Naked (1993)

Waste of time

Such a frustrating disappointment

As Good As It Gets

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Naked is something of a welcoming surprise, when I first saw it in 94', and in my opinion, was one of the best films I saw that year. The film works, mostly due to an incredible and original performance, that of David Thewlis, where the other two female leads are almost as good, especially, Cartidge, as the dependent Sophie, a heroin user, who's forced into performing some sex acts by the the conniving, malicious, and lonely pig of a landlord, Jeremy (Crustwell) though we're not sure he really is one at this point, when he makes this sudden intrusion. That's the thing about this film, every character is lonely, one such character, a night security guard, guarding what high strung and reckless 90's hero Johnny, (Thewlis) comically terms as "Space" which honestly is what he really he is doing. The film has an explosive and dramatic start with Johnny screwing a woman, where if it's rape, it's discernible, but with Johnny taking off quick to avoid a bashing, it must be. He arrives in Manchester and takes harborage at his ex-girlfriend's, Louise (Sharp) place. She's painfully lonely, obvious as day, where you don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize she envies the more outward and sex loving Sophie. Starting up a relationship, with Johnny, where really she's suffocating him, he goes out on a solo walk, into the night cold. Thus begins a journey where he meets a collection of people, first two homeless drug users, a pre Trainspotting face, and very un Spud like. Basically the others are unhappy, discontent loners, one woman even creeping Johnny out. Naked, I must warn you, is surprisingly, and bloody funny, from an A1 script, insightful and sharp, ala: Mike Leigh, where Thewlis is lumbered with a lot, bringing a performance of reality that just paralyses you. Too Crustwell, who I only saw in another film was impressive as his character was a horrible being, but there we're reasons. After all, he informs us he's going to commit suicide when reaching the big 40. And he can get rough too. Near the end, we really see the characters for what they are, and that includes Crustwell: lonely. Again being Mike Leigh, what we have is a situation set, through the motions movie, that probably would of had rehearsed improv, All 4 leads deliver solid performances, but none finer than Thewlis, where I had to see more of this guy. As this being the only other Leigh film, I've seen besides Meantime, which I really liked, this is that controversial, stand out from the rest of the directors flick, where we have a brave, daring and bloody film, one set apart from all of Leigh's others. At the end, as Johnny departs, the relentless loser, we're actually sad to see him go, in a film, every movie connisseur, should put down as a must see, but more so, a must see Thewlis performance, one which will have a lingering effect on the viewer, years after it's watch. The title reveals a lot too.

Johnny (David Thewlis) flees Manchester for London, to avoid a beating from the family of a girl he has raped. There he finds an old girlfriend, and spends some time homeless, spending much of his time ranting at strangers, and meeting characters in plights very much like his own.What to make of this film... is Johnny an anti-hero? We follow him, making him our protagonist of sorts, but can we really stand behind him? I should think not. Yet, we listen to his ramblings about bar codes, the Bible and Nostradamus and see how he affects people. Is he insane or just misunderstood? David Thewlis is an incredible actor and he is a joy to watch even when he might not be playing the most honorable person. Great to see him perform so strongly in the days before "Harry Potter".

In a drab, glacial, shabby London, Mike Leigh offers a disjointed succession of encounters you can't seem to grasp the essence of and that nothing, or almost nothing can be drawn from.As the main character, you wonder in a mass of raw ideas that for some are incredibly under-exploited, like Johnny's past and his physical and mental condition, and that for others are rather unrealistic, like the feminine behaviour in general.Paradoxically, the movie is very talkative in philosophical theories and other mystical tirades, and meaningless. Not to mention that with a duration of a little more than two hours, one can't say this movie is very digestible.What was the goal of the movie ? Which themes the director wanted to address ? What was the message he wanted to convey ? So many questions left unanswered.

Bleak and cynical and often uproariously funny. The bleakness would be overwhelming if not undercut so frequently with the humor of Johnny's rants. Much of the credit belongs to David Thewlis, whose brilliant work is comparable to McDowell in CLOCKWORK ORANGE or DeNiro in TAXI DRIVER. His character Johnny doesn't so much straddle the line between good and evil as he does swerve back and forth over it like a drunk driver. Johnny's darker qualities are neither negated nor mitigated by his charm, but his charm is substantial, with a wonderful gift for gab, a sense of intellectual curiosity, and a sarcasm-tinged but nonetheless genuine compassion for his fellow man buried under the bile. When Thewlis is on screen, he's riveting.Lesley Sharp is also superb as his ex-girlfriend, bravely attempting to maintain an air of stoicism in the face of Johnny's misanthropy, and Katrin Cartlidge is heartbreaking, if a bit shrill.The sour note in the movie is Sebastian/Jeremy, whose absolute vileness doesn't ring true in the context of the rest of the characters, who occupy much greyer territory. Perhaps he's simply there to make Johnny look not so bad in comparison. However, his role is small enough to overlook his presence, or at least consider it as the one truly rotten part of an otherwise excellent whole.