Quills

Rating:
Summary: Quills: Fictional Sade Tale A Gem
Review: Quills is one of the best films of they year. It's adapted by Doug Wright from his Obie Award winning play and directed by Phillip (Unbearable Lightness of Being, The Right Stuff, Invasion of the Body Snatchers) Kaufman. It stars some of the best actors working in films today: Geoffrey Rush, Kate Winslet, Joaquin Phoenix and Michael Caine.

It seems an odd time for a film which more or less romanticizes the last days of Marquis de Sade to be filmed and released-yet here it is. Although it's release is on a smaller city by city schedule, you'll probably want to make a point of seeing it in the theater.

Words are powerful things. The pen is mightier than damn near anything and creates more fear and controversy than anything as well!!! The pornographic and satirical writings of the Marquis de Sade (Geoffrey Rush) are not only escaping from the Charenton Asylum for the Insane where the aristocratic Marquis enjoys a great deal of creature comforts courtesy of a benevolent Abbé Coumier (Joaquin Phoenix), but they are also being published and distributed throughout France, much to the embarrassment of Napoleon who at first wants de Sade shot but then reconsiders and dispatches the sadistic but morally superior Dr. Royer-Collard (Michael Caine)to insure that de Sade's pornography is not seen by the public ever again. The Marquis' writings are leaving the asylum with the help of a laundress named Madeline (Kate Winslet) who's infatuated with de Sade's talent and in unrequited forbidden love with the Abbe'. Thus, the main cast of characters has been introduced, and the play can now begin.

There's a somewhat overly tidy twist ending which though clever, wraps up everything so neatly we're reminded this has been a stylish work of fiction. Pity we are not given an ending to match the opening of the film in which we seem to be witnessing a sado-masochistic moment from within the Marquis de Sade's imagination only to realize we are watching a public beheading of a young woman. There's a true feeling of being surprised and unsettled at the beginning of the film. Most will not leave the film unsettled or off-balanced however unless you want to really contemplate.

Geoffrey Rush has finally found his 'role of a lifetime'. At times perhaps you will see a bit of James Woods in Rush's performance. But Rush goes beyond what I suspect Woods would be capable of doing. He inhabits the immorality of his character like it was the skin he was born to stretch in. One forgets we are witnessing a bravura performance.

The more observant will witness a remarkable subtle performance from Joaquin Phoenix which does pay off in a fiery confrontation scene late in the film. It's not the kind of love it or laugh at it performance we got from him in Gladiator, but a much more textured and less affected performance.

Kate Winslet remains one of the most emotionally honest actresses of our time. I can't think of another actress working today who is able to seem so effortless and natural and resist the temptation to become overly theatrical when on screen, yet still portray distinctive and powerful characters like Winslet does. Her character wears a variety of masks, and the seemingly difficult task of playing someone like this in a natural, non-theatrical manner is handled perfectly by Winslet. She refuses to chew the scenery even when several opportunities beg for her to do just that. She's simply marvelous and has never been in a better film.

The film dazzles us in several ways. First is the approach that Kauffman takes. He is having his cake and eating it too, when he frames this vision of a Marquis de Sade as an 18th century martyr of freedom of thought and opinion. A man who's pornographic, satirical and sacrilegious writings so influenced the world, he had to be locked away in an insane asylum and persecuted for his 'art'. Kaufman and Wright don't shy too far away from de Sade's words, or from suggesting that his words are powerful, influential, hypnotic and dangerous. These are words that are capable of causing people to act on their animalistic urges and perhaps these are words that will create anarchy if not muted.

Yet Kaufman and Wright can not really show us much of De Sade's work at all. It would not get past today's censors and it would not be met by an audience with anything short of disgust. Some of de Sade's writings are beyond gross and a mainstream audience would hardly be able to stomach some of the material. We do hear snippets of what most would consider the sacrilege of his work, and it's shocking to see him spit on the bible and dismiss it so sharply - but these things are just the tip of an iceberg that the audience is spared from hearing or seeing.

Instead we get a pretty simple morality tale. Rush's de Sade is so beyond anyone's idea of decency that he doesn't seem very much like a dangerous threat to society as much as a drag queen martyr for freedom of speech and thought. The character of Dr. Royer-Collard (Michael Caine) is such a hypocrite, as an ultra conservative who uses his morality as an impenetrable shield, giving him carte blanche to cut with a sword without regard to how many he hurts in the process. He's a slimy villain minus only a few degrees of camp. We are given almost cliched scenes of melodrama and sequences that could have come from any number of over-written bodice ripper type novels (where caged women yearn to be freed). It's just here they are taken for a spin in a unique direction. They have been partially re-invented to fit into a more acceptable tall tale telling of the Marquis de Sade's last days. Even the most obvious and cliched of conceits, Dr Royer-Collard's teenaged wife Simone wanting to experiment sexually with a young contractor, after reading the Marquis de Sade, is acceptable because of the conviction of Amelia Warner's performance coupled with a need for something a bit familiar, and overdone to hang onto and feel vastly superior to.

There is some strong stuff in the film and it's not for squeamish or the prudish. It almost goes far enough at times, and it's certainly understandable why it holds itself it back from going any further.

No secret that repression and censorship and prohibition breeds acts and behaviors which rebel against the oppression. Here we have a film which tidily wraps the story of de Sade in 18th century clothing, but is quietly shouting messages to all who care to take notice of them. The repression the Marquis endured undoubtedly fueled his sordid tales, and the careful way the film represses itself may make audience members imagine more than what they've really seen.

I loved it. I enjoyed the deceptively tasty tone the script, actors and direction bring to the material which becomes a cousin to a Greek morality tale as re-thought by a modern Shakespeare, carefully presented for mass audience consumption..

Rather than be overly gross or pornographic the film gives us brilliantly conceived filmed scenes like when the Marquis ingeniously makes his clothing a parchment on which to write his latest story using his own blood as ink. Or even better when he whispers his stories from in-mate to in-mate until they are finally copied down by the devoted laundress Madeline to be smuggled to the mysterious man on a black horse who will whisk them away to the publisher.

At the end, the film starts to explode into a bloody Spanish Inquisition inspired finale you always wanted to see in one of those Hammer (or Poe inspired)Roger Corman films, where a larger budget would let them show you more debauchery and bloodshed. But it's then twisted into a too clever and too tidy of a finish.

The decadent look of the film must be credited to Rogier Stoffers' superbly crafted cinematography. He paints with light and film magically. There's also fine supporting work in the film by actors who portray other inmates suffering from various conditions of insanity. Although at times the in-mates are used as sort of comic relief, they remain quickly painted memorable portraits or characters, and not merely unimportant props.

There's great detail in the film which I savored with relish. The frames were used sumptiously by the director and his cinematographer. A few very memorable images will be replaying in my head for quite some time.

I know the film will disappoint some of you for compromising itself, and it will shock and offend some of you because of its material. I also know it's one of the best films of the year. Chris Jarmick, Author of The Glass Cocoon with Serena F. Holder-a steamy cyber- thriller Available January 2001 (Thanks for pre-ordering your copy here at Amazon)

Rating:
Summary: It's a SADE, SADE world!
Review: It seems that Geoffrey Rush can not be in a film nowadays without giving an Oscar worthy performance. Everything this man touches truely turns to gold. His chilling performance as the sadistic, well, you know who, is disturbing, yet poignant at the same time. Great performances by each member of the cast truely make Quills a tour-de-force! Michael Caine is headed for another Oscar nom (if not a win) and Joaquin Phoenix must be nominated for this, but will lose, to whoelse, but, Joaquin Phoenix (Gladiator). Great cinematography, great screenplay, an all around great film!

Rating:
Summary: GOOD ACTING KEEP IT INTERESTING
Review: Puritan should avoid this film at all costs , but on it's own terms ,it's quite good and director KAUFMAN was the right man to do it, since many of his previous movies dealt with sex.It's really about the sulfurate power of the written words.The marquis de SADE was a real pervert. GEOFFREY RUSH gives a commanding acting performance;KATE WINSLET continues her career by playing different kind of virgin heroines.Here, the vertu is put against the vice and the vice end up winning in an ironic twist ending.Not for all tastes.

Rating:
Summary: GREAT STORY, GREAT ACTING, GREAT ENDING!
Review: I'll be brief: Give the Oscar to Geoffrey Rush right now! Why wait? Rush's performance alone was worth the price of admission. This film captivated the theather audience in such a way that you could have heard a pin fall...on the carpet. Winslet is once again, wonderous. Caine is so cunning and Phoenix is simply fascinating.

From the sensual to the perverse, this film reveals itself as a mind-blowing study of human behavior.

Rating:
Summary: A MUST See
Review: Quills is sexy, shocking, erotic, sultry, funny, and dramatic all at the same time. Kate Winslet gives an Oscar worthy performance, as does Geoffrey Rush. Though not for all tastes, Quills is a masterpiece that will leave you thinking for a long time even if you didn't like it.

Rating:
Summary: A perverse historical drama for strong stomachs only
Review: One thing I can say about Kate Winslet is that she not afraid to take on controversial and demanding roles. In "Quills" she plays a laundress in the mental hospital where the Marquis de Sade is imprisoned. Geoffrey Rush is cast as the demented and perverse Marquis who has an obsession with writing down his violent and sado-masochistic stories. He therefore needs quills to write with and, when they are forcibly taken away, he must discover other ways to tell his stories. Joaquin Phoenix gives a fine performance as a priest who tries understand the Marquis and who is himself pulled into the insanity around him. And Michael Caine is cast as a pompous doctor whose methods of cure are as sick and perverse as the insane Marquis.

Set in 18th century France, and costumed well, the scene is set for a weird historical drama which is in itself perverse and sick... so perverse in fact that I found myself retching in disgust. Although some of the sex scenes are bawdy and humorous, it's the scenes of pain and torture that linger in my mind. But, after all, what can you expect from a film about the Marquis de Sade? Frankly, I'm not one to turn away from violence, but this film is a bit much, even for me. I therefore recommend it only to the very few who might be intrigued by the concept. But if it leaves you nauseous and depressed, don't say I didn't warn you.

Rating:
Summary: RECIPE FOR A FIERCE BUT INTOXICATING COMIC ROMP
Review: Take a controversial character, for instance, an infamous French aristocrat who writes fearlessly explicit pornographic tales from his asylum jail cell to which he has been consigned for committing violent crimes of passion.

Cast a maniacal Geoffrey Rush in that role, and use him with more than a pinch of artistic license, to philosophically discuss censorship and freedom of expression in art. Tipped in water-tight dialogue and a dramatically dark ink.

Throw in some action and intrigue, for example, our incarcerated prisoner having to smuggle his lurid works out of the asylum via a sweet, innocent maid who gains vicarious pleasure from reading the stories to self and others.

Of course, a dash of morality never hurt, so add a holier-than-thou priest who brings to the table a fresh aroma of common sensibility.

Stir well and add spice to taste. Viewers will revel in the mind play between the sordid characters you have created and be aghast at the depths to which it is possible for them to stoop. There, you have a marvel of a film that'll be seen again and again.

Quills is without reservations a fascinating cinematic masterpiece of our time, in every sense of the word, and deserves a warm place in every self-respecting film collection.

Rating:
Summary: Quills = disgusting scenes to turn your stomach.
Review: Yes, it is another well crafted, well acted and well done movie, but with such sadistic scenes to leave one thoroughly disturbed, upset and utterly sad. Yuck! It is so easy to use scenes of torture and the degrading of the human spirit (in this case of the Marquis de Sade) so as to make a movie seem profound. The film begins with a bloody beheading and I personally left near the end when a mentally deficient inmate was put in a small cage to be tortured. You know, folks, it takes greater skill and creativity to make a point with out the viewers all having to go through hell to "get it". This movie, in its savoring of revolting violence, is in itself a sadistic act.

Rating:
Summary: Amazing
Review: This is the kind of movie that stays with you long after its' been viewed. The acting is so incredible, (with my favorite being Joaquin Phoenix as the well-meaning but tortured young priest). The set design is so detailed and perfect. The screenplay is funny and sexy and disturbing all at once.

Don't expect a documentary. It's meant for entertainment, while still getting the message (several, in fact) across.

Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: "There is in each of us such beauty and such abomination."
Review: The story of the Marquis de Sade, whose name is inextricably linked with the word "sadism," comes alive in this absorbing but graphic depiction of 18th century attitudes toward love and sex, mental illness, religion, and crime and punishment in France. Adapting his stageplay for the screen, author Doug Wright sets the action primarily in the Charenton asylum, where the Marquis de Sade occupied a lavish cell. Philip Kaufman directs this noir film, which is filled with ironies and raises questions about who is sicker--the inmates or their wardens.

Geoffrey Rush, nominated for an Academy Award as Best Actor, is a terrifying Marquis de Sade, showing his wild rages, cruelty, and self-destruction, but also his need for understanding and human contact. Obsessively writing pornographic novels from his cell, he has a laundress smuggle them out to a delighted public. Dr. Royer-Collard, director of the asylum (sneeringly played by Michael Caine) is coldly formal, a believer in cruel punishment as a deterrent from abnormal behavior, his "punishments" rivaling anything the Marquis dreams up.

Madeleine LeClerq (winningly played by Kate Winslet), a lively laundress with a sense of adventure, is intrigued by the Marquis and helps him, showing herself to be more human and less a caricature than most of the other characters. Joachin Phoenix sensitively portrays the Abbe de Coulmier, a young priest who believes in the basic goodness of man, showing him as he agonizes over the conflicts between his church, his growing love for Madeleine, and his revulsion of Royer-Collard's perversities.

This film is violent and graphic, with some nudity, but the screenplay is elegantly written, filled with observations which both illustrate and elevate its themes. The dialogue is brilliant, though often more formal than one would expect of the inmates, conveying ideas at the same time that it accompanies violent action. The cinematography (Rogier Stoffers), with its dark prison scenes and close-ups of blood, dismemberment, and torture (some of it self-mutilation), combined with the costuming (Jacqueline West), make the nether-world of Charenton come alive visually.

Though the violence may be accurate and appropriate to the times, it is so pervasive and so graphic here that it seems to pander to an audience's baser emotions--it feels like a stage play given an extremely violent overlay for film. Still, the cast is wonderful, the story is absorbing, and the themes--what is morality, and how, if at all, should society control it?--are fully explored and presented. Mary Whipple