The first thing that I want to say about The Talented Mr. Ripley is that the titular character started off as being somewhat sympathetic but then started making me uneasy when he found Dickie and Marge in Italy. Ripley lives in a pretty terrible life in New York City, living in a trashy apartment in the meatpacking district doing what he can to get by. But the way Ripley sticks out in Italy, the way his pasty skin stands out on a beach of tans, the way he seems both endearingly awkward and obsessive over Dickie’s life, struck me the wrong way. From trying on his host’s clothes, covertly getting Dickie’s signatures and a handwriting sample, and pretending to kiss an asleep Dickie on the train, Ripley just feels uncanny and disturbing.

A big part of this event was determining how to interpret the killing about an hour into the film in the law sense. I had originally felt that Ripley was definitely guilty of murder in the second degree, and I felt bad for the people who Judge Miller had designated to defend him, feeling like they would be grasping at straws. However, I was completely incorrect; there were a lot of good points that people made, such as Dickie initiating the conflict by hitting Ripley first, or noting Ripley’s surprise when he knocks Dickie back with the oar. There was also room for interpretation, such as considering whether Ripley’s verbal insults count as provoking or not. This really gave me a feel for how complex and confusing a case might be, even when it looks, at first, like it’s a clear cut ruling. Even though the law has rules on what constitutes murder and what constitutes manslaughter and self-defense, there’s a lot of room in the definitions to move around and twist the case to favor one side or the other.