Skip to main content

Gay Pride and Prejudice


If ever there was a movie designed explicitly for Pride Month, it is Fire Island. There is nothing about this Hulu rom-com directed by Andrew Ahn that isn’t screamingly, intensely, proudly gay. And to behold that is something really invigorating, even for those of us not in the LGBTQ community; seeing such passion and uncompromising depth of gay culture on full display, and on a mainstream platform at that, is unavoidably charming in how it cuts to the spirit of Pride.
Of course it makes sense such a movie would take place over a week-long party. Fire Island is that thin strip off the southeastern coast of Long Island that is known in the summer as a vacation destination for gay men. In the movie, five friends, poorer than the usual types who flock there, come to the island with the goal of finding a sexual partner for Howie (Bowen Yang), the least sexually active one of them. Among the elites, Howie does hit it off with a guy, but one whose friend Will (Conrad Ricamora) dismisses him and his troupe out of hand -something that is overheard by Howie’s best friend and confidant Noah (Joel Kim Booster). We can guess where the drama of manners goes from there.
Howie is Jane, his love interest Charlie (Jake Scully) is Bingley, the three other friends stack up nicely to Mary, Kitty, and Lydia, Will is Mr. Darcy, and Noah is Elizabeth Bennet. This movie is Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, and it’s not subtle in pointing that out, to its’ slight detriment honestly. It begins with Noah directly quoting the iconic opening line and proceeding to narrate parts of the story from then on in voiceover that is probably the films’ most awkward and ill-fitting creative choice -purely designed to evoke the novel. It comes off as either condescending to the audience (assuming they won’t pick up on the narrative and character cues) or representative of a lack of confidence in the script’s ability to relate the text comprehensibly. Following in the footsteps of Emma Thompson, Booster wrote the screenplay himself and he shouldn’t have been so concerned; the story translates aptly and organically, Jane Austen being, like Shakespeare or Dickens, immortal and friendly to reinterpretation.
And it’s very fun to see the beats of this familiar story play out in a new context, with new dynamics but the same archetypes. It only fits that a modern Wickham would be a skeevy dude without much consideration for consent, or that Bingley would be a naive sentimentalist to an old boyfriend, or that Mary would be generally out of place at parties but determined to stick it out, or that Jane would be a hopeless romantic. Booster and Ahn understand the right ways to retool these characters, have fun with their personalities, and maintain the honest emotionality that keeps Pride and Prejudice so timeless. Class and social order are the critical themes and they have persisted through the centuries so as to always be relevant: class is still a big thing, even in the gay community. So I found myself all throughout exceptionally curious as to how the movie would spin its’ plot points. I wasn’t much dismayed.
There’s just a strong energy cascading all over, fueled by the enthusiasm of everyone involved -with the exception of maternal Margaret Cho, all openly gay men, using the structure of Austen to illustrate the diversity and nuances of their community. Some come to Fire Island merely looking for a good time, an excuse to engage in some shallow debauchery. Others are there due to social circumstance or obligation, and still others want a more meaningful hook-up. This may be one of the gayest movies I’ve ever seen, and not just because it features a high propensity of gay characters, but because it showcases so many different facets of gay society and identity: everyone from drag queens to flamboyant socialite types to unashamed transgressives to more down-to-earth introverts -all are represented here. And in allowing for assholes and villains and just toxic circumstances to exist within all this, it normalizes this world in subliminal ways -makes it easier to relate to a straight person without losing any of its’ queer dimension.
But of course it must be said Fire Island is not at all a movie made for the straights. It is, to pardon the pun, a queer eye through which everything is presented. There is a lot of blunt homoeroticism to the movie, many of the characters hanging around in speedos for much of the runtime in large gatherings, with the camera often honing in on and opaquely objectifying their bodies -much in the way we’re casually used to seeing with women. But there’s no political or gendered statement to it here, it’s simply a case of open joy in expression and sexuality.
It colours the romantic-comedy but doesn’t interfere with it as it plays out its’ own version of the formula. These movies are nothing without chemistry and while there unfortunately isn’t a whole lot showcased between the pairings (Noah and Will’s gradual romance isn’t given quite the fair shake, and feels obligatory by the end), it is there in terms of the larger ensemble, and especially in the friendship between Noah and Howie. It’s a rarely seen strong platonic bond between two gay men (gay Asian men at that) that feels genuinely heartfelt, owing probably to Booster and Yang’s real life friendship. And I have to say, Bowen Yang, who I’ve only heard of second-hand as one of the better of the new crop of SNL players, is really impressive in this as the humble, sincere one of the gang. Ricamora also plays really well the antisocial nature of his Darcy stand-in, exceedingly uncomfortable in this environment. He understands how to play the subtleties of this part, to give off that impression of aloof elitism in the form of a guy who just seems to be kind of a buzzkill until given the opportunity to let loose in a silly but charming way. And he gets in a couple good deadpan moments as well.
I wouldn’t say the rest of the movie is particularly as funny, which is a drag but that’s not quite the purpose that Fire Island serves. Just as its’ characters are doing, it’s meant to be a celebration of gay culture and gay love. How much it really succeeds at that I can’t speak to authentically, but it does feel like everyone involved is committed and having a good time sharing their world with us. And it really speaks to how dynamic Jane Austen is, for how specific her context was. The gays have now staked a claim to her as well and the union isn’t at all incompatible.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

The Wizard of Oz: Birth of Imagination

“Somewhere over the rainbow, skies are blue; and the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true.” I don’t think I’ve sat down and watched The Wizard of Oz  in more than fifteen years. Among the first things I noticed doing so now in 2019, nearly eighty years to the day of its original release on August 25th, 1939, was the amount of obvious foreshadowing in the first twenty minutes. The farmhands are each equated with their later analogues through blatant metaphors and personality quirks (Huck’s “head made out of straw” comment), Professor Marvel is clearly a fraud in spite of his good nature, Dorothy at one point straight up calls Miss Gulch a “wicked old witch”. We don’t notice these things watching the film as children, or maybe we do and reason that it doesn’t matter. It still doesn’t matter. Despite being the part of the movie we’re not supposed to care about, the portrait of a dreary Kansas bedighted by one instant icon of a song, those opening scenes are extrao