Ripley is a psychopath.
Or at least a sociopath. When someone hits you, you defend yourself. But you do NOT pick up a large blunt object (like an oar) and strike him on the head with it.
π
Or at least a sociopath. When someone hits you, you defend yourself. But you do NOT pick up a large blunt object (like an oar) and strike him on the head with it.
π
What if they're bigger than you?
share
Then you might just get your ass kicked, but he won't pick on you again.
π
Why should you allow someone to kick your ass? Why won't he pick on you again if you let him kick your ass?
share
You don't ALLOW the person to kick your ass, but sometimes it happens. And you've never been in a fight, have you?
π
You don't ALLOW the person to kick your ass by picking up a large blunt object (like an oar) and strike him on the head with it. Why won't he pick on you again if you let him kick your ass?
share
You don't LET him kick your ass, dumb shit! You FIGHT BACK, and even if he beats you up, he won't pick on you again. Bullies prey on the weak. Jeez, you're DUMB!
You've obviously never been in a fight, or you would know that.
π
Yes. Obviously.
This is the story of a sociopath going through a difficult process of self-discovery, and finally settling on a career path that suits his talents.
But still a sociopath, or maybe even a psychopath.
π
I think he was a sociopath, not a psychopath. He didn't like killing for it's own sake, and he wasn't cruel, he didnt tg hink making others suffer was fun or anything.
He lied and killed for expedience, as means to an end. Not as a hobby.
I tend to agree with that diagnosis, Dr. Otter.
π
Of course he was a psychopath. He was a serial killer.
shareTom Ripley reminds me a bit of Andrew Cunanan. When Cunanan couldn't get the life he thought he deserved, he went on a murder spree - killing those who had what he coveted. Ripley wasn't as extreme as Cunanan, but had some of the same psychopathic traits.
share
Wow. A blast from the past. Just checked out Cunanan on Wiki. What a sick bastard!
π
Yeah, this is pretty close. Cunanan wanted to be taken care of and be successful. He got a taste and wanted more. When it was taken away he got pissed.
I think Ripley did the same. He got a taste, but he also wanted to be Dickie and when Dickie threatened to take it away he killed him. Whenever anyone else did he killed them too.
The only difference I can see is Cunanan had rage. Dickie was much more meticulous in his process and defensive.
The way the scene is shot, the director intended for Ripley to just lash out at Dickie with whatever object was close at hand. If it had been a newspaper or cup of coffee, Ripley would have thrown that, but it just so happened the oar was the only thing nearby.
In reality, Dickieβs wound would be a fairly superficial one. The forehead tends to bleed a lot due to the higher concentration of blood in that area, so it looked worse than it was.
Still a sociopath, or maybe even a psychopath.
π
Yeah you can interpret that, although thereβs also the view that Ripley was acting in self defense and was somewhat justified. Dickie was also a violent narcissist who almost beat a boy to death at Princeton. It could easily have been Dickie killing Tom out of rage.
shareThe beautiful intrigue of this film is that youβre never quite sure. His killing certainly seems to be opportunistic and without real malice, but he kills both out of anger (Dickie) and to cover his tracks (Freddie and Peter) which raises the question why is it so easy for him to resort to murder first. Is it something he secretly enjoys? Which would make him both a sociopath and psychopath. Peterβs murder is especially questionable since Tom obviously felt genuine affection for him and could have conceivably found another way to escape capture than murder the one person who actually showed love for him.
Either way, this is such a brilliant film and I think the question of Tomβs true motivations only makes it more compelling.
Above all Ripley is a narcissist, which I believe is a key trait of sociopaths. He doesnβt enjoy killing, he just does it for self preservation, and his narcissism means that he has little room for remorse or guilt.
The film is a good portrait of the inner workings of a serial killer. When I first saw it I had no idea it was a kind of horror film.
As I said previously, he's a sociopath.
π€¨
You also said he was a psychopath.
Plus, you seemed to think hitting someone with an oar was a sign of Ripleyβs condition.
But youβve landed on sociopath, I see. Iβm willing to believe heβs a sociopath, but heβs certainly a narcissist.
Yes he is also a psychopath. The oar hitting incident confirms that. He's is also probably a narcissist.
π€¨
The killing of Dickie (and the immediate after effect) is indicative of a sociopathic personality, not psychopathic. I'd also argue that the "weeping" during the murder of Peter is also indicative of sociopathy.
shareThe initial oar attack was an impulsive crime of passion which Ripley instantly regretted, and he only kept going because Dickie retaliated and it basically became a fight to the death - thatβs not psychopathic behaviour at all, in fact it was closer to manslaughter.
A psychopath would likely plan the kill and take sadistic pleasure in it, maintaining control and dominance the whole time. Ripley was vulnerable, weak, and completely out of control when he murdered Dickie - who he was practically in love with.
[deleted]