Its a thoughtful adaptation that adds some interesting historical context without abandoning the plays odd little quirks. This is one of Pacino's best performances and its great to see something from him post 1990 that isn't all shouting or him bored out of his mind.

I never could get into the groove of Shakespeare's plays. Their language's too artificial and antiquated, making them even partly unintelligible to me. Plus I never liked the ridiculous mannerisms of actors playing classic plays. Still, the movie's not bad. First because of Al Pacino's excellent performance, which stands in contrast to what I just wrote before. And the sets are beautiful, artificial and original alike.

Excellent Shakespeare adaptation. The brilliant acting makes the text accessible to all. Beautiful. Classic.

This movie is so beautiful and tragic and suspenseful. I love it. It's the fucking bomb.

Outstanding solid rendition of Shakespeare's best play.

A fantastic adaptation of a difficult drama (at least by today's standards) Pacino is mesmerizing.

Michael Radford truly understood and recreated the main idea of this awesome novel, even though Al Pacino stole the show, he did it for good in this remarkable film.

The Merchant of Venice is an original and masterfully done adaptation of the Shakespeare's original piece, filled with emotions and a powerful acting performance by Al Pacino.

Al Pacino was heartbreaking. I don't think I've ever felt so much emotion from watching Shakespeare before. Gorgeous sets, too.

Watched this back in school when we had Shakespeare as a topic. Maybe thats why I was so bored, but for a "school movie" this one was not that bad, but pretty much not interesting.

Watch this version instead-more fun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRXWrq0AZN4

Why all the nipples already? And this of course. http://gu.com/p/xe8zh

This is a great popularized and verbally simplified version of Shakespeare for a wide audience with a top-notch cast. Especially Al Pacino's performance is genuinely moving, in his assuming the role of an embittered and torn old man, with superior feel for emotional shift and outstanding voice-acting. Lynn Collins also convinces with a good performance. The soundtrack is likable, light and strangely enchanting, and the scenery is beautiful. The movie does a great job of complicating the character of Shylock, and makes the viewer question his role as a victim or a villain. In the end, nobody will feel unmoved by the truly excellent and genuinely poignant court scene. The courting prices are shallow stereotypes and constitute the only kind of (unintentional) humour this otherwise dry movie brings. I do not understand the choice of not giving the play-appropriated importance and weight in consequence to the casket-scenes. This is strange, since the movie is clearly a dramatized version of the play, and else there is not much that distinguishes Portia from a common harlot when every man can come make his suit without consequence. It saddens me to see the superficiality of these scenes, because Shakespeare did provide more complex and sympathetic characters in the original.

Not a big fan of Shakespeare stories or movies. I haven't read the book / script, so I wasn't aware of the story. The film manages to build up some tension, but it was overlong.

although it seems interesting and al Pacino is great the complicated language used in many Shakespeare stories makes it hard to understand anything anyone is talking about making it very boring mostly and the long length doesn't help

Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons are both equally fascinating and compelling as the Jewish Shylock and the Christian Antonio respectively. Historians still debate today as to whether the Merchant of Venice is anti-semetic but I do not believe it is because neither character is portrayed as too sympathetic or too villainous. The overall message is about how mutual intolerance damages both sides of the spectrum and I believe this film portrayed it admirably.

Pacino as Shylock? Awesome.

William Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice is a decent film. It is about when a merchant must default on a large loan from an abused Jewish moneylender for a friend with romantic ambitions, the bitterly vengeful creditor demands a gruesome payment instead in 16th century Venice. Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons give good performances. The screenplay is a little slow in places. Michael Radford did an alright job directing this movie. I liked this motion picture because of the drama and romance.

The only thing that made this movie suck, is the fact that the play is so sad...

Al Pacino gets top-billing in this movie, and he earns it. His performance felt stiff at the beginning, but gradually her merges his explosive acting style with the character to create a memorable climax. The film attempts to focus on anti-semitic attitudes in Venice in the late 16th century, and explain Shylock's thirst for vengeance. But faithfully adapting the play makes it very difficult to make Shylock appear heroic. Sympathetic yes, but a protagonist no. The dark tone also makes the comedic, romantic scenes feel a little disjointed and out of place.