Not Bad Bard

I approached this movie with some trepidation, mainly owing to the presence of Al Pacino as Shylock. The only Shakespeare I had seen him attempt was his lead in Richard III. I was less than impressed by his acting in that one. I'm also always a little queasy about seeing screen attempts at encapsulating a three hour Shakespeare play in a two hour movie.

While I wasn't exactly delighted at the outcome of this attempt, there is a lot to recommend, thanks to some sure handed British directing and acting. And Pacino underplays a role for a change (for the most part) and he handled his line readings with aplomb.

The problem with the script (and it is, along with MEASURE FOR MEASURE and THE WINTERS TALE, one of Shakespeare's "problem" plays to begin with, in that it is morally ambiguous) is the obvious anti-semitism surrounding the moneylender Shylock. The film actually opens with a kind of disclaimer reminding the audience that Renaissance attitudes towards Jews were not exactly politically correct. Shakespeare's script certainly bears this out, which is one reason it still attracts negative criticism on many college campuses.

The director (Michael Radford, who also wrote the adaptation) and cast handle this delicate issue rather adroitly. Pacino manages to elicit more sympathy than derision for Shylock. The only quibble I have with interpretation occurs in the trial scene, in which Shylock's insistence on Antonio's (Jeremy Irons) repayment of his debt (the famous pound of flesh) is rendered much more menacingly and realistically than I've ever seen it portrayed. It really does appear to be imminently possible that Shylock is going to happily flay Antonio alive before Portia or any other contravening authority, such as the the the Duke (acting as judge) can stop him. This is generally downplayed in stage productions, but on screen it comes across as all too real. It works as far as dramatic tension is concerned, but approaches "over the top" as far as aesthetic distancing goes(which is another of the underlying problems of transferring a text from stage to screen).

As far as characterizations are concerned, I was disappointed in only one director's choice. He cut the servant, Launcelot Gobbo's famous "Devil or Angel" monologue, which is one of the few truly humorous bits in the play. The scene with the younger and elder Gobbo almost made up for it, however, as Ron Cook serves up a marvellous comic turn as Old Gobbo.

The acting is generally excellent, in fact. Irons is solid, if not entirely convincing as Antonio. Joseph Fiennes does yeoman work as Anonio's bosom buddy, Bassanio. Lynn Collins as Portia is a positive revelation. Her transformation to young male lawyer is dead on. She plays a full range of emotions with utter ease. Hers is the one truly award worthy performance in the movie. Pacino does an outstanding job of remaining in character. The usual Pacino vocal and physical tics are nowhere in evidence. He obviously studied hard for the role and most of his choices are good ones. The cinematography, consisting mainly of shots of Venice in all its resplendance, is extraordinary.

Radford & Company certainly perform no disservice to the bard in this production, which is saying a lot, actually. I'd include it among some of the better recent attempts at bringing Shakespeare to the screen, along with Fishburn's OTHELLO and Branaugh's MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING. It's worth at the very least a rental when it comes out on DVD, but if you get a chance to see it in a theater first, I recommend you avail yourself of the chance, if only to fully appreciate the cinematography.

BEK