Trio

1. "The Merchant Of Venice". Probably Shakespeare's most controversial play, "The Merchant Of Venice" has never before been adapted to the screen in an English language version. Now that it has, millions of people who've never read or seen it (including yours truly, who has actually read and/or seen most of Shakespeare's plays) get a chance to decide for themselves if the play is anti-semitic. The verdict? Well, probably.

For those unfamiliar: a young citizen of Venice (played by "Shakespeare In Love" 's Shakespeare himself, Joseph Fiennes) is in love with the beautiful Portia (Lynn Collins), but lacks the money to court her properly. He goes for help to his friend Antonio (Jeremy Irons), who lacks the funds himself but wants to help... so he reluctantly goes for a loan to the Jewish money-lender shylock (Al Pacino), who demands a literal pound of Anontio's flesh if he fails to repay the debt. When Antonio's ships all meet with disaster and his business is in ruins, it looks like Shylock may get his wish, and Antonio may lose his life, which could put quite a damper on the whole courting thing.

I recently read a long, detailed article by this film's director, Michael Radford, explaining how the play is a product of its times (when major tensions existed between the Jews and Christians of Europe), and how Shakespeare took great pains to show how Shylock was mistreated and harassed by his Christian neighbors so severely that any evil he may have done was on their heads. But this still doesn't excuse the protagonists's constant reference to him as "Jew" and "The Jew" (he has a name... it's Shylock, remember?), or the way they conspire to humiliate him and drag him down in a punishment far out of proportion to any crimes he's supposed to have committed (and these are the people who side we're supposed to be ON!). Pacino doesn't help the situation by over-acting the role so outrageously that even the sympathetic "Hath not a Jew eyes?" speach comes off like the ravings of a madman about to start foaming at the mouth. He's the classic Jewish stereotype... as played by an Italian American.

Well, then, how well is the film MADE? Not as well as it could have been, actually. Aside from Pacino, Feinnes doesn't seem to play a Shakespearean role as effectively as he played Shakespeare himself (not THIS Shakespearean role, anyhow), and Lynn Collins as Portia seems to be trying to do her best Gwyneth Paltrow impersonation and trade on audience goodwill for the previously referenced Feinnes/Paltrow collaboration, forgetting to be herself in the process. Radford seems to have chosen to excise so much of Shakespeare's original text that even someone such as myself unfamiliar with the original can tell that a great deal of significant material is missing. And then there's the overly melodramatic musical score...

I don't know if Shakespeare himself was an anti-semite, or simply trying to tell a story ABOUT anti-semitism. Maybe the original play, with all the material Radford cut out, clarifies everything. But as for this movie, we have a story that's discomforting to watch (and not in a good way), and a film that's not very well made even if that weren't the case... with one glowing exception. Jeremy Irons as Antonio is nothing short of brilliant, bringing a quiet yet desperate dignity and forcefulness to his role that stands head and shoulders above the performances of every other member of the cast. What a film this might have been with Irons at the center of the story. Somebody put this man in a LEADING Shakespearean film role, soon!

2. "Planetfall". Most regular filmgoers have seen their share of digital video releases. Generally, they're low- or no- budget affairs, stories of regular days in the regular lives of their protagonists. Not here. This zero-budget digital effort is a science-fiction story set on another planet and features space ships, aliens, explosions, and all those fun things. Of course, it doesn't come off like Jerry Bruckheimer, but that's part of its strange, twisted charm.

In the distant future, a female bounty hunter is hired to track down a shipment of what she's told is just money but which she suspects is something quite other, which has crash landed on an Earth colony world. What she doesn't know is that several other groups are also out to find it for their own purposes, and will literally kill to get it.

Filmed largely in Minnesota and Wisconsin by Minneapolis' own Car School film making group, the film's cast does not exactly give Oscar-worthy performances, and when the film requires you to believe that a character is falling off a rope bridge into a river of molten lava, the whole thing looks so fake you may feel like laughing more than anything else. But the local review that called it "what Ed Wood might have done if he had access to a SLIGHTLY higher budget and digital video" is not really fair. Wood always took everything he did completely seriously, and this film is made by people who are clearly aware of how cheesy and cheap this film is, and who do not hesitate to have fun with it. Its off-kilter sense of humor is constantly rescuing it from potential disaster, and some of the acting is actually not bad at all. And Minnesotans should have fun watching Tyrell Ventura, the son of our former governor, as Cyrus Theed, a sleezy businessman who will sell anything as long as it's of questionable legality. All of this, plus special effects that are often way beyond what you have any right to expect from digital video.

So what if eastern Minnesota and western Wisconsin never convince you that they're really another planet? So what if the whole film is just too low-tech, at times, to be believed? How many huge budget science fiction efforts from Hollywood these days have the totally nutty sense of fun that this film has? Acknowledging that your film is cheap and cheesy can be a tremendously liberating experience. If you're the kind of person who can get into enjoying a movie like that, then you should head on down to the Saint Anthony Main theatre, where "Planetfall" is currently a Twin Cities exclusive, and have yourself the same experience as the audience I saw it with, who were laughing throughout (in all the right places). You may find yourself echoing Frank Zappa's sentiments in his song about cheap science fiction/horror movies: "I need a little more cheapness, please!"

3. "The Lizard." Currently in a week-long run at the Oak Street Cinema, this film from Iran gives many their first look at a genre that most might have suspected did not really exist: the Iranian COMEDY!! Yes, really.

"The Lizard" is the story of an imprisoned burglar who escapes one day while disguised as a Muslim cleric. Unfortunately for him, everyone on the outside believes he's what he appears to be, including the congregation of the Mosque who were waiting for a new leader and become convinced he's the man they were told was coming. Suddenly the man who expected to make a clean getaway is stuck improvising strange, rambling sermons (not easy when he's almost totally unfamiliar with the Koran) on such subjects as the movie "Pulp Fiction". Worse yet, these sermons become hugely popular and he begins to become famous, not the best of developments for a man who doesn't want to draw attention to himself.

Weirdly and genuinely funny, this film will show audiences a whole different side of both the Iranian people as a whole and the Islamic religion in particular, in a story that brings to mind the title of an old Twilight Zone episode, "People Are Alike All Over". The story's observations about government, religion, compassion, and what exactly goes into living a good, moral life have a good deal of relevance wherever you live and whatever you believe, and should spark post-film discussions for a long time after the film is over. That's after you've stopped laughing, of course, which might take a while.

Oh, yes... some of you might be wondering whether this relatively benign film, which was a huge success with audiences in its native country, wound up being banned by the government there. To which I say: is "Alexander" a bad movie?