Customer Reviews

The Talented Mr. Ripley: A Screenplay

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Some people seem to be under the impression that this is a novel that has been adapted from the film, which it is not. This is Anthony Minghella's SCREENPLAY for his film which he adapted from the novel, and it is excellent. As a filmmaker I enjoy reading the screenplays for films that I like and anyone who enjoys reading screenplays will love this because it is a wonderful adaptation that proves the key to a great film is a great script.

would be interesting only to people, who study scripts seriously, who love Minghella's art, and who love the film itself. This particular script was not meant to stand on its own, unlike some scripts from other great films. It was only meant to be Minghella's subjective and brief overview of what he is going to create for the screen. I bought it because I was curious to compare written word with what I have seen on the film. This book has lyrics of "Lullaby for Cain" and full cast list, though, which is a nice touch...

After seeing this film I was quick to jump to the conclusion that the screenplay would be just as good. I am pleased to report that I was correct!

As a read, Ripley is captivating and diabolical. The words finely link together the voices and faces that I loved in the film. Anthony Minghella has such a remarkable gift! First English Patient, now Ripley!

All I really have to say about this screenplay is that it is honey--rich, sweet, and easy to swallow. You'll love it!

The screenplay and movie of "The Talented Mr. Ripley" are, in their own rights, excellent and quite effective, but they are a decided departure from Patricia Highsmith's novel. We all know that the motion picture is an entirely different medium from the world of the novel, but some of the changes the screenwriter Anthony Minghella made are questionable.
The novel deals so much with Ripley's inner existence (it's told entirely from his perspective) that it calls for the adaptor to externalize and use devices which will bring out what is going on in Tom Ripley's warped mind; otherwise we'd have a movie of too many voice-overs. Some of the alterations used, I think, would not appeal to Highsmith. The motion picture is an art unto itself which must externalize and make visual what is going on in the psyche.
A good line in the movie from Tom is "it's better to be a fake somebody than a real nobody."
Marge in the novel does not confront Ripley with Dickey's murder as she did in the movie, and Dickie never said he was going to marry her. In the book Tom's gayness is not as open as it is in the movie, but it is certainly there. In the novel Ripley commits "only" two murders, whereas in the movie he commits three.
The movie makes Freddie Miles much more of a presence than he is in the novel. Freddie is seen as a foil to Tom and is more opposed to him. He has Tom figured out, whereas in the book they don't see very much of each other. Meredith, a major character in the movie, and Peter Smith Kingsley do not appear in the novel. In one sense, because of the importance of all these other characters, Tom gets subordinated. Dickie is an amateur painter in the novel; in the flick he plays the sax. In the novel toward the end Ripley is almost always alone. He's hemmed in by people in the film.
In the movie Dickie is a much more sexually active heterosexual. In the book there is no Silvana who finds herself with child.
Dickie says that one of Ripley's gestures is spooky. If only he knew how spooky Ripley would become. Tom Ripley at times is like Uriah Heep, slavish, picking up things after his idol. Tom tells Dickie right off the bat, supposedly in jest, that he's a forger, a liar, an impersonator.
In the movie there is more of a tone of a gay relationship although one-sided on Tom's part.
A great movie script in its own right but a quite divergent adaptation of a brilliant introspective novel.

This book is an amazing adaptation of the movie . If you saw the movie, you have to read this book. The book is even better!

A novelization of a movie that was based on a book? Does anyone else find this to be an incomprehensible waste of trees? You'd do better to read the original - it's by Patricia Highsmith -, and here's hoping that the author makes no money out of this bizarre endeavor.

The book was better than the movie. I think the movie was too soapy. The ending was not conclusive