MovieChat Forums > The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) Discussion > Alternative choices Tom could have made

Alternative choices Tom could have made


I maintain that Tom's salient characteristics in this film are social envy, opportunism, desire for acceptance and poor judgement.

These led him into the apparently inescapable hole in which we saw him at the close of the film. He had committed three murders - Dickie, Freddie and Peter - and was evidently prepared to commit two more - Marge and Meredith. Due to his poor judgement, he dug himself in deeper and deeper, so it seemed probable that he would not escape justice for his crimes.

But if he hadn't met Herbert Greenleaf, what might his story have been? Despite his lowly men's room job, dismal basement apartment, and outsider status as a homosexual in the mid-1950s, he was young and relatively attractive, he was in NYC, and through his job, he had contact with wealthy connected people. He might have met someone, perhaps an older gay man, who would have loved and helped him. And then later perhaps he could blackmail him...

Thoughts?



"I am always happy to engage in POLITE discourse."

reply

I maintain that Dickie and Freddie were leeches and apoiled, narcissistic, elitist, arrogant, pampered scum. Anyone who can relate to Dickie or defend him seems stunningly naive or privileged. How dare Dickie call Tom a leech when he worked while Dickie lived off of his permissive dad doing nothing but having fun and lying around spending money all day. A more pathetic and unsympathetic slug can not be found than Dickie and Freddie. They were the real losers of the film and the world. Marge was a weak and shallow person too, clinging on Dickie like a leech. They were all leeches.

reply

Thanks for the analysis, comrade. Good luck with the revolution.

"I am always happy to engage in POLITE discourse."

De gustibus non est disputandum.

reply

the best choice tom could have made, if he wasn't sociopathic would have been to go to italy, not tell ddickie that his father sent hi drag out the expenses, return to new york and use the money and his obvious intelligence for something good. something to make him a good living.

but that was never an option, if the film/book ripleys game is anything to go buy, tom married, stayed in italy, and calmed down a little. more proof that being gay was just another scheme.

reply

[deleted]

Shouldn't trust fund babies deserve our pity and support when they are victims of murder? Why be so envious of their wealth and ease? They have something in common with the poor in that they are part of a system that keeps them in that position the same way it does the poor. I would rather be Mr. Greenleaf who built and managed a shipping firm than be the son who was born into it.

reply

Victims of murder? Ripley killed Greenleaf in an act of self-defense. One of them was not going to leave that boat alive. What would you have done had you been in Ripley's place? Let Greenleaf beat you to death in a fit of rage?

Ripley should have gone to the authorities immediately instead of dumping the body, sinking the ship, etc etc. That's where he made his the mistake from which there was no turning back.

Can't say what his chances of being found innocent of murder would have been, given the likely bias of the law in favor of Greenleaf. But at least morally the right choice would have been to have come clean and not tried to hide it.

reply

I don't think Ripley's chances of escaping prison for Dickie's murder would be very good if he confessed. The charge be reduced to accidental homicide. In Italy, where I live, right now there is a murder investigation of an American woman who was killed by a Senegalese illegal. He has confessed, after his DNA was found in her apartment and he was identified both by a witness and security camera footage. He claims he didn't intend to kill her - she had multiple skull fractures and had been strangled by a cord - but you can be sure he will be doing significant jail time.

reply

Ripley hit Dickie first, with an oar.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

reply

Of course. But how could he prove it?

reply

I am speaking more about not hating on these trust fund babies. I did not want to get into defining whether or not Dickie was a murder victim.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

reply

You said that Tom should have turned himself to the police, and handed over Dickie's bloodied body with the bashed-in skull. He would have been facing a murder charge for sure, and had no one to provide him with a good legal defense. In my opinion, leaving morals aside, he made the best choice.

reply

In my opinion, leaving morals aside, he made the best choice.

You can never leave morals aside. 

reply

I disagree. Dickie was dead, and nothing was going to bring him back to life. It was an accident. IF Tom hadn't gone on to kill Freddie and Peter, and IF he hadn't shown a willingness to kill Marge and Meredith, I don't see how it would have been better if he had been sent to prison. Those subsequent murders and potential murders were solely to protect himself from the consequences of the original accidental murder.

reply

But that's the whole point. The moral of the story. If he'd done the right thing, the moral thing, in the first place, he wouldn't have slipped all the way down that slope.

reply

In my view, Tom reacted and retaliated after being humiliated and cruelly rebuffed by someone he loved, which led to tragic consequences. He was human.

Perhaps that's the moral.

Unlike Dickie, there was nothing in Tom's past that would predict that he would commit brutal murders. Freddie's untimely end could have been predicted, because of his arrogance and condescension. Poor Peter was just collateral damage.

reply

Except remember Tom was already pretending to be Dickie when he first met Meredith? Tom was already practicing changing identities; becoming Dickie if he couldn't have him sexually was probably already pretty close to his mind.

reply

Are you saying Tom was planning to kill and replace Dickie? I think it was more that Tom was inexperienced and didn't know how small was the circle of anglophone expats in Italy. He didn't realise that Meredith would be connected to Dickie by mutual friends, if she didn't actually know him.

reply

Ripley hit Dickie first, with an oar.

He hit Greenleaf first, but it wasn't necesarily a lethal blow.
(It may have looked pretty bad, but Greenleaf still had enough strength to possibly kill Ripley.)
I don't know Italian law, and certainly not from that era. But if it had had happened in certain parts of the US today, it would have been unlawful for Greenleaf to fight back with disproportionate force. (For example, if someone slaps you, you can't then stab or shoot them and claim self-defense because such overwhelming force returned for a mere slap would be unreasonably excessive.)

Greenleaf looked like he was definitely trying to kill Ripley in a fit of rage, and looked like he might have succeeded if Ripley hadn't fought back. Remember what someone had said about Greenleaf's temper earlier in the film. He could get totally out of control when he became angry.

reply

Tom's salient characteristics in this film are social envy, opportunism, desire.
....
led him into the apparently inescapable hole.... he dug himself in deeper and deeper, so it seemed probable that he would not escape justice for his crimes.


Tom's various jobs are chosen with possibilities of mingling among the rich and powerful; at the very least, observing them.
I absolutely agree with you on these points. He has such envy, such ambition, jealousy, I'm sure there are a million words you could put here. It was like a game: "Who can I meet?" "How do I act when I meet them??" etc.

Yet it was impossible to predict what *might* happen, who *might* Tom run into in such places - if he bided his time. In this case, as you say:

But if he hadn't met Herbert Greenleaf, what might his story have been?


This is a great question. When Mr. Greenleaf meets Tom, Tom is quick but NOT thought-out. He sees an opportunity, and he grabs it, impulsively - first, mistaken to being a Princeton alum, Tom jumps in and goes for it, and by the end of the conversation Herbert Greenleaf is certain he has met a well-heeled young man. 'Does Tom want to go to Europe?' YES. His every statement, reply, to Mr. Greenleaf does nothing but increase the man's estimation of Tom. (Remember, all the menial jobs that allowed for observation of 'rich folk' :)

He is impulsive throughout the film (except when working towards *hiding* his impulsive behavior, when he seems most linear and able to think things out.)
His behavior towards Mr. Greenleaf is a perfect example. There's a mistaken identity, Tom thinks in a flash, something like "hmm this could be something...and if it isn't, I won't be worse off"; so he proceeds, turning what you might call a "fib" into a situation where he's telling lie after lie, lies that build upon one another as the conversation is going - it seems like Tom is thinking, "What next?" as in, 'how can I improve my lot in life?' which has been his goal all along.

So, ok, he's all set with this. What he has been striving towards all along... if he had NOT met Mr. Greenleaf, well, as you point out:
he was young and relatively attractive, he was in NYC, and through his job, he had contact with wealthy connected people. He might have met someone

True. He would've met *someone*, is the point, doesn't much matter who - Tom can theoretically show deep love for just about anyone, but it is really himself that he loves. For example, he thinks he makes a better Dickie Greenleaf than Dickie himself did.

As mentioned, his menial jobs all provide him with the chance to observe how one is to act, and second, well, you hang around enough and you're on your toes... *something* will happen. Maybe 5 years later - though I highly doubt it would have taken so long.
The only thing I disagree with is your comment:
He might have met someone, perhaps an older gay man, who would have loved and helped him.
He would've met someone, yes, perhaps an older gay man but not necessarily. He could take ANYONE with the imitation of charisma that he developed (Can one imitate charisma without being truly charismatic? There is a question for the ages.) An older gay man could work, but there were plenty of older women who would have worked just as well. - Of course, the men's bathroom job he's gonna meet more men than women, but still, he is AT the event and could run into anyone.
He could've met a Meredith, for example; any moneyed young woman who could introduce Tom into her family (this would not gave worked with a moneyed young man, not in the 1950's, not if he stayed in New York).
He'd have found someone else, it doesn't even matter who. He'd meet someone and go with it.. That was his purpose and he would stay in wait, for the right time, the right person...and who knows, perhaps violence would not have entered his story at all. But things added up, he got stuck, etc etc. The rest, it's hard to say if he actually IS a violent person to begin with, or if he turns into one due to circumstance. It kinda doesn't matter, within the film. There are a million interesting stories Tom could have gotten into...but this is it for Tom Ripley. No going back.

reply