Andrew Scott as THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY on Netflix

[Hikari]

Just learned that our Moriarty is playing another world-famous psychopath, Tom Ripley.  Brilliant casting, I daresay.

 

https://deadline.com/2024/04/andrew-scott-ripley-sherlock-netflix-1235873701/amp/

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for posting that -- I'm not familiar with the book, but judging by the article you linked to, it should be an interesting story.

I somewhat disagree with him calling Moriarty evil, though.  As I understand the terms psychopath and sociopath, they describe people who have no inborn sense of empathy, so that other people are judged only by what help or hindrance they're likely to provide.  So from Moriarty's point of view, he's presumably just doing the logical thing, and judging by the Ripley trailer, so is Ripley.

Hopefully there will eventually be a DVD, but Netflix doesn't seem to do those very often.

 

[Hikari]

3 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

Thanks for posting that -- I'm not familiar with the book, but judging by the article you linked to, it should be an interesting story.

I somewhat disagree with him calling Moriarty evil, though.  As I understand the terms psychopath and sociopath, they describe people who have no inborn sense of empathy, so that other people are judged only by what help or hindrance they're likely to provide.  So from Moriarty's point of view, he's presumably just doing the logical thing, and judging by the Ripley trailer, so is Ripley.

Hopefully there will eventually be a DVD, but Netflix doesn't seem to do those very often.

 

Matt Damon starred as Ripley in 1999 for Anthony Minghella.  Opposite Jude Law, a breakout role for him (Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor).  
 

Matt Damon displayed impressive chops for mimicry (Ripley’s specialty) and even learned piano to a high level for the role.  Probably due to the general discomfort with the psychopathic personality, this Ripley is played more as a little boy lost who is forced by fear and self preservation into committing his heinous acts.  He just wants to be loved and accepted, and is messed up due to a terrible childhood.  The audience is primed to feel sorry for this kid who has to keep killing people because they just won’t stop being nosy.  This Ripley murders, but seemingly against his will because the universe is conspiring against him.  

This is the modern interpretation of psychopathy, because I’m sure neither Matt Damon nor Anthony Mengele want us to view Tom as “evil” either. Not evil, just self-loathing, maladjusted, and unlucky. And cursed by perpetual loneliness.

Patricia Highsmith’s antihero is a lot more detached and opportunistic and cold blooded.  He enjoys playing with people.  The Netflix series is taking its notes from Highsmith’s book, including the noirish feel.  It’s a throwback to “Purple Noon”, the original Ripley movie in the 1950s.  John Malkovich played an older Ripley in Ripley’s Game.  I think the Scott portrayal will be more in the Malkovich mode  then the Damon one. Come to think of it John Malkovich would’ve made an outstanding Moriarty.

Maybe using terms like “evil” aren’t helpful, especially in diagnostic terms. As far as I understand it having read it this way, sociopaths are made through abuse or negative influences in childhood, and psychopaths are born.  The difference between the two hast to do with emotional responses and their limbic systems.  Sociopaths can still experience stress, fear and regrets.  They Exhibit physical symptoms of stress and emotions. Psychopaths do not, so the phrase “Stone cold” is apt. They don’t feel anything and can remain exceedingly calm when committing their crimes.

Based on this, I would say that Matt Damon’s Ripley is a sociopath and Highsmith’s Ripley and potentially Andrews Ripley are psychopaths. I would have to see the show to see what they come up with.  This has nothing to do with an inability to distinguish right from wrong, what normal people would call the conscience. Sociopaths and psychopaths do not experience conscience in the same way, in terms of feeling guilt. They are well aware that their behaviors are antisocial and often break the law. They do not care. They care about the consequences of getting caught but they do not acknowledge societal norms as binding upon them and can justify their actions as necessary. The line that distinguishes the sane from the insane is sometimes hard to determine. I think it’s possible to be insane but also know right from wrong.  

Previous generations accepted the concept of evil and the demonic without question, but evil is out of fashion now.  In our era we seek for justifications for behavior that hurts others. If unrepentant serial murder isn’t evil, I’m not sure what qualifies.

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

54 minutes ago, Hikari said:

Maybe using terms like “evil” aren’t helpful, especially in diagnostic terms.

Probably not, since such terms are judgmental rather than descriptive.

56 minutes ago, Hikari said:

As far as I understand it having read it this way, sociopaths are made through abuse or negative influences in childhood, and psychopaths are born.  The difference between the two hast to do with emotional responses and their limbic systems.  Sociopaths can still experience stress, fear and regrets.  They Exhibit physical symptoms of stress and emotions. Psychopaths do not, so the phrase “Stone cold” is apt. They don’t feel anything and can remain exceedingly calm when committing their crimes.

It seems to depend on which expert you listen to -- what I've read recently is that the two categories have a great deal of overlap, and may soon be combined under a new name.  They also say that many of the best surgeons are what you term psychopaths -- which is what enables them to cut confidently into the living flesh of a fellow human without any of the qualms that most people would feel.

1 hour ago, Hikari said:

... evil is out of fashion now.  [....] If unrepentant serial murder isn’t evil, I’m not sure what qualifies.

Well, if you or I did that, it would presumably qualify as evil -- but we wouldn't do it, nor are we capable of understanding why somebody else would do it.  So we label it as "evil," but that merely describes the behavior, it doesn't explain it, nor does it offer any clues on how such a person could be healed.  Life imprisonment (with no chance of parole) is basically our era's equivalent to burning at the stake -- it virtually eliminates any chance that the killer will strike again, which may be the best we can do at present.

 

[Caya]

Being a psychopath definitely doesn’t mean you have to be or become evil, though it probably helps a great deal. But for a counter example, I‘m sure I’ve linked to James Fallon here before but just in case: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-neuroscientist-who-discovered-he-was-a-psychopath-180947814/ .

[Hikari]

@Carol and Caya

A successful surgeon has mastered the art of dispassion when he or she is working.  It would help a great deal in a surgical career to be capable of such detached rationality and cool thinking under pressure.  I don’t suppose the first year med students who faint at the sight of blood or puke while dissecting a cadaver finish the program—or at least do not become surgeons.  A natural aptitude for professional detachment coupled with a dozen or so years of meticulous training produces people who are capable of cutting into other people’s organs while they are still alive.

That’s a rarified skill set but I don’t think every person who can do this deserves the label “psychopath”.  Surgeons are controlling their emotions in a specific professional environment, not that they don’t experience any.  A psychopath doesn’t feel anything ever, regardless of what he or she is doing. Other people exist for them like ants in an ant farm to a hobbyist.  That being said, the power and access to drugs and sharp implements does make the medical profession a highly attractive hunting ground for a psychopath.  I believe that it was sir Arthur Conan Doyle, himself a physician, speaking through his signature creation, SH, when he wrote “When a doctor turns bad, he is the worst sort of criminal imaginable”—Or words to that effect. I think sociopaths and psychopaths can be found in every endeavor of life. They are found in higher than usual concentrations in professions of power like medicine, the law, law-enforcement, and captains of industry and business…And show business and the visual arts are stuffed full of them relatively speaking because those are high risk high reward lots of ego fuel environments.

 The unifying characteristics of sociopathy and psychopathy which exist on a spectrum are a lack of empathy for others and a belief in their superiority.  Someone can be sociopathic without being violent or even necessarily committing any actions that break the law.  Their personal relationships are going to be shallow and there will always be some façade management happening because they often have to fake feelings or interests they do not have in order to fit in.  They can be mild mannered and law abiding—until they experience some stressor that makes their mask crack.  I think psychopaths by definition commit violent acts and crimes just to try and feel something, or because they are bored.  Usually they will manifest other mental problems too like schizophrenia or low IQ and will be too disorganized or unstable to avoid coming to the attention of the authorities.  There is a lot of overlap in these diagnoses, but I don’t think either condition is “curable”.  It’s not just the person’s behavior (what they do) but the fundamental personality (who they are).  A crucial part of their humanity is missing—Stolen from them or never there to begin with.  As such they could be said to have a profound birth defect that was not their own doing.  Is it fair then to call them evil and undeserving of life or freedom?  Maybe not “fair” as such—but is the prey wrong to protect itself from predators?  That’s what the sociopaths and psychopaths are—apex predators.  They care no more for you ir I than a hawk cares for a mouse—only as dinner or something to torture and play with.  You and  I are the mice who can only pray that either the hawk doesn’t see us or he gets locked up so he never will.

 

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

1 hour ago, Hikari said:

A natural aptitude for professional detachment coupled with a dozen or so years of meticulous training produces people who are capable of cutting into other people’s organs while they are still alive.

That’s a rarified skill set but I don’t think every person who can do this deserves the label “psychopath”

I agree (which is why I said "many" rather than "all" or even "most").

 

1 hour ago, Hikari said:

The unifying characteristics of sociopathy and psychopathy which exist on a spectrum are a lack of empathy for others and a belief in their superiority.  Someone can be sociopathic without being violent....

In general, yes.  But based on (a mercifully few) people I've known, they can -- maybe when others don't play according to their rules -- occasionally become violent.  That's true of most people, I suppose, but with these few the violent spells seem a lot less understandable to me, with a whole lot more WTF.

 

[besleybean]

I share my son's Netflix, but rarely use it.

So every now and then I check in, to see if they have caught up with me and renmoved me!

Popped in today, to be greeted by Andrew all over the shop...nice.