Undescribable Perfection

Excellent but underrated film

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

If you want an adaptation of Patricia Highsmith's "Ripley's Game" in terms of fantasy and fictional characters, very romanticized and unlikely to be true with a photocopied Malkovich's acting already present in his last 100 movies, go see this film with a bourgeois popcorn in one hand and a pompous pseudo-intellectual hollywoodesque far-fetched compliment on the other.If you want the opposite, check out Wim Wender's 1977s masterpiece "Der Amerikanische Freund" (aka. "The American Friend") and delight yourself with the dramatic triangular acting of these extraordinary actors and one of Wim Wender's mentors: the young Bruno Ganz and Dennis Hopper plus a still ferocious Nicholas Ray. Sadly Nicholas Ray dies almost 2 years after but not before co-directing his last film "Lightning Over Water" with his friend Wim Wenders.If you haven't seen it, after you've done it and unless you are in denial, you'll seriously reconsider "Ripley's game".

Patricia Highsmith is one of the very best crime writers of the 20th century. Her psychological thrillers are gripping and readable, none more so than the five novels featuring amoral, unemotional, conscience-free American Tom Ripley, who comes from humble beginnings and who amasses wealth by committing crimes such as theft, embezzlement and forgery. The first book in the series - The Talented Mr Ripley - was successfully adapted for the cinema. This later film, which is based on the third book in the Ripley series, is nowhere near as good as that earlier one. It fails to live up to the novel and is disappointingly dull fare. Set in Italy (with a few scenes in Berlin), the story concerns the attempt by Ripley (John Malkovich) to kill two gangsters who are a threat to him and to his British partner in crime, Reeves (Ray Winstone). The gangsters are interfering in Reeves's shady and lucrative business interests and may be able to reveal information about Ripley's criminal past. Both men therefore persuade a young British aristocrat (played by Dougray Scott), who is working as a picture framer, who is dying of acute leukaemia and who desperately needs money to support his family, to assassinate the two gangsters. But matters spiral out of control."Ripley's Game" is most noteworthy for the excellent performance given by John Malkovich. He dominates the film totally and portrays Ripley's sinister, manipulative and slightly psychopathic tendencies to perfection. However, as good as Malkovich's performance is, it cannot rescue a film whose plot and direction are frequently pedestrian, bland and boring. This is a film that is - amazingly, given the subject matter - almost wholly lacking in suspense or tension and in coherent character description and development. It is mind-numbingly dull, so much so that I almost gave up on it on a number of occasions. I decided to stick with it in the hope that it might improve. It didn't. The final scenes are unconvincing and poorly directed (as is most of the rest of the film). The score, by Ennio Morricone, is excellent. But that and Malkovich's performance apart, there is little to write home about. If you haven't read the book on which this film is based, or any of the other books featuring Tom Ripley, I urge you to do so. They are excellent thrillers. But give this very disappointing film a miss. 4/10.

The talented Mr. Ripley is in retirement in Europre; his last job that he carried out before retirement is shown early in the movie when the very elegant, suave, etc. Mr. Ripley turns and commits a very foul crime that shows his inner ruthlessness. The purpose of this scene is to introduce his cohort in crime as well as remind the viewer what sort of man Mr. Ripley is and the people he deals with.Years past and Ripley is seemingly absorbed into proper society; though there are rumors about his past. Nonetheless life seems to be going well for Mr. Ripley; living in a fashionable Italian villa as well as being in love with a world class musician. Then, his former associate in crime arrives unexpectedly at the villa. As unwelcome as this associate is Ripley does not throw him out immediately; that would be too rude even in private life. The visit is, unfortunately, not a personal one. Rather, it is business. The associate has some problems in Berlin with the new Russian crime bosses. He needs to find somebody who will take out one of these bottom dwellers. Does Ripley know a good hit man for the job? Ripley mulls it over and determines that the best hit man for a job like this would be somebody who has never done this sort of stuff before. Can an innocent man be persuaded to do this? This is not an easy question in the movies or in real life. In any civilized society murder is condemned harshly. Even if the victim of a murder is a low life him/herself the crime is treated as murder. Are there any circumstances where killing is allowed? Yes, there are some killings allowed such as on a battlefield during war. But, that is state sanctioned. Shooting somebody in a mob type killing is hardly allowed- or is it?? Can it be justified? But, even if a "suitable" victim is found does that give anybody the right to shoot them?? And, even if the person is deemed "suitable" for elimination by some standard- will the killing end with this individual or will there be retaliation? And, if there is, who can one call for help?? Does the end justify the means? This movie asks the question of whether a non-criminal can be induced to commit murder. It also asks other questions; some of them quite disturbing to even contemplate. In a way it is a continuation of movies that go back to "The Man who Shot Liberty Valence"; movies that question what ordinary people can do in extraordinary circumstances.Realistically I doubt that a man such as Tom Ripley even exists. He seems as improbable as James Bond. Yet, James Bond was (supposedly) modeled on some real life individuals. Such a man as Tom Ripley may actually be out there. If so, he (or they) will probably resemble the character John Malkovich portrays. It is a very good portrayal of a very complex person.

Although I thought early on this flick would be somewhat mindless, I was surprised to find a gem of insight into human character. Ripley, of course, is rich and without conscience so we could easily believe. What in fact Ripley's game really is I am unsure unless we could presume he is Satan in disguise.The psychological abduction of the young father who it was said had a fatal disease, could have been rewritten I think to make the good vs. evil underpinning and irony stronger. Indeed, what did the young man have to lose if his disease was fatal. I suppose one could say, to do as he did, allowing manipulation by Ripley to do great evil, underscores what many soldiers know, to kill once difficult, often and many easy.The plot seemed illogical at times and rushed towards the end. Do you really think, will all these dead bodies, some have baked story about a robbery would explain her dead husband and the German Moffia thugs?The contrast between who Ripley was objectively, a deceptive murderer and thug verses the refined music lover and cultured swine, cannot be over looked.Murder is murder and blood is blood after all.The flick left me pondering some of the more dicey parts of human existence, despite its short comings.