Loosely based on the latter part of the infamous Marquis de Sade's life, the movie seeks to take censors to task as well as those who look to hide art that offends them. Sade, an author and playwright, holds the rare distinction of having a word, sadism, named for him. His works of wicked erotic depravities both disturbed and titillated in his day and are still largely considered unprintable.
The story takes up with Sade imprisoned in the Charenton insane asylum in the early 17th century. His bizarre sexual preferences have landed him in prison repeatedly over the years. Now he is locked up for good but still manages to get into trouble. The Abbe Coulmier (Joaquin Phoenix) is attempting to cure him by encouraging Sade to write to hopefully purge himself of these ideas. Sade (Geoffrey Rush) is slipping his manuscripts to a chambermaid, Madeleine (Kate Winslet) who sells them to a publisher. One of these makes its way to the Emperor Napoleon who orders Dr. Royer-Collard (Michael Caine) to take over the asylum and quiet the Marquis' pen.
The Marquis is an irrepressible spirit in Rush's hands. He is unspeakably evil but nicely toned down to make him more acceptable for viewing. This is a man who writes because he has an unstoppable creative urge that drives him beyond reason. He doesn't do it to offend but because he must write as a vent for the tidal wave of ideas trying to burst out of him. When the Abbe takes away his quills and ink Sade quickly finds that red wine makes a nice substitute. Deprived of that he finds his own blood makes a respectable ink.
The Marquis' defiance outrages Royer-Collard but this is less an act of defiance than it is a necessary outlet for a creative force that he cannot control. This creates the odd situation where the man sent in the name of goodness becomes the villain and the loathsome pervert becomes the hero. There is no doubt that de Sade is a letch but Royer-Collard is little better. The difference is that Sade admits his perversions and revels in them. His tormentor however hides his urges behind the banner of censorship and normalcy.
The residents of the asylum develop an odd respect for the Marquis. It is impossible to think well of him but he acquires a degree of freedom from his chains by practicing his writing. His is a spirit that refuses to give in to the very end.
Rush's performance is nothing short of brilliant but the supporting cast hold their own. Kate Winslet adds great depth to what could have been a simple character. Her Madeleine is strangely attracted and simultaneously repulsed by Sade. Winslet reads the Marquis' stories with a saucy flair that almost makes them fun. Joaquin Phoenix continues a strong series of recent performances. He plays the priest as a man of almost ridiculous goodness who honestly thinks he can cure Sade. At the same time though he struggles badly with a desire for Madeleine even though he cannot have her. Finally Michael Caine crafts a truly memorable villain. His inquisitor has nothing but black coal for a heart and yet he is the one supposedly protecting society.
There is little doubt that this movie makes a strong case against censorship. It states loudly that art should be free to grow and evolve without the obstruction of government. It also speaks for the idea that any actions following the viewing of a work of art are the responsibility of the viewer not the artist. Most importantly though is the idea of personal freedom. In the movie the Marquis is locked in a cell but he never allows that to stop or even slow his expression of ideas. With that in mind, who is the real prisoner, Sade or Royer-Collard? Who is freer, the man who always expresses himself regardless of his location or the man whose ideas are constrained by society?
- This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
