Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

generationofswine I'm sorry Al. I mean, I am stoked that you got to do Will on the big screen, I really am. I am ecstatic that it was one of my favorites and monumentally depressed that labor of loves like this only get a limited screening and small box office reviews.Who wants to see "The Merchant of Venice" anyway? So sayeth the Millennial.Clearly a lot of people do. I mean, how many centuries has it been in production? Is that were they got the name for the sports car? Who knows.The fact is that it was brilliant. Not totally true to the source, but close enough where you're going to sit back and be in Elizabethan bliss.Especially since, for us historians, films depicted so beautifully, as this one was, just reinforces the fact that Shakespeare was the Joss Wheadon of his day.It may be high brow today, but so is Dumas.The fact is, a film like "The Merchant of Venice" if done right, should give you the sense of Elizabethan pulp. You should be able to sit back and understand just how popular he was with the masses of the day. it should be funny and beautiful and dramatic and this film captured all of that. Not as action packed as Hamlet, but just as entertaining.And that was what Shakespeare tried to do, entertain us.

chaswe-28402 The settings have already been described elsewhere as "lavish". "Pointless" should be added. Nothing at all is gained by the canals, the Rialto and the boobs; nor the milling cast of hundreds crowding out the scenes. With Shakespeare the text is everything, and if it is swamped by swirling background scenery much of it is lost, with no gain in realism. This production, with its numerous cuts and virtual re-writes, sadly misrepresents the original theatrical experience, messages and themes. It is markedly inferior to the productions featuring Laurence Olivier and Warren Mitchell, both easily available on dvds.The actors appear over-awed by the director's unsubtle instructions, and seem to be working hard to conform to requirements. The trouble is that this becomes strikingly obvious, and the net effect is forced and unnatural. It's heavy going, throughout. All performances are tense, stretched and unrelaxed.Scholarship since the early 1900s has made it abundantly clear that there were several communities of Jews, of various descriptions, in Shakespeare's England. Some were open about their faith, many others hid it by masquerading as Protestants, Catholics, Portuguese, Spaniards or Lombards. Notable were the Bassanos, reputed an extended crypto-Jewish family of court musicians originally engaged by Henry VIII, from Venice, some of whose children were baptized in England as Anglicans, but retained their Jewish character. Their descendants still live in England. Their Jewish origin has been strongly disputed, but it is nevertheless arguable that it was heavily concealed. Emilia Bassano, the author of a poem entitled, "Hail to God, the King of the Jews", was intimately known to Shakespeare. The Bassanos are directly alluded to in the play, by the naming of one of its main characters, and the inclusion of an otherwise enigmatic scene, heavily truncated in this version, where Lorenzo mysteriously extols the power of music to Shylock's daughter, Jessica. There is even a convincing theory that Shakespeare himself was half-Jewish. The Merchant of Venice should be judged with this in mind.

Desertman84 The Merchant of Venice is a romantic film based on William Shakespeare's play of the same title. It is the first full-length sound film version in English of Shakespeare's play.It stars Al Pacino,Jeremy Irons,Joseph Fiennes and Lynn Collins.It was written and directed by Michael Radford.One of William Shakespeare's most powerful comedies has been given a bold cinematic adaptation in this film version of The Merchant of Venice. Bassanio is a young and vital member of the aristocratic classes in 16th century Italy; however, Bassanio's impulsive nature and lavish lifestyle have put him deeply in debt, and he will need at least the pretense of a fortune if he is to win the hand of the beautiful Portia. Bassanio turns to his close friend Antonio, a successful businessman, for financial help, but with much of his fortune tied up in a sailing expedition, Antonio can do little to help him. To help Bassanio, Antonio turns to Shylock, a Jewish money lender who lives in Venice's Semetic ghetto. Antonio has often expressed his contempt for Shylock, who charges high rates for his loans, and Shylock clearly seems pleased at the ironic prospect of having Antonio as a customer; however,instead of interest, Shylock demands an unusual security on his loan though Shylock demands no interest, if Antonio does not repay the three thousand ducats in three months, Shylock will be entitled to a pound of his flesh.The movie was wonderful.It had some fine performances from Jeremy Irons and Joseph Fiennes.Also,the of Venice locations were a great background to the movie.Unfortanately,the film just turned into a good film and not great despite having Shakespeare as the author of the play.

Sa Ahm I read the book long ago, and had so much confusions. this is not a criticism about the movie, rather the perspective of the story itself.In the story, I think the so called villain here, Shylock, was actually not the actual villain, rather an oppressed Hero. He was the one who was seeing his fellow religious believers being oppressed, prisoned, and being thrown into the rivers, wearing always a mandatory red hat of racism; he was just following his own religion peacefully and minding his own business. he was regularly being spitted on by the dominating part of the society for being a minority member, and being called many mean names in occasions. He was the one who lent huge amount of money, not for earning interest, rather in good faith to his 'hating spitter', to meet a man's non- surviving wants (wants of alluring a wealthy woman into marriage), and then faced complete default and forfeiture at the time of repayment; and moreover he was robbed of his precious wealth by the same borrowing group; the daughter he had and raised was taken away by them (during 1596 conservative traditions, whilst lady Portia was obligated to follow her family's 'husband finding tradition' and yet she did follow).And after all the unjust and undepicted pains and sufferings he had gone through for so long, then he was asking for justice in a court full of that same dominating society members shouting at him with anger and despise; faced the so called legal trial by the judgement of a bias imposter in disguise of a civil doctor. After that he was forced with trickery to give up all his remaining wealth, esteem, daughter, home, and most of all his lifelong religious belief, left all alone in the street to rot in older age with humiliation and disgrace. And the dominating unjust party carried on living wealthy and happily ever after. And all along I felt a deep sigh about this entire concluding injustice.Though for an instance Shylock acted as a merciless villain for insisting on cutting that pound of flesh; but we must not forget or disrespect all his suffered misery in the context for being raging such insanity. I also perceive Antonio to be of a moderately good manner in the court. Finally,to derive and infer from the story, with due respect, I believe most readers and viewers need to reconsider their perceptions, and give it a good thought about what was right and what was wrong. This same story still lives in reality in our modern society in evolving fashion, thus perceptions should be at least close to just.