|
Your Scheduled Rides discount is waiting 💸
Ripley
Netflix trailer: t.ly/kpQ5k
It's creepy. And slow. And in black and white. And if this bothers you, stay away. But if in college you watched foreign films from the sixties, this will feel totally familiar.
The first thing you'll notice is the black and white. Honestly, I thought it would be like "The Wizard of Oz," turning into color at some relatively early point, but that proves to be untrue.
And the pacing... If you're used to American television it will be interminable. When "x" is killed...they'd immediately cut away in America, but the camera stays on the scene, it plays out, you feel the slowness of time, which ultimately has you inside the mind of the killer and...
I had to look up the girlfriend, Marge, an antique name if there ever was one, placing the series in time, which is the early sixties. She's attractive, but not drop-dead gorgeous, and she's not dressed to show off her assets, but the performance is so spot on that you're enamored of her character. Turns out she's played by Dakota Fanning, whose name I know, but I could not pick her out of a lineup. There was a time in the seventies when I knew every actor, followed them up the ladder, watched their career blossom, back when the world of visual entertainment was comprehensible. This was before movie actors shifted to the small screen, before the small screen got bigger. When you could be comprehensive. When films were still sometimes highbrow, before they all became cartoons, lowbrow. I think Hollywood would be stunned by the size of the audience looking for something more. Generally speaking, today's films wash over me. But I've been reading about "Civil War" to the point where I'm debating going to the theatre to see it, something I haven't done in eons.
Then again, when will it be on the small screen?
As for what you lose in screen size, environment, with sixty plus inches now the TV standard at home, that's no longer true. You don't have to see it on the big screen, never mind share it with an audience. Yes, horror movies are great with an audience, but I always loved going to the movies in the afternoon, when oftentimes there were fewer than ten people in the theatre.
Now the great thing about movies, when done right, is you get involved, you leave the rest of your life behind, it's a trip, you're transported to another world. And you'll get this same experience watching "Ripley."
However, "Ripley" is a great advertisement for upgrading your television to OLED, the image is so sharp, you forget the power of black and white, which Peter Bogdanovich used so effectively back in the day. Do today's kids even know who Bogdanovich was?
I may be the only person who is not completely thumbs-up on Andrew Scott's lead performance. He's kind of smug and at times obsequious and I didn't always find his portrayal truthful, I can't see a person acting exactly that way, unlike Dakota Fanning as Marge.
As for Johnny Flynn as Dickie Greenleaf. I expected him to be a perfect hunk, whereas he, like Ms. Fanning, is not drop-dead gorgeous, adding believability. The truth is very few people in life are so good-looking, and by casting them in films you separate the production from reality. Dickie is an intelligent rich kid, trying to separate himself from his family, that's why he's moved to Italy. Dickie is not a complete playboy, he's not a doofus, he's just too rich to have direction, a purpose in life. He's not a bad guy, he's not evil, unlike...
I retain only a few images of the 1999 film "The Talented Mr. Ripley," yet I remember that Ripley was a duplicitous scoundrel, but not much more. So the series was somewhat fresh. Then again, it's predictable. Then it's not. The pacing can make it excruciating, just like life, which is alternately boring or moving so fast you want to slow it down.
Eliot Sumner is great as Freddie, I didn't realize until just now, looking at his Wikipedia page, that he's Sting's son. Eliot can act. And he radiates a certain intelligence. And suffers no fools. He's suspicious and then his suspicions are confirmed.
As for the detective, Maurizio Lombardi as Pietro Ravini... At times he seems all-knowing, at other times out in the wilderness, and the way he always fires up a cigarette... Ravini radiates control, he doesn't care about you, just solving the crime.
And the hotel clerks... Every interaction is laden with meaning. Are they just evidencing their personality, are they suspicious, are they in cahoots with the police? Every interaction heightens your anxiety.
Maybe you don't know creeps, maybe you don't know sleaze. Maybe that's what today's elite college students are missing, having been coddled from birth. But the boomers... We've had contact with this type. Maybe hitchhiking, hanging at the bar with friends, people who you get a sixth sense about, want to stay away from. I lived with some guys who'd meet skiers on the hill and invite them to stay over, which I'd never do, I was always wary in the house when they were inside. Then again, the more open you are, the more opportunities you get. Whereas today everybody is suspicious, you can't even walk to school. You've got to be street smart to survive, and too many kids today are kept from the street.
So watching "Ripley" is going down a rabbit hole. It's not just another series to check off your list before you get to "Baby Reindeer" or another documentary about a subject you know all about anyway. "Ripley" stands alone, it's got no context, it doesn't fit in on the Netflix homepage, it's an art film.
But a series.
Yes, in Italian films of yore they could employ this slow pacing, but that's because not much really happened. But in ninety minutes, you can't slow down like this, like you can in a series. This is the right pacing for the story.
"Ripley" plays just like a foreign film of the past, it sets a mood, makes you think, engenders conversation. It's a starting point as opposed to an end point. You'll get into it and then not want to shut it off. It's both modern and of the past. Then again, people don't change.
More like this please.
--
Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, Unsubscribe
To change your email address this link
It's creepy. And slow. And in black and white. And if this bothers you, stay away. But if in college you watched foreign films from the sixties, this will feel totally familiar.
The first thing you'll notice is the black and white. Honestly, I thought it would be like "The Wizard of Oz," turning into color at some relatively early point, but that proves to be untrue.
And the pacing... If you're used to American television it will be interminable. When "x" is killed...they'd immediately cut away in America, but the camera stays on the scene, it plays out, you feel the slowness of time, which ultimately has you inside the mind of the killer and...
I had to look up the girlfriend, Marge, an antique name if there ever was one, placing the series in time, which is the early sixties. She's attractive, but not drop-dead gorgeous, and she's not dressed to show off her assets, but the performance is so spot on that you're enamored of her character. Turns out she's played by Dakota Fanning, whose name I know, but I could not pick her out of a lineup. There was a time in the seventies when I knew every actor, followed them up the ladder, watched their career blossom, back when the world of visual entertainment was comprehensible. This was before movie actors shifted to the small screen, before the small screen got bigger. When you could be comprehensive. When films were still sometimes highbrow, before they all became cartoons, lowbrow. I think Hollywood would be stunned by the size of the audience looking for something more. Generally speaking, today's films wash over me. But I've been reading about "Civil War" to the point where I'm debating going to the theatre to see it, something I haven't done in eons.
Then again, when will it be on the small screen?
As for what you lose in screen size, environment, with sixty plus inches now the TV standard at home, that's no longer true. You don't have to see it on the big screen, never mind share it with an audience. Yes, horror movies are great with an audience, but I always loved going to the movies in the afternoon, when oftentimes there were fewer than ten people in the theatre.
Now the great thing about movies, when done right, is you get involved, you leave the rest of your life behind, it's a trip, you're transported to another world. And you'll get this same experience watching "Ripley."
However, "Ripley" is a great advertisement for upgrading your television to OLED, the image is so sharp, you forget the power of black and white, which Peter Bogdanovich used so effectively back in the day. Do today's kids even know who Bogdanovich was?
I may be the only person who is not completely thumbs-up on Andrew Scott's lead performance. He's kind of smug and at times obsequious and I didn't always find his portrayal truthful, I can't see a person acting exactly that way, unlike Dakota Fanning as Marge.
As for Johnny Flynn as Dickie Greenleaf. I expected him to be a perfect hunk, whereas he, like Ms. Fanning, is not drop-dead gorgeous, adding believability. The truth is very few people in life are so good-looking, and by casting them in films you separate the production from reality. Dickie is an intelligent rich kid, trying to separate himself from his family, that's why he's moved to Italy. Dickie is not a complete playboy, he's not a doofus, he's just too rich to have direction, a purpose in life. He's not a bad guy, he's not evil, unlike...
I retain only a few images of the 1999 film "The Talented Mr. Ripley," yet I remember that Ripley was a duplicitous scoundrel, but not much more. So the series was somewhat fresh. Then again, it's predictable. Then it's not. The pacing can make it excruciating, just like life, which is alternately boring or moving so fast you want to slow it down.
Eliot Sumner is great as Freddie, I didn't realize until just now, looking at his Wikipedia page, that he's Sting's son. Eliot can act. And he radiates a certain intelligence. And suffers no fools. He's suspicious and then his suspicions are confirmed.
As for the detective, Maurizio Lombardi as Pietro Ravini... At times he seems all-knowing, at other times out in the wilderness, and the way he always fires up a cigarette... Ravini radiates control, he doesn't care about you, just solving the crime.
And the hotel clerks... Every interaction is laden with meaning. Are they just evidencing their personality, are they suspicious, are they in cahoots with the police? Every interaction heightens your anxiety.
Maybe you don't know creeps, maybe you don't know sleaze. Maybe that's what today's elite college students are missing, having been coddled from birth. But the boomers... We've had contact with this type. Maybe hitchhiking, hanging at the bar with friends, people who you get a sixth sense about, want to stay away from. I lived with some guys who'd meet skiers on the hill and invite them to stay over, which I'd never do, I was always wary in the house when they were inside. Then again, the more open you are, the more opportunities you get. Whereas today everybody is suspicious, you can't even walk to school. You've got to be street smart to survive, and too many kids today are kept from the street.
So watching "Ripley" is going down a rabbit hole. It's not just another series to check off your list before you get to "Baby Reindeer" or another documentary about a subject you know all about anyway. "Ripley" stands alone, it's got no context, it doesn't fit in on the Netflix homepage, it's an art film.
But a series.
Yes, in Italian films of yore they could employ this slow pacing, but that's because not much really happened. But in ninety minutes, you can't slow down like this, like you can in a series. This is the right pacing for the story.
"Ripley" plays just like a foreign film of the past, it sets a mood, makes you think, engenders conversation. It's a starting point as opposed to an end point. You'll get into it and then not want to shut it off. It's both modern and of the past. Then again, people don't change.
More like this please.
--
Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, Unsubscribe
To change your email address this link
May 1 - Amazon’s Prime Video ads rollout shows promise | Why video is key to Roblox’s ad strategy
|
|
|
| | ||||
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Your Scheduled Rides discount is waiting 💸
20% discount on your next 1 scheduled ride(s)! Heading to the airport? Doctor's appointment? A night out with friends? Don'...
-
In plain words, I am the music himself. So I have music forever, I have words forever. I did not inherit silver and gold and diamonds ...
-
Budweiser honors healthcare workers and military heroes in new campaign; United Airlines debuts cleaning protocols...
