SmugKitZine Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Supelice Dreadfully Boring

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Desertman84 Lennon Naked is a television biographical film focusing on the life of John Lennon between 1967 and 1971.It stars Christopher Eccleston as Lennon and was directed by Edmund Coulthard.This biopic about John Lennon as the beloved Beatle and focuses on Lennon's life during the end of that legendary band. While Lennon comes to term with the end of this fruitful creative partnership, he falls in love with Yoko Ono and must face his long-absent father who makes an unexpected return into his life.In 1964, in the peak of Beatlemania, a reluctant John Lennon is persuaded by manager Brian Epstein to meet Freddie Lennon, the father who abandoned him seventeen years earlier, with the press in attendance. When they meet, John accuses him of abandoning him, but his father says that "he left it up to John." John and Brian quickly leave the meeting.The movie jumps then to 1967, after Brian Epstein has died. The Beatles are giving a press conference about their new film, Magical Mystery Tour. John is skeptical about the film, but Paul convinces him to go through the idea. John then invites his father to his mansion to live with him. Freddie Lennon arrives and meets his grandson, Julian.The story goes up to 1971 with the final scene shows John and Yoko getting on a plane and flying away, while a text on screen reveals that after they left in 1971, they never returned after having a press conference where John and Yoko announce that they will go to New York to live.There is something disembodied about this attempt to exploit the name, fame and commercial fruit of the iconic bad-boy songwriter.But unfortunately,there is a lot to desired of from this TV special. But nevertheless,it gives a revealing insight into John Lennon and life before and after the band and music which makes it interesting and enjoyable.

physicsgoddess1 First if you have read Cynthia Lennon's book on John there is nothing new here. Second I was very disappointed in this movie. Maybe I was expecting too much as it was Masterpiece Theater? I was very disappointing with the lead Christopher Eccleston as John. He is too OLD (at 46 he's older than John was at his death let alone to be playing a 20 something). In the "Mother song scene" John looks the same age as his father Fred. That said, the actress who plays Cynthia did a fantastic job of showing her as a whole person and not some prop in John's early life (as she is often presented). And the actress playing Yoko was good as well. This could have offered great insight into John's problems had another actor been cast in the lead and a more rounded view of John been presented. Too Bad.

ociopia This sort of biopic is the best example of "we bring who we are to a film." I'm surprised at the few reviews I've read as they seem to think John Lennon was an adult. I thought the film daunting because it so obviously was exploring Lennon's psychological state and it was spot on. He was a man-child who did not mature. I can think of few films I've seen where we know we are watching someone who just can't get past their childhood pain. We are shown why Lennon is hurt. His mind swirls constantly around this pain. His reaction to his pain is barely veiled fury, a rage to hurt as many others as he can and an obvious self- loathing that cut to the quick. Lennon is absolutely crippled interpersonally. He sees "them" as all the people external to his self and then there is "me," who he knows is acerbic and difficult and he is stuck in this horribly vicious cycle. It is terribly sad and disturbing because, I suppose, Lennon is iconic.Along comes Yoko Ono and by some completely mystifying chance, he hooks up with someone who allows that injured child to come out and play and feel some freedom of expression. Does this cure him? No. Does it help him? Maybe. You do feel he is a bit happier, though still desperate. He glues himself at the hip to Yoko and never lets go. The film does not explore his creativity at all. In this I can't say the film is just as I don't know. But I did not think Lennon original, merely clever at being reactionary to anything that touched him. He refined "acting out" to an art form and melded this with Yoko's performance art. He lived his life asleep, his unconscious in total reign and it was a vindictive and hateful shadow that ruled him. I wonder how this man wrote "Imagine." I now think it was as much a personal plea to his inner self as it was a plea to the world.

sixbells99 Lennon's music has now reached mythic status, yet the man has always been a contradiction veering back and forth from saint to sinner like a ship in a storm. This film shows painful yet moving aspects of Lennon's life. It's all the more agonizing to watch as you see his tainted upbringing being repeated on Julian his first son. The film deftly moves from a historic Beatles film, focusing on the break-up and the last meetings of the band, to intimate moments in Lennon's life. None of it feels forced with some beautiful direction and photography. Christopher Eccleston doesn't quite pull off playing the most iconic Beatle. During close ups the deep lines cutting across his aging face show the 46 older is painfully too old to play Lennon during his 20's and 30's and almost distracts from the film. He has gone for a caustic Lennon, sourer than sulphuric acid with a tongue as forked as a serpent. There is not one scene where we are given the glimpse of the man who wrote "All your is love". Instead we are given an endless barrage of Lennon at his worse. But you cannot help thinking how much richer the film would have been if we had seen the other side of Lennon.Die hard Lennon fans will find much to criticise, however the scenes with his father and his Ex-Wife Cynthia more than make for these flaws.