Johnny's Movie Page: Review of Quills

Review of Quills
by Johnny Erickson

Dear Reader,

I wish to tell you of a tale, a tale of humanity and hypocrisy, of demons and deacons, of virgins and perversions. Our firmly woven story lavishes us with symbolism and devilishly peeps into our own obsessive natures. This wonderfully horrible fiction contains dialog that is both witty and delightfully dirty. But, what else is one to expect from the Marquis de Sade? More momentarily, but first, a poem:

Now that we have dispensed with the foreplay, dear reader, let us begin. First, we shall examine the characters of our melodrama and the titillating performances that bring them to life. Then, let us discuss the many forms of symbolism. Finally, we shall inspect the plot and reach a climatic conclusion. With that, we shift voice (for words should be the couriers of thought, never the jailers) and begin:

Geoffrey Rush throws himself into the role of the Marquis de Sade. He plays the part with both the grace of a Marquis and the ravings of a mad man. This fits. While the Marquis is mentally unbalanced, he is not so insane as to forget he is a Marquis and therefore should act with the grace of his standing. He is Larry Flint with style.

A purveyor of filth, the Marquis revels in debauchery. He loves to mock, to tease, to shock. The offense thrills and excites him. Afforded extra privileges and eccentricities by his position, he taunts Coulmier, Napoleon, and God. Yet, the Marquis is more naughty than wicked: he only toys with evil. Indeed, either by imprisonment or by impotence, he is abstinent throughout the film. His only crime is the obsessive need to shout what others only whisper.

This compulsion to express himself reaches fantastic levels. Writing becomes a necessity of life. If he cannot write, he will die. We all have our compulsions. We must straighten the crooked picture, fix the misaligned sock, and fill the conversational lulls. However, being unable to adjust a sock will only annoy and irritate us; it will not kill us. This is not true of the Marquis. If he cannot write, he will literally die. Nevertheless, this compulsion is not the root of the Marquis's madness. It is only a result of it. It is the Marquis way of dealing with the true source of his madness - loneliness.

(Note: just to interject here, fixing socks is one of my compulsions and, as I write this, my sock has wadded itself into the toe of my shoe. However, I think I will leave it alone. Maybe it will help me write better. After all, pearls only come from pissed off oysters.)

The Marquis's character is constant throughout most of the movie. He sits on the fence between good and evil. Eventually, he will be forced to choose between the two and this point comes when he realizes that he played a role in the death of the virgin Madeline (symbolically the death of innocence). After this, he can no longer remain the same Marquis de Sade. He can no longer rationalize his work by claiming that it does not harm others. He must change. To change for the better, he would need to give up the characters that comfort his loneliness. To change for the worse, he needs only to sink deeper into depravity. Depravity scares him, but loneliness terrifies him. It is at this point, as he teeters between two poles, that the Marquis goes insane.

When the Marquis spits on Coulmier, we know he has taken the easier road and descended into evil. He has lost the last of his grace and dignity. Without them, he becomes as an animal, speechless and wallowing in his own filth (both literary and literally). He solidifies his evil by swallowing the cross as he dies. The Marquis's fall is complete. His death completes the descent of another character as well, the priest, Coulmier.

Joaquin Phoenix is great as Coulmier. Although, he should probably wipe his eyes before he steps in front of the camera. He always looks like he has tears welling up.

Like the Marquis, Coulmier also undergoes a change. Like the Marquis, he goes insane over the choice between good and evil. And, like the Marquis, he chooses evil. Coulmier, had he been in Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, could have been called "mini-Marquis." He is essentially a prequel to what the Marquis has become. (This is wonderfully illustrated as he begs for quills at the end of the movie.)

In the beginning, kindness motivates Coulmier. He wants to restore the inmates' sanity and bring them back into the graces of God. Coulmier, diametrically opposed to Dr. Royer-Collard, would never inflict physical pain to cure a patient. His main goal is to save souls. He is unbelievably tolerant of the Marquis. This begins to change when Collard arrives. After this, Coulmier is no longer motivated by God's will alone.

When the doctor tells Coulmier that the Marquis has gone too far, Coulmier takes an uncharacteristic step by having the Marquis's quills removed. This is the beginning of Coulmier's downfall. He is no longer primarily concerned for the patient's soul. The doctor, a supposedly staunch moral leader, holds some sway over him, as does Madeline. Coulmier moves away from his beliefs and towards his desires (illustrated by his dream). With the removal of the Marquis's tongue, he completes his transformation. His action was not motivated by God, but by revenge. Still, Coulmier is on some level a man of God. When he sees the Marquis in the dungeon, he realizes his mistake. Then he tries to save his own soul, by blessing the Marquis. When the Marquis swallows the cross, he also swallows Coulmier's salvation. By providing the instrument of death, Coulmier has participated in the Marquis's death to the same degree that the Marquis participated in Madeleine's. Coulmier has become the Marquis.

Kate Winslet is good as the virgin, Madeleine. Like the Marquis, her flirt with evil leads to her death. However, Madeleine is the same character throughout the movie. She does not allow herself to fall into debauchery. At the beginning of the movie, she is a virgin intrigued by the Marquis's writing and at the end of the movie she dies, a virgin, while transcribing one of his stories. There is a moment when she takes her relationship with Coulmier too far. She realizes her mistake and pushes Coulmier away before it is too late for redemption.

Another character that doesn't change is Dr. Royer-Collard, played by Michael Kane. Defined by his morality (except when it benefits him to be otherwise) the doctor is a true hypocrite. He thinks the Marquis and his books are evil. Yet, when he needs money, he extorts the profits from the Marquis's wife and later even publishes the books. He espouses morals, and then marries and rapes a sixteen-year-old girl. When she runs off, the doctor does not/cannot blame himself. Instead, he punishes the Marquis. When Madeline dies, he locks up murderer. Yet, his inaction was the true cause of her death. Collard is the true evil in the movie. The Marquis's naughty little ditties are nothing compared to Collard's hypocrisy. In a movie filled with symbolism, Collard represent those who preach and practice morality in the public eye, but turn a cold shoulder on morals when it benefits them. He is the televangelist who lives on the life savings of others. He is the politician who campaigns with his family by his side, only to discard them through infidelity after the election. He is the reverend who preaches freedom for all, but denies a child a father, a woman a husband, and a wife trust by having an affair. He is a cannibalistic buzzard; he feasts on the remains of those around him.

The characters in Quills are fractals of society. They are the echoes and icons of those around us. The doctor is the hypocritical leader. The Marquis is the purveyor of filth and, all too often, the defender of truth. The Priest, Coulmier, represents the do-gooders in society who, while trying to save the wretches, are sometimes lured into the temptations they preach against. The virgin, Madeleine, represents those who flirt with sin only to be stung by it. The man on the horse was her salvation, but he arrived to late. The tattletale represents those who sin during the week, but who are the first in line for church on Sunday. She is the troublemaker, the one who can toy with evil and get away with it. The doctor's bride represents those corrupted by evil who then embrace it in one form or another. The inmates in the asylum represent society as a whole. They filter filth. These are the gossips and the rumormongers. The pervert that kills Madeleine, is representative of those members of society who are already twisted. Pornography no longer corrupts these monsters; it merely sets them off. We feel good when they are caught and caged. However, we never ask who is worse, the jailer or the captive.

There are other symbols in the movie as well. However, I have not been able to decipher the meaning of the candles, the swallowed cross, or the quills. I had planned to see the movie again, to gain a greater perspective, but alas, it is no longer playing in Salt Lake.

The plot for this movie is nearly flawless. The only problem is that the Marquis is not as sadistic as the real Marquis de Sade is reported to have been. Additionally, I think the real Marquis died of old age. But, since when did life pleasure fiction.

I have only two gripes. The first is the gratuitous, flagrant, in-your-face nudity and sex. Granted, it was a movie about the Marquis de Sade, but I think they may have overdone it. Did we really need to see examples from the Marquis's works? Wasn't the reading of them enough? I think the answer to these questions will lie with the individual viewer. While the nudity and sex where hard to watch (yes, I know, poor me, had to watch naked people), they did lend some authentication to the movie and are, perhaps, forgivable. My own opinion on this is still out, but is leaning towards the couldn't-you-have-done-the-same-thing-with-less side.

My other gripe is not with the movie, but with the theater. The sound kept cutting in and out. Having recently rated the Cinemark Multiplex 21 as the best in Salt Lake, I was disappointed and embarrassed at the sound quality. Cinemark fixed the problem halfway through the movie (after the guy next to me complained). However, it cut out again. This time I complained. By the end of the movie, the Marquis wasn't the only who wanted to decorate the walls in excrement. A big BOO and raspberry to Cinemark. For Shame!

Well, dear reader, we have reached the end of our little review. Quills is an insightful examination of humanity. The acting is wonderful. The script is wonderful too. The characters are perfect. This is an amazing film.

Madeleine: How can we know who is good and who is evil?
Coulmier: All we can do is guard against our own corruption.