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

Tackling a portrayal of the life of someone as controversial as the Marquis de Sade was always going to be a difficult task for writer Doug Wright, but that is what he set himself to do in 2000 `s Quills. The premise of the film is this, for various perverse crimes, de Sade (Geoffrey Rush) finds himself subject to incarceration. Due to his aristocratic status and the influence of his wife instead of the prison that he would expect, he is interned in an asylum. Here he is allowed his own room and a decent lifestyle, and under the direction of the Abbe de Coulmier (Joaquim Phoenix) is encouraged to write as a form of therapy, the idea being that writing his perverse thoughts down will purge his will to enact them. Unfortunately unbeknown to the young Abbe, de Sade with the aid of a besotted serving girl (Kate Winslet) is publishing these erotic works and making a tidy income. Word of his publications comes to the attention of Napoleon himself who in attempt to put a stop to the situation, appoints a new governor in the form of Dr Collard (Michael Caine). Collard and de Sade then embark on a power struggle as the aristocrat pushes the doctor to the limits, causing chaos and retribution as he does so.

The film is set mainly within the asylum and as such provides the sort of humour that you are not sure whether you should laugh at, after all the misfortunes of others is not morally the most forgiving of areas to poke fun at, but humour does spring from many of these portrayals whether intentional or not. Although there is humour to be found, the subjects at hand are dark and often disturbing, madness and perversion. De Sade's writings are of a highly erotic nature, made all the more outrageous by the standards of his day. Also written into the story is the hypocrisy of those in charge of the institution, their treatment of women and their view of their fellow man. The film does portray some ideas and contain some scenes that some people may not consider the sort of subject matter that they want to see on their television set. The film is aimed at the more broad minded person and is rated 18. These scenes aren't in themselves gratuitous, and in the hands of lesser writers could have been played for cheaper thrills, but in this case are mere suggestions of what is going on in the asylum rather than graphic portrayals. It is always said that the best and most horrific special effects take place in your own mind, and this film allows you to fill in the blanks between what is presented before you.

One accusation that you can make about the films portrayal of de Sade is that it is watered down. Here de Sade is seen as a writer of teasing erotica, the reality is that his works contained the worst perversions imaginable. That they have taken that approach is probably for the best as the film remains in the realms of drama rather that pornography. Again its not important to go into detail about the historical accuracy of his writings as that is probably a film that would have a very limited audience and probably would not get passed the censor. History aside what remains in this story is a battle between the artist who believes in the freedom of the pen and the doctor who represents the censorship, yes it falls short of the true facts but it allows the film to have appeal.

Geoffrey Rush is magnificent as the aloof de Sade, at a turn charming then sneering, romantic and then perverse. He manages to bring to the film a grace and delicacy required to portray an aristocrat of the times. Phoenix also lives up to him part as the man of cloth who tries to balance compassion with discipline, a task which drives him to the edge of insanity and beyond. Kate Winslett is good but not exceptional and Michael Caine is as always still Michael Caine.

To many this will not be a pleasant film and the subject matter of lunacy and sexual fantasy is not everyone's cup of tea, but depending on who broad your outlook is you may find that this film has much going for it. It is dark yet humorous, teasing yet not graphic and though not historically correct as a biography does contain the essence of the times and its outlook on morality, erotica and madness. A very different film but not for the faint hearted.

Recommended: Yes

Viewing Format: VHS
Video Occasion: Good for a Rainy Day
Suitability For Children: Not suitable for Children of any age