FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

danielflattery Mike Leigh has often been called a proponent of Social Realism and yet Naked, as his most unique and striking work, escapes this category. The constancy of the monochromatic darkness that surrounds Leigh's nocturnal oddysey is highly surreal and distinctly memorable, appearing to represent a futile search for intelligent company by protagonist, 'Johnny', who is played by David Thewliss. Almost every scene in 'Naked' is shot in dim lighting and generally with only one visible source of light. This helps to cast shadow and leaves whole areas of the scene totally black and, combined with exclusively low angle shots, leaves the impression that we are witnessing something of society's darkened underbelly.It is interesting that the one instance where Leigh opts for a bright, open setting is the scene where Johnny finds solace in the company of an optimistic and philosophically minded night watchman, with whom he jousts verbally. The well lit reception area in which the guard works seems to represent salvation for Johnny. Soon after however, the scene plunges back to darkness, culminating with the two hunched on a stairwell, Johnny appearing to have corrupted the nature of his companion. Johnny later refers to him as an 'insecurity guard'.Leigh's approach towards actors is somewhat revolutionary and Naked is no exception in this regard, with Leigh directing the cast to improvise extensively and formulating the script from the results. This approach leads to a naturalism or nakedness that is seldomly surpassed. The script is dynamic and totally unpredictable. Thewliss was directed to read the bible and the teachings of Buddhism as research for the role and frequently quotes from both, creating a haunting contrast with his character's overt atheism.The camera work features many long, tracking shots, the most impressive of which is the final shot of Thewliss, limping down the street after having stolen a wad of money from his newly reconciled girlfriend. Throughout the shot's minute and a half, the camera remains just in front of Thewliss, looking backwards at his slow progress. The camera here deliberately avoids the road ahead and is very striking for that reason, seeming to suggest the difficult and uncertain path that lies ahead for both Johnny and the society he inhabits.

ozan1982 This so called masterpiece is a good choice if you have too much free time and want to waste your time and energy with some inhuman's sick ideas. I can't believe the people who find the leading actor 'cool.' I think this movie is a total insult towards women. It's long and badgering dialogs, cheap score and sadistic discourse have nothing to do with cinema. Too bad I had thought it was a family drama before watching it. If you really want to watch something good on middle-class, existentialism etc. try Bergman, Haneke or someone from their class. At least they still have hope for the humanity. I just don't understand why people who don't believe in the future for humanity make films about it. If there is no future, why do you bother yourself with making films to tell it. Just go to park and lay down under the sun with the biggest secret of the history. And enjoy it. I never expected it but Leigh is a new Von Trier for me. Another big disappointment. Anyway, do not waste your time with this huge waste of 35 mm.

reachtitan Finally watched it. Mike Leigh's "Naked" is one of the most thematically disturbing and haunting movies you will ever come across. It tells the story of Johnny(Thewlis), a philosophical,world-weary drifter who is always on the run from the law.After committing a rape in Manchester, he lams to London to live at his former girlfriend's residence. Thereon, he again embarks on a surreal odyssey on the London streets meeting people as queer as himself. From answering questions as deeply rooted in theology and metaphysics;spitting out doomsday prophecies as some boardroom lecture to satisfying needs as banal as a hot-water bath and some sex, Johnny does it all here, on this trip.Director Leigh extracts performances verging on the edge of perfection from the entire cast and does so with superb improvisation which is quite evident,especially, in scenes that feature Johnny. Everyone is a knockout in the acting department, but,hey;then there is David Thewlis as Johnny.He delivers a portrayal that has shades of Hamlet,Jimmy Porter,even Jesus(a very sado-masochistic and cruel one at that). I say Jesus paradoxically because in a way Johnny wants to save mankind from the ignorance of believing we are not doomed and affirming that God has manipulated us(mankind) for the sake of some cosmic warfare. It is indeed a cynical and paradoxical second coming of Christ. Thewlis gave his 'naked' body and soul to this film by devouring almost every book about religion and eschatology as a part of role-preparation. he evokes time to time disgust,pity.hatred and wonder in his hauntingly mesmerizing performance.If you are looking for plot, there isn't any. Most of the film revolves around Johnny and his adventures. Fraught with existential overtones,it is a thunderous take by Leigh on the Thatcherite England which almost convinces viewers that it is a dystopian world we are living in; that apocalypse isn't far and we need something or somebody to awaken us from this nightmare.

brenjamesuk A weird film! The good bit is David Thewlis' Existential p**s-taking discourse with everyone he comes across - the bad bit is - everything else. Also, it's way too long. The charm had worn off. Ends up being long-winded and pointless - whereas had it been shorter it would have been bitter-sweetly succinct. Johnny, is the archetypal street philosopher, though instead of being a wise vagabond - he is in fact an on the run vagrant - on the run from life, that is. Also - who the f**k is Sebastian?All of that aside though, I have a real problem with Mike Leigh's films. He tries TOO hard to come across as authentic and real - and this effort becomes so conspicuous that it clouds everything else and it's all you can see. His films aren't authentic and real - they're the opposite of that - they're overdone and contrived. Most of his stuff ends up being a bunch of middle-class loveys performing their perception of an Idyll of plucky, chirpy, working-class folk! I suspect that the only thing that saves this film from becoming that, is the intensive involvement of Thewlis in developing the script and dialogue.Basically Leigh's approach in depicting authentic realistic working class characters, ends up producing a facsimile that is strikingly recognisable to the original article - but one that exaggerates the more obvious features - to a cringe-making degree. He creates cinematic caricatures.