Quills (2000)

Summary: A highly fictionalized telling of the last few weeks of the life of the Marquis de Sade (Geoffrey Rush), who was imprisoned in Chareton, a home for the criminally insane, during the Napoleonic era. The film focuses on what happens when Napoleon discovers that the Marquis is still publishing from within prison. Dr. Royer-Collard (Michael Caine) is brought in to appraise the situation, much to the chagrin of L’Abbé du Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix), who runs the asylum. Both men being to suspect the nature of the relationship between the Marquis and Madeleine (Kate Winslet), a laundry lass.

Serious, 2000 is where it’s at. Or it was where it was? Hmmm.

The highly fictionalized bit can be difficult to sort out. Suffice it to say that the characters are real, much of the events are real, but what happens between the characters is exaggerated to say the least.

I, for one, am very pleased with the fiction that Doug Wright added to his screenplay, which is based on his play. He claims that he had read about all of the Marquis’ quills being taken away to stop him from writing, and the whole story sort of grew from there. He carefully crafted characters that are as real as the air we breathe, putting them in alternatively exquisite and crushing scenes.

Another element I appreciate about Wright’s screenplay was his decision not to make L’Abbé a four foot tall hunchback, as he was in real life. I don’t have anything against 4” hunchbacks (e.g. my Nana), but I much prefer Phoenix.

Phoenix appears in three movies that were released in the year 2000. Having seen all three, I can honestly say that he turns in near-virtuoso performances in all of them. I say near because although I believe him to be a truly talented actor, I am very wary of applying to term virtuoso to anyone.

Here we see his capacity for romance and heroism, which goes against the grain of the villains he plays in the other two movies. The role of a priest in love is very much one fraught with victim-hood and intrapersonal conflict, both of which Phoenix conveys convincingly through deeply hooded eyes and hushed tones. His pale skin also makes him seem always slightly sickly, which conjures up images of sleepless nights and inner turmoil.

Also, like it or not, priests are often made to be very sexy in movies. Sex appeal is another important dimension that Phoenix brings to the role.

I did not, however, appreciate Wright’s choice to have Rush naked for a good portion of the film, and I did not appreciate Philip Kaufman’s (director) choice of full frontal nudity. I believe that in films it is often what you don’t see, not what you see, that counts. Sexual tension, not sex, is sexy. That which you think you see is much more frightening than any sight. And you can very obviously tell the audience that someone is nude without showing them.

Other than that, Kaufman’s direction is stellar. For all his critical acclaim, I’ve not seen a single picture of his besides this one. I should, though, as he infuses this one with wit, whimsy, and gothic suffering. It’s odd, isn’t it, that a film set in the early 1800s feels like it belongs in the dark ages because of the plot and location where the story enfolds?

Rush attacks his role with engulfing passion. Wright described the character as a “demented peacock”, and it’s clear that that description directed Rush’s performance. His Marquis is self-obsessed, arrogant, and never repentant. When he finally does collapse in tears, they’re almost wrong coming from him.

Winslet’s take on a servant in turbulent times is fantastic, right down to her adopted cockney accent. It’s a wonder that she can simultaneously appear worldly and innocent. And the sexual tension between Winslet and Phoenix so tangible that even the audience feels a little on edge watching them.

Caine as a villain is something else. I’m not overly familiar with his work, but I’ve always thought of him as a kindly old grandfather figure, much as he appears at the end of The Muppet Christmas Carol. Here he is downright evil, and I found it downright chilling. I’d rather not see him that way again.

I suppose I can’t be critical of the film for being graphic, though, since it is in keeping with the Marquis’ work. In fact, I might be tempted to say that this is a film the Marquis himself would be proud of.