The character of Tom Ripley was never meant to be pigeonholed. He is, in many respects, a walking contradiction â much like author Patricia Highsmith herself.

Fresh from All of Us Strangers (2023), Andrew Scott plays the title role in Netflixâs new series Ripley, a mini-series based on Patricia Highsmithâs 1955 novel The Talented Mr. Ripley. News publisher Out claimed Scottâs Ripley for gayness. However, Scottâs own aspirations are more ambiguous, saying âheâs a queer character, in the sense that heâs very âotherâ.â
In the novel, Tom Ripley is sent to Europe by Dickie Greenleafâs father to persuade him to come home to America. However, once he arrives, Tom becomes obsessed with Dickie and his lifestyle. When Dickie rejects him, he kills him and steals his identity. And this is only the first of his murders.
Highsmith wrote Ripley as having an elusive sexuality. As the character Marge says in the book: âHe may not be queer. Heâs just a nothing, which is worse. He isnât normal enough to have any kind of sex life.â
Each era since Highsmithâs novel has had its own screen version of Ripley, responding to its own sexual and moral times. Scottâs Ripley is different yet again: an enigma who is both compelling and frightening â connected to sexuality, but resistant to explanations, labels or pigeonholes.
Previous adaptors have âsolvedâ the problem of Ripleyâs ambiguous sexuality and amorality by pigeonholing him, and making sure he got caught â both of which Highsmith pointedly avoided.
In 1960, director RenĂ© ClĂ©ment made Ripley straight in Plein Soleil. In the final scene, the police close in to arrest him. In 1999, Anthony Minghella made him gay in The Talented Mr. Ripley. Minghella asserted that Ripleyâs âpathology is not explained by his sexualityâ, yet he punishes Ripley through his gayness when he has him kill his lover.
Refreshingly, Claude Chabrolâs Les Biches, thought to be loosely based on The Talented Mr. Ripley, neither pigeonholes nor punishes its lesbian/bisexual protagonist. The film was made against the countercultural foment of 1968. Its protagonist is so anonymous she is known only as âWhyâ and is not caught.
Scottâs Ripley is equally sensitive to its times. Scott said he and director Steven Zaillian were âvery concerned with labelling in 2024. [âŠ] Ripley wouldnât be comfortable in a gay bar; [âŠ] he wouldnât be comfortable in a straight bar.â
Gayness as a whole is not subtext in Zaillianâs production. Freddie Miles (Eliot Sumner) is explicitly gay. Dickie Greenleaf (Johnny Flynn) asserts âIâm not queerâ in the defensive manner of âsomeone who absolutely isâ, as observed by Digital Spyâs David Opie. Ripley plants a kiss on Freddieâs corpse while manhandling it. Inspector Ravini (Maurizio Lombardi) suspects Dickie and Miles were âinvolvedâ. And, finally, Ripley projects his own gay crush back onto Dickie.
At the same time, the series shows a sincere commitment to fluidity. Non-binary Sumner plays Freddie Miles, their slight embodiment contrasting with Philip Seymour Hoffmanâs fleshy, aggressive, bitchy, camp machismo in Minghellaâs adaptation.
The choice to embrace fluidity is also strategic as it keeps Zaillian open to sequels that could stick to Highsmithâs original plots. In subsequent Ripliad novels, Tom marries a woman. Although there are ongoing hints of bisexuality, Highsmith said: âI donât think Ripley is gay. [âŠ] Iâm not saying heâs very strong in the sex department. But he makes it in bed with his wife.â
If this is confusing, it is because Highsmith herself was a contradictory figure. She was a lesbian, but exhibited internalised homophobia. She was a woman, but wrote a collection of stories entitled Little Tales of Misogyny.
Her Ripley oscillates between the identities Dickie and Tom in The Talented Mr. Ripley, and between points of sexual identification in the wider Ripliad in an uneasy way that destabilises fixed identities. Ripley is by turns gay and straight, queer and nothing.
So, does Scott do well at playing ânothingâ? On one hand, the actor has said, âsometimes the reason we feel unnerved by certain people is because we donât know their backstory [âŠ] Whatâs wonderful about Ripley is we have no ideaâ. But he has also said âitâs actually the blankness thatâs sometimes hard to engage withâ.
Playing a sexual nullity is a departure for Scott. He was the outrageously camp Lord Merlin in The Pursuit of Love (2017), the hot priest in Fleabag (2019), and the heartbreaking gay man in All of Us Strangers. He has also played âqueer-codedâ villains, such as Moriarty in BBCâs Sherlock (2010â17), and Max Denbigh (codenamed C) in Spectre (2015).
To the character of Ripley he brings an ambiguous charisma and a Machiavellian sapiosexuality â sexiness that comes from being very, very intelligent.

Scott has said he resists being typecast as a gay character. Photo: Netlix
Scottâs one definite statement about Ripley is that âhis sexuality or sensuality comes out of his relationship with things â art, clothes, props, music.â Certainly, his Ripley has a love/hate relationship with âthingsâ. He desires Dickieâs pen, watch, ring and Picasso.
At the same time, inanimate objects prove to be obstacles as Ripley laboriously cleans up after his impulsive murders. Thereâs a boat he canât burn or scupper, an elevator that seizes up when he is trying to carry a body downstairs. The ring almost proves his undoing. And as Slate culture columnist Laura Miller writes, âwhat is a corpse if not an inconvenient person transformed into an even more inconvenient thing?â.
In his war with things, Scottâs Ripley reveals he is not talented. He makes mistakes. He is nearly caught several times. His botched cover-ups and his impatient sighs as he confronts yet another error, another chore, make the series âmordantly funnyâ.
These near-misses generate suspense and anxiety for Ripley, but he is too opaque, alien and other for empathy. Robert Elswitâs gorgeous black-and-white cinematography abets this, making the most of Scottâs obsidian eyes.

Ripleyâs black-and-white cinematography adds to an overall sense of unease and alien-ness. Photo: Netflix
Scottâs performance raises a question that has divided critics: how blank is too blank?
Depending on whom you ask, his Ripley is either âmesmerisingâ or âcharmlessâ. Is Scott too successful at playing the incalculable other? Either way, this debate will certainly drive people to Ripley to see what all the fuss is about. 
Joy McEntee is an adjunct senior lecturer at the University of Adelaide. She writes on Stanley Kubrick, American film, and literature to film adaptation. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Want to see more stories from InDaily SA in your Google search results?
This article may be shared online or in print under a Creative Commons licence