Classic play adapted into film

Director Michael Radford has undertaken the unenviable task to bring William Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” to the big screen. This marks the first cinematic version of the play made since the silent movie era.

But why is this so? This is one of Shakespeare’s better known plays and the past decade has seen a boom of movie adaptations of his other works.

The reason is that for modern audiences, this is one of Shakespeare’s problem plays. It takes place in 16th century Venice and tells the story of young Bassanio, who goes to his old friend Antonio to borrow money in that he might sail to the land of Belmont to woo the rich lady Portia.

Antonio is happy to oblige, but since all his money is tied up in trade ships, he must borrow money from his enemy Shylock. Shylock is a Jew and he hates the Christian Antonio because he and his peers look down upon and mistreat Shylock and his people.

But Shylock agrees to the loan. His only stipulation: If Antonio cannot repay the debt, he owes Shylock a pound of his flesh. As fate would have it, the play climaxes in a tense courtroom scene where Shylock prepares to do that very thing.

Sounds like a gripping drama. So what has been the hold up for a cinematic production? The problem is that the play was originally intended to be a comedy.

But the discrimination against Shylock, his thirst for revenge and his ultimately tragic fate are hard for modern audiences to swallow.

But this doesn’t stop Radford, and he succeeds in making the play work in today’s world by emphasizing the darker aspects of the play and using what humorous moments there are as comic relief.

The Venice he presents is claustrophobic and sepulchral, helping to set the serious tone.

Radford also tips the scales in helping the audience sympathize with Shylock, adding text at the start of the film that explains how poorly Jews were treated and by dramatizing some scenes that in the play are described second hand, such as Antonio spitting on Shylock in the market place.

Al Pacino plays Shylock, and he is perfect in the part. In his performance he manages to create a character who is both pitiful and horrifying. He is the strongest part of the movie, but this comes as no surprise as Shylock has always been the most complex character of the play and Radford puts much of the film’s focus on him.

The rest of the cast also puts in great performances. Jeremy Irons plays Antonio and Joseph Fiennes is Bassanio. Critics of the play have always questioned the relationship between the two characters, and the film definitely insinuates that the love Antonio feels for Bassanio is more than platonic.

This serves as almost a second love story for the film. Antonio is willing to risk everything, even his life, so that his friend can get what he wants. At first it is hard for us to sympathize with Antonio due to his obvious anti-Semitism, but Irons plays the part with such nuance that it is clear in the end that he at least somewhat repents his actions, as he understands Shylock’s hate of him and is ready to submit to his revenge.

Newcomer Lynn Collins is capable as Portia. She looks an awful lot like Cate Blanchett, which makes it interesting to note that Collins was given the role after Blanchett dropped out. The scenes in which she must patiently wait for Bassanio as suitors attempt to win her hand provide some breaths of comic relief.

While this is an excellent interpretation of a difficult play, it remains about accessible as Shakespeare’s other works.

Grade: A-