User reviews

Although an utterly engrossing and fascinating story, what is so memorable about this is how it looks. Over the years films and TV shows have often tried to be arty, frequently resulting in pompous and cringy pretentiousness. Without wanting to sound pretentious myself, this is the truest most beautiful piece of art I've seen for many a year. It gives you that same awe inspiring feeling of amazement as when you walk into St Vitus Cathedral or see the Taj Mahal for the first time.

This is as close to perfection as you can get but to be critical and needlessly picky, I suppose it could be said that it feels a little slow at times. Audiences used to fast moving, all-action dramas might not appreciate this as much as some of us. That pace which gradually ramps up is necessary. It allows you not just to get to know Ripley (played brilliantly by Andrew Scott) but to get to know exactly how he feels and what he's thinking. The genius of this production is that we find ourselves rooting for Ripley, a thoroughly detestable human being. He's got no redeeming features whatsoever yet as much as we grow to passionately detest him, we find ourselves hoping against hope that he's going to get away with it all. It's so exceptionally well written that we're taken on the journey with him and all of his emotional experiences and anxieties.

Is it right to enjoy such unpleasantness?

Andrew Scott gives a deeply neurotic and disturbing impression of one of the most beloved psychopaths in movie history. He's a great actor and he knows exactly what he's doing, sharp, precise, intense, on top of his acting skills.

Zaillian stretches the story out here, (sometimes a little bit too much in the last three episodes), taking 8 hours, compared to shorter former versions. I must say I like all versions, because Highsmith's original story is of genius quality, and it allows to open a lot of doors to different interpretations. I loved Alain Delon in the Rene Clement classic, as well as Matt Damon in the luscious Minghella version, but comparing the different interpretations in detail would take to long.

About this one: Yes, I loved that it was shot in atmospheric black and white (fantastic cinematography, every frame a piece of art!), I loved that this version was slow, I loved that it was so dark, I loved the sardonic humour.

I could have easily given this version 10 stars, but, I am sorry to say, the characterization of Freddie Miles didn't work for me here.

Black and white never looked so beautiful. I doubt even early 1960s Italy was this beautiful. This was the most visually stunning project I have seen in decades.

The performances were excellent as well as the direction. The writing was a bit drawn out. This really could have been two hours shorter, but you really don't mind it.

If Netflix could come up with something half this good on a semi monthly basis they'd be in the black again. This wasn't just visually appealing it was actually mature and reasonably cerebral. Miles above their usual offerings.

Warning: If you watch this, you will become addicted.

The cat saw it all, the looks exchanged between him and Ripley were unbelievable. Such Cinema Noir. 'Ripley" is a masterclass in tension, intrigue, and psychological depth. From its captivating performances to its meticulously crafted plot twists, each episode leaves you craving more. With lush cinematography and a haunting score, it's a mesmerizing journey into the complexities of identity.

I just loved it all, the B&W, the acting, the adaptation, directing and soundtracks.

I will watch some more work of the director for sure. Well done to all especially Lucio .

I definitely recommend this to everyone.

All eyes are on the "talented" Thomas Ripley, from the gargoyles and statues to that wonderful cat in his hotel. Shot in such a way that you feel you are there, you notice all the supporting pieces (and sounds), like the heavy glass ashtray, the creaky old lift and newspaper kiosks that set the stage and mood of mid-century Italy.

I don't know when I have ever watched such a gorgeous production, and the intrigue is through the roof in this one. Not sure Matt Damon's performance in the earlier version can be topped, but Andrew Scott is a close second. Patience is required, because it is a long series but ultimately rewarding.

I was hoping the scenes in Italy would be in color, because... Italy, come on! But I soon accepted the black and white format and now I don't think of it any other way.

Bravo for a series actually worth watching on Netflix that was made for adults!

In my mind, Alain Delon in Rene Clement's 1960 "Purple Noon" was the definitive Tom Ripley. Beautiful and totally amoral. Anthony Minghella's 1999 "The Talented Mr Ripley" had a bland but thoughtful Tom Ripley who felt and suffered. Minghella had a superb script, Gwyneth Paltrow, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Cate Blanchett playing riveting, unforgettable characters. There was also John Malcovich in a Liliana Cavani version, and although I've seen it, I don''t remember it, isn't that terrible? And the Wim Wenders version with Dennis Hopper doesn't count, good film, but it doesn't count as a version of Patricia Highsmith's novel. Now this. Ripley, the series. Hours long, in black and white. My first reaction was to rejected it but the truth is that I finish seeing it over a week ago and stayed with me, I can't shake it off. Why I wonder. And the reason is very simple. Steven Zaillian's version is truly wonderful. He has de-glamorized it. The whole thing. The story, the characters. Oh the characters. I was so used to see beautiful people playing them, in gloriously glamorous locations. This version is stark and Andrew Scott is like a replicant. No emotions, not even a hint of them. Invisible. As a consequence we do all the work. We gasp or look away. He just goes on. I know I'm going to see Ripley again, maybe not tomorrow but soon. I suspect you will too.

After years of using IMDB without an account after watching Ripley I had to leave a review. This is simply an excellent adaptation by Netflix and stand out performance by very talented Andrew Scott. Maurizio Lombardi dominates the scenes with his performance as inspector Ravini and his style of interrogations reminds my of Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds. The details in each scene and continuity across the episodes makes for a great story. Characters who make small observations eg hotel staff are often leveraged later in the story and no character is irrelevant. Dakota Fanning and Johnny Flynn are both fantastic in this show. The story has been told and used many times however Ripley brings the story to the masses and it is still enjoyable for those who know the story so pause your views on the comparisons and enjoy this excellent adaptation.

I loved the 'Talented Mr Ripley' version, however, have enjoyed this just as much in a different way. I liked the fact that it didn't just try to copy the last version. I was a bit taken a back at the older Tom Ripley in this version but just decided that a longer time period had passed and got used to it.

I thought the actor playing Tom was fabulous and also the different Marge was streets better than Gwyneth Paltrow whom I thought was the big weakness in the previous version.

The black and white worked so well with this, more sinister, and moody version. Whilst the colour of the last version worked with the 'Talented' version which portrayed a much more extraverted and upbeat Dickie.

The negative element for me this time was Dickie. There seemed to be nothing to like about him and he lacked any charisma at all. He was a bit wooden and sexless to be honest. Last time, you felt that Tom had fallen so in love with the Jude Law version that he could not bear to be rejected by him or live without him. This time, I just felt that Tom wanted to take over his lifestyle but had no feelings for him. So, I think this version has fewer layers to it and something was missing.

Still, you just need to accept that this is a completely different version, and it is very watchable and intriguing. Certainly, the actor playing Tom IS the film. I think worth it just for his acting.

This Netflix series had the most sumptuous cinematography I've seen in a while. Nearly every shot was a work of art, a moment captured in time, a beautiful and sinister view into this retelling of the story of psychopath Tom Ripley. This version takes its time to unfold the story, and Andrew Scott is the perfect actor for the part. Having just seen him in quite a different role in "All of Us Strangers", I was reminded what a versatile and compelling actor he is (and of course great in "Fleabag").

While some have called the show "slow", I think our vastly reduced attention spans don't allow us to savor the unspooling of a narrative. I enjoyed the long shots with interesting camera angles and the use of black and white was a genius move, adding to the dark undertones of the show. It was definitely a successful passion project for Steven Zaillian, though I think the role of Dickie could have used an actor with at least a smidge of charisma, and fun fact, the spawn of Sting and Trudie Styler plays Freddie, though only with limited success. Regardless of any minor quibbles, I definitely recommend it.

For a start Andrew Scott is 48 years old and looks it, so the persona of the young drifter doesn't fit. Next, not just his deliberately slow dialogue but all the casts methodical serious approach to everything becomes a drag.

Add to this this monochrome colouring and the series fails to deliver much punch, surprise or atmosphere apart from dreariness, Ripley is more of a depressed desperate loser than a crafty conman and opportunist.

They've put effort and thought Into the production but they have over done the styling, it drowns out the intrigue and fun the story.

So an average show, that could have been better.

Dakota Fanning's character is so deadpan she flattens most scenes she is in, the beauty and sparkle of Naples is totally lost, the lightness and purity that Gwyneth Paltrow once gave this role, made the character far more appealing.

So I'm being generous with a 5, it's mainly for effort, they tried hard but failed.

The 1999 "Talented Mr Ripley" with Matt Damon and Jude Law is one of my favorites to re-watch. However, being a movie and required to fit the time allowed, we don't learn much about Tom Ripley's back story, his normal life, nor of the many side stories in Europe. We know that, when he is mistaken for a Princeton guy, he doesn't correct the record. We learn early that deception is his friend.

In this 8-part series called just "Ripley" we see more clearly that this Tom is a bit older and how he lives the life of a grifter in New York. For example, he encounters the mail carrier and pretends to be going into the Dr Office, is handed the mail, he finds checks that he can cash. Or he pretends to be a bill collector and has a new check sent to his "agency." Using a variety of fictional identities, if a bank gets suspicious he just walks away and destroys that identity. He is slick and unperturbed, a man on his mission.

So the entire series has the same core story, with the same core characters and their relationships, but it treats Tom in a distinctly different light. It starts when Mr Greenleaf hires a P. I. to find Ripley, we are not sure why he knows about him, but that is how Tom gets the paid assignment to go to Italy and find Dickie.

There are a number of other differences but Tom is forever the grifter and when he realizes what Dicky has he wants it too. He wants that life, and the first episode ends with him practicing in the mirror, introducing himself as Dicky Greenleaf, foreshadowing what the rest of the series will be about.

The show is shot in B&W, which I see some complain about. But I love it, to give it that 'film noir' look and feel. With much more running time to play with it goes a bit deeper in some familiar scenes and also adds some that were not included in the movie. And finally, the last scenes and the ending are heading into a completely different direction.

In my mind there is no value trying to compare this 6 1/2 hour miniseries to the 1999 movie, they are quite different takes on the same core story. I like what they did here, I like the more deliberate pace, I like the B&W approach, to me it helps it feel like 1960s Italy.

Dark but good series, entertaining.

I am struggling to find the words to describe how brilliant this show is. It took me two episodes to find my feet with it, but once in, oh my goodness. The film photography is stunning, it is like watching liquid art. I didn't like the black and white to begin with, but loved it by the end. Light and shade has never been better used. Andrew Scott puts in a masterful performance in the lead role. He does that wonderful trick of being able to have you rooting for him even though you know morally you shouldn't. The supporting cast are excellent, with a particular nod to Eliot Sumner who I had never heard of before, but they are mesmerising.

This is not a fast, bang buzz type of show, but like a lot of the finer things in life, if you are prepared to invest yourself, it will reward you in measures.

This masterpiece of a series is completely unique from the movie, and really elicits its own distinctive film noir vibe both in cinematography and dialogue. Purposeful yet subtle performances by all involved; Andrew Scott is absolutely perfect for this role.

I haven't seen a TV series interpreted from a film source this well since Hannibal, where Mads Mikkelsen was also perfectly cast and gave an unforgettable performance.

What else can be said about this series? A bit of a slow burn, but the pacing is completely suitable, and allows for a bit more fleshing out and development of the characters. Although I love the vibrant colors along the coast of Italy as much as anyone, I feel the choice to use a monochromatic palette here really enhanced the mood and atmosphere of the story.

Top notch production in all aspects!

"They went up to Tom's room, and Dickie tried the bathrobe on and held the socks up to his bare feet. Both the bathrobe and the socks were the right size, and, as Tom had anticipated, Dickie was extremely pleased with the bathrobe". This is a passage from the beginning of this masterful book that is THE TALENTED MR RIPLEY (1955), by Patricia Highsmith, already adapted to the cinema more than once. As a huge fan, I was curious to watch the series RIPLEY (2024), but always suspicious that it wouldn't bring anything new. I was completely mistaken.

Only someone who really likes the story and has in-depth knowledge of it could carry out an adaptation of this level of quality, managing to turn the text around in an intelligent and original way, inverting several elements, most notably the fact that Dickie hates the robe that Tom chose, which activates an expression of disappointment in Tom, that goes completely unnoticed by Dickie, but could very well be the trigger for the hatred that Tom begins to nurture for Dickie.

The poor choice of robe is proof that Tom neither has refined taste nor occupies the social position he would like. This will be remembered later by Freddie Miles, when he glimpses the robe hanging on a door. In the end, even Tom realizes that that robe is not worthy of his new status, putting it in the trash. This importance attributed to the robe is, in fact, an excellent appropriation by the series creator, Steven Zaillian, of an element that, in the book, is only briefly mentioned in the beginning.

Freddie Miles also goes from being redheaded and plump to being dark-skinned and slender. Mongibello, a fictional town, is replaced by the real Atrani. Furthermore, both Tom and Dickie are well over 25 (if Andrew Scott initially seems unsuited to the role, the course of the story will prove otherwise, with his interpretation work being remarkable). Such adulterations confer some distinctive features to the series, although the essential remains, that is, a protagonist completely devoid of compassion, driven by envy, the desire to rise socially and the survival instinct, starting to kill whenever he feels threatened, but never feeling remorse. Someone who doesn't like himself and wants to be someone else, as shown, paradoxically, by the reflection that the mirror gives back to him when he wears Dickie's clothes. Paradoxical is also a the way it makes us feel as spectators: we end up wishing that Ripley will not be caught just to satisfy the curiosity of understanding where his amorality leads us.

In addition to inviting us to once again enter Tom Ripley's universe, the greatest triumph of this series is, without a doubt, the aesthetic-visual effect achieved with the choice of black and white, a beautiful photography and very well filmed and linked sequences (the boat sequence is perfect), which accentuates the atmosphere of suspense and mystery, inevitably transporting us to Hitchcock's films.

In the last part we are surprised by the appearance of John Malkovich, who played Tom Ripley in RIPLEY'S GAME (Liliana Cavani, 2002), in what we can consider a brief homage to the previous films. It's such a shame that the song we hear in the distance, in part VII, is not a fragment of "Tu vuò fà l'americano" (who doesn't remember Matt Damon and Jude Law making this song memorable, in Anthony Minghella's version, from 1999?).

I don't often post reviews but I was compelled to do so as I really can't understand the 1/10 reviews. It seems that some people can't move beyond the book or film. This is beautifully acted, beautifully shot. I found it a real feast for the eyes and mind. I binged watched it in two days which is a shame as I wished I'd made it last longer. At times I wished it would burst into colour as I remember the film which was very colorful and Italy is best served in colour. But the subject also excellently fits black and white. Enjoy and don't be put off by the strange reviews as this is a really nice series.

Five minutes into this and I'm in awe that it is one of the most brilliant black & white movies I have ever seen, and I've seen many. Andrew Scott blows away previous versions of Ripley. The cinematography is extremely skilled, I can't wait to get back to seeing the whole thing. Folks who claim "black and white is boring" would be better advised to go sit in a megaplex and watch idiotic Marvel spectacles. Have fun. It's about time someone really did an A-1 job of filming a Patricia Highsmith novel. Ripley is an abolutely classic depiction of a psychopath. Yeah, I watched Matt Damon and John Malkovitch, but this is an advance. Looking forward to more from the same director.

I just started episode 6 and I must say this miniseries is exactly what The Talented Mr Ripley needed - a deep dive into his character and motivation. I like the choice of a not so pretty boy for the lead actor. Both Alain Dolan (Purple Noon) and Matt Damon (1999 version) were stunningly gorgeous and fantastic in their roles but Andrew Scott brings a guy next door earthiness/sliminess to the character of Tom Ripley. He's someone who could easily blend into the crowd and go unnoticed. But, with each episode, he captures my attention no less than Dolan or Damon.

I'm loving the black & white cinematography and interesting camera angles which work well together to highlight the beauty of Italian architecture and the coast.

The noticeable lack of music is soothing and helps connect with the characters and the sounds in their environment. To me the sounds are like another character in the story.

With the strong supporting characters in the previous versions of Ripley, I was initially not sure of the characters of Marg, Dickie, and Freddie - but they grew on me and became very believable. I especially enjoy Freddie being British not American. The Brits do snobby so well!

Now I'm looking forward to the introduction of the inspector and how the next 3 episodes unfold...

Thank you to all involved in making this project.

The aesthetic of this series is absolutely gorgeous. I enjoyed the black and white, and the contrast with the sharp, modern resolution. The cinematography reminded me of the movie Roma, and they both share a leisurely quietude, but the similarities end there.

Roma managed to infuse itself with a quiet determination of character and moments of joy. This rendition of The Talented Mr Ripley spends too much time meandering through picturesque hallways and stairs, and not enough time establishing relationships and motive. Beautiful but empty.

The casting was also all wrong. All three leads should be in their 20s, but only one is. And of course it's the female character who is young, paired with men who are obviously in their 40s. I wanted to be able to move past it, but it was too distracting, particularly in light of the glacial pacing. Ended up being a beautiful waste of time.

Part of Tom Ridley's engaging charm is his earnest boyishness and his eagerness to please. So why cast a nearly 50-year-old man in the role? Andrew Scott is a respected actor, but this part is all wrong for him. I've enjoyed both the Matt Damon and Alain Delon versions, where Tom's youthful beauty opens doors ~ or at least leaves them ajar. And the black-and-white photography doesn't work here. Dickie Greenleaf's life was one of technicolor luxury; let us see it in all of its Mediterranean opulence. So very disappointed by the creative decisions that mar this newest version of Patricia Hightower's thriller.

I was hesitant at first to watch this. I don't know why. An absolutely stunning masterpiece. The acting was unbelievable, creepy, believable, and kept me glued the entire time. The cinematography was stunning. You felt as if you were in every single place that Ripley was. Although it was in black-and-white, you really can feel Italy. There was not a single actor that did not live up to their part.

I've seen the movie many years ago, and I enjoyed it. But I have to say, this remake was far superior than the original. I would love to see other shows redone in this matter. Everything about it was visually stunning.