This movie deserves five stars for Geoffrey Rush's portrayal of the Marquis alone. Taking up yet another challenging role, he becomes Kaufman's and script writer/playwright Doug Wright's de Sade as perfectly as no one besides him could have done. We see an aging Marquis who, although locked up in his cell in Charenton, is as arrogant by birthright as he is by nature; and thoroughly convinced of his own superiority, has tricked himself into an "I'm only here because I allow you to do this to me" attitude. Having heretofore shamelessly exploited the lack of control exercised by the asylum's resident priest, Abbé Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix), de Sade initially thinks nothing of the risk inherent in exposing Royer-Collard for the hypocrite that he is, thereby however ensuring the doctor's enmity even more thoroughly and quickly than he would have been sure to gain it anyway. A battle of power ensues that de Sade cannot possibly win, or so it would seem - although he finds endless ways of beating back every new measure of repression he is subjected to.

Intertwined with the battle about de Sade's freedom to write (and more importantly, to publish) is his and the Abbé's battle for Madeleine (Kate Winslet), the Marquis's ally in the publication of his writings as much as she is Coulmier's prodigy and pupil. Madeleine is in many respects the personification of the qualities each of the two men stands for; but more than that, she is the object of both of their unfulfilled desires. Ultimately, knowing that he has lost all his battles, chained to a prison wall and the Abbé at his throat, challenging the Marquis to admit that he loved Madeleine and to lay bare the weakness he had so striven to hide, de Sade tries to win yet one more time; disdainfully attempting to turn the exchange with the Abbé into the ultimate male spitting contest and thus exploit the limitations imposed by Coulmier's priesthood. But it is at the expense of a lie, and Coulmier sees through him. And whereas the Abbé soon thereafter comes face to face with his own demons, the Marquis is left with nothing but a final, desperate, equally abominable and grandiose act of rebellion.

While Geoffrey Rush alone would have carried the film even with lesser actors by his side, it certainly helps to see him paired up with Winslet, Phoenix and Caine and a well-chosen cast of supporting actors; not to speak of the outstanding cinematography. There may be plot twists that seem far-fetched (such as the "liberation" of Royer-Collard's convent-raised teenage wife Simone by de Sade's writings, and her running away with a handsome interior decorator), but ultimately, none of that is crucial to the movie's central conflict. Superb acting and direction more than make up for whatever minor flaws one might detect in the plot (and even for the license Kaufman and Wright are taking with biographical facts, something I am not always quick to forgive). The screen positively explodes every time Rush and Phoenix face off, and it crackles with tension and barely repressed desire in their respective scenes with Winslet. Great actors feed off each other, and in that respect, the movie probably would have benefited from a more direct confrontation between Rush and Caine as well. But even outside the clash of the film's four protagonists, many little scenes are skillfully used to shed additional light on the issues presented. Just think of Napoleon's court reader, feeling duty-bound to ask "Must I, your Majesty?" before proceeding with some of the more gory details of the copy of "Justine" that has fallen into the emperor's hands; or de Sade's wife telling Royer-Collard that the Marquis's greatest crime consisted in making her fall in love with him. - This movie would have deserved every Academy Award it was nominated for, hands down. Given its subject matter, however, it is anybody's guess why it didn't win a single one of them.

And the Oscar should have gone to ... this movie & Mr. Rush!
Review date: 2003-02-11 Rating: 10 out of 10

Pornographers make unlikely poster boys for the freedom of expression. This is true in the age of Larry Flint as much as it was true 200 years ago, at the times of the grandfather of all hardcore pornographers, the Marquis de Sade; and any movie addressing this particular issue will find itself walking a tight rope. Philip Kaufman, a veteran of the genre, succeeds admirably; albeit using a script which somewhat bends de Sade's biography and leaves out the more graphic details of his writings (thus, however, also neatly avoiding another NC17 rating, which would have been sure to follow otherwise). But portraying every aspect of "Justine" or any other of the Marquis's brainchildren is not crucial to this movie - in fact, it virtually banks on the fact that its viewers have either read de Sade's works or heard about them, thus instantly placing its audience on equal terms with the members of the society in which the Marquis lived, which oftentimes loudly condemned his works while at the same time clandestinely gobbling them down or, like Dr. Royer-Collard (Michael Caine), sent on imperial orders to Charenton to forever "cure" de Sade's "disease," practicing his preachings instead of their own.

This movie deserves five stars for Geoffrey Rush's portrayal of the Marquis alone. Taking up yet another challenging role, he becomes Kaufman's and script writer/playwright Doug Wright's de Sade as perfectly as no one besides him could have done. We see an aging Marquis who, although locked up in his cell in Charenton, is as arrogant by birthright as he is by nature; and thoroughly convinced of his own superiority, has tricked himself into an "I'm only here because I allow you to do this to me" attitude. Having heretofore shamelessly exploited the lack of control exercised by the asylum's resident priest, Abbé Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix), de Sade initially thinks nothing of the risk inherent in exposing Royer-Collard for the hypocrite that he is, thereby however ensuring the doctor's enmity even more thoroughly and quickly than he would have been sure to gain it anyway. A battle of power ensues that de Sade cannot possibly win, or so it would seem - although he finds endless ways of beating back every new measure of repression he is subjected to.

Intertwined with the battle about de Sade's freedom to write (and more importantly, to publish) is his and the Abbé's battle for Madeleine (Kate Winslet), the Marquis's ally in the publication of his writings as much as she is Coulmier's prodigy and pupil. Madeleine is in many respects the personification of the qualities each of the two men stands for; but more than that, she is the object of both of their unfulfilled desires. Ultimately, knowing that he has lost all his battles, chained to a prison wall and the Abbé at his throat, challenging the Marquis to admit that he loved Madeleine and to lay bare the weakness he had so striven to hide, de Sade tries to win yet one more time; disdainfully attempting to turn the exchange with the Abbé into the ultimate male spitting contest and thus exploit the limitations imposed by Coulmier's priesthood. But it is at the expense of a lie, and Coulmier sees through him. And whereas the Abbé soon thereafter comes face to face with his own demons, the Marquis is left with nothing but a final, desperate, equally abominable and grandiose act of rebellion.

While Geoffrey Rush alone would have carried the film even with lesser actors by his side, it certainly helps to see him paired up with Winslet, Phoenix and Caine and a well-chosen cast of supporting actors; not to speak of the outstanding cinematography. There may be plot twists that seem far-fetched (such as the "liberation" of Royer-Collard's convent-raised teenage wife Simone by de Sade's writings, and her running away with a handsome interior decorator), but ultimately, none of that is crucial to the movie's central conflict. Superb acting and direction more than make up for whatever minor flaws one might detect in the plot (and even for the license Kaufman and Wright are taking with biographical facts, something I am not always quick to forgive). The screen positively explodes every time Rush and Phoenix face off, and it crackles with tension and barely repressed desire in their respective scenes with Winslet. Great actors feed off each other, and in that respect, the movie probably would have benefited from a more direct confrontation between Rush and Caine as well. But even outside the clash of the film's four protagonists, many little scenes are skillfully used to shed additional light on the issues presented. Just think of Napoleon's court reader, feeling duty-bound to ask "Must I, your Majesty?" before proceeding with some of the more gory details of the copy of "Justine" that has fallen into the emperor's hands; or de Sade's wife telling Royer-Collard that the Marquis's greatest crime consisted in making her fall in love with him. - This movie would have deserved every Academy Award it was nominated for, hands down. Given its subject matter, however, it is anybody's guess why it didn't win a single one of them.

Wonderful piece of Cinema!
Review date: 2003-01-21 Rating: 10 out of 10

This is a surprisingly engrossing and entertaining film, which left me feeling like I had seen one of Hollywood's better efforts!

The story is pretty simple really! It follows the imprisonment of the Marquis de Sade in France's Charenton asylum at the turn of the 18th century

Geoffrey Rush is a perfect choice to play the Marquis de Sade in "Quills" and looks every part the stately court jester in dishevelled finery, and carries it with the fierce urgency of a writer whose sexual fantasies are his sole remaining defence against repression and hypocrisy. Deprived of quill and ink, he writes with wine, then blood, then his own faeces--a descent into madness or an impassioned refusal to be silenced? "Quills" embraces freedom of expression ("such beauty, such abomination", as one character notes) while affirming that all freedoms have a price.

De Sade smuggles manuscripts out of Charenton with help from Madeleine (Kate Winslet who is also wonderful!), a virginal laundress who relishes de Sade's scandalous prose--a divine irony since she was taught to read by asylum abbé Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix - also on top form), whose desire for Madeleine is suppressed by Catholic propriety. The delicate dynamic of this trio is shattered by the arrival of Royer-Collard (Michael Caine - who seems almost asleep through this sadly), a righteous hypocrite appointed to silence de Sade once and for all.

Rush's intensity ensures that the marquis's plight is no laughing matter. "Quills" has a point, makes it without condescension and knows the difference between madness and passion

There are some scenes, which leave you laughing, some which leave you crying and others leave you feeling full of anger! So many emotions in one film, leaves you quite worn out!

The ironic ending was unexpected though very clever and leaves you filled with a sense of sadness, anger and still hopeful!

Some scenes are quite graphic and nasty so please be aware of this, but you must remember the subject matter! It is, after all, a film based on the life of the Marquis de Sade! You can believe that this is no family film and no walk in the park!

However it is expertly brought to the screen by a fantastic cast and brilliant direction and writing!

Not everyone's taste but a brilliant film none the less!

A DARK AND DEPRESSING PERIOD PIECE...
Review date: 2002-11-21 Rating: 6 out of 10

Don't get me wrong. I generally love period pieces. I did not love this one, as I found it to be too depressing, though marvelously acted by a stellar cast. Most of the film takes place in an insane asylum which houses the Marquis de Sade.

Geoffrey Rush is marvelous and shines (no pun intended) as the Marquis de Sade, whom he plays as a deliciously salacious, old reprobate with a highly droll sense of humor. Joaquin Phoenix deftly plays the part of the young Abbe Coulmier, a tortured soul who is trying to fulfill his duties as a priest, while trying to resist his attraction to the virginal asylum laundress, Madeleine, beautifully acted by the earthy and talented Kate Winslet. Michael Caine plays the part of the evil Dr. Royer-Collard, who assumes control of the asylum, after Napolean becomes incensed at the licentiousness of the prose being published by the asylum's high profile inmate.

The story takes place in France at the turn of the eighteenth century in the gothic and forbidding Charenton asylum in which the notorious Marquis de Sade resides as an inmate. The asylum is run by Abbe Coulmier, who oversees the asylum with a gentle hand and believes that self-expression through artistic venues prevents the inmates from acting out those behaviors that got them sent to the asylum in the first place. It seems a serene, almost idyllic, well run place, with a relatively contented population.

Geoffrey Rush's portrayal of the Marquis is brilliant, and he makes the most of the often witty dialogue which the screenplay has provided. As a slightly rumpled member of the nobility, he lives in the asylum in faded splendor, writing sexual fantasies that he may no longer act out. Secretly assisted by the laundress, Madeleine, who ensures that his bawdy, sexually explicit, salacious stories reach a publisher, his prose becomes the toast of France, whose citizens eagerly await a new offering by the Marquis. His published story, "Justine", is ultimately read to the Emperor Napoleon, who decides that the asylum needs someone who will quell the Marquis.

Enter Dr. Royer-Collard, a doctor given to the use of an Iron Maiden and a water dunking apparatus to "cure" those unfortunate, disaffected ,and mentally ill individuals who come under his "care". It is he who is sent to the asylum and ultimately wrests control from the beleagered Abbe Coulmier, who is wrestling with his own demons and does not, at first, see what is coming down the pike.

Under Dr. Royer-Collard's administration, the asylum undergoes a change. It becomes more repressive. The more repressive it becomes, however, the more the Marquis demands to be heard. The more he demands to be heard, the more repressive the asylum becomes. It becomes a vicious cycle, with issues of power and control dominating.

Invariably, the Marquis rebels against this repression,. His rebellion initially manifests itself by tweaking the doctor. The Marquis tweaks him once too many times, however, and in a most public fashion. This incurs the doctor's wrath. As the doctor gains total control of the asylum, sadistic practices mask themselves as treatment. This, however, does not stop Madeleine from doing all she can to get the Marquis' writings to his adoring public, to her ultimate dismay.

The Marquis continues to write, even as his paper, quills, and ink, are removed, resorting to using using wine, blood, and even feces to write on sheets, his clothing, and the walls that imprison him. He simply will not be silenced.

Meanwhile, the good Abbe Coulmier is out of his league. Torn by his love and desire for Madeleine, as well as by his own impotence in the face of Dr. Royer-Collard's policies and practices, he begins his own seeming descent into madness. When he finally realizes that the bland and benign countenance of the doctor hides a malignancy greater than that which he had encountered among the inmates of the asylum, it is far too late.

The film is really an allegory, and there it succeeds brilliantly. As entertainment, however, I found it to be too dark and depressing to fully enjoy it.

Product Details/Specifications