Matthew Warchus
Pride

[Contains plot spoilers]

We need more films like Pride, that's the first thought that crossed my mind as I left the cinema. Warchus doesn't shy away from the complexity of historical events but still manages to build a functional cinematic mechanism capable of entertaining. The strength of Pride lies precisely here: if works like Two Days, One Night or The Wonders aimed to depict reality unfiltered, thus stripping away any aesthetic frills from filmic reinterpretation, this film works on two parallel tracks: it probes reality and history in their actual dramatic nature, with no concessions, but at the same time, it manages to construct aesthetic superstructures that lighten the viewing experience.

The handling of the characters is masterful in this sense: there is a deep realism in the construction of individual profiles, with no attempts to amplify the characterization of people who were and must remain normal. Despite avoiding exaggeration, the traits of the various protagonists emerge with precious delicacy, and thanks to this portrait-like naturalism, they settle even deeper in the mind of the viewer. No one is the protagonist, yet everyone is; it's a true ensemble film, able to carve out space for each character. The threads that intertwine are truly numerous, but the balance is perfectly managed among the various paths. Even in this diegetic distribution, the film is profoundly democratic.

Another crucial factor is the elegance with which the theme is treated: the wise choice is not to show the homosexual protagonists in their more festive and exhibitionist dimension. Even from this perspective, a deeply egalitarian balance prevails. The group of gay boys and lesbians is portrayed with great dignity, without the need to showcase any particular displays of affection or relationships to measure their otherness compared to the context. Warchus’s moderation is incredibly effective, working in both verbal and iconic subtraction. There are no long-winded speeches, moralistic sermons, or triumphant homosexual scenes; at the same time, there is no insistence on voyeurism of gay loves. This choice allows the director to shape a sequence of pure poetry, like the kiss between Joe and a boy during the charity concert; delicate, just hinted at by the shadowed profiles of the two boys, but for this very reason powerful and non-exhibitionist.

It would have been a good film, but not exceptional, if it had stopped at delivering a purely moralistic message like: look at how good the London gays are in helping the miners! Gays should not be discriminated against! No, Pride goes far beyond: it is not, after all, titled Gay Pride, but more strikingly Pride, the pride it wants to teach is much broader and universal. It's about the pride of each of us, the will to realize ourselves for who we are without being obstructed by the limiting forces at work in society and families. The final sequences are not important primarily for the success of the 1985 Gay Pride: the director's gaze, in fact, doesn’t need to legitimize the gay community; it's caressed from the very first minute and the rest of the world is framed as abnormal instead; prejudice is the disease discussed in this film. There is no need, therefore, to emphasize the inevitable dignity and success that the gay movement is headed towards.

The true heartbeat of the film is in the close-ups in the finale: here we are told how the lives of the people shown will follow a parabola of pride and deep dignity, each of them will travel their own path without hesitation, despite adversities, sometimes insurmountable. Jonathan’s fight against AIDS is successful, Mark’s, however, is not: but his victory lies in continuing to demonstrate for civil rights until the end, that’s where his pride concretizes. Similarly, the choice of the shy housewife Sian to graduate is a victory, Cliff’s coming out against the mechanics of bourgeois respectability is a victory, Joe’s decision to rebel against his family, the decision of the miners to support the Gay Pride manifestation. In short, the pride and will to assert oneself vigorously against common morality and the destructive logic of a backward society are not limited to the conflict between homosexuals and heterosexuals; instead, they involve many crystallized realities that can only be stirred by the strong initiative of a group of ordinary people but characterized by commendable perseverance.

Mark, in the face of disappointments and the miners’ rejection, seems to give in; he closes the door on the past. It's no coincidence then that once he returns, he is the central figure in the 1985 march: he is lifted by his companions as if to metaphorically highlight the exemplary importance of his experience. It doesn't matter if he will die of AIDS two years later, his actions have marked a fundamental achievement for millions of people. The clasped hands, framed in the final moments, do not only represent the solidarity alliance between gays and miners but also, and above all, a generational alliance between the pioneers who fought for social rights that will later benefit everyone and the future people who will enjoy them.