Regardless of the historical background of that period, the law at that time was obviously biased towards Christians, and the value orientation was also the same. The status and reputation of the Jews have also evolved lower and lower after the development of various situations. This is because they are not familiar with it, so I don’t want more. Say. Regarding the movie as a pure story, this story promotes too much of the same-sex love between Antonio and Bassanio (whether it is gay, or the so-called friendship that has withstood the test or exceeds love), and portrays the character of Sherlock. There are also biases, and it is understandable to be labeled as "anti-Semitic".
Since Lao Sha wrote this masterpiece, Sherlock’s stinginess, greed and cruelty have been imprinted on people’s hearts. He is injustice, and his failure is applauded. He and Antonio et al. The contrast reflects the good and evil of human nature. Such an understanding is widely accepted, but I cannot agree with it. From Sherlock's standpoint, what I give is sympathy, I can understand his revenge and resentment, and is worthless for his defeat, well, then let me talk about some alternative ideas.
First of all, although Sherlock cannot be said to be a human rights fighter, this kind of legal consciousness should be approved. Even his impassioned court has some meaning of fighting racial discrimination. Of course, for him, speaking these words to let It is understandable for people to understand sophistry, but in the special occasion of the court, such sophistry and hypocrisy are very reasonable and indisputable.
Secondly, under the circumstances that breach of contract was illegal at the time, it was more reasonable for him to ask for a pound of meat from Antonio. At the beginning, Antonio confidently signed the contract without any instigation or threats. It was entirely the behavior of a self-conscious person. Then What's wrong with him fulfilling his promise for this reason? He used the constant waves of the sea to be unable to reduce the power, the jackal caused the ewe to mourn for the loss of the lamb, and the pine and cypress were blown by the sky and couldn't help but make a sound to emphasize the metaphors. Sherlock's cruelty cannot be changed, but it disgusts me. If these words are spoken by others, they can enhance the tragedy effect, but when they are spoken by Antonio, I think it is a hypocritical performance. A prestigious person like him Nobles, if you can't keep your promises, you can't blame the other party for being unkind, but you can blame yourself for being too self-confident.
Furthermore, I always feel that with Sherlock’s eloquence, it is not impossible to retreat under Portia’s trap. It is a pity that he was dazzled by the desire for revenge and the good situation that was one-sided at the beginning, and committed too many crimes. Mistake. First of all, he should be as kind as the Duke had imagined, and if he was humiliated enough, he would be able to gain fame and fortune, but that obviously didn't fit Sherlock's character. Second, when Portia asked the doctor to stop Antonio’s wounds so as not to bleed and die, he should agree so that there would be no later punishing him on the grounds that "a foreigner attempted to murder a citizen by direct or indirect means" The result is, but according to his idea, he is indeed not obligated to hire a doctor, and the court is also the same. If God lets Antonio die, it will be a disaster, which is understandable. However, the so-called legal statement also has loopholes, what is meant by "attempt", what is meant by "murder", and how does the fulfillment of the contract count as "murder"? If Sherlock gives up that pound of meat, does it mean that he has broken himself "Attempts", these can obviously be debated again. One more point, he shouldn’t do it himself. When Portia proposes that he can cut a pound of meat, but “no drop of blood is allowed” and the difference is not “a tiny bit”, he can propose that the court appoint the most experienced and authoritative one. The butcher’s hands, as for the butcher’s “failure” to get blood or the weight is wrong, it is a matter of the butcher and the court, and it has nothing to do with him. What he wants is just a pound of meat. Well, it is not among the scope of his consideration. Finally, in order to increase the drama, Lao Sha arranged that everyone was so stupid that they couldn’t see the identity of Portia and the maid. If Sherlock could reveal the identity of Portia and the maid, the ending would be different. Of course, this is just talking. Drama is drama after all. A woman who pretends to be a man in a martial arts movie will never be seen by her sweetheart.
In short, Sherlock lost because he was not kind enough, magnanimous enough, and cunning enough.
Let's relax, talk about Portia.
This clever and witty woman showed the cuteness of the little woman when her husband offered to thank him, but unfortunately her ring returned to her side, but then she forgave her husband, as if nothing happened, accepted The husband’s apology was given. If it is me, I think it is difficult for me to understand. After all, the meaning of this ring is extraordinary. Giving out the ring is equivalent to ruining a wife's love for her husband. Even if he has a touching explanation, I can accept his touch, but it is difficult to treat this as having never happened. Today he can have such an explanation, and tomorrow he can betray himself with the same touching explanation. This is not Stingy or inconsiderate, but he made me feel a sense of insecurity.
Therefore, the conclusion is that women should not test the loyalty of men casually, because time and God will naturally test you. Whether he is loyal or not, you will definitely be able to see the proof.
View more about The Merchant of Venice reviews
