S01.E01: I A HARD MAN TO FIND

[AnimeMania]

Tom Ripley's life of petty crime in New York City detours with an offer to bring a wealthy man's wayward son home from Europe.

Premiere Date: April 4, 2024      Netflix   

[MollyB]

I had forgotten how much older young men looked in the 50-60's.

Always been a Patricia Highsmith fan and I think this was a good take on her work.  The black and white photography and the locations used were perfect.  The non-emotional street smart villian vs the confident monied hero was a nice contrast, too.

 

[BusyOctober]

I loved the Matt Damon-Jude Law movie, and the book.  So glad to see this interpretation with Andrew “Hot Priest”  Scott.  I agree the black and white is beautifully done.    I also like the director’s camera angles.  All the sharp angles of the villa’s stairs plus the B& W make it feel “Hitchcock-ish”, but not in a derivative way. 
 

My only complaint is this version of Tom and Dickie look 10 years older than the  “post-grad” 20-something’s in the book. So believing Dickie is still running from his dad  (and his dad still chasing him) as a mid-30 something is a stretch.  But Johnny Flynn and Andrew Scott are making the most of their characters.

[QQQQ]

At first I thought Andrew Scott was too old to play Ripley. Then (as always happens) I became mesmerized by his performance, talent, and everything else that makes him so damn enthralling.

[SunnyBeBe]

I wish I liked the actor playing Ripley, but I don’t find him interesting at all.  I like the story, so I intend to watch it anyway.  I’d like to compare to the movie and commented on that thread.  

[Maximona]

19 hours ago, BusyOctober said:

My only complaint is this version of Tom and Dickie look 10 years older than the  “post-grad” 20-something’s in the book.

That's my complaint, too.

But Scott is terrific as Ripley.  Reminiscent somehow of Kevin Spacey in Usual Suspects.

[Pi237]

Scott’s subtle facial expressions where he’s showing obvious disgust but trying to hide it are genius.

not as into this Dickie. He doesn’t have that primal allure Jude Law had, but who does?

[Rickster]

I don’t remember the movie very well and never read the books. I thought the first episode very slow paced and way too much in love with its admittedly artful black and white photography. It seemed to me the photographic choices were driving the narrative rather than being in service to telling the story.

[Pi237]

The black and white is pretty, but it seems such a waste to film there and not use color. It also gave the films sleepy vibe which might be intentional, but ended up muting the emotions in many scenes. Guess I’m one of those unsophisticated types who finds B&W a bit boring. 

Edited April 8, 2024 by Pi237

[Sweet-tea]

On 4/8/2024 at 10:46 AM, Pi237 said:

The black and white is pretty, but it seems such a waste to film there and not use color. It also gave the films sleepy vibe which might be intentional, but ended up muting the emotions in many scenes. Guess I’m one of those unsophisticated types who finds B&W a bit boring. 

Agree. I remember being captivated by how beautiful the location was in the movie, the beautiful blue water and sky.  It made me want to go to Italy. The black and white doesn’t give the sense of luxury and beauty to me. So far I’m not big on the casting of either of the leads but I’ll keep watching. Perhaps they’ll grow on me. 

On 4/7/2024 at 10:40 PM, Pi237 said:

not as into this Dickie. He doesn’t have that primal allure Jude Law had, but who does?

I thought the same thing. I remember being mesmerized by Jude Law. 

[MaggieG]

On 4/17/2024 at 6:55 PM, Sweet-tea said:

Agree. I remember being captivated by how beautiful the location was in the movie, the beautiful blue water and sky.  It made me want to go to Italy. The black and white doesn’t give the sense of luxury and beauty to me. So far I’m not big on the casting of either of the leads but I’ll keep watching. Perhaps they’ll grow on me. 

I thought the same thing. I remember being mesmerized by Jude Law. 

Jude Law in his prime was really something else.

I've only seen the Matt Damon movie and never read the book. Does it ever get explained how Dickie's dad gets Tom's name? Clearly Tom and Dickie were never friends. Why would friends of his mention Tom's name?

[shrewd.buddha]

Started watching, but debating as to whether to continue. 
Considering the age of the actors, I had thought this was going to take place after the events of the first movie/book.  As is, it made me think of Yentl, (40-ish Streisand playing a 13 year-old, because..?)

The black&white is a choice, but the scenes in Italy are so stark and sparsely populated,  it feels like a Hitchcock horror movie. 

The biggest obstacle for me is that, unlike the Matt Damon movie, I feel no sympathy for this Tom Ripley.  This Ripley gives off a stalker/sociopath vibe. Not sure if that is intentional, but all my sympathies are with his unwitting victims. 

Edited April 22, 2024 by shrewd.buddha

[Ohiopirate02]

3 hours ago, shrewd.buddha said:

The biggest obstacle for me is that, unlike the Matt Damon movie, I feel no sympathy for this Tom Ripley.  This Ripley gives off a stalker/sociopath vibe. Not sure if that is intentional, but all my sympathies are with his unwitting victims. 

Are we supposed to feel sympathy for Tom Ripley?  I did not get the impression that the creators of this expect us to.  Tom is a criminal, and we see that in the first episode.  He's committing mail fraud before conning the senior Greenleafs for an all-expenses paid trip to Italy.  And I'm not getting any "eat the rich" commentary out of the writing, directing or acting though I am not too concerned with Dickie's wellbeing.  But, Dickie is a archetypical character that I normally despise, the rich dilettante.  And I am finding Johnny Flynn to be an effective dilettante.  Him being in his late 30s makes the character work.  I don't find the actors and characters being older a minus here.  Aging them up also gives insight into why Tom is as desperate as he is.  

[Sweet-tea]

A big issue to me is that the Dickie character isn't nearly as compelling and charismatic as he was played by Jude Law in the movie. It was easier for me to understand why Ripley was so taken by him in the film, because Jude Law was intoxicating and really sexy. I don't get that sense from Johnny Flynn. He's attractive but kind of vanilla. He does give off the casual confidence of someone wealthy and privileged, so I'll give him that. But there isn't any chemistry between Dickie and Ripley as there was in the movie.

Also, Dickie gets killed off too early, and then we're just left with Ripley. I don't think he's interesting enough alone to carry the show, at least not Andrew Scott's portrayal. 

However, Scott does do a good job of showing what a sociopath and/or psychopath Ripley is in his reactions to others, the forced laughter, feigned responses and expressions, etc. 

One thing I didn't like about the film was it was too long. I remember leaving thinking it should've been 30 minutes shorter. It dragged at the end. I've seen this a lot in movies. They could've been great if they had been edited. I've wondered if it's the director's ego. 

Edited April 22, 2024 by Sweet-tea