Ripley's Game (2002)

well done but totally implausible

That is it in a nutshell. More than acting, beautiful filming and style were required to make a better movie. I kept thinking how the movie could have been improved. But the sheer implausibility of every component of the movie right up to the last scene in which the final murders occured prevent this movie from coming together in a meaningful way.
Consequently it is just a stream of events and characters not without interest but ultimately superficial. August 11, 2008

"Why did you do that....?"

"Ripley's Game" is terrifying, humorous, and possesses an infectious cancer that makes you sympathize deeply with John Malkovich's older Tom Ripley, a sociopathic aesthete who seems to appreciate the finest forms of art--classical music, painting, Italian symphonies--and then in the same hour garrote four people on a subway train with only one concern: whether or not his expensive Brazilian watch has broken.

In this film, Ripley has retired to a villa in Italy with a beautiful girlfriend he plans to marry. At times Malkovich clearly steps out of sociopathic form to add a little warmth to Ripley's charming and repulsive character: he hangs on every word she says, buys her a fabulous organ from the old country, and bakes her the finest bread he can find. All the while he is fixated on one unfortunate man, a middle-aged picture framer dying of cancer, who made the mistake of insulting Ripley at a dinner party while he was standing behind him. Jonathan Trevanny is the everyman, unremarkable except for his growing misfortune, with a newborn child and a loving wife adding to his well founded financial existential anxieties.

Ripley's thug friend Reeves (played with impeccable slime by Ray Winstone) hires Trevanny for the assassination of a Russian drugdealer.
Despite his obvious moral tribulations about the matter, he actually does it: when Ripley discovers this, he is dumbfounded. One gets the chilling impression that somehow, in some way, Ripley knew he was capable of it.
The pay off is 50,000 dollars and this enables Jonathan to ensure a future for his child.

Reeves then propositions Jonathan to garrote a Balkan mob boss on a train, but Ripley, for mysterious reasons, will not allow Jonathan to be used in this way. First of all he is incapable of it, and there also seems to be a demented paternal quality to their relationship. Malkovich is perfect as this soulless and yet somehow affectionate robot of a man--he voice is calm, warm, possessing full knowledge that he is without a conscience and desperately wanting to know why.

At one point he tells Jonathan flatly: "When I was younger, about your age, it troubled me badly that I lacked what you're displaying now: a conscience. It no longer does. I'm not afraid of witnesses or people because I don't feel that anyone's watching. Nothing momentous just happened on this train. The world is not any lesser now that these men are gone. A little less noise, a little less harm, perhaps, that's all."

The ending of the film is a gesture of self sacrifice on the part of Jonathan which may or may not change Tom Ripley: the ending of this twisted and somehow hilarious film is actually upbeat in a way. Ripley is able, perhaps for the only time in his life, to appreciate or witness that most unusual of human behavior: selflessness. This is one of the most drop dead funny films I have ever seen: Malkovich is the wittiest and most carefree sociopath in the history of film, as far as I can see. His dialogue is priceless. Ennio Morricone's score is gorgeous and sets the mood very well. A must see! July 1, 2008

A decent thriller that fails to live up to its potential...

When comparing `Ripley's Game' to Wim Wenders' `Der Amerikanische Freund' there are a few things the audience notices. First, Cavani's `Game' is a much glitzier, glossier piece than Wenders' `Freund'. The plot is less confusing, much easier to follow than Wenders' original (which had me asking all sorts of unanswered questions in the end) but in a downswing `Game' looses some of the unnerving terror that Wenders created with `Freund'. Despite not understanding what was going on at times, I never felt anything but on edge throughout `Der Amerikanische Freund', whereas with `Ripley's Game' my interest waned a tad in scenes.

Sadly, both films fail in one similar area; Tom Ripley. I don't know if maybe I've just been spoiled by Matt Damon's orgasmic portrayal of the twisted psychopath in the far superior `The Talented Mr. Ripley' but neither Hopper nor Malkovich have been able to impress me. Malkovich has a little more charm and polish than Hopper had, but he is far too brash for me to appreciate his madness (and I really need to read the novel because `The Talented Mr. Ripley' made it very clear that his interests were towards men, not women). Their concept of Ripley comes off more studied and clichéd, as if they took everything we think someone of their nature would be like and then just give it to us `textbook'. Damon was a stark contrast to this, giving us an awkward, gullible man who fell in love too fast and trusted too much and gave way to his insanely carnal desires at the expense of others. Malkovich and Hopper come off a little too confident. I know that Ripley is supposed to be older and wiser in this film (and `Der Amerikanische Freund' as well) but I can't help but feel negatively towards the depiction of him in the two films. Damon's character was ruthless in the end but he possessed this natural awkwardness that made him likable. I don't see any likable traits in Ripley in either of these films. Why anyone would warm up to him is beyond me.

When the film started the first thing I noticed was that Dougray Scott was in this film. What ever happened to this guy? He was charming in `Ever After' and domineering and sinister in `MI:2' and then he just disappeared. Here he is a bit of a let down, giving the audience a clichéd impression of grief and guilt. Bruno Ganz was brilliant in `Der Amerikanische Freund' and I wanted Scott to be as well. In fact it wasn't until the final scenes where I saw some real, honest emotion from his character (most notably while he sits in the car watching Ripley set another car ablaze).

The best thing about this movie, by far, is Ray Winstone. His performance is electric, commanding and dominating. He is an actor I am eternally smitten (his performance in `The Proposition' is the work of gods) and here he continues to prove me right about him. Winstone has this natural charm and charisma that draws you to him, even when he's playing scum. I can't help but he culled into his voice those beady eyes. As Reeves, he plays the gangster role with exquisite precision, creating a supporting character that is carries this film on its shoulders.

One thing I didn't enjoy was the omission of the subway murder scene that is so etched in my mind from `Der Amerikanische Freund'. This time the murder scene takes place in an insect exhibit and is short and bland. I remember standing in front of the TV during the subway scene in `Der Amerikanische Freund', watching Ganz walked aimlessly, following his victim, stalking him, for minutes that passed so slowly, so anxiously. That scene is flawless. It's not here and I found myself feeling empty after I realized that.

In the end `Ripley's Game' is a decent thriller that has some chills and a nice steady flow, but it never reaches the levels that both `Der Amerikanische Freund' and especially `The Talented Mr. Ripley' had achieved. Winstone is a gem of an actor and his performance makes this film worth watching. Malkovich is fine, as is Dougray, but neither of them match the brilliance of the actors that came before them (Damon and Ganz respectively). Give it a watch, especially if you are a fan of Highsmith and or the `Ripley' series. It is far from a bad film, it is just not a great one. May 9, 2008

It's good, but takes patience.

Often this film is criticized for its slow pacing and laborious character development. How is that? I enjoyed being able to watch these actors, especially John Malkovich, sink their teeth into the characters. One great payoff, if one is interested, is that it does not talk down to your intelligence and makes the film slightly more believable. It helps if you think you know a character. It is more of a film, rather than a skit, like so many of these Hollywood pictures turn into.

My only criticism would have been a more fulfilling end sequence, but, hey, maybe I am preconditioned to by-the-number endings.

Also, the dialog in this film is impeccable, as is John Malkovich's acting. Give it a shot. January 11, 2008

RIPLEY'S GAME never gathers enough steam to be totally absorbing

When a film is more interesting for it's stylish look and soundtrack,then something is missing! Having read the complete "Ripley" series, and then seeing the two films made based from the books, I still conclude that these films, and now particularly RIPLEY'S GAME just doesn't build up enough steam to propel this train down the tracks! It starts...it moves a little...we see some action,but we see very little character development.The book,I still feel, is rather so-so and I don't think that the movie fares any better.
The "sociopathic" Tom Ripley is now older and has been living in a Villa, is married to a talented harpsichordist,and has become rather complacent in the last three years,not fooling any one,no swindles,no murders.Ripley (John Malkovich) feels insulted at a gala one night by art framer Jonathan Trevanny.At this point,Reeves (Ray Winstone), an ex-partner in crime to Ripley, proposes that a "hit" needs to be made on a Russian mobster.Ripley hatches the plan to entice Jonathan, who is rapidly dying of leukemia,to do the murder for a total of $100,000.Jonathan (Dougray Scott) wrestles with the idea and relents to do his first killing.Jonathan, though,becomes involved up to his dying neck in more crimes for money and that is the crux of the story!
Now...though this sounds possibly interesting,it only mildly gets sparked.This film is like watching a barely lighted fire that is always in danger of expiring if something or someone does not rekindle the flame,The flame is barely relit and the movie creeps its way to an end with mild promise, but little to recommend a second viewing.I personally do not find that John Malkovich (who seemed to be replaying his Valmont from DANGEROUS LIAISONS,only with less effect) as the older Ripley has made this character compelling enough to jump from the pages to the screen like Matt Damon did in the original THE TALENTED MR.RIPLEY.Ripley is neither interesting enough to hate or sympathetic enough to be loved.He is a most difficult character,on both page and screen, to really hold my attention in this installment.
Dougray Scott, on the other hand, does more with his gaunt,leukemia-stricken Jonathan, as he is the real heart of both the book and the film.BUT,there is still a lot that is not clear about Jonathan's motivations to taking on the kill thrill.
This is a handsomely made film.It is pleasing to the eye, and the soundtrack by Ennio Morricone is amply satisfying, but all-in-all RIPLEY'S GAME should be played elsewhere.As Amazon states,and I agree, the film is "nebulous." December 9, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...