The Merchant of Venice is a tragic comedy by William Shakespeare, believed to have been written between 1596 and 1598. Though classified as a comedy in the First Folio and sharing certain aspects with Shakespeare's other romantic comedies, the play is perhaps most remembered for its dramatic scenes, and is best known for Shylock and the famous 'Hath not a Jew eyes' speech. Also notable is Portia's speech about the 'quality of mercy'.
The title character is the merchant Antonio, not the Jewish moneylender Shylock, who is the play's most prominent and most famous character. This is made explicit by the title page of the first quarto: The moſt excellent Hiſtorie of the Merchant of Venice. With the extreame crueltie of Shylock the Iewe towards the ſayd Merchant, in cutting a iuſt pound of his fleſh: and the obtayning of Portia by the choyſe of three cheſts.

　双城记英语读后感1After reading "A tale of two cities"
　　 "A tale of two cities" is one of Dickens's most important representative works.The novel profoundly exposed the society contradiction before the French Revolution,intensely attacks the aristocratic social class is dissolute and cruel,and sincerely sympathizes with the depressed classes.The novel also described many magnificent scenes like the revolt people attacked Bastille and so on,which displayed people's great strength. The novel has portrayed many different people. Doctor Manette is honest and kind but suffers the persecution actually ， Lucie is beautiful and gentle ，Charles is graceful and noble，Lorry is upright and honest ，Sydney is semblance of indifferent, innermost feelings of warm,unconventional but also selfless and lofty，Miss Pross is straightforward and loyal，Evremonde brothers are cruel and sinister......The complex hatred is hard to solve, the cruel revenge has made more hatreds, loves rebirth in the hell edge,but take the life as the price. As an outstanding writer,in Dickens's work,the language skill is essential.Each kind of rhetoric technique,like the analogy,the exaggeration,the contrast,the humorous,and the taunt are handled skillfully,and the artistry of the work is also delivered the peak."A tale of two cities" has its difference with the general historical novel, its character and the main plot are all fictionalizes.With the broad real background of the French Revolution,the author take the fictional character Doctor Manette's experience as the main clue,interweaves the unjust charge, love and revenge three independences but also incident cross-correlation stories together,the plot is criss-crossed,and the clue is complex.The author use insert narrates,foreshadowing,upholstery and so many techniques,causes the structure integrity and strictness,the plot winding anxious and rich of theatrical nature,it displayed the remarkable artistic skill.the style "A tale of two cities" is solemnity and melancholy,fills indignantion,but lacks the humor of the early works.

　　双城记读后感 2
　　A TALE OF TWO CITIES
　　The tale of two cities is a historical story, one of Dickens’ long fictions.The background to the novel is the revolution of France .It portrayed a brutal and bloody story , but it also contained love and friendship.
　　In the novel, Dickens sarcastically described a typical cruel nobleman—marquis of Evermonde . When he was young he and his brother stole a countrywoman by force and killed her family .What’s worse , he used his power to imprison Dr Manette , a kind and honest man who knew all the things they had done and wanted to disclose their crimes . In order to hide their crimes. Marquis of Evermonde and his brother threw Doctor Manette into prison for 18 years . During these 18 years,Doctor Manette lost his freedom and suffer a great in spirit .
　　I felt unthinkable that Marquis of Evermonde and his brother killed people just as easily as they killed chickens. They deprived other people’s freedom as they liked and they thought it was normal and unremarkable. They had never realized that they had done something wrong or something improper. Because their nature was cruel and evil, like demons. There is an old saying which means: People who commit too many crimes will kill themselves. After all, there is justice in the world. The demons can’t be rampant forever. Because the world will not forgive them. They will pay their lives for their crimes. Let’s see the consequence of the Marquis,’’He lay there like a stone with a knife pushed into his heart.” I think it was just what he ought to gain and it is a real exciting scene.
　　The Marquis’ death was just the beginning of people’s resistance to the nobleman. Gradually more and more people joined in the revolution. One after another nobleman were sentenced to death and their heads were cut down . However, some innocent people were implicated in the revolution. Charles Darney was one of them He was the nephew of Marquis of Evermonde. To the opposite of his uncle, Darney was a kind and independent young man.
　　Dickens spoke highly of kindness mercy and love in the novel too. This is the other thone of the novel when Doctor Manette was released from prison. It was his daughter Lucie who took care of him and helped him return to normal. During this time, Dr manette and Lucie knew Charles Darney and Sydeny Carton, the two young man fell in love with Lucie at the same time . At last, Lucie married Chares Darney .Dr Manette accepted Darney as his son-in-law although he knew that Darney was the nephew of the man who threw him into prison for18 years. This is the love between father and daughter. And Sydeny Carton , the very great man ,loved Lucie deeply. He promised Lucie that he would do everything for her happiness. He did it truely ,he sacrificed himself instead of Darney who looked the same as him. This is love for lovers . This is the most wonderful thing in the world. It also reminds us that no matter how no matter when there is true love existing. At the end , Lucie, Dr Manette and Darney arrived in England safely.
　　The tale of two cities is different from other historical fictions. Its characters and main plots are fictional under the real background of the revolution of France. The author made the experience of the fictional charactor Dr Manette as the main clue.The plots are complicated, and they are flexuous and dramatic. The structure is complete and rigorous.
　　Dickens had dear love and hate. He praised those who ought to be praised and attacked those who ought to be attacked. The motivation of the novel maybe just warn the English dominators. But I think we can learn something meaningful from the tale of two cities.

Hills, bagpipes, mist, the word “Scotland” written along the bottom of the screen – it can only be one place. That’s right, Wales. Nah, only joking – as if anyone would ever make a film about Wales.
Mel Gibson both directed and starred in this tartan-clad epic about William Wallace, the legendary Scottish freedom fighter/terrorist who, even way back in the 14th Century, had already had enough of the English going on about winning the World Cup in 1966. So, armed with just some rocks, a few hundred muck-dwellers and an extremely peculiar accent, he led a nation to fight for freedom from English tyranny. Or something along those lines.
It’s actually fairly appropriate to be so vague about all of this, because nobody really knows all that much about the real Wallace (and most of what we do know comes from a poem). You could spend a lifetime picking apart the historical inaccuracies in the flick, and there would still be those who’d disagree with what you found.
Because of that, how much enjoyment you can get from this 177-minute beast depends largely on your willingness to accept Wallace as a charmer with biting wit and a permanently clean-shaven chin. As the sort of bloke beautiful French princesses would hand over national secrets to simply because of the way he looks at them. Or even just as a guy who doesn’t smell like moss.
The most breath-taking, if gruesome, parts of the movie are the incredibly lifelike battle scenes. Putting them together must have been an immense project to undertake, but you’ve got to hand it to Gibbers – he does it very, very well. He also makes a likable hero figure, providing you can put to the back of your mind the fact that he’s basically playing the original ned.
Personally I find the movie far too long, particularly as parts of it play like a TV advert for the Scottish Tourist Board. In one scene, for example, Wallace sprints to the top of a mountain and just stands there, kilt billowing, for no apparent reason. Anyone who’s ever worn a kilt will of course know that the last place you’re likely to linger is a-top a windy Scottish mountain. Talk about “freedom”!!
2
Long before The Passion of the Christ, Mel Gibson directed another cinematic masterpiece, Braveheart. Filmed against the backdrop of majestic mountains and rolling meadows, it tells the historically-based (yet not entirely accurate) story of William Wallace, a common man’s warrior who led the Scottish people in rebellion against King Edward I, also known as “Longshanks”. Written by Randall Wallace, an American tourist fascinated with a Scottish statue of his namesake, the script collected dust in Hollywood for over a decade before Gibson made the brilliant decision to put it on the big screen. Just like The Passion, it’s a decision he would not regret.
Set in the 11th Century, Braveheart catalogues the struggle of Scottish serfs who labor under the brutal oppression of English occupation forces. Amidst these terrible conditions, William Wallace (Mel Gibson) falls in love with Murron MacClannough (Catherine McCormack). Insistent on not sharing his wife (a proclamation by the king gives local rulers “first-night rights” to new brides) Wallace secretly marries Murron. Nevertheless, an English knight assaults her, sparking a fight with Wallace. Fleeing the village, Wallace believes Murron has escaped and will soon meet him at a secret rendezvous point. But Murron is captured and executed by the king’s emissaries.
Angered by his wife’s murder, Wallace instigates a local rebellion, slaughtering all the king’s loyalists in his village. As his rebellion grows, a distraught Longshanks (Patrick McGoohan) dispatches his fabled Northern Army to destroy it. But the heroic Wallace delivers a stirring speech to rouse his men, while deploying an ingenious battlefield trick to defeat the king’s cavalry.
With the power and legend of Wallace growing day by day, Longshanks relies on his daughter-in-law, Princess Isabelle (Sophie Marceau) to broker a truce. But Isabelle’s power is limited, and Wallace realizes his people can only win freedom if backed by the Scottish nobles. Their appointed leader is Robert the Bruce (Angus MacFadyen) who vacillates between his own idealistic views and his father’s pessimistic pragmatism. Will the nobles join with Wallace? Will the Scots win their freedom? Only history tells us the answer.
With elaborate costumes, vivid battle scenes, and a noble hero as its focal point, Braveheart is more than your typical run-of-the-mill action movie. Part history, part Hollywood heroism - its timeless idealism strikes a cord with every viewer. In fact, the movie itself led to a revival in nationalistic pride that fueled the successful Scottish independence movement of the 1990s. It’s a testament to the strength and character of the real life William Wallace. A thousand years later, his enduring legacy continues to transform the European landscape, and Mel Gibson captures the noble warrior’s passion with an awe-inspiring Academy Award-winning masterpiece.
3
BRAVEHEART is set in Scotland in the 1200s. It tells the true story of William Wallace who was a famous commoner who led his people in a rebellion against the English. The movie is of epic proportions, length and grandeur. We learn the entire history of William Wallace from the age of 8 until his death.
Mel Gibson, in what I found to be his best role ever, plays the grown up Wallace. Gibson directs the movie as well. The story is full of fascinating history of which I knew little. I have a good English history background but was surprised at what little early Scottish history I knew. Wallace wants to live in peace and ignore the English atrocities he has witnessed, but circumstances force his hand, and he declares war on the English. His battle cry is freedom and many poor people follow him in his quest. The story itself is quite compelling, and the script is excellent.
The political intrigue among the Scottish nobles makes you wonder whose side they are on. As the story unfolds, you come to realize that they are only interested in enriching themselves and do not care about their own people. They constantly counsel Wallace to compromise his ideas in order to achieve some lesser, but more practical solution. His vision is a singular one of freedom for his people. I found myself thinking of Gary Cooper in THE FOUNTAINHEAD and the similarity between his role and that of Gibson's. All of the leaders who were the "wisest" urged constant compromise on their rising young stars in both movies.
Actually, the movie most like BRAVEHEART is GETTYSBURG for both had huge and realistic battle scenes with wave after wave of humans charging each other and dying. Of course, many people will compare BRAVEHEART with ROB ROY. They are both about old Scottish heroes, and in my book, BRAVEHEART wins hands down. Finally, you may find yourself thinking of the Judas story from the Bible except here the movie has a plethora of Judases.
One example of the quality of the script is that the writer manages to introduce a very funny character without it seeming like merely a plot device, which of course it is. This character is a mad Irishman who steals every scene he is in with his dialog. I laughed out loud many times. Although there was little humor in this serious tale, there was just enough to keep me from ever tiring even though I had to stay seated for three hours.
Too often period pieces seem like merely exercises in style. I found QUEEN MARGOT to be one such movie. Here the wonderful costumes and set decoration feel totally authentic but in a natural way. I felt like I was actually in the thirteenth century where people's faces were frequently dirty and in general personal hygiene was minimal. When they made their kills in battle or in revenge, I could sense how close they were to animals then. The blood would splat on their faces, and they could just as easy have been wolves.
I have been to Scotland many times and it is gorgeous. In a low key but quite impressive way, the cinematography makes one feel the beauty and the isolation of countryside. The music with the recurring and haunting melody of the lone Scottish bagpipe sets a sad and yet serene tone and mood.
BRAVEHEART runs a long, but well worth it, 2:52. I would not want it shorten. It is rated R, but NC-17 would be more appropriate. It is THE goriest movie I have ever seen and that too I would not change because it allows one to vicariously live through what actual battles in that period would be like. Please be warned that you will see almost every part of the human body being chopped off or stabbed in one scene or another. Imagine any physical horror, and there is probably a scene of it in BRAVEHEART. Nevertheless, there was not one scene where I thought the violence was gratuitous. I would let older teenagers see the movie, but would be careful with impressionable younger ones.
4
When pagan Saxons invaded Britain pushing the native Celtic tribes back in the mountains of the west and the north of the country they couldn't have known what difficulties they leave to future generations. One of the difficulties were Scots, though they weren't much affected by the pagan invasion.
Throughout the history, Scots (as a tribe from Ireland was in 360 mentioned by Romans) had a changing luck in battles, whoever they fought. They had had many various allies and fought against many various enemies, including their former or future allies (politics).
Originally based in Ireland, the Scottish tribe later established their kingdom on the west coast and isles of today's Scotland (between years 501 and 503). Generally, they were never good friends with tribes which lived on the isle, called Britannia by the Romans, before them; perhaps because they came from Ivernia, today's Ireland...
The intolerance between the two sides resulted in many battles and rebellions. In 600, 300 Edinburgh horseman were killed by the English, in 1014 king Malcom II defeated the Danes, four years later another victory was won on the river Tweed, at Carham, against the army of Anglo-Saxons (particularly Northumbrians). On the other hand, king Duncan was defeated by the English and killed by famous character of the Scottish history, MacBeth, who is defeated in 1057 by Malcolm Canmore in the battle of Lumphanan etcetera etcetera.
Then, in the year of approximately 1272, William Walace is born in Ellerslie. He is fated to become one of the most important characters of the history of Scots. In age of twenty-five years, he kills sheriff (originally shire-reeve) of Lanark and a revolt is unleashed. Perhaps many Scots were waiting for a leader to emerge, because the same year Wallace defeats the English at Stirling Bridge.
His luck changed when he was defeated at Falkirk in 1298. In 1305, he is betrayed and executed brutally, his head being mounted on London Bridge.
That is a very rough outline of a life so very important, of the life of William Wallace, a thorough Scot, exactly the William Wallace about whom this movie is. His father was killed by the English, his wife was murdered by the sheriff of Lanark (which is a reason why the sheriff ended up equally) - no mercy could have been awaited from a man that had never seen mercy on the side of his enemies.
Braveheart is a heroic epic told compactly and relatively objectively, noticing everything important that most probably happened in the life of William Wallace. After all, it doesn't have to be historically exact - it is a legend and even if it was "only" a legend, it would be a most impressive one.
5
Back in 1995 when I first saw this movie I was wowed, it was a cinematic epic and one which I thoroughly enjoyed.... a few years later when I met my future spouse I was subjected to this movie on a weekly basis and now I cannot bare to watch it.
Anyway back to the movie, if you have been living under a rock and haven't seen it here's the basic story Mel Gibson plays William Wallace a Scottish highlander who leads his people in a uprising against the English monarch.
Now just so you know this film however "based" on historical events is completely inaccurate, Wallace was in actual fact a Scottish Noble (his family was rich), Wallace never had a wife, and the French princess Mel gets jiggy with would've been around 8 years old at the time, the only real truth in the movie was that he was hung drawn and quartered and he lead an uprising...the rest is Hollywood bullsh*t.
I'm giving the film 4 stars because if you are unaware of the historical inaccuracies and you haven't seen it 100 times you will be entertained, its a good movie.