Lennon Naked (2010)

Just perfect...

Great Film overall

A different way of telling a story

Blistering performances.

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.

John Lennon comes over in this film as overbearing, callous, uncaring, rude, acerbic, immature, self obsessed, in fact its hard to see any redeeming features in the character who stars here. Whilst we (the fans) all know that John could sometimes lean towards the above we also know that he had a very funny, caring and deeply intuitive side as well, I've lost count of the number of times I've heard Paul or Ringo say 'John was a lovely guy'. Well Im sorry but the John portrayed here was anything but. Make your own mind up about how far down the road of character assassination Lennon Naked goes. As far as being factual with the events of this period of Lennon's and The Beatles a lot of the events I have read about before and assume to be fact,although I suspect it only vaguely represents the actual truth, but then, only the people present in the rooms would know for sure. Overall I didn't like it, I thought Eccleston, who although credible, was too old for the part and this distracted from the reality overall. If your at all a Lennon fan, I wouldn't recommend it, way too one dimensional in its approach of portraying John Lennon for me, although you might think I am biased being a fan, I have tried to look at it objectively though, Id be very interested to know what Cynthia thinks of it.

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.

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.