MovieChat Forums > Lennon Naked (2010) Discussion > one of the worst things i've ever seen

one of the worst things i've ever seen

posted 13 years ago by estella2
9 replies | jump to latest

this was SO bad i had to turn it off before it got even half way into the film ( sometime around the pool scene with cynthia.) honestly i can't believe i managed to get even that far into it without banging my head through a pane of glass. oh my gosh how terrible was this movie! so bad so bad. so inaccurate. whoever put this together must have known absolutely nothing about john lennon. the actors looked nothing like the characters they were playing. when i first pressed this on my indemand i was thinking it was the john lennon in nyc documentary and boy was i surprised when i started watching this instead. i thought it was seriously a joke.....like the ruttles or something. but then it started to get serious and i was like.....wait?? are they trying to be for real serious or is this a gag? because i thought it was supposed to be a gag. although it seemed like an inappropriate time to have a gag around the anniversary of his death. the john lennon in nyc documentary was incredibly good though. this 'film' looked like a squashed bug on a bathroom wall compared to the 'lennon nyc' doc. this film was criminal it was so bad.

reply

[–] Dea-voNod88 13 years ago

Agreed! this biop was absolutely terrible!

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] magic8ball2112 13 years ago

Me thinks its a reaction to having one's personal heroes shown as anything but the heroic 'working class hero' image he created.
Sure the main actor didn't look 100% like the titular role, & the 'character' of Lennon was more acerbic than anything in Hard Day's Night. But it wasn't a wholly bad movie.
Just the same, I won't exactly run out & get the DVD, lol.

Of course....now I have a yen to see Backbeat.

reply

[–] estella2 13 years ago

not true. i've read *many* books on lennon that are anything but flattering. i've watched and listened to interviews with lennon. i've been to liverpool and met childhood friends and neighbors. this was so inaccurate. although i will say that i was suggested a clip to watch from a later part in the film where he plays the song "mother" to his dad. i know that didn't happen in real life, but that was the only scene that i felt had any merit.it was very moving even though it was fictional. i think that is exactly how he would've acted and how he wished it would have happpened. Lennon said in an interview that when his father approached him later in life he decided to give his father as much time as he had given him-about two years. Lennon ended up cutting off contact with his father a bit earlier than two years into his visit. maybe if they had said in the title "lennon: what could've happened but didn't" then it wouldn't have been so insulting. i know it was mentioned in credits (this is fictional) but it seemed stupid that they tried to pass it off as even semi real. i have seen these types fictional modern documentaries before-one example is "Elvis Meets Nixon." I loved that movie. it was based on hearsay and stories so it was pretty much a fictional story based on real events. but it still held onto as much accuracy as possible. this lennon naked just seemed like it was put together at a rushed speed. just sloppy. it could have been better had they done some editing and better casting, better writing...etc. the costumes were also very off on time period. at least "Elvis meets nixon" got that right.

reply

[–] westindixie 13 years ago

I slightly agree. Whoever wrote and directed this did a horrible job. But Christopher Eccelsten <SP?, the man who played Lennon was fantastic I thought. I feel like he was the only good part of the entire production, and his talents were ill used. I would love to see him play Lennon again but in a better written film and maybe have it chronicle his time in America as well.

reply

[–] estella2 13 years ago

the actor did the best he could with what was given to him. i'd like to see him in some other roles in the future. it's just this was a shame.

reply

[–] at7000 12 years ago

Yes, I am sure this is total B.S. compared to way things really went down. But in fairness, they do start the film with a disclaimer to the effect that "Some scenes are entirely fictional."

The film is "watchable" for a Beatles/Lennon fan. Not much more though. Now, on to my pet peeve-

I understand that castings this type a film is a trade off between acting ability vs. the actors resembling who they are portraying. On this account, the film fails miserably. The actress who played Yoko, whilst Japanese, looks nothing at all like Yoko. Same is true for John, Paul, and the rest of them. This spoilt it for me. I mean not even close. They might as well have hired John Travolta or Lawrence Fishburn to play Lennon. The bloke was just not convincing. Although his acting was good.

It was enough to ruin the film.

reply

[–] disturbedtool68 12 years ago

people tend to criticize this film for it's inaccuracies, or for not knowing Lennon, but they dont say what was inaccurate

the opening w/ Brian wasnt really correct in that Brian loved when the Beatles got attention.

But the rest?

The press conferences were, at times, WORD FOR WORD exactly what John said. THe only difference was that the Beatles stopped doing press conferences when they stopped touring.
Those words were taken from one on one interviews.

He lived in a big house, his marriage (never a real marriage) was falling apart. His father re-appeared in his life and John 'dealt' with it. He gave him money and sent him away.
It showed the irony of John leaving his son (by pushing Cynthia away) like his father left him.

He put up with a lot of crap because of Yoko.

what was so inaccurate? how was this not like John?

===

listening to:

reply

[–] backofthevan 12 years ago

When they can't even be bothered to find actors who actually resemble the real-life characters they're playing I can't be bothered watching. I think I would agree with your assessment, although that may be a "stupid" thing to say without watching it. But what you say makes sense. And the casting is so dreadful I really can't bear to watch it. (having lived through that time period and being a massive Beatles fan, saw them twice in person, etc.)

reply