kitellis-98121
With forty years of gay history and a hundred gay lovers being crammed into less than 100 minutes, the end result is somewhat rushed and uneven.However, this is an important social and historical document, and though it suffers badly from the noble attempt to cram too much in to too little time, it is nevertheless an extremely well-made film with high production values.A wealth of still images and film footage from the director's own archive combine with intelligent and thoughtful interviews filmed in cities around the world to tell multiple complex stories; intimate personal ones, and broader social and political ones.The overburdened narrative struggles to maintain cohesion under the weight of its many parts, and this is the film's biggest failing. The writer/director/editor/narrator already KNOWS the story, so he speeds through his storytelling without ever allowing the viewer to catch up. At times it is very hard to know which character is being discussed, and where/how they fit into the story.It was, perhaps, a mistake to structure a 40 year history of gayness around 100 sexual conquests by the director, as the "countdown" list doesn't always fit comfortably into the larger narrative. Watching this film is a little like walking through the perfume section of a department store: You are bombarded by multiple aromas, and get a general awareness of their differentness, yet ultimately they mix into a confusing, foggy miasma.This film needed to be longer, better paced, and better organised. However, its overall value should not be underestimated. Personally, it moved me on several levels, not least of which was the nostalgia of re-visiting events from my own youth in London during the times and events depicted. I was actually there at the Clause 28 march - I think I even saw myself in the archive footage - and I certainly remember how it felt to be a non-heterosexual male back then.If nothing else, this film successfully highlights how things have changed for the gay community, and how they have manifestly not.
