Quills

Rating:
Summary: A wondrous film for every possible reason
Review: I notice that most times this film is reviewed, wether it be by real critics or ... users, it is oftentimes bashed for glorifying the Marquis without ever mentioning the tone, acting, or anything about the actual film itself, just its subject matter. This is a crime.
This is among the most moving films I've ever seen. The characters, while perhaps not 100% true to historical fact, are fascinating and played phenomenally well, from key-player Rush to the minor characters who I still can't name the actors behind them, but are still ingrained into my memory. It is directed with a kinetic, eye-catching flair and is paced wonderfully; avoiding the boring, dragging mode that most films with a historical base have.
I feel that this is a very moving film with an extremely positive message, and that its important for anybody to see; not just ACLU devotees such as myself.

Rating:
Summary: Not What You Might Think
Review: Reading the jacket for this film one might think it was a cute, somewhat titillating, European comedy about the randy but lovable Marquis and his uptight persecutors. Uh, no. The problem with this film is its subject. I'd heard of De Sade but had no idea how depraved and degenerate his work really is. The stories that the film would have you believe are breathlessly awaited by a titillated Paris are essentially well written but exceedingly graphic descriptions of the most vile and disgusting "sex" acts imaginable. It is most definitely not erotica.

I am no prude, but I quickly lost any sympathy for this character, which meant I either had to root for his equally appalling persecutors or somehow identify with one of the supporting characters, such as the tormented and confused priest. No thanks. This movie is basically well-produced well-acted high-minded [stuff]. The message fails because in the end the "good" guy was just as bad, if not worse, than the "bad" guys. The Marquis was not a misunderstood "artist" but rather an adolescent pervert who probably deserved to be locked away. A truly distasteful film, all in all.

Rating:
Summary: Quills
Review: The movie has a really lame ending. However watching Marquis de Sade's passion and stubbornness is intresting and enjoyable. Again, Geoffrey Rush does a great performance along with Kate Winslet.

Rating:
Summary: The Freedom of Madness
Review: Come with me to the bowels of France's unspeakable hell: Charenton Abbey, a madhouse of the 18th century. Here, within its thick stone walls, inmates are subjected to every possible cruelty, many of which are beyond watching, at least for this reviewer.

And now we enter the lavishly appointed cell of the infamous Marquis de Sade, whose brilliant rendering by Geoffrey Rush will leave an indelible imprint on your mind. Incarcerated in the asuylum for his sadomasochistic writings (and doings, one presumes), the Marquis is, despite his predelictions, a sly, brilliant, and totally mad genius. His writing keeps him alive; his life has become narrowed to the point where his writing IS his freedom, and nothing can or will stop him.

Smuggling de Sade's risque and shocking manuscripts out of the madhouse, virginal laundress Madeleine, played wonderfully by Kate Winslet (who is given much more of a chance to show her considerable acting talents than she was in "Titanic"), is drawn to his writings--and to the Marquis himself--like the proverbial moth to the flame. But their strange relationship is never consummated. Nor is the strong desire between Madeleine and the tortured Abbe Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix), torn apart by his conflicting loves of the church and the woman.

Michael Caine gives a chilling performance as the cold, evil hypocrite, Dr. Royer-Collard, sent to take control of the madhouse and silence the Marquis (whose smuggled works are being read by all of France) once and for all.

The darkness and horror of this film, rendered beautifully by Philip Kaufman's inspired direction, is sparked throughout by the increasingly insane brilliance of the Marquis' incredible wit and ingenuity in continuing to write. Deprived of his quills, he turns to wine and a chicken bone, then to his own blood, and finally, his feces as he leads the viewer on an inexorable descent into the madness of despair.

Very hard to watch, very depressing, but so brilliant, especially in the tour de force by Geoffrey Rush, that it is a must-see for anyone who takes film seriously.

Rating:
Summary: Outstanding performances
Review: Geoffrey Rush turns in a great performance as the legendary, licentious and libidinous libertine, Count de Sade. The movie depicts de Sade during the last 12 years of his life, which were (perhaps appropriately) spent in an insane asylum. I don't know how accurately it reflects this period in de Sade's life, but the film nevertheless has an interesting plot and there are outstanding performances by Rush, Winslett, and Phoenix.

De Sade is a man driven to write. At one point, the director of the asylum takes his quills and paper away from him for corrupting the other inmates with his writings. But de Sade is a man with a mission-- he continues to write with his own blood, and, well, other bodily fluids--as it becomes clear that his dark muse will not be denied no matter what the cost.

If you liked Rush in this movie, also try the Tailor of Panama, where he is also excellent. In this movie, Rush plays the prevaricative tailor, spinning his web of fantastic intelligence data for Osnard, the ruthless and manipulative British MI.6 agent (played by Pierce Brosnan), even as Brosnan snares Rush in his own web of international intrigue.

Both are fine movies. Big Steve says check 'em out and don't Bogart the popcorn.

Rating:
Summary: Philip Kaufman's Quills
Review: The Marquis de Sade has been portrayed on film before, but never this well. Geoffrey Rush is riveting, making him both compelling and disgusting at the same time. A lesser actor would have turned de Sade's scenes into "moments" that could be safely played during an Oscar telecast, but Rush is fantastic.

The Marquis smuggles his writings out of the insane asylum he is in through a laundress, played by Kate Winslet. She is under the tutorship of the young priest Joaquin Phoenix. Phoenix is trying to help the insane by getting them involved in the arts, and the Marquis is writing popular pornography for the French masses. Napoleon gets in a flutter, and sends the harsh doctor Michael Caine to the asylum. Caine himself has problems as he has just gone through on an arranged marriage with a young teenage girl just out of the convent.

The new bride gets a hold of de Sade's work and eventually runs off with her chateau's architect...de Sade, an outspoken atheist, must find other ways of continuing his writing, and does in some very horrific manners.

There is not really a plot here, as the Marquis' privileges are eventually taken away to the point that he is nude in his emptied cell, and still finds time to butt heads with Caine, and God.

Rush is spellbinding, to use a cliche. Joaquin Phoenix is terrific as the young priest. He fights against temptation as well as any clergyman put on screen. Michael Caine gets back into the kind of juicy roles he used to get twenty years ago. Winslet is great as the laundress.

What Philip Kaufman seems to be saying with this film is that words can and do corrupt, but they corrupt the corruptable. The Marquis' literature has negative effects on the uneducated in the film (the inmates, the asylum's illiterate employees, and the naive teen bride), and when put into context of one's life, words alone will not make one kill or fornicate. The feelings, good or bad, are there already, and the Marquis will not change that. It always angers me when some parents' group or clergyman blames the world's problems on Eminem or "American Pie." Impossible to patrol your children twenty four hours a day, you say? Then educate them so they know these words, the music, and the art are just that. Turn the TV off and read to them. If it is rated (R) and the kids are under 17, maybe they should not watch it. This is why I made up my own content warnings and put them at the end of each movie review I do.

I strayed off the topic a bit, but "Quills" is an important film that should keep people talking about art, censorship, obsession, love, sex, religion, and madness. And it is ten times better than the moldy "Gladiator."

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, sexual violence, profanity, female nudity, male nudity, sexual content, strong sexual references, and adult situations.

Rating:
Summary: Right's, Morality, Hypocracy
Review: As the other one-hundred reviews of this movie have states, this tale is about the Marquis De Sade and the freedom and responsibility of censorship. While I thought Rush, Winslet, Phoenix, and Caine played their parts perfectly, I gave this movie such a low review simply because I disagree with how it presents its premise. With so many movies about censorship, they go about expressing their ideals with Larry Flint and porn types and basically do a disservice to their cause. They also make an attack on religion and morality paramount. I hated them doing that!(Like there freemon of speech should NOT be attacked and mine SHOULD!) But i digress....
This movie being about De Sade, naturally there is lots of sexual innuendo and sexual acts (some of which are very unconfortable to watch). The story pretty mush flows and its underlying theme that "freedom comes with responsibility" is the just about the only thing in the whole movie a agreed with.
Watch it with a mature and analytical attiture. This IS NOT a date movie.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: Quills is about the life of the notorious Marquis De Sade in a French Mental Insitute. Marquis De Sade is brilliantly played by Geoffrey Rush in what should have been a Oscar winner. Kate Winslet plays a woman who works at the Mental Insitute who smuggles the stories of De Sade out of the insitute. It is one of the best films of 2000 and definatly a beautiful work of art with beautiful set designing. I would not recommend this to people who can't stand De Sade (he is the father of sadomacohism and other things I probally can't talk about on Amazon.com). But, other people would love this.

Rating:
Summary: Funny and sexy.
Review: A sexy period piece. I'm not a big fan of Shakespearean artsy movies with guys in tights, but this was very funny and sexy. The Marquis De sade, what a great idea for a film. Kate Winslet was delicious as was Geoffrey Rush. He was perfectly cast to play the Marquis de Sade. I Was pleasantly surprised to see Michael Cane as the good doctor. The surprise performance was from Joaquin Phoenix. He is turning in to a real actor. Move over Tom Cruse and watch out Leonardo.

Rating:
Summary: "Quills" just doesn't hit the target
Review: Oh my. "Quills" is one of those movies you buy on a leap of faith because of all the Academy Award nominations and great actors. Then, (and you know how fickle the Academy Awards nominations can be) you ask yourself "Why?" The cast is terrific! Geoffrey Rush (Shine, Shakespear in Love and Mystery Men), Kate Winslet (Titanic), Joaquin Phoenix (Gladiator) and the great Michael Caine (The Cider House Rules) do their best to get the viewer interested but even they can only do so much. There is nothing in Quills. It's banal, boring, not credible and a general disappointment. If you want to find out about the Marquis de Sade watch the A & E Channel's Biography on him and pick up one of his works. They are still printed. Chances are you'll start to rewind the movie before it's halfway through like I did.