I liked the dark humor scattered throughout, especially when Freddie is in the apartment. Loved the John Malkovich cameo. The black and white filming was a nod to Hitchcock imo and the lead’s performance grew on me and became believable.

I lost interest in the final episode and felt it was too long, but it does wrap up in a humorous way.

Let’s recast this series.

Who should have played the roles?

Who are the young Jude Laws and Gwyneth Paltrows of today?

And who can play arrogant weirdo better than Phillip Seymour Hoffman?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Such a disappointment about Ripley’s age. In the book he is supposed to be around 25. It doesn’t make sense he would be around Dickie and Marge’s parents age.

right? Why did they even make this choice? Have they said in interviews anywhere?

I read that the character in the Netflix series is supposed to be 36, so I have no idea why they decided to cast someone who is 47 - and looks 47. No way he looks 36.

I think he looks older than 47. And I too keep remembering the youth of the film cast and how that totally doesn't exist here, not even with Dakota Fanning, who is a great actress. She comes across middle aged.

Yes!

I don’t think the story works unless you have young, beautiful people who come across as privileged/spoiled.

The actors playing Dickie, Marge, and Freddie were just bad choices.

Andrew Scott should have played this role 15+ years ago and he would have won awards. He’s still good in it…but he’s surrounded by the wrong people.

And the black and white ruins it. They could have started in BW in NY and transitioned to color once arriving in Italy.

The cat was awesome. I hope he wins an award.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Such a disappointment about Ripley’s age. In the book he is supposed to be around 25. It doesn’t make sense he would be around Dickie and Marge’s parents age.

right? Why did they even make this choice? Have they said in interviews anywhere?

I read that the character in the Netflix series is supposed to be 36, so I have no idea why they decided to cast someone who is 47 - and looks 47. No way he looks 36.

I think he looks older than 47. And I too keep remembering the youth of the film cast and how that totally doesn't exist here, not even with Dakota Fanning, who is a great actress. She comes across middle aged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Such a disappointment about Ripley’s age. In the book he is supposed to be around 25. It doesn’t make sense he would be around Dickie and Marge’s parents age.

right? Why did they even make this choice? Have they said in interviews anywhere?

I read that the character in the Netflix series is supposed to be 36, so I have no idea why they decided to cast someone who is 47 - and looks 47. No way he looks 36.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Such a disappointment about Ripley’s age. In the book he is supposed to be around 25. It doesn’t make sense he would be around Dickie and Marge’s parents age.

right? Why did they even make this choice? Have they said in interviews anywhere?

Anonymous wrote:I'm loving it. Completely different interpretation and very interesting: everyone is a little less impressive (Dickie is a really bad artist; Marge aint all that; they are wastingtheir time), Ripley is seedier/more odd. The black and white cinematography and scenery is stunning!

I say this as someone who loves the Jude Law/Matt Damon version a lot.

But I appreciate how different it is yet still such a compelling story!

Sold, I didn't want to watch it before but your description makes it sound like great character studies

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Such a disappointment about Ripley’s age. In the book he is supposed to be around 25. It doesn’t make sense he would be around Dickie and Marge’s parents age.

I'm loving it. Completely different interpretation and very interesting: everyone is a little less impressive (Dickie is a really bad artist; Marge aint all that; they are wastingtheir time), Ripley is seedier/more odd. The black and white cinematography and scenery is stunning!

I say this as someone who loves the Jude Law/Matt Damon version a lot.

But I appreciate how different it is yet still such a compelling story!

Why bother filming in Italy if you put it in black and white?

Could have just filmed in Baltimore.

The boat scene was funny.

Visually stunning but otherwise meh so far. It’s like Scott is in a different movie than the others.

Anonymous wrote:Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Agree with all of this! No charisma in the supporting cast, and casting a 47 year old in the lead was bizarre.

Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow looked the part: privileged young Americans.

The guy who played Dickie seemed badly cast and nothing about Dakota felt right in this film.

Sting’s non-binary kid was just so odd in this film for Freddie.

Andrew Scott is brilliant…but far too old for the part.

Anonymous wrote:Why black and white?

Why is Freddie a non-binary person…in the 1960s?

Why did they cast unattractive ordinary looking actors for Dickie and Marge?

A lot of weird choices.

Yeah! Didn't production understand that there was a gender binary back then? How stupid of them. And that Dakota Fanning -- so horribly unattractive and ordinary looking.

Yeah. So many weird choices.

Why black and white?

Why is Freddie a non-binary person…in the 1960s?

Why did they cast unattractive ordinary looking actors for Dickie and Marge?

A lot of weird choices.