Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Just overrated. There is nothing more than unconnected aphorisms with the environment or dialogues. Actually, there are more. David Thewlis's perform is really good and things are good in this movie but it's not awesome as much as people say it is. I'd rate it maybe more than 7 but my expectation was so high because of the people who talk about this movie.

Mike Leigh's 1993 film NAKED is a drama on sexual relations -- how men hurt women, how some women accept that hurt out of low self-esteem and a desire to be wanted or supported. It is distinguished by its remarkably lifelike characters. Most of the film was worked out in improvisations for several months before shooting began. Leigh wanted his actors to create elaborate back stories for their characters, fully living inside of them so that when the cameras started rolling they would be completely convincing.As the film opens, Johnny (David Thewlis) has to flee Manchester after a sexual encounter with a married woman turns into rape and she threatens to set her husband after him. Stealing a car, he heads to London to crash at his ex-girlfriend Louise (Lesley Sharp), gets involved with her flatmate Sophie (Katrin Cartlidge), and spends a couple of nights homeless in London. Interspliced with this are scenes of Jeremy, a rich real estate broker whose sexual conquests serve as an upper-class counterpart to Johnny's own. Naturally the viewer is led to wonder what will happen when these two men meet.Something is wrong with Johnny, he answers anything said to him with a rambling torrent of words, a logorrhea that is a form of intellectual bullying; this deeply wounded man seems to feel the best defense against the cruelties of the world is a good offense. Only 27, Johnny is so wasted that he is taken for much older. In this, Thewlis's performance is one of the masterful screen portrayals of an eccentric or mentally ill person, like Dustin Hoffmann in RAIN MAN or Peter Sellers in BEING THERE.But all of the characters here are memorable, and my thoughts have often gone back to them in the time since I saw this film. I do have reservations about the plot, inasmuch as the last scenes of the film (which were decided only late in the filmmaking process) too suddenly change the tone and may seem anticlimactic. Nonetheless, I would recommend this film and believe it a great one in spite of its undeniable flaws.

i loved it! a great film with lots of sad music,dark satirical humour and typical of the works of Haneke there were lots of animals. i also loved the work of mike Leigh were there were lots of sad songs and piano fights. best film of 2008 by far, and definitely reflective of contemporary British culture. I must recommend! Finally, typical of the work of Leigh there were lots of beautiful camera angles and piano fights. I also loved how Leigh used elegant camera angles which ironically juxtaposed the dark reflection of inner city Britain to the peacefully put together long shots. Best of all the film acts as a great reminder of the tremendous works of Leigh. My only concern is that the use of animals may have been overdone in particular backgrounds of scenes. Criticisms? well my one criticism is that the work of Haneke is not THAT great of an influence. Overall, a great watch!

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.