William Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (2004)

Rarely has The Merchant of Venice, one of Shakespeare's most complex plays, looked as ravishingly sumptuous as in this adaptation, directed by Michael Radford (Il Postino). In a decadent version of renaissance Venice, a young nobleman named Bassanio (Joseph Fiennes, Shakespeare in Love) seeks to woo the lovely Portia (newcomer Lynn Collins), but lacks the money to travel to her estate. He seeks support from his friend, the merchant Antonio (Jeremy Irons, Reversal of Fortune); Antonio's fortune is tied up in sea ventures, so the merchant offers to borrow money from a Jewish moneylender, Shylock (Al Pacino, Dog Day Afternoon). But Shylock holds a grudge against Antonio, who has routinely treated the Jew with contempt, and demands that if the debt is not repaid in three months, the price will be a pound of Antonio's flesh.

The Merchant of Venice is famous as a "problem play"--the gritty matters of moneylending and anti-Semitism sit uncomfortably beside the fairy tale elements of Portia and Bassanio's romance, and some twists of the plot can seem arbitrary or even cruel. The strength of Radford's intelligent and passionate interpretation is that he and the excellent cast invest the play's opposing facets with full emotional weight, thus making every question the play raises acute and inescapable. Irons is particularly compelling; kindness and blind prejudice sit side by side in his breast, rendering the clashes in his character as vivid as those in the play itself. --Bret Fetzer Amazon.com

 Romance and suspense; prejudice and revenge
It must be remembered when viewing this film that it is a contemporary re-interpretation of the original play by William Shakespeare. It is a reinvention. Therefore some reviewers selected to review it by comparison to the original Shakespeare. In summary, this is not the original. It has been edited and emphasis has been shifted. It appears that considerable editing of a relatively long play was done, some of which modified the full impact of the characters of Shylock, Antonio and Portia. In addition to the editing for modern audience's attention span, a shift in emphasis was made to address concerns that the play was anti-Semitic and that a more favorable light needed to be cast upon Shylock.

Therefore, I am here reviewing this particular film, a reinterpretation of Shakespeare's play, as an independent product divorced from the original play. When cut lose from the original script, we begin to see that the play has the difficult balance of covering a suspenseful story of revenge which runs parallel to a comedy of romance, yet using the same actors in both parallel storylines. How does it resolve this parallel structure? It does it by giving both storylines incredible rich attention to exquisite detail, rich costume, elegant lighting, and superb acting. Pacino, Irons, and Lynn Collins are all in top form.

I found the film to be a feast for the eye and ear. As always I found Pacino to be a powerful force on the screen. However Lynn Collins is a new star in the firmament. In the current interpretation, Shylock is both victim and perpetrator and yet his downfall is keenly felt and his final stare into the camera is accusatorial, conveying to the viewer the message that justice has not been done.
February 23, 2008

 A good version of one of Shakespeare's lesser plays
Even setting aside the issue of anti-Semitism, "Merchant Of Venice" is not one of Shakespeare's better plays -- it is inherently a bit flat and lacks internal drama. Also, it is billed s a comedy, but there isn't much funny about it. Wisely, director Michael Radford hones in on the tragic aspects of the play, heightening the twin tragedies of Shylock and Antonio. Al Pacino plays Shylock to the hilt, avoiding an interpretation that has him appear either sinister or victimized: this Shylock is a powerful man, greatly angered, and in the famous "Does he not bleed?" speech, there is not a hint of self-pity. I agree that there is a flatness to this production, but I'm not sure i entirely the fault of Radford or his cast. (Axton) February 21, 2008

 A fantastic version
This is an amazing cast, and Al Pacino plays the perfect Shylock. I cannot recommend this movie enough, whether you are a lover of Shakespeare or just looking for a movie for the weekend. This is the best version I've seen yet. :) December 19, 2007

 The Tragedy of Shylock: The Jew of Venice
It is absurd to use the relatively modern term "anti-Semitism "as a worrisome point either in this movie or in the original late sixteenth century play. It is neither the first nor the only time that a stereotype aging male Jew has been used as an almost villainous character in English literature; notably Fagin the master thief and fence in Oliver Twist. The movie version of Oliver Twist of 1948 has Alec Guinness playing Fagin's role with no redeeming features in a very ugly stereotype (much more so than Dickens' portrayal) which seems implausible so soon after the horrors of the holocaust were revealed in newsreels. In the 1982 made for TV version George C. Scott excellently plays Fagin as more of a not unlovable scoundrel than a villain; if less grotesque than the 1948 version it is still unavoidably a stereotype as that is how Dickens conceived the character.

In The Merchant of Venice, however, the producer of the film actually manages the drama in such a way that one actually feels sorry for Shylock as the most sympathetic and deepest character in the whole play. In fact one wonders why Shakespeare did not entitle his play "The Tragedy of Shylock:The Jew of Venice". After all in the end Shylock loses half his wealth, nearly his life and his daughter. In this film version he is shown completely humiliated when his fellow Jews shun him (something not at all indicated in the original drama). As viewers our sympathy with Shylock has little to do with our modern knowledge of where anti-Semitism or any other kind of racist behaviour and such irrational attitudes lead to, whether to the World War II holocaust of the Jews and Gypsies by the Nazis, the Ottoman persecution and holocaust of the Armenians at the end of World War I or the more recent attempted genocides in former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Darfur.

Shakespeare deliberately portrays his heroes. Antonio and Bassanio as rather shallow and not particularly likable characters in The Merchant of Venice, it is the far more likable and lovely Portia that emerges as the winner in this drama and Shylock the loser. What Shakespeare conveys to us and the movie as well is that Shylock's passion for justice is entirely understandable given his shabby treatment as a Jewish moneylender but he has gone too far in demanding the full course of Venetian justice, after Portia in the guise of a young advocate has offered him an honourable and gainful way out. In the role of a classical hero Shylock suffers from hubris, he has sworn an oath to his God not to relinquish his claim on Antonio's bond and his demand for unmerciful justice ultimately backfires on him. To me there is nothing anti-Semitic in that.

The heavy-handed written explanation of renaissance attitudes to Jews at the beginning of the movie is as unnecessary as the similar one concerning the decency of average Italian-Americans whenever The Godfather is screened on mainstream US TV channels. I am sure that anyone unfamiliar with Shakespearean English will not understand any of the Shakespearean movies anyway and the rest will be well versed in renaissance attitudes to Jews, not much different from those of the middle ages, the nineteenth century or the first 45 years or so of the last century,for that matter. The producer put in some less heavy handed scenes at the end that emphasise that nobody lived happily ever after. The final scene in the movie, but not in the original drama where Jessica is shown, not as satisfied with her husband as one might expect. To marry him she has forsaken her father and her religion, stolen the family jewels and seen her father scorned and humiliated. Her deceased mother's ring is shown still on her finger, and not sold to buy a monkey as was spitefully told to Shylock. There are no words in this final scene but her face says it all, masterfully! An Elizabethan audience would not have had any sympathy for Shylock, though I think Shakespeare did feel for his character. (Their characters even if fictitious, become very real for writers). The final scene with Jessica is a modern implant as was the previous screen where a piteous Shylock is shunned by his fellow Jews, a probable outcome of his humiliation in court which would have been keenly felt by co-religionists who were expecting a triumph of justice for the whole Ghetto. One knows, without Shakespeare or the movie telling us that Bassanio is bound to cheat on the lovely Portia sometime in the future, he wouldn't be a renaissance Venetian playboy if he didn't.

The cast is excellent without exception. No ham or emotive acting in this version. The costumes are superb as are the choice of locations. Above all the enchanting musical background composed by Jocelyn Pook. Al Pacino is at his very best in this movie after accepting some rather poor roles in various movies during the 1990s, and Jeremy Irons is a very believable Antonio. Llyn Collins plays an excellent and very lovely Portia -who would have thought she is a Texan by birth! Oh she is far lovelier than the rather mousy and hammy Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love, with whom she has been unfairly compared! Joseph Fiennes out does himself again in an Elizabethan role as Bassanio. Special mention must also be made of the very sensuous Zuleikha Robinson (watch out for her in Rome Season Two.) Among the highly entertaining minor characters Dave Harewood plays a very convincing and amusing role as the Prince of Morocco, one of Portia's suitors and Mackenzie Crook a wonderful Lancelot Gobo, Shylock's treacherous servant.

The cinematography is exquisite. So what if it is somewhat shorter than the original drama, Shakespeare works, unless Bowdlerised, seldom suffer from careful editing when transferred to the screen. I highly recommend this movie to all Shakespeare lovers.
December 9, 2007

 Stunning production of a difficult play
The Merchant of Venice is one of Shakespeare's comedies, although it is easy to forget this, as it sometimes has more of the feel of a tragedy. The plot is simple enough: in 16th c. Venice Bassanio falls in love with the beautiful and intelligent Portia, but needs money in order to court her. He turns to his friend Antonio who agrees to borrow 3,000 ducats from the Jewish moneylender Shylock to finance Bassanio's courtship. Shylock is willing to provide the loan at no interest on one condition: Antonio must pay with a pound of his own flesh if he can't repay the money on time. Antonio readily accepts the deal, as he is sure that he will have plenty of money when his ships come in. With his dearly bought wealth Bassanio succeeds at winning Portia, but news arrives that Antonio's ships have sunk. Shylock, already angry at Antonio's and other Christians' past treatment of him, is pushed over the edge by the fact that his daughter (Jessica) has eloped with a Christian boy and taken most of Shylock's wealth with her. Shylock demands that Antonio forfeit his pound of flesh because he can't pay the bond and refuses to accept anything else.

The dilemma that faced this film is the same one that plagues every production of The Merchant of Venice: how do you solve a problem like Shylock? It is his character, more than any other, that highlights the anti-Semitic overtones of this play, something that was prevalent in Shakespeare's society but which is entirely unacceptable today. In my opinion, this film does a wonderful job with Shylock's character, and Al Pacino gives an outstanding performance in the role. Although Shylock is still portrayed as cruel and unforgiving in his pursuit of Antonio's pound of flesh--even going so far as to sharpen his blade in the trial scene where the validity of the bond is being determined--he is not a soulless, evil creature. Instead, he appears a broken man, worn down after years of being spat on and scorned by the same men who later come to ask for a loan--Antonio included. He is a bitter, wounded, tragic figure, whose world is crumbling around him with the betrayal of his daughter (whose elopement and subsequent conversion rejects both her father and her religion). Shylock's haunted face in the final scenes of the film is absolutely heartbreaking, and he is not a man to be reviled as much as a man to be pitied.

Al Pacino is not the only actor to do give a stand-out performance. Jeremy Irons, as Antonio, provides the right air of melancholy and weariness for a man who begins the play by lamenting, "I know not why I am so sad; it wearies me." Richard Fiennes (Bassanio) is a gallant young lover and honorable friend, while Lynn Collins is an excellent Portia, and makes a disturbingly good boy in the court scene where her character must pretend to be a male law clerk.

Two other high points of note: the scenery and the music. This was the first movie of the Merchant of Venice to be actually filmed in Venice, and the city makes a gorgeous backdrop. The music is beautiful and goes perfectly with the atmosphere of the film; the two stand-out pieces are "With Wand'ring Steps" and the haunting "Bridal Ballad" (which plays over the closing credits).

While some Shakespeare purists may be upset that the film does not reproduce every single line of the play (students seeing this movie instead of reading the play, beware!), it is a beautiful interpretation and nothing absolutely vital is left out (although, as other reviewers have noted, some good scenes didn't make the cut). And, I feel, the increased humanization of Shylock in fact adds quite a lot to the original.
October 30, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...