The remake is better - Plein soleil (1960) Discussion

[–] MartyMacFly 18 years ago

Plein soleil is infinitely better. The Minghella version is pure crap. Tom Ripley, in the book, is a seductive, intelligent character. Alain Delon is perfect for the role, while Matt Damon is miles away from good (Jude Law, who appears in the film, would have been a much better choice). Besides, every subtle detail from the book (and Plein Soleil) is changed for open homosexuality, poor story telling...

reply

[–] SheBear 18 years ago

Reading the book may prejudice you towards a certain idea of what the character should be like. I haven't read the book. I've seen both films and, though both are good, I think the remake is better.

reply

[–] masurra 18 years ago

the talented mr ripley was a huge dissappointment compared to the book

reply

[–] Huffman1 18 years ago

The Talented Mister Ripley was digustingly horrible, I still can't believe they did a remake of the original, awesome french film. What a shame.

reply

[–] faornelas 18 years ago

open homosexuality??
It's true that the movie can be read as the denial of homosexuality, but while in the book there is a conversation between Dickie and Ripley where the first one clearly states that he is not gay, no such conversation exists in Minghella's picture.
You can never tell wether Ripley really feels something for Dickie or if he is just playing a game to achieve his goals. That's what subtelty is about, and that's what makes the movie brilliant.

As for Plein Soleil, I love the cinematography, the score, and the ending, but Alain Delon is way too beautifull to play Ripley.
Those who read the book know what I'm talking about.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mikeijames 17 years ago

i agree that the minghella's interpretation derives strength by leaving the idea of ripley's homosexuality unstated -- yet wholly obvious -- because anyone who's read the entire ripley series by patricia highsmith cannot help but come to the conclusion that tom ripley's sexuality is nothing if not a closed question -- in one novel, he even dresses in drag.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SAMRubinsky 9 years ago

And what the hell does dressing in drag have to do with whether or not a literary character, or anyone else, is gay?

reply

[–] waldenpond88 12 years ago

Hi faornelas,

I read the book at least half a dozen times, but don't remember that it says anywhere in the text that Ripley was not attractive.
So I don't know what you are talking about.

Alain Delon was a more convincing Ripley than Matt Damon, but I enjoyed the remake, too.

reply

[–] mikeijames 17 years ago

for clarification, are you saying that every detail in the novel has been construed as a homosexual event in the minghella interpretation or the plein soleil film?

reply

[–] ilzamaria 18 years ago

I prefer Plein soleil
and the ending is amazing

reply

[–] paris_texas 17 years ago

I never read the book, but to me The Talented Mr. Ripley seems like a more complete film, it takes more time in building the suspense. But I'd say that hands down Plein Soleil has the better ending. I thought Jude Law's performance was the exact copy of the actor playing Dickie in Plein Soleil, I mean he has him down even to the maneurisms and way of speech, and I could definetely see some of Alain Delon in Matt Damon, it is undeniable that the direction of Talented Mr. Ripley was influenced by the original film not just the novel.

reply

[–] gioconda 17 years ago

For those who think Delon was "too beautiful" to play Ripley as written in the book, Patricia Highsmith disagrees. She considered him "the ideal Ripley".

I've read many interviews with people who worked with Delon who said his beauty was only skin-deep, and his elegance was a facade. Maybe they were jealous, because Delon certainly cashed in on those looks, could snap his fingers and the women came crawling. He had a rough childhood, was kicked out of many schools, and even worked as a butcher for his father, amongst other blue-collar jobs. Once he made it, though, he went for the finer things in life [Bardot, Nico, Romy Schneider and countless groupies].

I found his portrait of a sociopath truly chilling. Certain shots are printed in my memory banks, like when Ripley grabs something to eat after killing Freddie. Brrrr. That's cold.

Maybe I am old school, but Matt Damon's rather wooden acting, especially when he was trying on Greenleaf's clothes, did not capture the nuances of a true psycho. Also, Gwyneth Paltrow's Venus flytrap ego sucked a lot of attention from the male characters.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mikeijames 16 years ago

yeah. although i tend to think that minghella captured the look of the fifties in a more convincing way in the later film, i still find something slightly more mesmerizing about the cinematography in "purple noon".....

reply

[–] jcappy 16 years ago

"Plein Soleil" is considerably more honest and artful (in good sense) than the latter film. And the Greenleaf of the latter seems to be something of a ripoff of the earlier Greenleaf (including looks)---or maybe i should say pays tribute to it. I might sell the latter dvd, but wd not consider selling the former--it's a real keeper.

reply

[–] Benedict_Cumberbatch 16 years ago

"Purple Noon" was great. The remake, although decent, with some qualities (Law, Hoffman, Blanchett, the cinematography, score), is extremely overrated. Gwyneth Paltrow was wooden as usual, and Damon wasn't bad, tried to play a different Ripley... but doesn't match Delon's brilliance in the original. Granted, I haven't read the book, but "Purple Noon" was a much better film IMO (oh, and the ending is fantastic).

"I did cramps the way Meryl Streep did accents" - Calliope (Middlesex)

reply

[–] robobeatnik 16 years ago

Minghella's remake is far superior. For starters, Minghella's version begins with Tom and gives us the background necessary to accept who Tom is and why he would want to be someone else. So much more is fleshed out in Minghella's version, it really feels like he took Plein Soleil and filled the numerous cracks. Not to mention that Minghella's version is absolutely gorgeous to look at. The entire thing is perfectly shot.

And for those of you speaking about Tom's homosexual tendencies in the Minghella version, I love the fact that his sexuality is vague. He can be anyone and anything, remember? He shifts from one thing to the next and has no real identity. So to me, it only seems natural that his sexuality would be an extension of that.

"Do you really think it's cool to hit the sauce with a bun in the oven?"

reply

[–] thesnowleopard 15 years ago

I saw Plein Soleil, oh, must have been thirty years ago now, on television. I'm pretty sure I switched in after the credits because I never caught the title. For decades afterward, if someone had asked me, "What are two of the most chilling movies you've ever seen?" then Les Diaboliques and "that flick I saw a really long time ago about the two guys on the boat and...um...I remember it *really* well, but I have no idea what the title is" (I do remember it better than that, but I don't want to get spoilery) would have been high on the list. There was the climax on the yacht, of course, and *that* ending. I think she must have suspected all along, to start screaming immediately like that. I would have loved to see it again, but since I had no idea where to even start, all attempts to find it failed.

When I saw "The Talented Mr. Ripley", I was underwhelmed. Damon played Ripley as a bit of a victim (oddly enough), while *his* victims were conveniently slimy or self-absorbed so you didn't really care what he did to them. It just felt pretty and empty to me. I made no connection to the film I'd seen nearly three decades before.

It wasn't until a few months ago that I rediscovered the original and made the connection--completely by accident while looking up another French film. And I was very happy to find it. It had been a mystery that had been bugging me for a long time.

So, let me put it this way--three decades from now, I doubt I will be racking my brains to try to remember the title of The Talented Mr. Ripley. Not saying it's a terrible film, or anything, just that it's no Plein Soleil.

The Snowleopard's homepage: http://www.geocities.com/rpcv.geo/other.html

reply

[–] drjukebox 15 years ago

Suffice to say that the remake may be more intellectually satisfying, but Plein Soleil is a much better film.
I enjoyed both. This is my gut speaking - Plein Soleil is infinitely better.

reply

[–] Yinky 15 years ago

Of the two I liked Plein Soleil better, but honestly, neither follows the novel closely at all.

I think Highsmith has created one of the fictional world's greatest psychopaths. Delon was spot-on (as was Malkovich), but I hated the big morality trip in the end. (AND! The money was left to Tom, not Marge.) I also didn't like how he romanced Marge--in the novel, Marge was outright annoying, and Tom despised her. (She also wasn't physically attractive.) Then in the 1999 version, they inexplicably make him overtly gay. (To the person who wrote of his "vague sexuality"--are you serious? He asked Dickie if he could get in the bath with him! Remember "My Funny Valentine" sung all creepy and weird to Dickie? And how about how he kills his LOVER in the end? There's nothing vague here, if you ask me.) I didn't hate the 1999 version, but I didn't like how Damon's Ripley was frightened and insecure about his deeds. Or how he cries as he kills his last victim. Not Ripley. He doesn't care about people. He just wants to win the game.

Also, in the novel, nobody suspects him (except for a couple policemen). In TMR, Marge screams at him that she knows he did something, and so does Marge in PS ("he would never kill himself"). That didn't happen. Marge bought it, hook line and sinker.

reply

[–] Eumenides_0 14 years ago

I prefer the Minghella version by far. Marge actually does something in the film instead of just whining and screaming at the end of a silly, moralistic, tacked on ending. Paltrow's Marge is intelligent, she's intuitive, she suspects something's wrong, and she nearly dismantles Tom's plan.

The film has beeter cinematography and music, and it's a beautiful historical recreation of a lost era. Clemente just had to fly to Italy and film the streets. Minghella's film is a period piece. That requires more effort.

Minghella didn't have a twist ending that seemed like something Alfred Hitchcock rejected for one of his TV series. It stayed true to the novel's end.

Also, Damon's Tom is a far more complex and tortured villain. Remember that he kills the thing he loves most not once, but twice. That's chilling.

And ultimately the narrative was more fluid, with a preamble that sheds some light on Tom instead of opening in the middle of the story.

I liked Plein Soleil, but for me Minghella's film remains the best adapation of a Tom Ripley novel, although my favorite Ripley remains Jon Malkovich.

This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.

reply

[–] little_wing 14 years ago

I concur Eumenides, I've seen both films and read most of the Ripley novels. I must conclude that Minghella's film is better - even better than it's written counterpart, imo. I liked some of the changes that were made. Part of the problem with Plein Soleil is with the actress who portrays Marge - she just was not a good actress. It also seemed as though the characters weren't as well developed in Plein Soleil but this could have been because French is not my native language and I missed some of the nuances to their characters. Most of all I really hated the ending of the French version. It was rather heavy handed.

Reaction time is a factor in this, so please pay attention.

reply

[–] GrandeMarguerite 14 years ago

Clemente just had to fly to Italy and film the streets.
When reading this, I was thinking "Well, if filming is that easy, I just wonder why talented filmmakers are so scarce".
First of all, remember that in 1960, filming in the streets was still a rare thing. Plus I don't think that filming in the streets is that easy: you have to select people, to direct them, to organize various street movements... Yes, Clément didn't have to recreate the era, however he still needed the help of a good costume designer and a good photography director!

By the way, it is not "Clemente", it is Clément.

reply

[–] Aulic Exclusiva 13 years ago

Nonsense!

Plein soleil is a great film. Nobody could say that of the Minghella thing.

Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist

reply

[–] Eumenides_0 12 years ago

Plein soleil is a great film. Nobody could say that of the Minghella thing.

I can, for all the reasons I mentioned before. But the crucial point for me is the awful ending. The remake isn't drowned in cheap moralism. I think it's funny France didn't have the Hayes code and still French filmmakers, oh so much more sophisticated than their American cousins, thought crime could never pay. That's not only silly it devalues the moral point of Highsmith's novels, that an amoral man can and will triumph in the world, he'll kill, steal, assume fake identities, and he'll live a luxurious life in return. For its time, that was certainly unique. It was a missed opportunity for Clemente, but he obviously wasn't one to think outside the box.

This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.

reply

[–] waldenpond88 12 years ago

You are right in one point: the Matt Damon remake is closer to the book and the ending is like the book ending.
However, as long as Patricia Highsmith was alive (1995), she always considered Alain Delon her favorite Ripley, the perfect actor for playing Ripley.

Too bad that they didn't film another Ripley with Alain Delon in 1970/1971 when "Ripley Under Ground" was published, the second Ripley novel. Delon would still have been young enough to play Ripley and we wouldn't have been forced to wait until 2006 when the movie was finally realized.

reply

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

Yeah, I´d also give a slight edge to The Talented Mr Ripley and mainly because of the first 40 minutes or so of Plein Soleil as well as the ending. I mean, firstly, the thing opens at some random moment already in Italy which gives it a strangely rushed feel that takes awhile to go away. Secondly, the opening third of the film contains rather large amounts of exposition when Delon and Ronet are often engaging in titillating conversations about how well the former could impersonate the latter that just sound silly and prepare the viewer too well for what´s to come. In the remake, things are allowed to unfold more naturally, without this unnecessary talk (which seems to have been that author´s favourite device for some reason as the same kind of goofy, idle chatter about murder is also featured in Strangers On A Train she wrote, to equally poor and awkward effect). Also, the occasional thinking out loud Ronet does, is very artificial feeling and kind of annoying - ditto the forced and overwrought quarrels between Ronet and the broad. And... the ending. Needless to say, it would have finished on a perfect note with Delon sitting in the sun by the sea, sipping that drink of his. This "justice prevails" thing is just ridiculous, especially as it arrives with such an unbelievable plot device - there´s no way the corpse could have been stuck to the ship the whole time without anyone (including Delon, of course) taking notice. Pretty dumb.

Plein Soleil is visually more impressive and more atmospheric, but I also feel Damon and Law were more effective as leads than Delon and (particularly) Ronet - although not by much. As far as I´m concerned, it´s The Talented Mr Ripley 9/10 vs Plein Soleil 8/10.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] MrBigglesworth999 11 years ago

I saw "The Talented Mr Ripley" first, years ago, then recently "Plein Soleil".
This was advantageous for me in that PS starts with no backstory about Ripley's reason for being in Italy, but I knew that already of course.

I thought that "pretty boy" Delon was more convincing and more chilling as the murderous and cunning Ripley than the relatively less attractive Damon.

I agree about PS being more impressive and more atmospheric than TTMR. The hurried start with no back story is PS's weakness.

However, on balance, I would reverse the ranking order. PS 8.5/10; TTMR 8/10.

reply

[–] A_Fistful_of_Pennies 11 years ago

I really like both movies for different reasons. It's interesting just how different they are despite both being pretty true to the book (well compared to most book to movie adaptations).

I liked Alain Delon more as Ripley and he carried the film a lot more for me. Matt Damon was an ok Ripley but a little more boring, but the story was really compelling. So I like Purple Noon more for the excellent performances and the style and I like Talented Mr. Ripley more for the storytelling.

reply

[–] Suriname86 11 years ago

I prefer the remake as a film but i prefer Alain as a lead; the man was absolutely beautiful and had a lot of presence.

reply

[–] lnoft97 11 years ago

I'm watching Purple Noon right now. There is no comparison. Purple Noon is stunning to look at, as is the breathtaking Alain Delon. Pig-nosed Matt Damon and Goopy may be 'better" but I remember TMR being excrutiatingly long, and I lost interest before it ended. A comparison: Purple Noon is a hand-picked bouquet peonies and garden flowers in a vintage tin watering can, on a table at a seaside cafe. TMR is a big mundane arrangement of sterile cold roses sitting on a conference table in an office. May be bigger, but not as pretty, not 'better'.

reply

[–] PoppyTransfusion 11 years ago

I prefer The Talented Mr Ripley to Plein Soleil as well, although not by much. I prefered Jude Law as Greenleaf to Ronet who felt artificial in the role to me. I don't think there's much in Ripley as played by Delon and Damon for me. They're different for sure and Damon's was the more sympathetic rendering with Delon's Ripley more inscrutable. Both films were beautiful to look at with exquisite styling. Plein Soleil was simpler in plot that TTMR, which worked more the suspense. Plein Soleil is much more understated and ambiguous than the remake.

As an aside I prefer Malkovich as Ripley to either Damon or Delon.

Why do you refuse to remember me?

reply

[–] djsnafu23 11 years ago

Surprised so many here really don't like 1 of the 2 versions. inghella's film looks astonishing, both films are fantastic, amongst the best thrillers ever made. I gave TTMR a 9 (might even revise to a 10 down the line) and Plein an 8. HOffman, Paltrow and Law more than making up for Delon being better than Damon.

....

http://soundcloud.com/dj-snafu-bankrupt-euros

Coz lifes too short to listen to Madlib

reply

[–] hugelypopularbeef_193 10 years ago

Surprised that there are so many strong feelings towards one film and not the other for so many people. I'd say Plein Soleil is the weaker film (for reasons already mentioned on this board - the sudden start halfway, the lack of nuance in the characters, the ending), but both films have their strengths. Plein Soleil has the edge in terms of cinematography and atmosphere, whereas The Talented Mr. Ripley features more developed characters and a more fleshed-out storyline.

When it comes down to the interpretations of Ripley in either film, however, there is no right or wrong - these are two very different interpretations of the character, and Delon and Damon both nail the characters as written. Delon plays a sociopathic and more believably charming (and handsome, let's face it) Ripley, whereas Matt Damon plays a disturbed and rather pathetic version of the character, one who's meant to fade into the background, one who's meant to envy others and wish to be someone more successful and admired.

I haven't read the book, so all I'm going on is what I can see on-screen. Delon couldn't play Minghella's Ripley, because he's too good-looking and has too much presence to be a face in the crowd, whereas Damon couldn't play Clement's Ripley, because he's too plain to look at and ultimately too warm and sympathetic a performer. I personally think both actors are perfect as the two separate characters they play.

For me, The Talented Mr. Ripley is the better film, though I can understand why for some Plein Soleil would be better. Personally, I find Minghella's Ripley much more disturbing, as his actions seem like those of a man not entirely in control of himself, and the relationship between Dickie and Tom in Talented is more complex and believable. I'm not that big a fan of Damon's as an actor (Delon is more subtle), but there's something very creepy about him in Talented. Plus, in this one Ripley gets away with it, and there's nothing scarier than that.

reply

[–] Ore-Sama 8 years ago

The remake is nothing but a dumbed down popcorn flick, and not even a particularly entertaining one.

"Purple Noon" made Damon sympathetic to an extent, as Philip was something of a jerk, and what lower class person hasn't dreamed of living the high life? Not that it excuses what he did, and the film never really tries to do so. It presents a balanced, unjudgemental portrayal and trusts it's audience.

Not the remake. They amp up the sympathy card to a ludicrous extreme, reducing everyone into caricratures. There's not even a shred of subtlety to the remake in any regard, and Damon's portrayal isn't even in the same league as Damon's. The movie certainly doesn't look as good.

There's nothing in the remake I would give the edge to over the original. Much like remakes such as "Point of No Return" and "Summersby", "The Talented Mr Ripley" does nothing but highlight what made the original work.

"It's just you and me now, sport"-Manhunter

reply