This post may contain affiliate links for books we recommend. Read the full disclosure here.
“Ripley’s Reviews” is an ongoing series where I will review every book in Patricia Highsmith’s “Ripley” Series, as well as multiple screen adaptations of the novels. I will post my reviews on the first Thursday of the month, and delve into the twisted mind of one Tom Ripley and all the various interpretations that he has come to life within.
TV Mini-Series: “Ripley” (2024)
We have come to the final “Ripliad” adaptation, in the form of the 2024 Miniseries “Ripley”. This was, interestingly enough, the thing that inspired me to do this entire blog series, as I saw it on my Netflix, started it, and then thought ‘huh….. I should really re-read the first book’. Which in turn turned into ‘Or MAYBE I should take on the ENTIRE series!’ So I turned off “Ripley”, and decided to save it. And about a year later, I was back, booting up this miniseries once more. “Ripley” stars a few people I am familiar with. The first is Andrew Scott, who I knew best from the movie “Pride” and the show “Sherlock”, who plays Tom Ripley. The next is Dakota Fanning, who plays Marge. I think the only thing I’ve seen her in is “The Runaways”, but she was solid in that. And finally we had Johnny Flynn as Dickie, who I had only seen in the 2020 version of “Emma” where he played Knightley. There was also Eliot Sumner playing Freddie, but I hadn’t seen them in anything before this. I went in with high hopes.
For the positives, I do have a fair amount of praise. The first is that this entire mini-series is brilliantly shot, and it captures both beauty and horror in a way that I found stunning. The black and white coloring makes things all the more stark, and there are scenes in this that took my breath away. In particular, the scene where Tom murders Dickie in the boat really stands out; it’s incredibly abrupt, it’s violent and jarring, and the way that it just keeps going through the murder itself and the way that Tom takes steps to cover it up were so unnerving I had to pause it a couple of times. We also get some beautiful shots of Italian cities, while also finding claustrophobia and lots of tension as Tom walks through various streets. This show takes its time with the story, lingering on its cinematography to set a scene and build tension.
And for the most part, I did enjoy the casting. I thought that Dakota Fanning as Marge was a great choice, and I really appreciated the way that this story presents her, not as a naive and incredibly kind love interest, but as someone who is a bit of a sour puss, but also immediately put off and suspicious of Tom when he just happens to re-enter her friend Dickie’s life by pure coincidence. Even when Tom ‘fesses up’, she isn’t sure, and I liked a more wary Marge in this story. I also thought that Andrew Scott was probably the most sinister Tom we have seen yet, with a cold calculating way about him as he ingratiates himself into Dickie’s life, and it feels as if he has made a decision about targeting and disposing of Dickie almost from the jump. Scott can play sinister, as we have seen in “Sherlock”, and in this he is a truly unnerving Ripley, deeply scary and cold. He is perhaps the most robotic of psychopaths that we have seen of a Ripley characterization, but I really enjoyed how much he scared me.
But, my biggest issue with this mini-series, as gorgeous as it is and as terrifying as Andrew Scott is and as perfect as Dakota Fanning is… Guys, I sincerely feel that Andrew Scott is a bit too old to play Ripley. And I feel that Johnny Flynn is too old to be playing Dickie (and I am saying this as someone who is only a little younger than he is). When Tom and Dickie are in their twenties, I am more inclined to buy Dickie’s devil may care privileged holidaying, and I am more inclined to believe him letting Ripley attach to him because of their supposed college connection. But when Dickie is in his late 30s, I just don’t buy his father not taking measures long before this moment. AND ON TOP OF THAT, we see Ripley running his small cons and schemes, but when it comes to bigger ones he loses his nerve pretty quickly, so I find it difficult to believe that he has been able to be this kind of con man for this long without being caught or without having to pivot off the path due to a lack of sustainability. And to almost add insult to injury, this adaptation felt not nearly as queer as I had hoped it would be. I fully recognize that Highsmith claimed that Ripley was never meant to be gay, but I was hoping that after the 1999 film there would be some kind of precedent to at least push it a little further that the strange quasi-sexual obsession that the Damon film had, and that the book had some undeniable hints at, with Ripley focusing a little too much on Dickie and his charismatic self and seeming to long to not just be him, but possess him. In this adaptation Dickie is kind of lackluster in most ways, and by taking out his dynamic personality we don’t get a captivating obsession from Ripley. It feels more like it’s just a momentary focus for the sake of the hunt, which isn’t BAD, per se. As i said, I find this version of Tom to be absolutely chilling. But without the obsession with Dickie feeling somewhat personal, it takes out a layer I had hoped it would be exploring and toying with, and it made it thud all the more.
So while it’s gorgeous and I enjoyed the interpretations of a few of the characters, overall “Ripley” had weird choices that kind of made it stumble for me. Next time I’m going to do a conclusion write up of my entire “Ripley” experience, and after mulling on it a bit I will be curious to see where this one ends up. I do recommend checking it out for the stunning visuals and the way that some of the scenes play out.
The Library Ladies 