markmuhl The movie by Anthony Minghella differs in quite some way from the older French movie Plein soleil, which is based on the same novel by Patricia Highsmith. Especially Tom Ripley (M. Damon) is quite a different character, more emotional and less coldly calculating his deeds but also alarmingly adaptive like a chameleon and elusive like a snake. In fact, his real character is quite intangible, as he is constantly taking over the roles which best meet the expectations of his environment to be exactly the person that people want to see in him. He is so spookily good in this, that people hardly realize that they are also being manipulated by Tom to his own favour. Not being accepted, however, is not part of the game and if it does happen, Tom is getting out of control. Not for very long though, since after the murder Tom soon regains control and he reaches top form in setting out wrong tracks. In this sense, however, he is very similar to the Tom Ripley given by Alain Delon in the older French movie. Another feature that makes the film different from its predecessor is the fact, that Tom's homoerotic affection to Dickie Greenleaf (J. Law) becomes obvious. In fact it is the rejection of this affection that greatly contributes to the murder, which makes it a far more emotional deed. The murder of Dickie's distrustful friend Freddy Miles, however, is in both movies a mere necessity in order to reveal the first murder, but it needs to be stated, that Freddy left a deeper impression on me in this version of the movie since the performance of Philip Seymour Hoffman as young rich snob is really outstanding.I also liked the fact that Marge (G. Paltrow) in the newer version of the movie sees through Tom Ripley's game, although she cannot prove it, a fact, which drives her almost crazy. To me it is quite plausible that the person, that best knew the victim of a murder, can judge whether a faked suicide is in line with the person she used to know. This also means that Tom Ripley is actually unmasked in both movies, although it has to be conceded that from a sense of justice the two endings are truly different. That the older French movie version of the Highsmith novel does a better job in bringing across the atmosphere from the 50's can hardly be valued as a merit since the movie was almost shot in this very time. Still, from a today's point of view, it may be taken as a criterion to decide which movie should be the preferred choice.

zanydr18 This is a REMAKE of the 1960 movie, "Purple Noon", a foreign film. It starred Alain Delon. I do not know why this is not said anywhere at all! Having seen both, I believe this one was much better. The acting, the plot, the suspense timing and twists done, all coincided well with the 1960 film, but this version outdid the original by far. The only thing else I could say is the 1960s actors were prettier.

yalierli I have seen in the past years more than 500 movies. I just saw this movie, and I must admit that I never seen a movie like this. It affected me differently than other movies. most movies don't spend this much time in getting the viewer to know and feel connected to the characters. This movie spends an entire hour getting the viewer to know the characters before the main plot even begins.

Kirpianuscus one of films defined by this simple expression. a good job. almost impeccable. because it is a thriller, a trip in Italy, an useful lesson of psychology and remind of the talent of few admirable actors. Jude Law is perfect in the skin of Mr. Ripley. sophisticated, selfish, profound in a bizarre manner, his character is the picture of a social class. Matt Damon is the inspired choice for the translation of a fundamental transformation step by step. the fascination about a friend, new life style, possibilities as gifts of a status, the seductive flavor of a dangerous game for survive. a film who reminds old fashion thrillers. and who has the great chance to have the perfect cast. one of memorable movies for rhythm, performances and the levels of story. see it !