First note: ftps, as a protocol, is what happens when siblings marry.
Stapling SSL on top of FTP's dual channels is like stapping skis on a
dachsund and calling it a sled: it's amazing it works at all. The
necessary dual channels lead to numerous nasty and conflicting local
"solutions". These work great until they don't, and it's hideously
awkward to test with all the different "solutions" that may arise in
between your client and a remote server.  This makes the mishandling
often out of the control of the hands of any one party. Proxies,
firewalls, and even client implementations come up with subtle
distinctions that break things. So you might be able to get it to
work, but I urge you to revisit whether you need it. (I've had good
success with WebDAV over HTTPS, for example, which is also built into
most of the same clients and only requires port 443 handled normally,
not the dual channels of FTPS.)

Second. If you're running an FTPS server, why not use the built-in
vsftpd, which supports it as well as can be reasonably well, rather
than interweaving Filezilla into the mix?

Third. the "lftp" tool is about as sophisticated as you can get for an
FTP/FTPS client. It's very powerful, very scriptable, and even works
very well for mirroring and websites. Does "lftp" work, rather than
the command line "ftp" client itself?