Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-08 04:47:35

Merchant of Venice Worth a Pound of Flesh at Least

Hath not Al Pacino talent? Hath not Al Pacino charisma? In abundance. Also, top-notch acting from everyone in cast. Good directing. Great costumes and sets. Superb interpretation of Shakespeare.

2012-05-07 15:22:10

Sexual overtones

The male closeness in the opening scenes was a bit too much for my high school students, and the showing of [...] really distracted many students. Besides that, though, the movie was colorful and really gave a good idea of what life was like for the Merchant of Venice.

RichHartford 2012-05-07 17:30:49

Merchant Was Good But Not Great

The Merchant of Venice is a romantic film based on WilliamShakespeare's play of the same title. It is the first full-length soundfilm version in English of Shakespeare's play.It stars Al Pacino,JeremyIrons,Joseph Fiennes and Lynn Collins.It was written and directed byMichael Radford.One of William Shakespeare's most powerful comedies has been given abold cinematic adaptation in this film version of The Merchant ofVenice. Bassanio is a young and vital member of the aristocraticclasses in 16th century Italy; however, Bassanio's impulsive nature andlavish lifestyle have put him deeply in debt, and he will need at leastthe pretense of a fortune if he is to win the hand of the beautifulPortia. Bassanio turns to his close friend Antonio, a successfulbusinessman, for financial help, but with much of his fortune tied upin a sailing expedition, Antonio can do little to help him. To helpBassanio, Antonio turns to Shylock, a Jewish money lender who lives inVenice's Semetic ghetto. Antonio has often expressed his contempt forShylock, who charges high rates for his loans, and Shylock clearlyseems pleased at the ironic prospect of having Antonio as a customer;however,instead of interest, Shylock demands an unusual security on hisloan though Shylock demands no interest, if Antonio does not repay thethree thousand ducats in three months, Shylock will be entitled to apound of his flesh.The movie was wonderful.It had some fine performances from Jeremy Ironsand Joseph Fiennes.Also,the of Venice locations were a great backgroundto the movie.Unfortanately,the film just turned into a good film andnot great despite having Shakespeare as the author of the play.

QuantumDiver 2012-05-07 04:55:52

Shakespeare still mystifies the audience

Hats off for any director who decides do make a period drama withShakespearian language and then manages to pull it off convincingly.More so if it just happens do be "The Merchant of Venice" which isShakespeare's most controversial play and, after "Hamlet", his biggestand perhaps most audacious work.Gone is the modernization og language, the twentieth century idioms andclothing. Gone is the poetic license to rewrite the play and give ussomething under the banner of Shakespeare.No, what we see here is a movie that stays true to the play, a moviethat follows a great vision from an even greater writer.Instead of having Di Caprio or Hawke playing light-weight titlecharacters, the director shows us the measure of his passion with thisplay that none other than the true screen legends of Al Pacino andJeremy Irons would do.Assisted by the remarkable Joesph Fiennes, who turns in his secondShaekespearian adaptation since "Shakespeare in Love", he has turnedinto a good Shakespeare actor."The Merchant of Venice" is about more than just entertainment. Likethe works on which it is based, the movie tells a deeper tale ofpassion, pride, love, hatred and above all else is a tale about thedestructive, yet nurturing, power of any one man's passions.Simply an outstanding work of art.

2012-05-04 09:21:15

loved it

It was really well done, they truly changed this comedy and strongly brought it forth as a drama. I can not have seen better acting from Al Pacino in my lifetime. It was truly a break-through role that I've seen him in. I can successfully say, it got my heart racing at one of the peak scenes and I've never experienced anything like that from a movie before.Everyone should go watch it, even if you don't know about Shakespeare.

massimobrambilla 2012-05-03 21:28:04

A good movie, a so-and-so Shakespearian movie

Al Pacino has lately been performing in a long streak of productions,some of which really bad, but this one is among the good ones. He isone of the characters endowing thickness to the emotional, actorialpart of the movie (on the other side Shylock's daughter is, for want ofa more proper term, disastrous). The problem is that choosing arigorous lecture of the text (as far as I could tell, since I saw it inItalian) always is a difficult challenge and this movie, as opposed toe.g. Richard III by Loncraine, partially fails to that. E.g., the lovescenes, those for which Shakespeare is appreciated and famous, are theshallower ones and Antonio's drama is underrepresented (apart from thefinal catharsis). The scenography and photography is indeed remarkableand the movie does not lull itself in the costume genre. The visualcitations from the paintings, after Greenaway's Tempest are not sointriguing anymore. In any case, you'll not be disappointed. just a bitof a feeling that it could have been something more...

2012-04-29 23:21:49

Al Pacino at his finest

This review is from: William Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (DVD) This film is the Rock'em Sock'em Robots of the Shakespeare world. This is the "True Lies" meets the "Terminator" of the 15th Century. The acting is that intense. Al Pacino turns in his finest performance as Shylock. When he rails about justice and righteousness it felt to me as if bombs were going off around around me. The sheer power and conviction of Pacino in this film should be enough to deserve two Oscars. The rest of the cast are excellent of course, but if you ever wanted to see Al Pacino in his natural element, as he was meant to be seen - this is where to find him. A++

2012-04-29 08:46:06

Excellent Production

This review is from: William Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (DVD) William Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice is an excellent and faithful production of Shakespeare's classic. Joseph Fiennes and Jeremy Irons perform beautifully in the roles given to them. The women who played Portia and her maid (whose names I can't remember at the moment) were good choices, and the climactic scene where Shylock is about to cut the pound of flesh was carried out with great suspense. The only reason I don't give this movie a full 5 stars is because of Al Pacino. Although he acted wonderfully, I just couldn't get over hearing his New York accent come through despite his valiant attempts to disguise it. In spite of that one flaw, I highly recommend this movie for any fan of Shakespeare.

ctomvelu-1 2012-04-29 11:45:23

Huh?

Reviewing a movie based on a Shakespeare play can be volatileterritory. I took a course in Shakespeare in college, but MOV was noton the reading list. So it's like MOBY DICK, which actually was on oneof my reading lists: I never read the thing -- nor, in the case of MOV,have I ever seen seen a performance. If this movie adaptation is anyindication, I think I now know why. The movie is dreary as hell, and Ibegin to understand why one rarely come across this play. I don't knowif I should blame the director or Shakespeare. One thing is certain:the cast tends to whisper much of their dialogue, and I cannot imaginehaving sat through this in a theater with out bolting. Also, I havenever been a fan of the skinny, pasty, too-English Fiennes brothers,and one of them plays the "hero" of this piece. Pacino is hard to get aline on, so I will simply say I would like to someday see DustinHoffman in the role for comparison. I also was not impressed with theactress playing Portia, who looked like the slightest breeze wouldknock her over. I suspect this was a British production, which mayexplain its anemia and dreariness. It might have helped had it beenAmerican. Get a little hot blood going, know what I mean? Approach withextreme caution. Beter yet, go watch ROMEO AND JULIET instead

2012-04-29 00:30:20

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.

Debby 2012-04-26 17:33:09

Must see - - it's Shakespeare!

This should rank up there with other great classic films from Shakespeare. Although my expectations were low because of Al Pachino and some reviews I had read, I was not disappointed, he did very well. My only complaint of the film was the worded explanation of how Jews were treated at this time in Venice. That was not needed at the beginning at all, but rather insulting. It's like stating and explanation of why the play is in iambic pentameter and thus explaining what iambic pentameter is.

thinker1691 2012-04-26 10:41:10

The Price of Mercy

In 16th century Europe, in a play entitled The Merchant of Venice, ayoung man (Joseph Fiennes) wished to compete for the hand of abeautiful woman, named Portia. To do this, he needs money of which heis woefully absent of. Asking his best friend Antonio (Jeremy Irons),for the sum, he learns he too is short of funds, but is willing torisks his name and credit with a short term loan from a Jewish moneylender named Shylock. (Al Pacino) In my opinion, this is one of hisfinest and most superb performances in his illustrious career. Despitethe fact Bassino wins the hand of his intended, his friend Antoniofalls prey to the vengeful and vindictive hatred of money grubbingShylock who is hell bent on getting his "Pound of Flesh" in the courtsof Venice. The court room scene is drama at it's very best. Pacino'sperformance and Irons' reaction is theater at its finest. There aremany versions of this Shakespeare play, but with Pacino, Irons andFiennes it becomes a masterpiece. *****

2012-04-25 22:26:49

Well made, even courageous, adaptation of Shakespeare's most controversial play

A courageous adaptation of Shakespeare's most controversial play. The film contains an introduction stating that Jews lived in Venice in a ghetto and under oppression, but after that the movie pretty much follows the play. The director's doesn't even shy away from using the play's most controversial lines. But what is more courageous from Radford, I think, is to be faithful to the material as a comedy, the way Shakespeare meant to. To us, in the 21st century, a comedy with a strong (and approving) anti-Semitism element in it, is unthinkable. That is the reason why in the last century, it has always been shown on the stage as something more of a tragedy (this when the play has been staged; for obvious reasons, this excellent play hasn't been staged many times in the last 100 years). The romantic element was also toned down in modern times; this certainly doesn't happen in the movie, where Portia's romantic choices become central. The movie only botches in the way Jeremy Irons plays Antonio. In the play, Antonio is a very arrogant man, something that shows clearly in the scene where the bond with Shylock is agreed on. The arrogance of Antonio is one of the reasons why Shylock hates him so much. But Irons plays him as a one note melancholic man all way along; this makes it somewhat more difficult for us to understand Shylock's thirst for revenge.

2012-04-25 14:28:02

A Wilderness of Monkeys

Just how instituionalized religious prejudice once was can be seen today in the recent Mel Gibson debasing of "The Passion of Christ." The benchmark of how insidious was the practice, however, has always been William Shakespeare's masterful "The Merchant of Venice." It accepts unblinkingly the anti-Semitism of Elizabethan England, where it was written and premiered, and of Renaissance Italy, where it is set. The Bard called it a "comedy." Audiences reveled in reviling the hapless Jew, Shylock, then not a major character. But for every laugh a director finds in the text today, we pay dearly.Over the years, Shylock has become the fulcrum of this "problem play," displacing the title character and redirecting its focus and critical appreciation. In his adaptation, director Michael Radford remains respectful of the poetry while reimagining the play as cinema. He draws our attention to its lighthearted romance, social context and human drama, giving each equal weight. In so doing, the director has given us one of our finest Shakespearean films and, in casting Al Pacino as the Jew, a Shylock of harrowing depth. The actor's interpretation of the role is vivid and all his own.Without altering text, Radford also has given the merchant (Jeremy Irons) another reason for borrowing money from Shylock to help his friend (Joseph Fiennes) court an heiress (Lynn Collins): the merchant is in love with his friend, which in the end all three come to realize. Other examples of oblique insights inform the script, such as the unease of Shylock's daughter, who has fled into Christian arms, revenge as redemption, and the closing playful cruelties. Some playfulness is needed following one of the most powerful courtroom scenes ever written and played to tense perfection here by Pacino, Irons and Collins.Artfully shot on Venetian locales, lighted, scored and costumed, and acted as naturally as the comedy and tragedy unfold and dovetail, this is a movie for people who avoid Shakespeare movies. It's full of fog and rainstorms, busy and bawdy streets, candlelit interiors, lapidary canals and, well, Venetian life. Fiennes, who played the playwright himself in "Shakespeare in Love," is almost too handsomee. For this DVD, Pacino, who played "Richard III" on Broadway and shot a documentary about it ("Looking for Richard,") joins the other filmmakers in a valuable commentary and a "making of" extra. Add Radford to the list of filmmakers --- Franco Zefferlli, Roman Polanski, Kenneth Branagh, Baz Luhrman, even Gus Van Sandt ("My Own Private Idaho"), and of course Laurence Olivier and Orson Welles before them --- who know how to bring Shakespeare to cinematic life. On film you can show instead of tell, getting to the beating heart of the great plays faster than on stage. The heart of this masterpiece pulsates in every frame of film.

porcelianheart7 2012-04-22 04:20:16

This movie was great!

The Merchant of Venice is a fantastic movie. It's very true to theoriginal Shakespeare play. If you saw Jeremy Irons in Casanova andliked his performance, this is a movie for you! If you saw JosephFiennes in Shakespeare in Love and you enjoyed his performance, this isa movie for you! If you saw Al Pacino in Donnie Brasco and liked hisperformance, this is a movie for you! It is a very enjoyable movie andif you're studying Shakespeare like me, this is a great movie to see!!The only problem with this movie is that you can't let the little onessee it because is has a wee bit of nudity in it. But other than that,it's a really good movie!!

Montse 2012-04-21 10:54:14

Adorable!!

Esta pelicula me gusto por que te lleva al mundo de Shakespeare. Tiene el romanticismo y como siempre la trajedia que hace a William Shakespeare inolvidable. Tengo que decir que si no estan familiarizados con el trabajo de Shakespeare va ser muy dificil entenderle a esta pelicula.

Raul Faust 2012-04-20 19:18:29

ZzZzzzZzzZ

Well, this is one of those movies that I don't feel allowed to rate.You know, I thought it would be an adaptation to the mainstream public.Instead of that, I got to see an historical (and boring) Englishlanguage and lots of slow scenes. I'm familiar with The Merchant ofVenice, I read it in college, but this movie is just not entertainingor attractive. It's boredom to the bone. The only thing I can say goodabout this film is the acting which was good. Al Pacino's specially.But for those who like this kinds of films it may be very good. If youappreciate mainstream movies, get away from this. IMDb wants me towrite more about it, but I just said all I had in mind...

dcTalker 2012-04-20 09:19:36

Pacino is BRILLIANT here..

Seriously, where is Al Pacino's Oscar nomination for this one? Is itthat we take him for granted at this point in his career? Pacino hereis extraordinary.. He gives a complex, heartbreaking performance asShylock, the Jewish money lender.. the movie as a whole was quitegreat, with beautiful shots of Venice to look at and a pitch perfectscore to listen to.. the other actors all do a fine job as well, butthe real reason to see this is Pacino.. I have seen all the nominatedOscar performances of 2004, and I must say that Pacino was snubbed..blame it on the anti-semitism associated with the play, the lack ofcampaigning by the studio, the late release date with no major push, ormost likely, all of the above.. in my mind, the best performances ofthe year belong to Jamie Foxx in Ray, Don Cheadle in Hotel Rwanda, andAl Pacino in The Merchant of Venice..

BroadswordCallinDannyBoy 2012-04-19 15:43:47

Terrific adaptation

This is probably one of the best film adaptations of any Shakespeareplay.Upon writing his plays Shakespeare could only imagine what the worldshe set his stories in could possibly look like and the same goes foraudience. The stage, especially at Shakespeare's time was remarkablylimited of props and pretty much the only thing was dialog and somecostumes. With today's film audience thirsty for visual spectacle afilm maker must bring those world's to life to attract a largeraudience. This film does that in a terrific way and the sets, costumes,and cinematography is brilliant and truly puts Shakespeare's work onthe screen. Each setting, from the streets of Venice to Portia'sestate, every costume, from extras to key players, looks alive andthere very little details have been overlooked.Next is the cast, which is one most directors would probably kill for.A fantastic set of actors does a terrific job, from the minor roles,like the Prince of Morocco to leads like Antonio. However, special notemust be made of Al Pacino's superb performance as Shylock. The play hasbeen criticized, over many many years, for anti-semitic tones and arethey here? Without a doubt, but director Michael Radford coasts thefine line and Shylock's image isn't really that of a villain as much asa victim. This point is made rather dully by a on screen text at thefilm's opening, but that is necessary as, inevitably, not everyone isfamiliar with the play's background.Whether someone is a Shakespeare aficionado or some has never seen theBard's work on screen or on-stage, this is a film to see. 10/10Rated R, rather ridiculously, for a few scenes of momentary nudity.

2012-04-19 03:14:15

Merchant of Venice

This review is from: William Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (DVD) This is a good version of the play, but since I am a school teacher - let me give you a big heads up - there are a lot of bare-chested women in this that does nothing to further the plot. It's my husband's opinion that they are there so that men will watch the movie. The other problem is that this version is trying so hard to be politically correct that it bends Shakespeare's meaning to suit a twenty-first century audience. I feel this is done in such a way as to cause problems with the basic plot.