The Tragedy of Shylock


Al Pacino brought a depth of humanity to Shylock rarely seen in Shakespeare. Although the character is a villain, I felt a lot of pity for him at the conclusion of the trial.
As the prologue states, Jews were persecuted and despised by the Christian world. Shylock was nothing more than a tragic outcome of that persecution, a product of the hate and intolerance inside all the people surrounding him at the Duke's court.
Of course I'm glad he didn't kill Antonio, but in many ways he was justified in his feelings. A lifetime of pain and humiliation were built up within him.
All in all, this film has quickly become one of my favorite historical dramas.

reply

Hear! Hear!

reply

[deleted]

Al Pacino was great and the story of Shylock was the most touching and memorable part of the movie. But the other, more lighthearted parts, like Portia choosing her fiance and later on testing how faithful Bassanio is, seemed quite trivial comparing to Shylock's story.

Originally, Shakespeare had meant Merchant to be a comedy and commonly Shylock was portrayed as a comical evil character, who gets what he deserves. Shylock was not portrayed sympathetically until the 19th century. So as a result, this movie also is somewhat incoherent.

reply

Incoherent to the original play you mean?

I do not think so. You are right that Shakespeare has portrayed the character as an evil one and that this is a comedy play.by comedy we mean that it is a happy ending. I do not consider the ending as happy. But we can not say that Michael Radford has made a movie incoherent to the play. He even used Shakespeare's dialogue.

It is just that he gave you some hints at the beginning of the movie to understand why Christians acted that way with the Jews. I only disagree about the homosexual touch he gave to the characters and the topless grils (I am an Egyptian and Arabic Sateltite channels censors any nudity or sex scenes. This led them to cut the most beautiful Speech Al said upon asked by Antonio's firends if he will still carry on with his bond where he said among his lines "If you prick us do we not bleed?")

As for Shylock, Shakespeare has drawn a character. Al Pacino just gave life to it. By life, this means he highlighted the human in Shylock.

reply

I thought it leaned towards being incoherent too. Much of the play was cut. And every time I see this play performed I get the sense that it's supposed to be a comedy, and not a romantic drama.

The suitors, the banter between Bassanio and his friend and servant, Shylock demanding his pound of flesh, all of it seems to play strangely when presented as a drama. It's like a mixture of genres.

reply

Well i dont recollect any scenes cut but, even if there are, then I think it is a matter of eliminating un-necessary details because the play with its theme and its course of actions are untouched.

You may be right about the comic frame. But for me I prefer this frame, it renders the play more depth and more up to date issues to be tackled.



"It's Pacino. It's enough. At the very least...he'll craft a word or line of dialogue"

reply

There's some "slapstick" and conversational banter, and I think a minor character or two that were cut. Though admittedly my memory's a bit hazy.

reply

I consider this movie as one of the greatest movies of Al. I always read this play by Shakespeare. Never felt sorry for Shylock except in the last scene where he was forced to change his religion and this I believed is injustice. But after watching the movie..I am sympathizing with Shylock from the very first moment when he was spitted at.Moreover, he only decided to carry on the bond after his daughter's elopment. The Christians has taken my daughter..so I will show them what I can do to them.

Even at the court, when he was about to cut down the pound of flesh..Al Pacino was hesitant (I say Al Pacino andnot Shylock..because this is Al Pacino's fingerprints on the character- I have read somewhere that Al way saying that Shylock did not know if he will do it or not)when Portia shouted "Tarry a little" he screamed out as if was totally involved in some thinking will he do it..will he not? He reacted as if someone has awaken him from a sleep in a fierce way..and so he cried "Ah!".

Then came the scene where he was informed he will have to convert. God! Al was just great..more than great.. the sound he made..not a cry..a deep sound of someone dying of sadness..grief..injustice.

The end scene was terrific too..Looking at his ex-fellow Jews going to pray..closing the doors of the synagogue..and he ..left alone outside, unable to join them.. Such a look on his face! Such eyes!

reply

[deleted]

Shylock is the only sympathetic character in this play. Although the others are not bad people when it's about their kind, they are all - even the wise Portia - very mean to Shylock. I can totally understand him. He was humiliated constantly, his daughter betrayed him. At the end, he's practically killed. His former fri8ends cast him out for leaving his religion, and the Christians will never accept him. That scene when he stands alone outside the temple is heartbreaking.

I never understood why Pacino didn't get an award for this. It was a wonderful, deep performance.

reply

To me, Shylock is much less the villain than the bigoted, hypocritical, nominally Christian society in which he lived in.

Also, to me he is one of the very few sympathetic characters in the play.


reply

God, I couldn't TAKE IT when he was out on the streets in the rain yelling out his daughters name and crying. (Her name happens to be my name which also made it tens time more personal)

I also agree. I just completely dispised almost everyone else in the play but him, not because he's sympathic, but because he seemed to actually have a fair reason as to why he was such a villain. I DID want him to kill Antonio though XD

I still don't get the meaning of the play...it seems the bad people won, but then I thought maybe the moral was that mercy and justice always pays in the end?

www.simplydustinhoffman.com
-#1 site for Dustin Hoffman fans-

reply

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sympathizes with Shylock. The first time I ever saw the play they had all sorts of trash falling on the stage after the court scene and Shylock was walking around in it and looking at it as if he was looking at his own life falling apart. I felt incredibly sorry for him then. Today I finally saw this version and Pacino was wonderful. I never felt anything for any of the other characters and I really hated them when they turned the tables on him. The way they humiliated him and took everything from him. And that’s not just the court scene, he’s treated incredibly badly throughout the play. I can almost understand why he would want to cut out Antonio’s flesh.

I think it’s the way how Shylock is handled in this adaptation (and the other ones I’ve seen) that makes all the pissing and moaning about those rings that comes after it seem so stupid. If Shylock used to be only a comic villain, the rings-stuff would have worked better since the play would have been more of a comedy. But because of how sympathetic Shylock is treated in all the adaptations I’ve seen, I always find it impossible to care about what comes after it.


Take these broken wings and learn to fly

reply

I've read of at least one production which had Shylock's friend Tubal on stage with him during the trial, pleading with Shylock to forget this madness and give up the bond. When it becomes clear that Shylock has dug in his heels, Tubal storms off the stage in disgust. This is a very nice way for the director to say, "Judaism isn't the problem. Shylock himself is." It's true that he's not treated fairly, but does that give him the right to seek another man's death?

This movie seemed to do much the same in having other Jewish men in the courtroom with Shylock, begging him to go ahead and accept the money and forget the bond.

reply

by jschillig (Sat Jul 24 2010 06:12:29)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I've read of at least one production which had Shylock's friend Tubal on stage with him during the trial, pleading with Shylock to forget this madness and give up the bond. When it becomes clear that Shylock has dug in his heels, Tubal storms off the stage in disgust. This is a very nice way for the director to say, "Judaism isn't the problem. Shylock himself is." It's true that he's not treated fairly, but does that give him the right to seek another man's death?

This movie seemed to do much the same in having other Jewish men in the courtroom with Shylock, begging him to go ahead and accept the money and forget the bond.

Yeah, that's kind of the way I read it.

*EDIT*
He's just a nasty character who might have been picked on the past for being a Jew, and perhaps empathizes with all acts of anti-semitism. He was picked on, it hurt and effected him, then those feelings synergies with other witnessed acts. I mean, this is how wars start. And Shylock strikes me as being at war with the Venetian gentry.

He's just a jerk, regardless of his history.

reply

people like shylock are the reason
the world stood back and let hitler murder 6 million

reply

Okay, so who was responsible for Stalin?

reply

beats me

reply

The meaning I got out of it was that a desire for revenge and retribution will bring more pain and sorrow.

You might lose with me, but you will never win without me!

reply

True, Shylock is a sympathetic character in the film but he is less so in the play. Although I do not believe Shakespeare was an anti-Semite, I doubt that his main objective was to highlight the plight of Jews in Venice. This is Radford's "take" on the play, and even though it succeeds, it remains a 21st Century, politically correct, view of the character and his plight. Shakespeare's focus was on the destructive power of vengeance, and Shylock's obsession just happened to suit the theme.

reply

I think Shakespeare intended SHylock to be sympathetic, even if many of the audiences in Elizabethan England did not see him that way. After all, the monologue about "Hath not a Jew eyes?" really hits home that all are human. And Shylock pointing out the hypocrisies of people owning slaves and treating them poorly (a life of miserable drudgery) were nearly as guilty as he was when he sought a pound of flesh he bought.

I think people miss the point of the play. The play is really about justice vs. mercy. ANtonio is hardly a perfect guy. He spits on Jews. Bassanio is even worse. He borrows money to put on a false-front of wealth to win a woman so he can pay off his debts. He never told her he was in debt. Lorenzo and Jessica steal from Shylock. So the Venetian Christians, for the most part, are hardly admirable people. Why would Shakespeare give them obvious flaws if he wanted them to be "heroes". The only hero of the play is Portia. And she offers Shylock the chance to be merciful (and thus receive mercy). She bid him to be merciful and take his 6000 ducats and leave, which he could have done. Shylock could have left the courtroom still a Jew and 6000 ducats richer. Instead, he leaves poorer and forced to denounce his Judaism to save his life. He had a chance to be merciful. He refused. Portia told him that he asked for justice and he was going to get more than he wished for. SHe also said that we pray to God for mercy (Shylock said he didn't need mercy "My deeds upon my head") and that same prayer teaches us to render the deeds of mercy.

I think Shakespare was trying to portray Christianity as a religion of mercy. Not perfection. And that the rejection of Christ and adherence to "the law" is a rejection of mercy, something everyone needs (but Shylock realizes this too late).

reply

@wintermonk, I somewhat agree with you. i read the book long ago as well, 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.

reply

[deleted]

ABSOLUTELY SFOXLY - THANK YOU!!!

reply