I have now seen Anthony Minghella's The Talented Mr. Ripley three times and I have officially changed back to my original tune. It was my belief upon first seeing the ad-campaign for Ripley and after having read the screenplay (both before actually seeing the film) that it was going to take the Oscar for best picture.
You must all bear in mind that I am sitting here in Germany and at the time I did not have access to films like American Beauty, The Insider, etc. When I first returned to the states, the first film that I saw was Sweet and Lowdown, the new Woody Allen picture. I immediately realized that he is WAY out of the running for any award outside of a Razzie. The second film I saw was Magnolia which I think should be nominated for every award under the sun, I just don't think that the academy has the guts to nominate it. Watching them cower away from The Ice Storm and Boogie Nights both in the same year has proven that to me.
 | I immediately thought (on that Sunday afternoon) that American Beauty was going to take it all (I still believe it has one hell of a shot and I have a rather extensive bet with someone should it win). After I saw Ripley on Christmas night (which would be the following Saturday) I immediately thought that it did not have a chance in the world. I was so disappointed in the film that I began to wonder how in the world it was nominated for Golden Globes. To me, it was the Michael Collins of the year...I'm sorry Michael Collins, I promise to buy your DVD... Neil Jordan, you know I love you.
However, I have now seen Ripley three times(I know that I have said that twice now; thank you). I have had a chance to recalibrate my take on the Ripley character. I am now able to accept Mr. Minghella's interpretation. Where I would have simply left Ripley a psychotic devoid of any sympathy, Minghella seems to believe that the audience needs to identify with his protagonist. Now I am beginning to see how that works...even though I am not convinced it was the way to go...Minghella has made one hell of a film. |
Outside of possibly Magnolia, the film is incredibly well shot. It is the most beautiful thing to be released all year. I do also think that Titus has remarkable art direction, costumes, and cinematography, but the film is a tad over the top for my tastes and thus I have to side with the more down-to-earth and seamless Ripley.
Sitting in Europe I have read piece after piece about the incredible cinematography of American Beauty. I will admit that Conrad L. Hall has done fine work, but I just don't see what everyone is raving about. The film is adequately shot. There are some moments of artistic inspiration… but it is hardly a masterpiece. I realize that John Seyle had a lot more leeway working in Italy than Hall had working in suburban America, but this seems hardly an excuse to me. I remember a certain suburban film --The Ice Storm--a few years ago directed by Ang Lee that had remarkable cinematography. Perhaps there weren't roses bursting out of Christina Ricci's shirt, but I will still side with The Ice Storm over American Beauty ten times out of ten.
Now, I don't want the world to think that I am down on American Beauty. I think it is one of the best films that I have seen in years. To be honest, I think that it is a better film than Talented Mr. Ripley. It is more streamlined, it has more to say, it is more original, and it is more timeless (despite the fact that it seems tied to the '90s… I think Minghella's interpretation of the Ripley character is going to seem fatally '90s in years to come). Yes, American Beauty may still take home the gold. I am merely saying that my Christmas thoughts which shut Ripley out of the running were a grave mistake. Also... I am beginning to think that Ripley is more of a "Best Picture," but that is an issue I will get into with a whole other html.
