S01.E08: VIII NARCISSUS

[AnimeMania]

(Season Finale)

Tom reinvents himself again, creating an enviable life in Venice — as long as his lies hold.

Premiere Date: April 4, 2024      Netflix   

[magdalene]

Well, I binged all 8 episodes in a row - which is something I never do.

The actors should be too old for these characters but young men actually looked like men back then, not boys. And who would be churlish enough to complain about the caliber of talent they have at play here.

Obviously the story only works because it takes place before the advent of modern criminal sciences.  Not even the talented Mr.Ripley could get away with these murders nowadays.

They should film the other Ripley books. I'd watch it in a minute.

[SunnyBeBe]

I wasn’t wild about any of the main characters casting, but found it quite enjoyable nonetheless.  I wish the show had more discussion.  

[MollyB]

18 hours ago, magdalene said:

They should film the other Ripley books. I'd watch it in a minute.

Ripley's Game came out in 2002.  John Malkovich played Ripley and he nailed it as a sociopath.  Purple Noon came out in the 60's and is a fair adaptation.  Both are available on Prime. 

[DMK]

37 minutes ago, MollyB said:

John Malkovich played Ripley and he nailed it as a sociopath. 

I guess that explains Malkovich’s little cameo in this series.

[magdalene]

That cat stole all its scenes...

[cdnalor]

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

  I wonder how Ripley explained the wig and beard disguise to his butler and housekeeper.

The boatkeeper described Tom and Dickie as men in their thirties to the police, so I guess the characters were aged up for the miniseries.

The stark black and white imagery was beautiful and the story held my interest throughout the eight episodes, so bravo!

 

[Swartz]

   Loved the cat and the actor playing the inspector.  Loved the actor who played Dickie too. 

I thought the whole thing was superb!  I didn't want it to end

[DMK]

58 minutes ago, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

And for all the rigmarole about the boat, it being found bloody, burned and sunk, which is why they were presuming Tom dead, when the inspector interviewed Tom, he didn’t ask him about it. Wasn’t very good at his job, all things considered. 

[SnarkAttack]

14 hours ago, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

  I wonder how Ripley explained the wig and beard disguise to his butler and housekeeper.

The boatkeeper described Tom and Dickie as men in their thirties to the police, so I guess the characters were aged up for the miniseries.

The stark black and white imagery was beautiful and the story held my interest throughout the eight episodes, so bravo!

 

Agree.  When someone is missing or someone is a suspect, you're going to have photos to help jar people's memories, even in 1961.

I don't understand why Marge didn't pursue speaking to Dickie personally.  Even if she figured he was dumping her, she'd still be concerned for him if she didn't trust Tom.  She gave up so easily.

The sloppy clean up of the blood on the steps sure didn't seem Tom-like at all; he was very meticulous about everything else.  How he very publicly got Freddie out of the building was very risky and therefore unbelievable to me, even thought it was very late at night. 

I didn't know that the person that played Freddie is the non-binary offspring of Sting.  I looked it up because the last name is the same.

So, as someone said, if everyone believed Dickie was alive and then they found out Tom was alive, why wouldn't they pursue why the boat was sunk and burned and had blood?  Also, how Tom survived after going in the water with the boat coming at him and the anchor hitting him was unbelievable.

Dickie being pulled down in the water with the anchor attached was very terrifying.  

[MollyB]

15 hours ago, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

In the first episode I was wondering how Tom was going to pull off the passport photo when he looks absolutely nothing like Dickie.  In the movie he changes his hair, at least.  In the later episodes when the officer comes to bring Marge to Rome, he fiddles with her 'work' and yet didn't ask who it was in the picture of a young man.  Or Marge commenting to him as to who that was.  I would have thought, too, that the newspapers would have run at least a college or passport photo so people could contact the police if they saw him.  Or Dickie's father sending a photo to the police.  Then Det. Ravini would have realized early on 'Dickie' was not Dickie.  The police in this series come off as very lax in their investigations.  Ravini's counterpart in San Remo (?) seemed more interested in his croissant, which I guess is the equivalent of a donut in America to make a cop look lazy.

 

1 hour ago, SnarkAttack said:

why wouldn't they pursue why the boat was sunk and burned and had blood? 

because it could have been stolen from Dickie and Tom, who then didn't want to report the theft.  They (well, Tom, and he said Dickie was at the station) did leave town rather suddenly.

[DMK]

2 hours ago, MollyB said:

because it could have been stolen from Dickie and Tom, who then didn't want to report the theft.  They (well, Tom, and he said Dickie was at the station) did leave town rather suddenly.

Yeah, but the point is that the inspector didn’t even ask. He clearly wasn’t buying anything “Dickie” had told him but he didn’t follow up and ask Tom about it.

[Pi237]

12 hours ago, SnarkAttack said:

 

I didn't know that the person that played Freddie is the non-binary offspring of Sting.  I looked it up because the last name is the same.

 

They had a very interesting look, but I felt the acting was flat. I’m biased because Hoffman did a lot with that role, but from the first introduction where they had Freddie standing in shadow like a Marvel villain, they seemed too polished and unthreatening for the role. 
 

The actor who played Ripley killed it. Every time he showed disgust for someone it was a highlight.  I don’t think they did enough to show why Dickie ended up wanting him to stay. In the Jude Law/Matt Damon version, you felt a friendship growing. In this, they seemed to barely tolerate one another. 
 

Cat was the real star. Loved the tiny paw prints in the blood, little rascal.

[dancingdreamer]

We kept asking  for the detective,  do you have a photo.???  It did make for a glorious  ending though. 

Ripley  certainly  covered his tracks well, but when Marge found Dickies ring, we thought she'd  be found in the canal,  slippery moss being the end of her.

We thoroughly  enjoyed  it.

[Irlandesa]

I remember reading this was going to be in black and white and I thought it was going to be a waste considering where it was shot.  But as a fan of old black and white movies, I ended up loving it. It was beautifully shot and I loved how it played with depth and shadows. 

I go back and forth between loving the languid pace of this and wishing it had been trimmed up a bit.  I'm truly torn. I do know that I liked that the first four episodes were relatively short.  It made them so easy to binge.  The longer the episodes got, the harder it was, although I think I loved every minute of the finale.

3 hours ago, Pi237 said:

Cat was the real star. Loved the tiny paw prints in the blood, little rascal.

Lucio!  I think that was the only color in the series.

3 hours ago, Pi237 said:

 I don’t think they did enough to show why Dickie ended up wanting him to stay. In the Jude Law/Matt Damon version, you felt a friendship growing. In this, they seemed to barely tolerate one another. 

I imagine it was largely defiance for Dickie since his father sent Tom but I do think the character came into his own after Dickie's death. 

And I absolutely loved everything about his look in the finale. 

I am a little surprised Marge and the cop didn't take a moment to describe the person they saw in this apartment who called himself Dickie. 

[Kenz]

Stairs, lots of stairs. My husband even pointed out the stairs in the Picasso painting. Even though parts of this series were unbelievable, the way it was crafted, great acting of the main characters (even Dakota Fanning? I'm not quite sure about that role), and the cinematography was outstanding.

[DMK]

12 hours ago, Pi237 said:

They had a very interesting look, but I felt the acting was flat. I’m biased because Hoffman did a lot with that role, but from the first introduction where they had Freddie standing in shadow like a Marvel villain, they seemed too polished and unthreatening for the role. 

I actually liked Eliot Sumner as Freddie. The thing I didn’t buy is that Tom had such a hard time schlepping Freddie’s dead body around. Freddie just didn’t look very heavy.

[MollyB]

9 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

It was beautifully shot and I loved how it played with depth and shadows. 

I loved all the steps-I got an "I'm in an Escher drawing" vibe.  I did think it bold to show Caravaggio in black and white, but then it is all about the light, isn't it?  Well played.  The more I watched the more I liked the directing and filming choices.

[Alexander Pope]

I too wasn't sure about the slow pace at first, but ultimately it really won me over.  Partly because as many have pointed out, it was so beautifully shot. The architecture, the constant shots of sculpture (so expressive and mute), the stairs, the majestic and cold public spaces of train stations and banks, the many encounters with desk clerks (each of whom were compelling in their own right), were as important as the main characters.  This resonated for me with what it feels like to read Highsmith (I have been reading a lot of her recently)--her leads are often hiding in public, being pursued, and her narration is somehow both mundane and compelling at once--her lead characters have interiority but it's conveyed through a lot of seemingly banal detail.  This series really captured that IMO.

On the subject of Marge--I think she didn't try too hard to help them find Dickie because as the last couple episodes made clear, his tragedy was helping her literary reputation.  His death allowed her to make Vogue and get her book published.

It has really haunted me after finishing it--something I can say about few other shows.

Edited April 11 by Alexander Pope

[MamaMax]

On 4/9/2024 at 11:12 AM, DMK said:

I actually liked Eliot Sumner as Freddie. The thing I didn’t buy is that Tom had such a hard time schlepping Freddie’s dead body around. Freddie just didn’t look very heavy.

But-  pardon the expression- it was dead weight. Even a sleeping toddler gets really hard to carry after a while 

[DMK]

11 minutes ago, MamaMax said:

But-  pardon the expression- it was dead weight. Even a sleeping toddler gets really hard to carry after a while 

Fireman carry. Sling Freddie over the shoulder like a sack of potatoes.

[MamaMax]

https://www.vulture.com/article/ripley-easter-eggs-netflix-best-moments-shots.html

 

I thought you all might enjoy this! 

 

[Bannon]

There was a lot to like in this, but it ultimately required way, way, too much suspension of disbelief. I gave up when it tried to get me to buy that the inspector could be looking at Ripley, made up like Lon Chaney, Jr., in a Wolfman movie, and not see immediately that it was the same guy he saw in the Rome apartment. Good grief. I don't remember the movie being that ridiculous. Is that scene in the book?

[MaggieG]

I read an interview with the showrunner, can't remember where now, but he mentioned he cast Dakota Fanning because he needed someone strong to go against Ripley. So I was excited for the last episode thinking that Marge is going to figure out Tom's game and confront him. Only for her to just annoy him with her presence. 

When we first met Ravini, I thought this guy seems like a smart man, he can get to the bottom of this. Only for him to sit in a dark room with Tom in a wig and never figure out that he already interviewed this man.

I liked this show but there were a few moments of eyerolling. It was shot beautifully though.

[Jordan Baker]

I finished the last two episodes last night. I just loved this series. As others have mentioned, the cinematography was amazing. The story was gripping. And Andrew Scott. Just wow.

I liked the small touches, too. Tom (as Dickie) was dressed in beautiful, tailored clothing that looked effortly glamorous. When Tom (as Tom) changes to meet up with Marge at the cafe, he's back to looking a bit schlubby. 

I agree that Tom's attempt to fool Ravini by donning a wig (and darkening the room) was probably the weakest point of the series. I can overlook that, though, because the rest was so good.

I would love a sequel. Ravini vs. Ripley, Round 2?

[Sweet-tea]

On 4/7/2024 at 6:46 PM, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

This was frustrating to me. It seemed something simple that could have alleviated a lot of the confusion. The fact that he didn’t ask reminded me of sitcoms where the whole show is based on a stupid misunderstanding. Irritating and weak writing. 

I also don’t understand why the detective wouldn’t have caught on that Ripley was the same guy who said he was Greenleaf. Dark lighting and disguise aside, it wasn’t that convincing. His voice and mannerisms were the same, and the detective is trained to look for things like this. 

Also, what is Ripley going to do for money in England? He was cut off from the trust since Dickie supposedly died. 

I slogged through the whole show and there was no pay off. I was disappointed at the end. There were no heroes on here or people who were smart enough to root for because they saw through Ripley’s antics. Even the ending scene with the father telling Ripley he was a nice young man bothered me. 

Maybe it’s because the author of the book was a weirdo. I read a quote from her where she said she liked to see evil triumph over good or something like that. I’m paraphrasing. 

[Sweet-tea]

On 4/22/2024 at 12:45 AM, Bannon said:

There was a lot to like in this, but it ultimately required way, way, too much suspension of disbelief. I gave up when it tried to get me to buy that the inspector could be looking at Ripley, made up like Lon Chaney, Jr., in a Wolfman movie, and not see immediately that it was the same guy he saw in the Rome apartment. Good grief. I don't remember the movie being that ridiculous. Is that scene in the book?

Me too. This was absurd to me. The inspector was smarter than they made him seem here. And all the shots of the ashtray got to be too much for me. 

The news stories would've included a photo of the missing person, even in the 1960s. 

On 4/29/2024 at 9:06 AM, MaggieG said:

When we first met Ravini, I thought this guy seems like a smart man, he can get to the bottom of this. Only for him to sit in a dark room with Tom in a wig and never figure out that he already interviewed this man.

Yes. Ridiculous and frustrating for the viewer.

Edited May 5 by Sweet-tea

[DMK]

37 minutes ago, Sweet-tea said:

Also, what is Ripley going to do for money in England? He was cut off from the trust since Dickie supposedly died. 

Ripley sold Dickie’s boat. So he has the money from that. Plus, he cashed as much money from the trust that he could before Dickie’s death closed it out.

Edited May 4 by DMK

[Sweet-tea]

34 minutes ago, DMK said:

Ripley sold Dickie’s boat. So he has the money from that. Plus, he cashed as much money from the trust that he could before Dickie’s death closed it out.

Perhaps but it wouldn't be enough to sustain him long the lavish way he was living. The boat wasn't that impressive or expensive. And it looked like he was spending the money from the trust as fast as he was cashing it in. 

[shrewd.buddha]

On 5/4/2024 at 6:51 PM, Sweet-tea said:

I slogged through the whole show and there was no pay off. I was disappointed at the end. There were no heroes on here or people who were smart enough to root for because they saw through Ripley’s antics. Even the ending scene with the father telling Ripley he was a nice young man bothered me.

My exact feelings regarding the show.  It took a while to get through it all - the pacing and drawn out conversations made each episode feel like a two hour movie.
  I wondered if I had become an old softie who felt more sympathy for the victims instead of the charismatic criminal - but this Ripley was not charismatic. 
  At the end, I was still sad for Dickie, who no one cared enough about to fight for more answers about his alleged death.

On 4/29/2024 at 10:06 AM, MaggieG said:

It was shot beautifully though.

The cinematography and camera angles were impressive. But Italy looked like a ghost town (probably due to costs of trying to recreate a time period?).
  While I appreciate the showrunner's choice to be true to the locale, the requirement of reading  English subtitles did start to wear on us as the series went on. 

[Duke2801]

On 4/8/2024 at 10:49 PM, Pi237 said:

They had a very interesting look, but I felt the acting was flat. I’m biased because Hoffman did a lot with that role, but from the first introduction where they had Freddie standing in shadow like a Marvel villain, they seemed too polished and unthreatening for the role. 
 

The actor who played Ripley killed it. Every time he showed disgust for someone it was a highlight.  I don’t think they did enough to show why Dickie ended up wanting him to stay. In the Jude Law/Matt Damon version, you felt a friendship growing. In this, they seemed to barely tolerate one another. 
 

Cat was the real star. Loved the tiny paw prints in the blood, little rascal.

ITA about them not really showing any good reason that Dickie wanted Tom to stick around. It was odd, and lessened my enjoyment of the first few episodes.

As much as I like the actor playing him, I think the show got much better and more interesting once he was killed off. Andrew S is such a strong actor that he really carried the show on his own from that point on. 
 

 

[30 Helens]

I just finished binging this series and I'm disappointed at the relative lack of discussion here.

I have read the book and seen the movie with Matt Damon and Jude Law. I like this version more than both of those. To me, the plot was never the point. I don't care if events don't correspond with current science, or if tertiary characters don't respond the way we think they should. It's not about that. It's about getting a glimpse into one damaged mind, and identifying with his feelings of desperation and isolation.

I thought Andrew Scott did an amazing job of both internalizing and externalizing the emotions of Tom Ripley. Just a curl of the lip, and I could sense his disgust. A blink of the eye, and I could feel his panic. He played the role with subtlety, yet always gave just enough. I love Matt Damon, but his acting wasn't even in the same league. Others here have said they were disappointed in the portrayal of Dickie as compared to Jude Law's, but I think that's beside the point. Dickie doesn't matter-- Tom's reaction to Dickie matters. And Andrew Scott nails it. (The portrayal. Not Dickie, sadly for him.)

 Beyond the acting, I thought the cinematography was outstanding. Breathtaking, even. Shots were framed as works of art, lighted like the Caravaggio paintings that Tom adored. I'm sure the use of black-and-white photography turned off some viewers, but color photography simply would not have had the same impact. It was a tribute to noir film and a nod to expressionism all at once. I didn't care if I was just watching someone climb an endless flight of stairs, I was enthralled doing it.

I don't know if this adaptation was a ratings success, but I hope it did well enough that more Highsmith works will be considered. I would love to see more versions of the other Ripley books, and I would be especially interested in Steve Zaillian's take on Strangers on a Train. 

Bravo, brava to everyone involved. This one will stick with me for a long time.

[MollyB]

On 5/22/2024 at 10:56 PM, 30 Helens said:

I just finished binging this series and I'm disappointed at the relative lack of discussion here.

I think a lot of that stems from not being able to have booktalk.  This is a production that needs the comparison or reference to the book to understand what is going on.

I agree with you that this was a marvelous effort.  I loved the Carravaggio paintings, the winding stairs and the world-weary way Tom acted when he was by himself.  I think he channeled Highsmith very well.  I'm also not concerned about 'the science'.  I didn't believe Tom could carry a dead body down stairs and into a car in the book, or the movie and here.. well, bouncing a dead body down marble steps without getting caught.  Uh, no.  The boat scene was also a little far fetched (same in the book) but it did really add some tension.

Having read Strangers on a Train which is waaaay different than the Hitchcock version, I would love to see Zalliam & Co take it on.

[MicheleinPhilly]

On 5/23/2024 at 1:56 AM, 30 Helens said:

I don't know if this adaptation was a ratings success, but I hope it did well enough that more Highsmith works will be considered. I would love to see more versions of the other Ripley books, and I would be especially interested in Steve Zaillian's take on Strangers on a Train. 

Bravo, brava to everyone involved. This one will stick with me for a long time.

I've read that it has not been and was also VERY expensive to produce. I'm hoping it gets nominated for and wins a boatload of Emmys and other awards to convince Netflix to stick with it. But I'm not optimistic. 

[sugarbaker design]

On 5/27/2024 at 11:38 AM, MollyB said:

Having read Strangers on a Train which is waaaay different than the Hitchcock version, I would love to see Zalliam & Co take it on.

Highsmith loved going to dark places, while the Hitchcock version didn't.  I would love to see a true adaptation of SoaT.

On 5/28/2024 at 11:42 AM, MicheleinPhilly said:

I've read that it has not been and was also VERY expensive to produce. I'm hoping it gets nominated for and wins a boatload of Emmys and other awards to convince Netflix to stick with it. But I'm not optimistic. 

My contemporaries couldn't watch it for various reasons.  1.  Too slow!  2. B&W  3. Sub-titles.  Don't hate them, they're more of a Bridgerton crowd.

[chediavolo]

On 4/7/2024 at 7:46 PM, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

  I wonder how Ripley explained the wig and beard disguise to his butler and housekeeper.

The boatkeeper described Tom and Dickie as men in their thirties to the police, so I guess the characters were aged up for the miniseries.

The stark black and white imagery was beautiful and the story held my interest throughout the eight episodes, so bravo!

 

That’s what I came here to say ..this is absolutely unbelievable that no one asked for a photo. Even in the 60s a photo would’ve been put in the newspaper of the suspected murderer and the victim. Not to mention nobody noticed the voice on the phone was not that of the person that they have known, depending on the case,  for years or that they have been talking to just recently? And when he “disguised” himself when the detective came over. His voice, inflections,  and mannerisms were exactly the same. What a bunch of bullshit. This really took me out of a whole show. Dakota is a horrible actress. Ripley was sometimes incredibly cunning and the other half of the time a dumbass. 
I don’t know why they had the character Freddie being played by a female. I kept  thinking was this is one very pretty,  effeminate man. Not at all as is in the book or previous movies.  

[MollyB]

On 4/21/2024 at 10:45 PM, Bannon said:

There was a lot to like in this, but it ultimately required way, way, too much suspension of disbelief. I gave up when it tried to get me to buy that the inspector could be looking at Ripley, made up like Lon Chaney, Jr., in a Wolfman movie, and not see immediately that it was the same guy he saw in the Rome apartment. Good grief. I don't remember the movie being that ridiculous. Is that scene in the book?

I just finished reading the book and there is a scene when Rovinni meets with Tom and doesn't recognize him as the 'Dickie Greenleaf' that he interviewed after Freddie's murder.  It comes nearer the end when Herbert Greenleaf comes to Rome to find his son.  Tom pulls off the masquerade by putting on glasses, tearing a button off his coat to look shabby and generally acting shy and unsophisticated with the police.  He also dims the lights and has lost the weight he put on (to be more like Dickie),

[meep.meep]

I've not read the books but I kept saying "put on glasses!" when he was getting ready for the inspector.  Other parts of the episode I kept saying "put down the ashtray!"

I sure remember those horrible metal ice cube trays and how impossible it was to make them work!

I didn't make the connection between the Picasso and the stairs until the end.

Truly great cinematography and acting.  I think Fanning held her own and was much better than Paltrow.  Scott was superb.  Is Malkovic's character from the books?

[Sweet-tea]

On 6/17/2024 at 9:26 AM, sugarbaker design said:

Highsmith loved going to dark places, while the Hitchcock version didn't.  I would love to see a true adaptation of SoaT.

My contemporaries couldn't watch it for various reasons.  1.  Too slow!  2. B&W  3. Sub-titles.  Don't hate them, they're more of a Bridgerton crowd.

I was glad they used subtitles. One of my pet peeves is when they have characters in a foreign country speaking English with an accent. It always takes me out of the movie. I don't mind reading the subtitles. I would rather it be authentic. 

Having said that, I had several other issues with this series, which I described above. It held my interest enough for me to complete it, but it was seriously flawed IMO. 

[sugarbaker design]

12 minutes ago, Sweet-tea said:

I was glad they used subtitles. One of my pet peeves is when they have characters in a foreign country speaking English with an accent. It always takes me out of the movie. I don't mind reading the subtitles. I would rather it be authentic. 

Same here!

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 4/7/2024 at 8:49 PM, DMK said:

And for all the rigmarole about the boat, it being found bloody, burned and sunk, which is why they were presuming Tom dead, when the inspector interviewed Tom, he didn’t ask him about it. Wasn’t very good at his job, all things considered. 

 

On 4/8/2024 at 10:07 AM, SnarkAttack said:

So, as someone said, if everyone believed Dickie was alive and then they found out Tom was alive, why wouldn't they pursue why the boat was sunk and burned and had blood? 

Yes, and the investigator hired by Dickies' father raised the very important issue of where Tom's money came from (unlike Marge, he could follow up any claim about a bequest from Aunt Dot), but dropped it as soon as he heard that Dickie was supposedly gay.

On 4/7/2024 at 7:46 PM, cdnalor said:

Hard to believe the inspector never asked for a photo of Dickie to pass around when he was trying to catch up to him.

 

On 4/8/2024 at 10:07 AM, SnarkAttack said:

Agree.  When someone is missing or someone is a suspect, you're going to have photos to help jar people's memories, even in 1961.

 

On 4/8/2024 at 11:43 AM, MollyB said:

I would have thought, too, that the newspapers would have run at least a college or passport photo so people could contact the police if they saw him.  Or Dickie's father sending a photo to the police.

 

On 4/9/2024 at 12:56 AM, dancingdreamer said:

We kept asking  for the detective,  do you have a photo.???  It did make for a glorious  ending though. 

Tom was awfully lucky that none of the photographers following "Dickie" got a good shot of him.