Sade (2000)

i must have seen a different film!!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

This movie allows the French to give their own version of Sade and is historically accurate to the extent that it contains references to Sade's actual beliefs, as they appeared in print, and events in his life that have been corroborated. Sade turns out to be a thoughtful, philosophical man who looks at life head-on without illusions about the supernatural; moreover, the Sade of this movie is remarkably free from malice, cruelty and resentment.The script is well thought out, offering every point of view, and depicts some wonderful tender moments when he bids farewell to his protégé who similarly returns his affections with substance and sincerity, for she has undergone 'a learning experience'. No sign of wanton cruelty or mindless prurience there.Splendid acting, thoroughly believable characters, each individual a depiction of concord or dissent, the film shows every opinion circulating during the Revolution. The story does not portray 'the seduction of a young girl' for she is totally willing to accede to Sade's predilections and simply wants to experience life - that which her class and religion has denied her - before joining her ex-nobles at the guillotine.There are very few pictures of Sade that remain and it is difficult to assess how his physiognomy was representative of his disposition. Was he a besotted blockhead or just an unusual philosopher? Anyone who looks into the history of Sade's life is surprised by just how un-monstrous he turns out to be. Generous, tolerant and life-affirming, Sade was more simply a libertine - one who regards freedom of sexual expression a desirable thing and encourages people to get acquainted with their animal passions. His matter-of-fact atheism and his love of nature make him a very likable man - far preferable to the unhealthy vengeful Christianity that loves sending unbelievers to hell and eternal torment - for there be another version of sadism, indeed.And concerning sado-masochism, who amongst us has not enjoyed a massage that was a bit too strong, or a little spanky-panky in their sex life? Sade does not advocate thoughtless cruelty and his sex acts are strictly consensual among those with eclectic tastes. Hm-mm.

Only one thing hampered my total enjoyment of this film: Isild le Besco, with her Asian looks, cannot possibly be the child of Jean-Pierre Cassel and Dominique Reymond. Otherwise this is far better than Kaufman's Quills as a portrait of Sade. Daniel Auteuil is always at home in costume parts (remember him as the doomed officer in The Widow of St. Pierre?) and his ease with the part is wonderful. This is a more thoughtful, more world-weary debauched aristocrat than the caricature that Geoffrey Rush gave us. My favorite scene: dinner at the prison, Sade musing about Robespierre's belief in a supreme being--would that be solid, or a gas perhaps?--as he courts Emilie, under the watchful eyes of her parents.Benoit Jacquot has made a film that is more accessible than some he has done. There is a Bressonian austerity to some of his past films that this one thankfully lacks. The Marquis had the ability to appeal to your love of liberty and hatred for tyranny, at the same time as making you appalled when you sit down to read his novels. Jacquot knows this and plays down the writing.

Not too long ago we had an excellent portrayal of the Marquis de Sade by Geoffrey Rush in "Quills," a well acted, fast-paced, tense distortion of Sade's stay at the notorious Charenton insane asylum. Plucking at our compassion demanding decent treatment of the mentally ill and our general revulsion against extreme physical "cures" for madness, "Quills" reminded us of the bad old days when the insane were brutalized by the inhumane.Now we have a very different marquis in "Sade," a film that has received some extravagant and, in my view, not fully deserved praise. It is a very interesting film, worth seeing (the full-scale guillotine in action is worth the price of admission). But it's not great.Daniel Auteuil (Sade) is a very fine actor, one of the most interesting and versatile in both English and French language roles. His Sade is remarkably laid back given the Terror, the uncertainty of survival in a rest home cum upper class jail. For a man whose writings are permeated with lurid descriptions of sexual acts of every kind and who describes his own participation on most pages of many books, Auteuil's Sade comes across as a man on holiday from his perversions. Geoffrey Rush was closer to the soul of Sade (he had one, you know).Sade befriends a very able actress, Isild Le Besco, "Emilie," an awakening teenage noblewoman at first repelled by and then saturninely attracted to her new mentor. Sade informs her that he is indeed a "libertine" who has done it all but, unfortunately, he expresses himself with the same passion that a first time-invited dinner guest to my home will mention that he is a vegetarian.The real marquis was a fiery character and not just on paper. Imprisoned (as he was most of his life), he rallied angry protestors outside the walls of his jail with such effect that he was immediately whisked off the premises to another facility. Thus he missed the storming of the Bastille the next day (which would have resulted in at least his temporary liberation), an event that has given France a great holiday and made it easier for many to remember my birthday.The machinations of Robespierre (and one of his lieutenants who shares a bed with Sade's still involved mistress, by whom he has a cute kid,) are almost tepid given the fervor of that madman's mode of governance. So tame is this Robespierre that I almost felt badly for him when he went for the Big Haircut.Auteuil is much too detached for his character and for the times. When he expounds on his libertine philosophy to Emilie and anyone who will listen he sounds like a present day alternative-press sex columnist on a time warp trip. Sade stirred things up wherever he was confined. In this film even the one scene of intense sexual passion appears to almost bore him.The cinematography is impressive. Perhaps to avoid being described as a period piece, instead of music associated with the French Revolution (not a bar of the Marsellaise) the music of Poulenc provides some of the background. Poulenc and the French Revolution?An interesting but overpraised film.

It is hard to rate a film about Marquis de Sade without being preoccupied in any way. For instance, compared to "Goya en Burdeos" this film performed much better in drawing a historical context for a historical character. But I would still expect more than that from a film about de Sade. Despite the very good acting, original sets and costumes, and a coherent script, there was something missing. De Sade's known main characteristic are his sexual notions, and those have been hidden in innuendos. It was an attempt to portray de Sade without showing sexual excesses, but you cannot discuss a controversial character without disclosing the reasons for the controversy. To those who are not familiar with de Sade, I would recommend reading a brief description of him in an encyclopedia before seeing the film.