Urban Cinefile
"One lady threw herself at me and hugged me and kissed me and called out, 'Francis! Francis! She was pissed, but it helped my confidence no end! "  -Sir Derek Jacobi on playing Francis Bacon in Love is the Devil
 The World of Film in Australia - on the Internet Updated Tuesday July 28, 2020 

Printable page PRINTABLE PAGE



Quills explores the life of one of history’s most controversial figures: Donatien-Alphonse-François, Marquis de Sade. But, says Eleanor Singer, black is not always black and white not always white, which is what you would expect from a director like Philip Kaufman.

This time last year (2000), Michael Caine could be seen on screens around the world playing the very likeable (if somewhat controversial) Dr Wilbur Larch, the orphanage director and occasional abortionist in The Cider House Rules. It was a role which won him his second Oscar (his first was for Hannah and Her Sisters in 1986). But, during the months that Dr Larch was endearing himself to American audiences, Caine himself was back home in the UK, working on a very different movie.

"beyond their logical conclusion"

Ironically, the role he was playing was again that of a doctor, but a much less likeable one: Dr Royer-Collard in Quills, the latest film from director Philip Kaufman, which was shot through the second half of 2000 at Pinewood Studios, plus on location in other parts of England and is based on a prize-winning stage play by Doug Wright.

Quills is a partly fictionalised recreation of the period spent in the asylum at Charenton by one of history’s most enigmatic and reviled characters: Donatien-Alphonse-François, Marquis de Sade, played in Kaufman’s version by another Oscar-winner, Geoffrey Rush. A writer most of whose books it was still impossible to buy over the counter as recently as 20 years ago, Sade did a lot more than give the world the word ‘sadism’. He was to the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment what Salman Rushdie is to Islam: a writer and thinker who pushes the tenets of a belief to and beyond their logical conclusion.

"natural morality"

For the French philosophers of the pre-Revolutionary era, human nature replaced God as the source of morality. Sade simply turned this on its head, saying basically: ‘If it is in my nature to be cruel, then that is my natural morality’. The problem was, he put his philosophies into practice, particularly on the sexual side, again pushing things to their logical extreme. "If it is the dirty element that gives pleasure to the act of lust," he wrote in his most notorious book, The 120 Days of Sodom, "then the dirtier it is, the more pleasurable it is bound to be."

As modern writers and film-makers have recognised, from Simone de Beauvoir (who wrote an entire book on Sade) to the Italian director Pier Paolo Pasolini (who used The 120 Days of Sodom as a way of exploring Fascist Italy in his film, Salo), it is not so much the feverish side of Sade’s imagination that makes him our contemporary: it is the subversive nature of his thought and behaviour. This, essentially, was what attracted Kaufman to the project.

"a provocative film"

"I have always been fascinated by extreme literature," he says, "because it expands on our concept of what is human. And Sade more than anyone seems to demonstrate how extreme behaviour can bring out hypocrisy in those who claim to be moralists. Quills is a provocative film, but the Marquis would have it no other way."

It also, thanks to Rush’s performance, presents a man rather than a monster. "Geoffrey brings an essential humanity to the role that lets the audience into the heart of a man who otherwise would be considered nothing more than evil," says Julia Chasman, who produces Quills along with Nick Wechsler and the director’s son (and regular producer), Peter Kaufman. "His portrait seduces you into curiosity about the Marquis, and then he unleashes his full complexity."

"the source of his genius"

The focus of Wright’s play and Kaufman’s film is the ‘cure’ which Napoleon attempts to impose on Sade, using Caine’s character as his tool. This brings Royer-Collard into conflict with the young abbé who runs Charenton, played by Joaquin Phoenix, swapping the petulant villainy of his Emperor in Gladiator for a complex portrayal of a man of the cloth who is determined to find the good in the Marquis. And the doctor’s cure is repeatedly thwarted by Madeleine, the young laundress (played by Kate Winslet), who responds to the writer in Sade, smuggling his manuscripts out of Charenton, but repeatedly rebuffs the sexual energy that is the source of his genius.

"Kate brings all this to life with an extraordinary believability," says Kaufman. "To think she is just 23 is amazing, because she has such worldliness, such articulateness, such an astounding ability to express the depths of feelings and ideas. And the word ‘beautiful’ isn’t nearly strong enough to describe what she brings to the screen."

"the good soul"

But the abbé Coulmier’s relationship with Sade similarly lies at the heart of the film. "In a sense, I’m trying to extract the soul from the Marquis and he’s trying to extract the man from me," says Phoenix. "That’s the core of our relationship. Madeleine brings forth a desire that is foreign to Coulmier. He doesn’t understand it, but the Marquis does because, of course, that’s his speciality."

"Coulmier has to represent us all," adds Wright. "He’s trapped between the grinding, ferocious powers of government as exemplified by Dr Royer-Collard, and the very real threat of chaos as embodied in the Marquis. He’s the good soul in all of us, crushed by forces we are not large enough to control."

"All villains think they are nice"

If the film has one outright unsympathetic character, it is Caine’s Royer-Collard. But, as one would expect from the director of such probing and nuanced films as The Right Stuff, The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Henry and June, Kaufman’s film doesn’t deal in black and white. "I remember Michael saying that the great thing about the story is the way it wrong-foots you," says Peter Kaufman. "You think you’re going in to see a film about the evil Marquis de Sade but it turns out that it’s surprisingly funny. Of course, there is a dark side to the story, but the film never loses its fun or wicked sense of humor." All the same, Royer-Collard - whose (ultimately unsuccessful) methods of attempting to ‘cure’ Sade are every bit as repugnant as the darker pages of The 120 Days of Sodom - seemed so unsympathetic that Caine was initially reluctant to take the role.

"I was attracted to the project because it had a great script, a great director and a great cast," says Caine. "But when I first read through my part, I thought, ‘This man is so evil, there is nowhere to go with it’. Then I read it again, and I began to find the way. Fifty percent of him is made up in the spaces between the words. I like playing characters who are sinister, but I look for a way to give them some kind of redeeming qualities. I play villains on the principle that no man is a villain to himself. All villains think they are nice people."

"depiction of hypocrisy perfected"

What is more, it is Royer-Collard who provides the final link with contemporary reality, forging a bond between 18th-century Charenton and the 21st-century White House.

"We spoke of his character in terms of being a Kenneth Starr-like man who believes he’s doing a wonderful thing by ridding society of Sade’s writing: a man who pursues virtue unaware of his own lack of it," explains Kaufman. "Michael took the idea that Royer-Collard feels good about himself and his actions and played that to the hilt. His Royer-Collard is truly, as Sade says in the script, a man after Sade’s own heart. I think the Marquis would have loved this depiction of hypocrisy perfected."

Doug Wright, who wrote the screenplay, says, "I hope the film reaches beyond the notorious man at its centre to speak to a 21st-century audience. I’ve endeavored to follow the example of my betters, plucking Sade from the musty pages of history in an attempt to address critical issues in our time. "When the Marquis de Sade died in 1814, he made a surprising last request for a man so wholly devoted to scandal and sensationalism: to be buried anonymously in a thicket, so that ‘all traces of my tomb will disappear from the face of the earth, just as I hope all trace of my memory will be erased from the memory of men’.

"an overlooked genius"

"No such luck. For almost two centuries, scholars, critics and fellow artists have been rooting about in Sade’s grave in an effort to form a conclusive portrait of the man. Opinions are wildly divergent. Some heavy-duty thinkers - Artaud, Nietzsche, Kraft-Ebbing, Angela Carter and Camille Paglia among them - rank Sade as an overlooked genius, a ‘Professor Emeritus of Evil’. A few even praise Justine as a work to rival the satire of Jonathan Swift. The Surrealists adopted Sade as their patron Saint, citing him as ‘the freest spirit who ever lived’.

"Others - like Louis Bongie and Roger Shattuck - are far less generous. They’re loath to see Sade resurrected at all. His writing is attacked as monotonous, his philosophy sophomoric and his impact on the world of letters merely toxic. "I pray that he doesn’t mind the intrusion, especially in light of his last request. I’d hate to be on his bad side."

Published March 1, 2001

Email this article


Read our

© Urban Cinefile 1997 - 2020