It's a fine adaptation of a Patricia Highsmith's story about sociopathic Tom Ripley & associates. Müller shoots it brilliantly to look like a Hopper painting (Edward), and Hopper plays Ripley coldly (Dennis). There's the added attraction of casting a bunch of directors as actors.... but is it ever more than a series of gimmicks?
I recall, oh, almost fifty years ago, when I was taking the Clarion writing course and one of the students talked about how you had to work at developing your style of writing. I always thought that was ridiculous. Did you also have to develop a style of walking, a style of breathing, a style of putting your shoes on in the morning? You tried various things, and some of them worked and you kept those. Some didn't and you abandoned those. What was left was your style. Think about how to do it a little better. Maybe it will work and you'll be successful, however you define success.
While I started this movie, I wondered if this was director Wim Wenders working on his style. Perhaps he thought it was a reflection of the story. After all, Tom Ripley is a manipulative, controlling character. Directors are manipulating, controlling characters. Was he trying to see if those character traits would show up on the screen? Or is it about nested levels of auteurism? A director directing directors as artists who create works of art over which they have absolute control... only they're forgeries, so they're all lying and it's all elephants all the way to the bottom.
Or perhaps I was just overthinking this because Wenders was tired of the critics and when a fellow director showed up, he gave him a role, then continued on as a goof. Maybe I should shut up, watch the movie, and see if I enjoyed it. There's a novel thought!
Bruno Ganz is living the virtuous life of an art framer, since he's too ill to do restoration work. He's dying, actually. Ripley, whom he's annoyed, gets him set up doing killings, helping him liberally, happily and clumsily. There's lots of spilt brains and tortes for that wacky (no pun intended) German sense of humor. It's all Ripley's fault; it's some sort of low-level metaphor of American corruption, even if, for my money, Ganz corrupts pretty easily.
In short, it's a fine piece of translation of Highsmith to the screen, and kudos for that. If that's your idea of a good time, congratulations. It's not really mine.
But Müller's lighting is gorgeous.
I recall, oh, almost fifty years ago, when I was taking the Clarion writing course and one of the students talked about how you had to work at developing your style of writing. I always thought that was ridiculous. Did you also have to develop a style of walking, a style of breathing, a style of putting your shoes on in the morning? You tried various things, and some of them worked and you kept those. Some didn't and you abandoned those. What was left was your style. Think about how to do it a little better. Maybe it will work and you'll be successful, however you define success.
While I started this movie, I wondered if this was director Wim Wenders working on his style. Perhaps he thought it was a reflection of the story. After all, Tom Ripley is a manipulative, controlling character. Directors are manipulating, controlling characters. Was he trying to see if those character traits would show up on the screen? Or is it about nested levels of auteurism? A director directing directors as artists who create works of art over which they have absolute control... only they're forgeries, so they're all lying and it's all elephants all the way to the bottom.
Or perhaps I was just overthinking this because Wenders was tired of the critics and when a fellow director showed up, he gave him a role, then continued on as a goof. Maybe I should shut up, watch the movie, and see if I enjoyed it. There's a novel thought!
Bruno Ganz is living the virtuous life of an art framer, since he's too ill to do restoration work. He's dying, actually. Ripley, whom he's annoyed, gets him set up doing killings, helping him liberally, happily and clumsily. There's lots of spilt brains and tortes for that wacky (no pun intended) German sense of humor. It's all Ripley's fault; it's some sort of low-level metaphor of American corruption, even if, for my money, Ganz corrupts pretty easily.
In short, it's a fine piece of translation of Highsmith to the screen, and kudos for that. If that's your idea of a good time, congratulations. It's not really mine.
But Müller's lighting is gorgeous.