand what the critics and others saw in this movie. I
found it too long, too drawn out and overwhelmingly dull. Throughout, I
waited for some climactic scene, but there was none. The only saving grace
was the beautiful cinematic shots of Italy.
Save your money and use it for something else.
This movie left me wondering where my money went. I sat through the entire thing hoping that something would happen to make the movie entertaining, but all it did was have the same events happen over and over again with no resolution. It built up a lot of tension, but never releases it. I blame this solely on the screenwriter, because it was well directed, well acted, and the scenery and music were excellent, but the plot lacked. I haven't read the book, and probably never read it now. Even my friends (who like more dramatic movies than I do) were highly dissapointed. The trailer was very misleading in the fact that this movie is not suspenseful in the least as there is no real mystery to what is going on. I don't recommend this movie to anybody, instead go see "Man on the Moon" or something.
Duality -- the ability to be one person in a certain situation, and
in another -- is the underlying and pervading theme of "The Talented Mr.
Ripley." It is a theme that sparks the central conflict of the picture,
that influences each of the main character's decisions and actions. Each
character in the film is either pretending to be something else, or
directly to a superficial identity. The film unravels each of the
character's motivations for doing so, and in so doing strips away the
of reality we construct for ourselves. Characters either uncover the
explicit duality of their lives (Cate Blanchette's willingness to admit
she travels under another name), or have it uncovered for them (Tom
When each character is laid bare, when each character is most fully
themselves, when each character stops acting and pretending, they are
The film presents a main character who does his best to pursue another life -- but he cannot ultimately follow through with it. We are trapped by who we are, aren't we? Gwyneth tries to become Dickie's ideal woman, to avoid asking him to settle down, but she cannot -- she wants the home and the family. This is her undoing -- she weeps in the film, "I must have pressured him". Dickie can't escape the fact that he loves the nightlife -- that he strays, that his attention only lasts as long as the diversion. He says he will marry Gwyneth, but we know that his eye can never stop roaming. This is his undoing. Dickie's pal -- superficially polite, while snide and arrogant at the same time -- is much smarter than he appears, which leads to his undoing as well. When each of the characters lets their guard down and becomes who they are, it destroys them. Each of the characters has a tragic flaw that they try to ignore, or play to, a flaw which undoes the perfect lives they all pursue.
The ironic twist is that Tom Ripley is the catalyst for all of this -- yet, his tragic flaw is that he has no flaw. While each of the main characters has an identity they are running from, Ripley HAS no identity to speak of. He starts out pretending, and he pretends through the entire film. Who IS Tom Ripley? Even Tom himself wants to know. One would think that this would enable him to become the perfect actor -- when you paint on a blank canvas, one would think you can paint anything. But even Tom, blank as he is, distills down to someone -- even if it is a blank canvas, a "real nobody." And it is not only himself he is unsure of -- it is the entire world around him. Among his first lines in the film is a line uttered while listening to a jazz record -- he mumbles to himself, "Can't tell if it's a woman or a man." It is this uncertainty that informs the world he sees, and how he relates to it. Is Tom gay or straight? Is he evil or good? Even Tom doesn't know.
The film points out that we cannot run from our own darker half. We are all tempted to become someone else -- anyone who has been made fun of in school, who has longed for the life of the rich and famous, can identify with this The enemy is not without, it is within. It is this same duality which haunted and tormented so many of Hitchock's characters, most notably (but not exclusively) Norman Bates in "Psycho." "The Talented Mr. Ripley" is a worthy heir to that film classic in its ability to get the audience to sympathize and empathize with Tom. We feel his love for Dickie Greenleaf -- we feel his frustration at being shut out of his life -- we feel the awkwardness of being trapped in a situation that was never intended. As we watched Marion Crane's car pause in the swamp and waited breathlessly, perversely hoping it would sink and allow Norman's mother to get away with murder, so too we watch Tom Ripley descend into darkness, and when the cops arrive at his hotel, we wait breathlessly with Tom, hoping he will get away.
Duality is present within us all... and while we are taught "to thine own self be true," in this film it is only when we are true to ourselves, that true pain comes.
The Miramax Oscar hype is on and you are their pigeon!
I found the pacing of the movie to be way too slow. I was bored throughout the second half and was praying that the situation would PLEASE JUST UNRAVEL! (like we all knew it ultimately would)
This feeling was exacerbated by not following through with devices developed in the beginning of the movie. For example, early on, we learn of Mr. Ripley's incredible talents; however, he ultimately only puts a sliver of them to use. Paltro's confrontation through the door was begging for him to throw his voice but Ripley lies there silently.
In the end, I found this movie to be simply ordinary and not the deserving the credit that Miramax would have you believe it to deserve.
The first half of this movie was somewhat interesting. You sit and wait for something, anything, interesting to happen and this movie does not fulfill any expectations you may have. It is a slow-moving and dull 2 and 1/2 hours of waiting for the big bang. The beginning part was interesting...we delve into the life of Tom Ripley, a man who is so unsatisfied with being simply ordinary that he takes on a job that will offer him the chance of adventure. Matt Damon is good in the role as Tom. But we can never learn why he is the way he is or why the ending offered no sense of closure. Gwyneth Paltrow is okay as Marge but spends the last half of the movie in hysterics. Jude Law did a fine job as Dickie Greenleaf but that was in the first half of the movie (the better half). Overall, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" was a disappointment. Expecting thrills and a fast-paced film, what was seen was an overdrawn and dull film. Don't pay the $9. Wait until it comes on cable if you must see it.
Don't let the previews trick you like they did me. I went to this movie thinking geeky guy goes for beautiful girl. Rather it is nutty, unstable guy goes after beautiful girl's boyfriend. It is not so much this premise that disturbs me more than the trailers that make it look like a typical Damon-Paltrow fluff on a stick flick. I am more angry about being misled than the film itself. That said, Damon does a great job in the lead role of this boring film.
Possibly -- or the closest we may get to one. The film makes some brave
choices -- first, in its decision to avoid the stark colors of black and
white which so frequently affect how we see the main protagonist (don't
believe me? See the scene where Ripley and Peter are talking about
-- Peter is clad in black, Ripley in white). Ripley is not a sociopath or
psychopath, but simply a young man, unsure of himself (one of his first
lines addresses his inability to distinguish a jazz singer by his/her
voice), his sexuality, and his place in the world. He has made a hobby out
of impersonating others. He is caught in a situation he never intended to
be in, a situation that rapidly spirals out of control.
Additionally, the choice to make Ripley homosexual is certainly a brave one, especially by modern Hollywood standards. The waters of sexual attraction were never more muddied than they are in this film -- Matt Damon and Gwyneth Paltrow both love Jude Law, who loves neither. In the complicated relationship that develops between Paltrow and Damon, Damon is the mistress to Paltrow's wife-figure. This underscores the tension that develops between them as Damon tries to incorporate himself into Law's life (and identity). It makes for a fascinating dynamic that is never explored, since after the murder Paltrow has nothing to do except get more and more suspicious (a tough motivation to play). The presence of Cate Blanchette's character muddies waters even more -- Damon is no screaming queen, and there is a sense in which as he plays out Dickie's life he is allowed to become a virtual Jekyll and Hyde -- he is both a sophisticated, suave man about town, attracted by and to women, and a repressed, insecure, frustrated homosexual man running from his own conscience. Is he gay, or not? Is he a good kid simply drawn in to bad circumstances, or is he a murderer? By allowing this uncertainty to play itself out without a complete resolution at the end, the film dares to invite its audience to make up its own mind -- a brave standard by any measure in today's climate.
The theme of duality also pervades the film, much as it did in Hitchcock's work ("Psycho" and "Strangers on a Train" are two obvious examples). Shots are constantly framed awkwardly and intentionally -- props, buildings, even whole sides of the city mix together that don't fit. Dark and white contrast in the frame -- and each character is off-set by one another, no more so than Cate Blanchette and Gwyneth Paltrow. At one point Damon drives down a road populated with mirrors, which are often a visual clue in Hitchcock's films.
The film is finally Hitchockian in its central question -- "how far would you go to be someone else?" Anyone who was ever picked on in school -- anyone who has ever idolized the rich and famous -- can appreciate what Damon's character faces in the film. Hitchcock always peopled his films with characters with whom you could identify with -- ordinary people cast into extraordinary circumstances. The film puts a mirror up to us and asks, "how well do you know yourself?" By placing us in the position of Matt Damon's character, we are forced to ask, "while these things he commits are terrible, can you honestly say that you wouldn't/couldn't do these things if placed in the same position?" The film's ultimate question -- "how well do you know yourself?" -- is the most profound...and the one it leaves us asking.
Like the recent film "The Limey", "The Talented Mr. Ripley" took a good bit of time to digest and reflect on. Walking out of the theater with my Italian comrade Americus, I said right off the back, "I did not like it". But after a few days of taking it in, my original opinion is half-right. After a fascinating first half, the film loses steam for me until the last ten minutes. Regardless "The Talented Mr. Ripley" is a cerebral psychological tale, well executed and unlike most cookie cutter films cranked out by Hollywood today (with the possible exception of this year). It also claims an unbelievable performance by Jude Law, whose stock should sky rocket after this, and of course the beautiful landscape of my people, Italy. It is a gorgeous picture to the human eye.
"Ripley" is adapted from the novel by Patricia Highsmith, which first received film treatment in the 1960 French-Italian film, "Purple Noon". It is the late 1950's and Tom Ripley (Matt Damon taking a risk unlike his buddy Ben Affleck), is a young man with no clout or fortune. He is asked by shipping magnate Herbert Greenleaf (James Rebhorn) to go to Italy and bring back his son, Dickie (Jude Law), which Tom lies about knowing from Princeton. Once in Italy, Tom starts to soak up the ambiance of the rich and famous and attempts to take on the role of the upper crust. He works his way into the life of Dickie and his fiancee Marge Sherwood (Gwyneth Paltrow). But Tom's charade is starting to bore Dickie and is being question by those around him, and eventually tragedy strikes Dickie. Tom now take the opportunity to dig in deeper by passing himself off as Dickie to the point where there is no return back to ordinary Tom.
Director Anthony Minghella of the overrated and big yawn "The English Patient" strikes a chord this time around and creates some suspenseful moments and wonderful sexual ambivalence that rings so true in life as we know it, but may not want to admit. Some of his scenes are astonishing including the wonderful scene between Tom and Dickie in the bathroom, while Dickie is bathing. But this film belongs to Jude Law who sets the screen on fire in every scene. You can see his mind working a mile a minute and are never quite sure what he is thinking all the time. It is one of this year's best performances and deserves an Oscar nomination for supporting actor. Unfortunately Law exits the 2nd half of the picture, which then falls entirely on Matt Damon's shoulder. Without the interesting bond between Dickie and Tom, what is left in the second half of this film is a not so interesting murder mystery that only redeems itself in the last few minutes of the reel. Damon captures the shallowness and manipulative side of the character, and the desire to climb the social ladder, but what is missing is the sheer desperation that makes this character so tragic. Some of the other actors here do some very good work including Jack Davenport as Peter who falls for Tom, and Philip Seymour Hoffman as Dickie's obnoxious and creepy friend. The female roles are not as fully realized as their male counterparts and Paltrow and Blanchett probably signed on for the scenery. There is really nothing special about their performances. Jude Law is the one that shines here and Damon must be given credit for tackling a very difficult role.
"The Talented Mr. Ripley" is not for your average movie audience who needs to be spoon-feed everything. This is a highly intelligent and visually beautiful film that probably needs more than one viewing to really appreciate. Recommended. × × × out of 5.
Despite many flashes of visual style, this film misses opportunity after opportunity to be a truly Hitchcockian study of sociopathology. The scene in the lobby of the opera house, for example, directed by Hitchcock, would have been a genuine gasper. Other, more obvious gaffes: the film begins with narration, which never recurs (Where is Ripley when he is telling us this story? Why is he telling it? Why have only one line of this narration?); the skyline in the background of the opening scene is modern day. The film comes vividly to life in scenes where Ripley's buried emotions come to the fore -- in the boat, for example, or in the final scene -- but ultimately Matt Damon is not a strong enough actor to bring this fascinating character to life. Both he and Gwyneth Paltrow, in fact, seem startlingly amateurish alonside Jude Law, Cate Blanchet, and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, who are all superbly confident. The tendency of visual and sound effects to dominate modern movies here invades what could have been a wonderfully complex character study; instead it seems to be a film about photography and jazz.
This movie has a lot going for it. A great cast playing great characters
against a wonderful backdrop. However, the plot is limited and
The movie drags on, with just more of the same placing the viewer in a
I saw it on the second night it was out. About a quarter of the audience left before it was over (no joke) and a significant number of people cheered at the end, saying out loud 'Thank God it's over'. A real disappointment.
|Page 5 of 70:||              |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|