Ripley star Andrew Scott discusses steppingAndrew Scott discusses queer-coding and the making of a killer in his character from Patricia Highsmith's "The Talented Mr. Ripley" and subsequent novels.
It's great to finally find an interview that allows Andrew to actually share his insights about the character without being interrupted after 20 seconds. Thank you for a respectful interview.
He's such a talented intelligent lovely guy, and I admire his professionalism promoting this Ripley series on Netflix, given he has just lost his beloved Mum. I think he may be wearing her cardigans for comfort in the early stages of grief. I can relate to that, and I respect him for being able to function better than I was able to do at the same stage.
ANDREW SCOTT can't do no wrong when it comes to acting...he is one of the most fascinating actors of this generation💎👌🏾👌🏾 And he is so charming, smart and humble in these interviews that its impossible not to enjoy him.
I've seen several interviews with Andrew on this role and all have been interesting, but since you allowed him to speak fully, this has been the best and most thorough analysis of the character I've seen thus far. Well done.
Great interview! Reviews by top critics said Tom has NO love or whatever for Dickie and it's just his life and wealth that Tom wants. This interview with Andrew has proven that wrong!! Andrew Scott is an AWESOME actor....I subscribed to Netflix just for Ripley and I do not regret it a bit!
Well these critics 1) have little interpretation skills and 2) haven't read the book, obviously. Another reason could be a more or less subconscious wish to "straight-wash" Ripley, as was the habit with every gay character in the past (speak: Death in Venice), but perhaps that's not the case in 2024 anymore.
He would be great as the new James Bond (even though he was in Spectre who cares) Even if it was a one of would be cool.They need to stop doing bond in modern times and do one set in the 60s etc cooler clothes,it's not all about computers and cellphones,cctv etc
Great interview. Such a great production and Andrew's performance is SOOO good! To be honest, as a cis-het-white, somewhat priviliged (some ways not) person, (who also has issues with all that new kind of language because it can also be "othering", but I'm over 50 and that's a longer more complicated conversation) I love how Andrew points out that the isolation the character feels and the rage that ALL humans are capable of is what gives this character the ability to attract our empathy despite his horrible crimes. So fascinating! I now want to read everything by Patricia Highsmith. (Didn't know she wrote Strangers On A Train!! One of my favorite Hitchcocks!) I just read a thing about her where she was asked why she prefered to be alone most of the time. She said (paraphrase): "It's not that I don't like people, but my imagination works better when their not around". Ripley was partially her! (Save for the murders of course).
May I ask why it is so important to point out that we are cis-het-white-folks with some privilege just to be able to express an opinion on someone's acting?
Yeah, we should just say "people who experienced killing other people". Just like we all say "men who have sex with men" instead of "gay". And also let's not forget: "people first"!
I understand Ripley received outstanding reviews from ALL the critics and the dedicated fan base LOVED this series. If truth be told, I found it quite SLOW moving - EIGHT HOURS and IMHO, it could have been edited down to 3-4 one hour episodes if the editing was tighter. There are far too many very long scenes with zero dialogue - Ripley sitting alone at a street cafe reading the newspaper, blah, blah, blah - the first episode wastes about 25 minutes filming him on the train and bus travelling to the village where Dickie Greenleaf lives. When Ripley first arrives in town, he doesn't even have Dickie's home address, which seemed quite odd, because Dickie's multi-millionaire father had his mailing address and frequently would send him letters. Tom spends about 15 minutes at the post office, speaking in very broken Italian trying to get Dickie's home address from the post office clerk.....too many scenes of Tom sitting in his residence, staring into space - silent. The oddest part about this version was months after Dickie was murdered and his decomposed body is at the bottom of the lake, tied to a huge rope on a concrete anchor - there are several scenes of Tom and Dickie having conversations, as though Dickie is still alive (?) I could not figure out if this was a dream sequence or Dickie was having psychotic breaks? I prefered the Jude Law, Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow version BUT I did slog through all 8 hours of the Netflix series ONLY because of Andrew Scott's spellbinding performance. I loved the aesthetics of the black and white photography. There was a massive difference in how Dickie, Tom and Marge roles were portrayed - comparing the 2 hour film with this new Netflix series. All 3 characters are far colder and lack social skills - in the 2 hour film version - Dickie has a breezy, superficial jazzy charm, yet it was easy to realize he has no "center" at the core of his personality - just an idle trust fund kid, no semblance of artistic talent who is floating through life on water-wings.....in the 2 hour film I loved the sequence when Dickie and Tom visit an Italian jazz club and Dickie, as a hard core narcissist takes over the jazz band and starts banging on the drums, completely oblivious to the other, professional musicians. In the 8 hour Netflix version, Marge and Frederkick Miles immediately dislike Tom (with good reason) and are openly dismissive of him in the Netflix series - I preferred the 2 hour film version because of Phillip Seymour Hoffmans masterful performance. There was much more screen time with Frederick Miles and Tom interacting together and it was gratifying to watch Phillip Seymour Hoffman "spill the tea" and call out Tom for being a grifter, freeloading leech and a massive phony - in the Netflix series, they only meet briefly once - and the next encounter, Dickie murders him. The film version was better IMHO because Marge and Dickie had many affectionate scenes together and the audience could watch how there was genuine affection between them - they are ENGAGED and living together in Dickies villa in the 2 hour film version - in the Netflix version, there is no semblance of romance between them - and they live separately in different residences. There was a massive contrast in how Marge was portrayed in the film and the Netflix series - Gwyeneth Paltrows interpretaion of Marge is a woman with a sunny, friendly, fairly naieve, ingenous personality - but in the Netflix series - Marge seems to be a bitter shrew. I slogged through ALL 8 hours in a 2 day "binge streaming" fest solely because of Andrew Scott's brilliant performance and the exquisite cinematography. Despite how very slow moving it was - I still greatly admired Scott's bravura performance. I highly recommend streaming "Fleabag" - I think (?) it is on Netflix - I watched the entire series multiple times since it first was broadcast - Andrew Scott plays a completely different type of character - in "Fleabag" he is cast as a charming, romantic leading man - typically, he plays rotten to the core vililans - so "Fleabag" was a nice change of pace.
Why are so many people on the internet using the word ‘coded’ now? Did some tick tick type discover Stuart Hall and now it’s the only thing people want to reference (presumably without reading Hall himself).
It's not explicit, so its coded. Its not that deep nor is it a recent term to be used. It's been used online since there has been a queer community online.
@@decadeofmcfly there’s definitely a proliferation of the word online. I’m an academic, familiar with the quotidian and media studies contexts for the word, but there has been an odd use of it online recently, when other words would be more apposite (“That’s so X coded”). I blame ThickTok.
Because it makes the user sound intellectual. Btw, there is no need to "queer-code" Ripley. He's obviously gay. In the book as well as in the Matt Damon adaptation.
What a great interview. This performance put the queer, front and centre in the Ripley character. Amazing to here 21st century queer linguistic constructs applied to historical characters. Love!
Please stop using the word "queer" so 1950s. Try gay. Or homosexual. It's like the use of "straight " I wish my community would use heterosexual .
5 месяцев назад
Absolutely and totally agree with you. Putting aside the New Queer Cinema ( The Living End ' etc ) which was short lived, it is no longer applicable, and never should have been, to our lives. When asked I just say I am in a same sex relationship.
The goal should be just to be able to say 'in a relationship' you might not be too clear on Andrews personal (public) views on his sexuality if you think he'd do that. There are factions of the community that have reclaimed the f slur, so if you view queer as a slur or see it as innapropriate then prehaps view the stories and such of people who do claim that word and understand that there is more than your own experience at play here.
I wish people would stop to use "content" the way it's been used since yesterday. I also don't like "cultural appropriation" simply because there is no such thing. Or "literally" when it means "not literally". But there isn't much I can do, right? It's the sum of language users who decide.
The interviewer is a pain in the neck. She’s desperate to put Ripley in a ‘gay box’ or in today’s fashionable word ‘queer’ which some of us find offensive still.
Sorry - who were you listening to? What interview were you listening to - one happening in your biased imagination? Andrew is very articulate about his understanding of the character and their sexuality. The interviewer simply supports that - their actual job.
Your experiences are not everyones. You thinking of queer as a slur is unfortunant, all over the world though, people have different relationships with words. Reclaim the term that was a slur. Reclaim it. Don't hide from it. Reclaim and rewrite. We cannot change history and turning your back rather than educating and learning is a misguided choice to make.
I still find "queer" offensive. In fact I feel slightly sick when I hear it. It was the normal word used by people of my parents' generation to describe people like me. It was always said with cruelty and with a sneer. It was also a term of abuse used in schools. Black people don't have to hear people talking about "n*****s". The word is rightly no longer used. "Queer" is just as offensive to gay people but we have to hear it all the time. I loved Ripley and didn't see the character as gay at all. He was a solitary con man, as Andrew Scott said.
