|
 |
|
News | Film Reviews | Links |
|
 Buy on VHS
|
The Merchant of Venice
(1973) I watched this 1973 adaptation of Merchant of Venice on the heels of viewing Radford’s recent film and, I’ll tell you, the comparison doesn’t flatter the former. Most who seek out this version are probably curious as to how the legendary Laurence Olivier fares as Shylock, the Jewish money-lender, and one of Shakespeare’s most memorable “villains.” I put that word in quotes not because it was equivocal for Elizabethan audiences, but because modern audiences are naturally troubled by Shakespeare’s apparent anti-Semitism. Actually, Shakespeare had probably not ever met a Jew (Jews had been expelled from England by the time of his writing) and I find Shylock to be an ultimately multi-dimensional, almost unintentionally sympathetic character. He’s certainly the most memorable in the play. But that brings us back to Olivier, who is little more than memorably awful as Shylock. My sister, Rachel (who has an elephantine memory), hadn’t seen the movie in many years, but could still do a spot-on imitation of Olivier’s buck-toothed, eye-rolling, and wildly over-the-top portrayal of the money-lender that had me convulsing with laughter and quite nearly requiring medical attention. So Olivier does manage to make an impression, but it’s the kind of impression that can color a person’s appreciation for Shakespeare. If any teachers are reading this and have Merchant on their curriculum, I’m begging you not to show your students this movie! Like Olivier’s offensively awful performance as the Moorish general in Othello, his performance as Shylock would probably have turned me off to Shakespeare had I seen it at a more impressionable age. Don’t get me wrong, I love Olivier. His Richard III is, for me, a top-five favorite Shakespearean performance. His King Lear is a deeply moving tour-de-force. But his outside-in acting aesthetic sometimes leaves a vacuity in his performances. Olivier doesn’t suggest any interiority to Shylock. His rage and bitterness all seem dumb show and have the (presumably) unintended effect of making Shylock pathetic and funny. What odd choices Olivier makes. Honestly, why the buck teeth? Did he find a set in the props department and take an inexplicable shine to them? They’re distracting and stupid-looking. His reading of Shylock’s best known “Hath not a Jew eyes?” speech is accompanied by crazy gesticulations, fluttering eyelashes, and theatrical rolling of every “r.” The effect detracts from the impact of the words. Later, when informed of Antonio’s monetary misfortunes, he does a silly little dance that struck me as inappropriately hilarious. Or maybe this is Olivier playing Shylock as the buffoonish “comic villain” Harold Bloom recommends. Who knows? I certainly don’t. Olivier’s performance is head-scratchingly strange. So if Olivier’s performance is why you’re curious about this movie, I suggest you spare yourself the misery. The other actors are fine, if uninspired. I liked Jeremy Brett (best known as “Sherlock Holmes”) as Bassanio. He has energy. A rare moment of inspiration in this production occurs after Shylock has been publicly humiliated and forced to convert to Christianity. Bassanio looks positively nauseous. He is just human enough to find the trial that strips Shylock of his livelihood and Jewish faith a travesty. Interesting choice and very effective. Joan Plowright is a solid Portia, though a little old-looking for the part (have potential suitors been wrongly guessing the gold and silver caskets for nigh on twenty years?). A brief bit of hilarity is offered by Charles Kay as a senile Prince of Aragon. He chews the scenery to shreds and seems way out-of-place in an otherwise stodgy production, but at least I woke up from the half-sleep the rest of the movie induced. In case I’ve been too vague, I don’t recommend this version of Merchant of Venice. See the recent Radform film with Al Pacino as Shylock for a more sober, understated, and affecting adaptation of the play. |
