Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie's plot.

It's late 18th century, and blood runs red in the market places, where guillotines chop the lives of nobles short to the perverse delight of the poverty-stricken crowds. And there, from the window of his asylum cell, the infamous Marquis de Sade looks down, observes... and writes.

The film grips your attention from the start, as the tranquil, harmless looking situation with a teary-eyed beauty is transformed by the panning of the camera to reveal the complete horror of the fate that she is facing. The grimaces and eyes of the witnesses, perversely glowing with blood-thirst, ravish every detail of this bloody affair of execution. And de Sade writes... his naughty little tales.

I don't want to rob you of the experience of the film if you have not seen it yet, so I'll reveal only the very basic setting.

Geoffrey Rush is cast as the Marquis, and fills the role to perfection. Marquis de Sade is a brilliant, at times repulsive, yet oddly charismatic character. Locked in a mad-house, with his clever brutally honest wit, and total lack of pretence he has won the friendship of the rather progressive clergyman, Abbe Coumier (Joaquin Phoenix) who is in charge of the asylum. The Abbe allows certain privileges for the Marquis - books, furniture, wine with meals, and, most importantly, paper, ink and quills. The Abbe is oddly fascinated by this man, and conflicted by what he feels for him and what he should, as a guardian of morals, feel towards him. Joaquin delivers a subtle, excellent performance as the Abby.

While the Abby allows the Marquis to write his graphic and sadistic (as the very word "sadist" is defined by the infamous Marquis) tales for "therapeutic purposes", he certainly doesn't intend to allow them to ever be published. Unknown to him, the Marquis receives help from a chamber maid, Madelaine (Kate Winslet), and his writings are smuggled off to the presses. The chamber maids are entertained, enticed and shocked by the writings which lure their curiosity not allowing them to miss a word... Sold in secret in the alleys, his stories sell as fast as the presses can print. As a copy of "Justine" reaches the hands of Napoleon, the trouble begins.

Michael Caine plays the part of Dr. Royer-Collard - a highly respected "moral guardian", and a man of science, who is sent to observe and intervene if needed at the asylum, to ensure that the filth of de Sade will never again reach the hungry eyes of the public. Caine's performance is brilliant, as the performances accross the board in this movie seem to be.

The irony is bitter-sweet - Dr. Royer-Collard is like a character from one of de Sade's tales. While the Marquis writes of sadism, and acts of vile sexual abuse, the "good" doctor performs them. His methods of "curing" the mentally ill are extremely cruel, and from the wry suppressed smile on his face, you can see that he derives pleasure at holding the reigns of power over someone else's suffering.

What makes this movie a masterpiece is the clever portrayal of ironic contrasts - the disguised sadist loudly proclaiming morals is sent to "cure" the open sadist who is constrained to perform on paper, and who pretends to be nothing else but a sadist. The marquis does not keep up appearances; he demolishes them.

"Quills" makes a strong statement against censorship, but even more so against hypocrisy. How true it is that those who are most vocal about morals, most ready to judge others by their supposedly high standards, fail miserably in practicing what they preach! The point is made with lucid, clever insight.

Although a serious movie, I found a devious little smile creeping on my face at times - and, at the theatre, there was some satisfied laughter to be heard when Rush as the Marquis delivered some especially witty line in an especially titillating fashion.

While the movie was thoroughly enjoyable, I must warn that some scenes may be too graphic for the queasier audience.

My only complaint was the a bit overt melodrama that the film indulges in towards the end. The ending was as clever as the rest of the plot, but.... there was something missing - or perhaps there was just a bit too much there. This one complaint isn't enough to deduct a star from my review - I still consider this a five star movie.

"Quills" offers plenty of subtle nuances, meaningful tensions between characters and symbolism in the scenes, without being snobbishly artistic. Nor does the movie stoop to mere shocking effects, despite its graphic nature. This is one movie that I think will reveal more of itself on a second and third watching. If you still haven't seen it the first time, I heartily recommend that you do yourself a favour, and remedy the situation as soon as possible.


Recommended: Yes

Suitability For Children: Not suitable for Children of any age