+ another review of The Talented Mr. Ripley by Cynthia Fuchs
Queer Ripley
Amidst all the hoopla shouting of the probable Oscar proliferation showering upon The Talented Mr. Ripley; the ongoing comparisons (of the original series of novels by
Patricia, the French film Purple Noon, and Anthony Minghella's creation); and glowing appreciation for Minghella's assembly of the most fashionable young and beautiful, there lie hidden a few very nasty notions regarding homosexuality. Unlike the previous
cinematic version and the Highsmith series, here Ripley's
homosexual status is emphasized. Gone are the surreptitiously
longing gazes offered up by Alain Delon at the object of his
desire, and the read-between-the-lines homoeroticism in the
novels. Here, Damon/Ripley may not be out and proud, but the
character's gayness is central to
Minghella's version/vision.
This particular characterization is not automatically problematic
per se. And a director re-writing a novel or previous film to
suit his or her ideas is hardly a new notion. Yet with this
particular revision, it seems fitting to analyze the results.
Minghella evidently believed it appropriate to restructure the
story in such a way as to highlight and emphasize Ripley's
homosexuality. And if it's unproductive to ask the unanswerable
question of why he did this, it may be illuminating to consider
how it works out in the film.
The two moments in the film where the serial killer Ripley's
gayness is affirmed through a physical connection with the
desired other occur specifically just before, during, or directly
after he has murdered someone. The confirmation and consummation
of his sexuality is thus conjoined with his murderous
sociopathology. This presentation inextricably merges the
homicidal Ripley with the queer Ripley. There can be no effective
separation between the two when they are placed together as
layers embedded within each other. These two sides yet again
converge in scenes involving the one character created by
Minghella (the heterosexual female Meredith Logue [Cate
Blanchett] who remains unscathed by Ripley); and another
character whom Minghella expands into a love interest for Ripley
(the self-identified that is, out homosexual male Peter
Smith-Kingsley [Jack Davenport], who suffers a much sadder fate).
These characterizations cannot be called accidental, particularly
with regard to a writer-director heralded to be as fiercely
meticulous as Minghella. Perhaps the above comments are rash and
fail to see these depictions as mere aspects of Tom, a gay man
who unfortunately happens to live in a fiercely closeted and
homophobic world (not so long ago, in the late 1950s). In such a
view Tom would seem to be sadly suffering from a horribly
displaced, murderous self-abhorrence.
But this film is not a subversive, controversial gay rights tale
documenting the overall effects of toxic homophobia, nor is it
meant to be. It is a suspense film released by Miramax over the
holiday season for maximum financial and Oscar-related benefits.
It is a film that takes its apparent premise Tom is gay and he
kills and contorts it to such a degree that another very
different reading Tom kills because he is gay rears its ugly
head.