Ripley was a success for Netflix, but the same can’t be said for its attempt—or lack thereof—to portray the main character’s queerness.
And maybe it’s the fault of anyone who goes into it expecting anything queer. But let’s reframe the Ripley expectations considering existing works.
The Netflix adaptation is not the first time the Tom Ripley story has been told. But it is the first time a piece of media has subverted everything about Ripley.
At their peak physical attractiveness and with careers on an upward trajectory, Matt Damon and Jude Law played the dynamics of Tom and Dickie, with Gynweth Patrow embodying Marge in the 1999 adaptation of Patricia Highsmith‘s novel.
The film is an entertaining thriller that was a hit with audiences at the time, but watching it within the past ten years, one could feel that something was off.
For one, Tom had a mixture of feelings for Dickie, but it was clear that he was attracted to Dickie. Not only by his stature in life but also his physical attractiveness.
Dickie did not feel the same, and it didn’t matter if he did because the desire for what Dickie had surpassed anything romantic or lustful Ripley ever felt about him.
As Tom kills Dickie and lives his life trying to throw people off, he also meets Peter, someone who he harbors romantic feelings for. However, Tom also kills Peter (boo!) to protect his secret.
There is not a single same-sex kiss in the film; looking at it from the lens of the time, it did as much as it could. Even with straight actors who might have been willing to go there, the audience might not have.
After all, it took six more years for anything like that to happen in the mainstream film scene with Brokeback Mountain, and if you watch HBO’s Entourage, you will get why it took that long.
The Talented Mr. Ripley is a beautifully shot film with great performances, but not gay.
When the TV adaptation was announced, it was a great opportunity to undo the crimes of the first film and Emerald Fennell‘s Ripleyesque wannabe, Saltburn.
However, after watching the series, it seems like it aimed to subvert everything about Tom and his talents.
Ripley is shot in black and white, which takes some getting used to in the 2020s when TV panels can replicate natural colors with outstanding accuracy.
Why is Netflix’s Ripley In Black and White?
Creator Steve Zaillian made the purely creative decision to make the series in black and white.
While setting out to make Ripley, Zaillian wanted to capture a different aspect of the character. He wanted the story to be dark and sinister, and he felt that doing black and white shots was a great way to achieve that.
It was also an homage to the novel he first read, something he spoke about, saying, “The edition of the Ripley book I had on my desk had an evocative black-and-white photograph on the cover.” That image stayed with him for a long time, and it is how he envisioned the story happening.
Highsmith’s novel was published in 1955, and color photos were not widely used until the 1960s. Maybe she couldn’t afford one. Also, life happens in color.
Now, making a black-and-white show in the 2020s is certainly a choice. It can turn people away from the story, but given the viewership number, it did not detract from it.
In fact, the color scheme succeeds and elevates the story. But that’s not to say if the opposite had happened, it wouldn’t be true. Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story was shot in color, and the twisted character was clear.
The story makes the show successful by taking the viewer through Tom’s mind. The show leans heavily on the darkness found in him and sticks with that for the duration of the series run.
It opens up his world, desires, and fears, showing the unfortunate man who would do anything to get ahead–anything.
But notably, Tom comes off as a one-dimensional psychopath whose desire supersedes his honest work ethic.
‘Ripley’ Works Extra Hard to Avoid Labelling the Character’s Sexuality
The jury’s still out on the effectiveness and need for labels. According to younger generations, labels are unnecessary. According to older generations, labels are unnecessary. The reasons for this vary from generation to generation, but the effect is the same.
When characters are not labeled, they can be anything. The chances of them being like everyone else rise. And queer people are not like everyone else.
Ripley had a few jobs, but its biggest task was to give viewers the Tom they were denied in 1999.
A Tom Ripley who’s confident in himself and his sexuality, but what was offered was a slouched man who had no desires apart from hate and casual ease with committing murder.
It was an opportunity to right the wrongs of the film, and while there were not many, lack of gayness was one of them.
There has never been a better time to make a gloriously gay TV show like the current time. There has never been a better platform to do it than Netflix. And there has never been a better actor for it than Andrew Scott.
When asked about the Tom in his show without any sex appeal or desire, Zaillian answered to Variety, saying,
“I don’t like to do anything overtly; I think subtlety is best. It’s not that I’m trying to hide anything, but I think it’s all there.”
Steven Zaillian – Variety
Scott went deeper with his answer, saying,
“I didn’t want to diagnose him with anything in particular. I don’t think he would be comfortable in a gay bar or a straight bar. I think his sexuality is elusive to him. I think he has a feeling of love for him [Dickie]. Sometimes it could be sexual. Sometimes it could be fraternal. And sometimes it could just be amicable.”
Andrew Scott – Variety
Now, these are word salads.
One could not expect anything else different in the form of an answer because it is clear that the show was actively trying to avoid making itself “gay”–even with characters like Freddie Mills (Eliot Sumner), who is in a relationship with a man, Max Yoder (Louis Hoffmann).
Did you forget that? That’s because it’s very forgettable.
While it was never clear whether Ripley was in love with Dickie in the source material, it is worth considering when it was published and how much leeway the publisher had.
At least with The Talented Mr. Ripley, there was enough homoerotism to make it noteworthy.
With Ripley, it’s just a story, and one can’t even critique it because it is clear that it was what they were aiming for.
The template for remaking movies from the 1990s, when it was peak homoeroticism, is Interview with the Vampire.
That’s what Ripley should have been.