So he still has one loose end to tie and that's Meredith. She thinks he's Dickie who is dead and she will obviously tell people that she saw Dickie on the boat. At some point it would have to get back to Marge and Dick's father even if it takes years. What do you think Tom does about this?
shareI haven't read the book, but apparently he manages to get off the boat and disappear. It is a very big plot hole, because as Tom has seen, the anglophone expat community in Europe in the late 1950s is small and interconnected.
But somehow, even if Meredith and her family did report that they saw Dickie on the boat, Tom would manage to get out of it.
Yeah, I agree that he would find some way out of it.
This has bothered me for years. I really want to know how Tom will handle this situation. Of course when word gets around that Dickie was alive and well, this will send red flags to Marge. Also to Meredith when she hears that Dickie "killed himself".
Maybe Tom will kill Meredith after they get off the boat but then again, she probably told her family that Dickie is on it and they will see him. Maybe she won't tell them because she was told by him that he was in a protection program and she doesn't want to create problems for him. Who knows. I wish we did lol. Meredith is way too much of a liability to Tom getting away with all of the murders. At some point, the only way Tom can ensure his getting away with it would be to kill Meredith.
So then why did he kill Peter if he was just going to disappear when he got off the boat?
shareIf Peter ran into Meredith, as he inevitably would have, Tom's deception of pretending to be Dickie would have been exposed. Peter would have told her that Dickie had disappeared. He thought about getting Peter to remain in the cabin to prevent that. I maintain that he could have just told Peter that he had been playing a game with Meredith, pretending to be Dickie. Peter was so in love with him that he probably would have gone along with it. But Tom wasn't taking any chances of a meeting between Peter and Meredith, so he killed him to ensure that never happened.
Until he met Meredith, Tom wasn't planning to just disappear when he got off the boat. All except for Meredith, Tom's identity as Dickie was over. He had escaped detection as Dickie's and Freddie's murderer, he had been given Dickie's trust fund to live on, and he had Peter, someone who loved and wanted him. Everything was perfect...until Meredith showed up. He would certainly have killed her, but the presence of her family prevented that. After killing Peter to buy some time, he would have had to either disappear, either into the Middle East or North Africa, or killed Meredith as soon as possible.
But even if he had managed to kill Meredith later, her family could have said they had met 'Dickie' on the boat. He had already met her aunt in Rome. All he could do was disappear and hope the past didn't catch up with him.
Exactly... "all he would have to do is disappear" which he was going to anyway. Which still doesn't answer my question in why he killed Peter. Because either way he was screwed. Dickie had supposedly killed himself. And Meredith (whether he killed Peter or let Peter live) still saw him on the boat. So he was screwed the second he saw Meredith on the boat. If he had disappeared, just like you said, word would have gotten around that 'Dickie' was seen on the boat and the police, and Dickie's father and Marge would have immediately known it was Tom, especially after Meredith and fam described his looks. So why kill Peter when he was going down anyway? He would have spared Peter's life. Peter's presence being alive wouldn't have made his case any worse, it was already as bad as it could have been. Peter saying he was with Tom wouldn't worsen or better how utterly effed he was being seen on the boat as 'Dickie'
I think him killing Peter was for drama and shock value to add to the drama of the film, and make things more sad honestly. It was pretty pointless. In fact keeping Peter alive may have helped things if anything. Peter could have been his alibi and told people Meredith must be going crazy. Tom could have yes, like you said, told Peter it was a game and asked him to go along with it and help him so he doesn't get in trouble. But Peter could have told everyone Tom was with him the entire time on the boat as Tom and that Meredith is getting her social circle messed up. It would be risky. But either way killing Peter wasn't actually necessary if he was going to disappear anyway.
As I said, he killed Peter to buy himself some time. He wanted to avoid the inevitable confrontation between Peter and Meredith and her family, where his charade would have been exposed. He could not have colluded with Peter in saying Meredith was crazy, because, remember, Tom had already gone to the opera with Meredith and her aunt as 'Dickie'.
All of Tom's murders were impulsive and unplanned (Dickie's death was accidental). Tom was apparently prepared to kill Marge with a razor, despite Peter being expected at any moment, all because she had discovered Dickie's rings, something he could easily have explained. So he wasn't a very strategic killer; he made avoidable blunders.
Tom's success depended on him never running into Meredith or her family. Also, Marge was angry and bitter because she knew Tom had killed Dickie. It's possible she would have made it her business to prove it. At the very least, she would have broadcast her suspicions far and wide. Additionally, it is clear that Freddie Miles came from a wealthy family. They could have hired a detective to uncover Freddie's killer. Tom's only hope would have been to disappear somewhere far, far away and change his identity.
Few problems with this, all of which must be increasingly maddening for Marge:
(1) as far as Freddie's family are concerned (assuming they're still around), he was murdered by Dickie, who's since killed himself, so they may not want to reopen old wounds by hiring someone to start a new investigation. As far as they're concerned, the case is closed
(2) The way Mr Greenleaf and the private detective dismiss Marge as "hysterical" and her suspicions as "female intuition", the patronising way she was referred to as Dickie's "sweetheart", possibly summed up the attitude women faced at the time, especially among that set. It's unlikely Freddie's family, of the same background, would take her any more seriously. It would just be dismissed as her not wanting to believe/face "the truth" about her beloved Dickie.
(3) If Dickie's own father believes him to be the murderer, why would Freddie's family doubt this
(4) As revealed by the private detective, there's enough from Dickie's past to reasonably believe that Dickie was capable of it (and while Marge wouldn't be privvy to this, we the viewers see evidence of this on the boat. Although he lashes out at him with the oar, Tom is immediately apologetic and wants to help, but Dickie starts strangling him and Tom has to fight him off in self defence - you have to wonder if other people have witnessed similar behaviour from Dickie when he lost his temper)
All this is assuming Meredith even saw Marge again - the only time they met was when Tom "arranged" it, so there's no inevitability that their paths would cross again. They live in different parts of Italy, if both even stay on there. Plus, given the animosity or awkwardness between them (Marge believing Meredith tried to "steal" Dickie from her in Rome) it's unlikely they'd actively seek each other out.
You are right. The second Meredith spotted him on the boat the charade was over. Tom made a safe bet by killing Peter since he would most likely run into Meredith on the boat. If he spares Peter he risks getting caught right away, but if he kills him then he has ample time to disappear and start a new life somewhere once he gets to Athens. He really has no other choice but to become a ghost a this point. Like you said he could have spared Peter and played dumb with Meredith but it would be risky. Even if Tom managed to pull all that off the charade was still over. Word would get back to Marge and she would remember Tom was with Peter.
Everything would've been just fine if he never ran into Meredith. Dicky and Freddy are already dead, but now Peter is expected at his concert in Athens, but he never shows up. Tom already told Marge he's going to a concert in Athens with Peter, but now Peter has vanished off the face of the earth! Marge would eventually hear about Peter missing and immediately put two and two together. Eventually Meredith would be questioned and she would tell Marge she was on the boat with Dicky. Marge would show her a picture of Dicky and Meredith would realize she's been played. They would go to Mr Greenleaf and tell him everything. Greenleaf would then have his detective conduct a rigorous investigation.
The good news for Tom is he will have a big head start, and if he stays out of trouble, and keeps a low profile he will probably never get caught.
Hey, why all the pessimism?
Did you miss what is the main talent of Mr Ripley?
He is lucky.
As the books delighfully describe, he expects the police to be there at his arrival ready to capture him.
But in mid 20th century, surprise! Nothing happens.
He waltzes off the boat and on with his life, NEVER to be bothered again.
Why can't the same happen after this film?
He can explain who he is, and that Dickie had been wanted by the police (as Detective McCairn told Mr.Ripley).
Anyway, it is FICTION..(I've loved that movie ever since seeing it in its 1999-2000 run)
Very fascinating movie with COMPLETELY period piece background and vehicles (all female, like Marge said boats should be, in that one scene where Dickie's boat was named Bird after Charlie Parker..)(see "Very Quote Movie" from me). I was born a few after eh 1958 or whatever setting. So good that no anachronisms (except Freddie's singing mike in the store and few others.) The movie only more makes want to go to Italy! (sigh)
I don't see that as a plot hole but the downfall of Tom, eventually. Meredith would somehow cross path with Dickie's family in the future and the stories would not match. Not to say any photograph of Dickie would tell Meredith the Dickie she knew was someone else. And all things point to that man to be Tom.
For sure Tom was going to kill everyone at that point. The most logically point for Tom is either disappear and risk Meredith telling the story; or get off the boat first, and then kill Meredith on a one a one situation. I don't remember where the boat was going. It could be back to the States or somewhere in Europe. Anyhow, killing both Peter and Meredith would set off a chain of alarms. It's like everyone around Tom got killed off within days. It's hard to overlook Tom.
The boat was going to Greece, because Peter had a concert in Athens. Tom should have just disappeared after Marge and Dickie's father left. But even so, he ran the risk of encountering the ubiquitous Meredith! At some point, he would have to come clean to her that he was not Dickie, because Dickie had disappeared.
Marge's suspicions were not going to die. She would have spread them far and wide, and Tom would have become poison among the wealthy east coast US-American expat crowd.
True. Eventually Meredith would find out. Best thing to do is just to disappear. As long as Mr. Greenleaf is not pressing for these matters Tom should be safe. Tom does not mix well with the wealthy expat anyway, and Mr Greenleaf probably doesn't want him to. Marge would be soon dating another wealthy guy and got married shorty after (this is the 50's).
Whether or not Meredith would tell the story to Mr Greenleaf would be another story. The best case scenario for Tom would be Mr Greenleaf says he doesn't want to hear another word about the Tom Dickie relationship. Ending Meredith's story.
For sure Tom was going to kill everyone at that point. The most logical point for Tom is either disappear and risk Meredith telling the story; or get off the boat first, and then kill Meredith on a one a one situation.
Yes we almost forget about that blasted Meredith don't we. Tom really doesn't plan most of what he does, he's a quick study as PSHs charter says before getting killed. Even impersonating dicky was after the desk clerk failed to notice it was really tom. He really should've skipped back to new York but he's hooked on the lifestyle and decides to keep playing the game this time with Peter. He accidentally says hes dicky to Peter. Uh oh. His luck has run out. Really interesting to speculate if he got away.. I haven't read the book, but it does seem likely he gets off but it's doubtful he gets away with it this time.. but it was doubtful he ended up getting money and escaping Scott free but he does.
shareI always wondered the same thing.
The best solution would have been to go South to Egypt or to the Levant. I imagine he might have been able to disappear somewhere in Lebanon or Israel back in the 1950's. Both countries had fairly large English speaking communities. Of course Lebanon back in the period was another highly regarded vacation destination so he might have run into Meredith there too after some time had passed.
Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death.
Good plan. The expat crowd in North Africa and the Middle East was different from the one to be found in London or the European countries around the Mediterranean. A lot of gay expats chose Tangiers, for example. I don't see Meredith venturing further than Greece.
The question is, when could Tom get rid of Meredith? Perhaps he could have arranged to meet her alone in Athens and then killed her.
Meredith is way too sweet to hold a grudge and (alert, BAD "holding" pun afoot) she would love to hold Tommy tight, she'd no matter, prefer HIM to Dickie.
shareMaybe that witness protection/protective custody story Tom told Meredith would hold her over, but I suppose Tom had to eliminate Peter for fear of exposure, since Peter probably wouldn't go along with Tom pretending to be Dickie (even though he was pretending to be Dickie the entire time they knew each other), so that protective custody deal wouldn't fly with both Peter & Meredith being in the same location.
On an unrelated note, I found Meredith to be especially dishy.
Meredish.
shareWhat *I* want to know is...
What the FUCK did Ripley do with Peter's corpse???
There's no privacy on a cruise ship, there's a working crew around 24/7, and passenger cabins are always accessed through corridors, where people may be up at all hours partying or being seasick. When was there a time to get the body to the rail, and throw it into the sea, without being noticed??? Was Ripley strong enough to carry a grown man of average size to a rail and heave it over? Because FYI human corpses are incredibly heavy, awkward, and horrible things, even before they go into rigor mortis...
he did manage to carry, or at least drag, freddie miles' body, didn't he? and he seemed way heavier than peter.
besides, from what other people said, it seems in the book Tom just flees the ship. If peter is the only one that knows he is tom, not dickie, and peter is dead, he might leave peter's corpse in the cabin, leave the ship somehow and disappear
First of all, how can one flee a ship in mid-ocean? And if he did run for it once the ship made port, and left the corpse to be discovered, then he'd be wanted for murder, and Meredith and her family would spread the word about a murderer pretending to be Dickie Greenleaf to the whole Expat Society world. In a week, every English-speaking rich bastard on the Continent would know the story, and Ripley wanted to fit in with the English-speaking rich bastards of the Continent.
No, if he could just get rid of the corpse, then he could go on pretending to be Dickie until he could transfer his financial assets to a new identity, but to buy that much time he'd need to get rid of that heavy, awkward, gruesome corpse...
No, if he could just get rid of the corpse, then he could go on pretending to be Dickie until he could transfer his financial assets to a new identity, but to buy that much time he'd need to get rid of that heavy, awkward, gruesome corpse.
If rigor mortis hadn't set in, borrowing a cart late at night would be his best bet. But he'd still have to lift the corpse of an average-sized man over the right rail somehow,, which means traveling through the ship and then lifting the corpse by main strength to the top of the rail. Say the corpse weighs around 170 pounds, well, when was the last time you housted 170 pounds of dead weight onto cart height or rail height? Ripley was moderately fit, but not big and powerful, it'd be hard for him...
And once away from the ship, I don't know what identity he'd take. Maybe take the first trail to Switzerland to think things out. I doubt he'd go back to being Top Ripley, as Tom Ripley might be under suspicion in the disappearance of Dickie Greenleaf, and he couldn't be Dickie a lot longer. I understand that in the book's sequels, he assumed identity after identity, perhaps that's where he started.
Well I like to think Malkovich in "Ripley's Game" is literally the same character, years down the road and considerably more cynical, selfish and sociopathic. He's just as mercurial and short-sighted as Matt Damon's Ripley, just a lot more ruthless.
Which means I think "Tom Ripley" is a safe identity as long as he avoids Meredith and her family going forward. I that's do-able as long as he avoids that society's "known haunts," since they do appear to be creatures of habit.
Makes sense, then, that in "Ripley's Game," Tom's still a poser and a wannabe, now trying to fit in with an entirely different group of "high society" regulars.
Surely he just invites her back to his cabin, bends her over and ties a belt around her neck.
Hops off at the next stop and disappears and leaves the 2 dead corpses to Dickie Greenleaf
The one thing he can't do is kill Meredith on board the ship, and chuck the corpse and have her vanish. If a rich woman vanishes, the captain radios the police, and the ship is quarantined until the killer is found. And when the body washes up on some beach with a broken hyoid bone, then Ripley would be under quarantine and facing a murder investigation being pushed along by a rich and powerful family, and a man whose cabin-mate is nowhere to be found would be a prime suspect.
His options are limited to doing what he's going to do, playing along with Meredith and her family and then leaving town before things get awkward, and pushing her over the side when people will see her fall but won't see her be pushed. That's harder than it sounds, because he's got to act when there are people around, and he's got to make absolutely sure she dies with no mark on her body. Because if she is a good swimmer or just gets lucky, she'll be screaming that Tom pushed her when she's hauled on deck.
Yeah, killing Meredith is out of the question.
That was established with Tom's first question to her: "Are you alone?"
I saw this in the theater and it actually got a big laugh. We all know what he's thinking: "Are you alone ... and can you SWIM???"
1 he could put him in their luggage, chop him up to fit in the window or wait for a quiet moment at night to just carry him out.
The cart plan is good.
2 other than Marge and Meredith, nobody knows he is with Peter. Or even that Peter is on the boat. Tickets were anonimous.
When is Peter expected? How hard will they look for him?
I doubt any police would ever be involved, in a few days after their arrival the concert hall would just call Peter's hotel and maybe home number in Venice.
No answer? Fuck him, just quickly find a replacement.
There is no case in the news about Peter, who also, being gay, looked like a loner with no family and close friends. He just vanished, like a lot of people does even nowadays.
3 no, in the books he takes no other identities, he is just Tom (only occasionally he impersonates smebody, but he lives as Tom Ripley).
He arrives with the boat expecting to be arrested, but he is not, nobody looks for him ever again.
An adult male corpse wouldn't fit in any luggage except a steamer trunk, and the problem with chopping up corpses is that they leak afterwards! So I suppose that if Ripley had had a steamer trunk and was willing to throw most of his clothes over the rail to make room, AND he was landing someplace where there was no danger of customs officials going through his luggage, he could have gotten the corpse off of the ship and worry about disposing of it later, and if you've ever thought about disposing of a corpse in a region you aren't familiar with it's harder than you'd think. I can't imagine how hard it would be to dispose of a corpse in a place as crowded as Venice, where every single inch of public space is overlooked by 37 apartments and there's no unpaved ground to dig in, if that's where he was landing, it'd be as bad as trying to do it on the ship!
Anyway, if you ever wanted to cut a shipboard corpse into pieces and throw it into the ocean without anyone noticing, you'd have to have the right kind of cabin. Some cruise ship cabins have balconies or portholes that are directly over the ocean and a good platform for tossing body parts, some cabins have portholes that don't open (as on my one cruises), other cruise ship cabins have portholes or balconies that overlook a deck, and that would mean that in order to get the corpse or parts into the ocean, you're back to having to leave the cabin. Seriously, I wish they'd taken a minute of film to show how Ripley did it, because it's a very difficult task.
But I think you're right, if Ripley wasnt' caught with the corpse, it's unlikely that anyone would look very hard for Peter. He was gay and living as an expat, which during that era would suggest he was estranged from his family, and perhaps that his family would actually be happy if he vanished without a trace. That's how things were, in the Bad Old Days.
Yes, chopping it up would be the least feasible. Imagine he actually manages to cut it and to push it out, and then all the parts leave a nice track of blood on the side of the ship.
But the trunk idea would be: put Peter in the trunk, lock it tightly, roll the trunk out of the cabin, park it in a good uncospicuous spot (like next to other boxes or under one of those cargo blankets), guard it for the day so it is left undisturbed, then at night throw the trunk overboard.
Also Ripley is great at getting what he wants, he could make up a good lie to justify the need for his trunk to get fresh air (he has some precious tea shipment in it that needs colder temperatures than the cabin? Some bs like that).
If Ripley is going to roll a trunk out of his cabin and leave it someplace random, I hope he remembered to bring a heavy padlock and a length of chain to secure it on board! Because thefts happen on cruise ships, anyone aboard with larcenous tendencies would definitely want a look inside, and it's not like there's a hardware store in a cruise ship where he could buy the lock and chain. And then if it's a question of tipping the trunk out of the ship, he'd probably need to add some weights to make sure it sinks... and again you have the problem of trying to get a heavy trunk with a human corpse and some weights in it over the ship's rail. Without being seen.
I wonder if the book answered the question of how the heck Ripley dealt with the body?
There was no Peter homicide, nor Peter love story, in the book. Where Ripley is straight, or a closeted gay at most.
He is on the run from his previous Italian endeavours, he expect to find the police at the shore waiting for him.
Back to Peter's corpse, wouldn't a standard trunk for this kind of travel automatically be lockable and tightly so? No need to buy an extra lock and chain.
And for floating, come on, I doubt it would stay watertight for days, it would just get flooded and sink on its own.
I can see a scene like in Psycho, with Ripley at the back of the ship doubting for a minute when the trunk is still floating, then after a bit he sees it no more, and smiles. Hey wait, I just realized this scene is in the movie already, when he sinks Dicky's boat, lol.
You might be able to fit an adult corpse into a trunk, but by the 1950s hard suitcases were in style, and as young bachelors who weren't clotheshorses I presume both Ripley and Peter would be traveling comparatively light, so I'd guess they were both carrying suitcases too small for a corpse. But if one of them had had a trunk, well, probably best to weight it, as if the ship is going from one part of Italy to another, they're never going to be far from shore and it just wouldn't do for the trunk to wash up on a beach or be found by a fisherman.
And you've still got to get the corpse over the rail unseen on a crowded ship...
Otter, sorry but I disagree with your whole post.
Ripley loved owning clothes, and now that he was rich would definitely be the kind of guy to travel with a little wardrobe trunk full of different outfits and other vain crap.
Weighting it is certainly a good idea, but going from Venice to Greece the boat would be in deep waters, hundred of miles away most of the time, with seriously zero chance of anything reaching any shore unless it was made to float.
And to get it over the rail, a Peter filled trunk would weight max 80/85 kg. Not light but he could just roll it on the rail itself a couple of times till it climbs it, or use some other object to start higher and then push it above. Or maybe a little plank to slide it up?
Or how about a door on the railing itself?
Was there any such opening at all to load/unload on mid century ferries? Back then public safety was a joke, so maybe boats had some gate on the railing.
Hey, I understand none of this is ideal for a murder, but these kind of crazy plots are typical Ripley, particularly when he is covering his naughty deeds.
actually, Meredith doesn't know he's with Peter either - she says her aunt thinks she saw him, and Tom/Dickie dismisses this, saying he hasn't seen Peter in months, and categorically states that he's travelling alone
share