Merchants of Venice

We recently finished reading Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice, in my 8^th grade literature class, and it was such a pleasure to get back to Shakespeare. Whenever I have the privilege of reading the work of such a remarkable wordsmith, I find myself enjoying the sheer pleasure of having their words in my mouth even without paying attention to the meaning of the words.

Merchant of Venice is one of my favorite of Shakespeare’s plays because in many ways it is very typical of Shakespeare and deceivingly rich and complex. The basic story goes like this: Bassanio has fallen in love with Portia, a wealthy nobleman’s daughter in Belmont. In order to pursue Portia, Bassanio must borrow money from his old friend Antonio, but all of Antonio’s wealth is tied up in three ships that are still at sea. So Bassanio is forced to borrow money on Antonio’s credit from Shylock, a cruel Jewish usurer. Shylock agrees to lend Antonio/Bassanio the money on the terms that if Antonio is not able to repay the bond in 3 months, Shylock may take a pound of Antonio’s flesh from whatever portion of his body Shylock chooses.The climax of the play is this fabulous court scene in which Shylock demands justice and the fulfillment of his bond (because, of course, Antonio's ships never come in), and Portia dresses as a man, plays the lawyer, outwits everyone winning the case for Antonio and Bassanio.

I absolutely love this play. I love it because Portia is one of my favorite heroines: she is smart, witty, and saves Antonio’s life. (She cunningly points out that Shylock may take a pound of Antonio’s flesh but that the bond does not allow him to draw a single drop of blood.) I also love it because Shylock is such a dynamic and complex character. While he is undoubtedly one of Shakespeare’s most evil villains, he is also very sympathetic.

This weekend I watched two adaptations of this play and was sorely disappointed by both.

Al Pacino’s Merchant of Venice (2004) is well done: the portrayal of Antonio and Portia were very good, but Pacino’s Shylock was a little on the crazy side, thus difficult to empathize with. Also, they cut down Gratiano’s role and he is one of my favorite characters—a jokester. But my real problem with the movie was the nudity. Everywhere you looked there were topless Elizabethans. It was gratuitous to the point of being ridiculous. I think the director was trying to make a point that prostitution was another way in which flesh was “sold,” but this could have been achieved with clothes on. Sadly, now I will not be able to show this movie to my class.

The next is a much lesser known version. This adaptation is set in the 1930s and it plays with self-consciousness of being a film (which Shakespeare loved to do with the stage). This all worked really well, but the production quality is awful! There are about 2 sets for the whole movie which consist of beige walls and minimal furniture. The costumes are all in shades of beige and black—no color. And the camera work is boring. Shylock’s performance was excellent, but the rest of the cast fell victim to a very common Shakespearean fault—overacting! Just because it is Shakespeare does not mean that the performance has to be serious or operatic. Portia was ridiculously overplayed.

Sigh, how I wish that Kenneth Branagh had adapted Merchant of Venice! Could somebody please do an excellent adaptation of this excellent play?—one that captures its sadness and it humor, its dynamism and complexity, and that is appropriate for middle school. Please!