Stylish but barely mediocre overall

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Tom Ripley is a young, pasty fellow with a knack for imitation (and accumulating skills) and little to no experience of the world outside his neck of the woods when a well-to-do older fellow approaches him about a son living it up in Italy on daddy's money who he wants to come home. Will Tom go over and persuade him to do so, for pay and expenses?Such is the setup to one of my favorite films and among Matt Damon's best, and arguably one of the best of the '90s (though it was released in the final week of that decade). Based on Patricia Highsmith's 1955 novel of the same name, the first in a quintet, it is the most faithful adaptation of two - the other being "Purple Noon." In this version Ripley, after falling in love with the young man's life and possibly the young man (Dickie), decides to use his various abilities (one of which is an aptitude for homicide) to dispatch him and appropriate his identity. Regardless of whether he loved or was merely infatuated with Dickie one thing about the apparently scrupleless titular character is clear: Ripley does not love himself; who he is, actually is, will not do. Perhaps 'becoming' someone else allows him some temporary relief. But it also opens the door to all sorts of problems, both legal and social - ultimately necessitating more murders.Can the creepy chameleon with a preference for the finer things ever be free of the law's long reach, or himself? Is Ripley incapable of love or is he only unable to not kill those he loves? This film is a superb character study, of an atypical, multifaceted sociopath on the loose in Europe (and with the skills to pay the bills - in someone else's handwriting). Featuring a solid supporting cast that includes Philip Seymour Hoffman, James Rebhorn, and Jude Law as a charisma-oozing priveleged type - and helmed by "The English Patient" director Anthony Minghella - "Ripley" is a thriller/drama that is a cut above. A mentally lingering minor masterpiece that revolves around a lonely rootless man who might be an empty husk that fills itself with clever tricks.

Off my back the musical backgrounds to "The Talented Mr. Ripley" is really ear-friendly thanks to the great composer Gabriel Yared. The score is very reminiscent to the classic scores from the old Alfred Hitchcock films that Bernard Hermann contributed to like "Vertigo", "North By Northwest", and the always crowd-pleasing "Psycho". The opening titles has that feeling like Hitchcock as the picture slowly materializes into a stream of different colours. However, the film falls flat in trying to be a modern-day Hitchcock film, because the Master of Suspense would never consider making something so disjointed and muddled.Under the direction of Anthony Minghella who directed the riveting ghost romance "Truly Madly Deeply" and the overlong and mundane "The English Patient", which won him an Oscar in hopes to repeat himself here as well being that this film is also within the 2 hour and 30 minute range. That's five times longer than Hitchcock's "North by Northwest" with the difference being that Hitchcock's film starts slow and the intensity builds up as the film progresses. Minghella's film fizzles as it goes along and ends without any kind of logic once the credits roll.Set in the 1950's, Matt Damon stars as Tom Ripley, a low-income musician who gets mistaken for a Princeton graduate. When approached by a wealthy shipbuilder Herbert Greenleaf (James Rebhorn), he's assigned to go to Italy to bring his son Dickie (Jude Law) back home. Dickie is enjoying the life there with his wife Marge Sherwood (Gwyneth Paltrow). Ripley get adjusted to this lifestyle and does everything he can to nurture it as much as possible. Damon and Paltrow have been good in many films, but here, they seem to be streaming along with very little complexity. Jude Law seems type-cast in roles he's played before like "In the Garden of Good and Evil" and "Wilde". The real standout performances are by Cate Blanchett and Philip Seymour Hoffman, but they're just fillers and it saddens me to see how underused they were.I went to see the film because I was fascinated by the wonderful novel it was based on by Patricia Highsmith who also is known for her book "Strangers on a Train". The movie looks good when wrapping up around the two hour mark, but instead we're forced down out throats with a unnecessary scene by dawning Ripley's homosexual urges which before then was only pondered upon. The gay subtext was only meant to be a mystery and should never have been revealed. This is just another fine line of Hollywood clichés of gay serial killers which to this point has become homophobic and inexcusable.On the positive side of this movie, it's great to see the legendary Walter Murch in charge of the sound design and the editing. He's done plenty of collaborations of some of the biggest films in cinema including "The Godfather Trilogy", "Apocalypse Now", and "The English Patient". His specialty is cutting a scene with its sound to follow and it proves effectively in this suspenseful drama. It's probably the best thing about this movie that's worthy of a second look.The first hour of the movie was incredible and I enjoyed it very well. Still I have my doubts if its highly recommendable. It could be to some extent, however I get better satisfaction watching classic suspense films like "North By Northwest" and the original incarnation of this film Rene Clement's "Purple Noon".

I have seen in the past years more than 500 movies. I just saw this movie, and I must admit that I never seen a movie like this. It affected me differently than other movies. most movies don't spend this much time in getting the viewer to know and feel connected to the characters. This movie spends an entire hour getting the viewer to know the characters before the main plot even begins.

Having said that, I've read a lot of the other reviews, and many seem to feel the characterization of Ripley in the book is superior to the film version. It sounds like the novel's Ripley was a more proactive kind of a guy: rather than waiting for things to happen to him, he went out and MADE them happen. That approach would seem to make more sense in this kind of drama. The Ripley of the film was almost inert. The only real effort he put into the story line was to learn something about jazz. Opportunistic in only the most passive of ways, he allowed events to wash over him like ocean waves and then only sprang into action when it was absolutely necessary to direct the events himself. This type of character rarely reaches significant levels of success in his chosen field, whether it's brain surgery or identity theft.I'll admit that I had my doubts about the plot from the start, right from the time Ripley "connected" with Greenleaf Senior over the Princeton jacket. I have a little experience with the "old boy" system and I find it almost impossible to believe that Ripley was able to convincingly present that he was ever at Princeton because I know the kinds of questions that always get asked when an alma mater is being discussed among fresh acquaintances.I'm one who didn't mind the length of the film, at least; it seemed to want to have a lot to say and I was fine with how long it took to try and tell it. I don't have much of an opinion on Matt Damon one way or the other, but he was nothing special here. Jude Law and Philip Seymour Hoffman turned in the best performances by far. The location shooting was beautiful.All in all, there was enough here to make me curious about reading the original novel someday, but the film itself is only average.