I first saw Mike Leigh’s Naked in August 2012. I originally wrote my review after watching it for the third time in 2014. It was a film that would grow to be my favorite piece of cinema ever made. To this day, I have always looked at my early reviews with a mixture of nostalgic glee and bizarre resentment, and the last few years have seen my style and approach to film criticism change considerably and develop to a more nuanced position.

Yesterday, I rewatched Naked for what must have been the twentieth time, and more than anything else, I felt the need to revise my review on what would be roughly the fifth anniversary of my first viewing, because Naked is one of those few films that never leave your mind. There is a panoply of discussions to be had about this film, and in revisiting it, I want to look at a few things I may have missed the first time, and simply expand on some of the ideas I did not have the capabilities to do the first time around.

Naked is a film that left me absolutely speechless. To date, this is one of only three films that have actually left me at a complete and utter loss for words – the others being Orson Welles’ The Trial and Charlie Kaufman’s Synecdoche, New York. Only these three films have elicited such an intense response in me that I have been unable to sleep at night because of them. Naked in particular has remained with me over the past few years, and simply have failed to leave my mind, and unlike the other films (which I did enjoy tremendously, but would prefer to never put myself through the emotional fatigue that came with these films), Naked is a film I constantly want to watch.

To date, the only two films I have watched more are The Birdcage and The Shining. Naked is a film I constantly feel the need to revisit because it is a riveting, beautifully complex and often hilariously funny social satire that serves to be an exercise in deep-thinking that always leaves me with a new perspective. I have yet to watch this film and not feel some sense of mental stimulation, having found something utterly new and exciting in this extraordinary film.

Mike Leigh is a filmmaker that is just “there” – there isn’t any doubt that he is talented, and there is the rhetoric that exists in popular film circles that he is a great filmmaker. What I do not see very often is the claim that he is one of the greatest filmmakers of all time, and certainly in the pantheon of the most supremely talented artists working today. Here is my very abstract view on what Leigh does that sets him up as one of the most audacious filmmakers of all time – whereas many actors want to perform Shakespeare, and quite a filmmakers want to film Shakespeare, how many can lay claim to essentially writing like Shakespeare? Naked is a film that is garnered through the same sense of human tragedy that many of The Bard’s characters exhibited – and it serves to be a film that follows the same philosophical yarn that many writers have looked at over the years. What is Naked but an updated version of Hamlet, filled with the same ramblings delivered by endearingly complex anti-hero who shares so many similarities with the exceedingly gloomy and gloriously sardonic dane?

Besides Leigh, who served to be the captain of this unique vessel, there is another person who deserves credit. If someone asked me to describe precisely what makes Naked such an extraordinary film, I’d respond with two words: David Thewlis. A recognizable character actor who is reasonably beloved and has mainstream appeal due to his crossover into mainstream productions on both sides of the pond, as well as his involvement in several notable films (such as his iconic role in the Harry Potter film series), it all started with Thewlis’ explosive performance in Naked. There are very good performances, there are exceptionally great performances and there are brilliant performances. Then there is David Thewlis in Naked. I cannot express how unbelievable his work was in this film. Johnny Fletcher is an enigmatic, hopelessly complex character who has very little redeeming qualities has committed some heinous crimes in his past and is a misogynistic, sarcastic rapscallion who depends on his own relentless nature to survive.

Johnny exists to cause trouble and stir up controversy, and he influences each and every person he encounters in ways that leave them absolutely distraught and changed for the worse. There is not a single encounter with another person in this film where Johnny isn’t a complete malicious bastard. Then why is it that we just cannot look away? Thewlis is just far too good to ignore. Johnny is a truly charismatic character, a figure we just can’t look away from. How else can we see such a raw and vicious human being serve to be so fascinating and endearing? Thewlis commits to this role unlike any actor I have seen before – he develops a character both verbally – through Johnny’s countless monologues and interactions with characters, as well as physically, dedicating himself to an exhausting degree to displaying the true complexities of this character. Johnny is a deeply flawed and relentlessly despicable character, but why do we love him so much? It is all due to Thewlis’ incredible and masterful performance. Thewlis interprets Leigh’s creation as a upper-class intellectual in the body of a lower-class scumbag and does so with remarkable skill and ferocious brilliance.

Thewlis may be the driving factor behind this film, but it is wrong and ignorant to not consider the extraordinary supporting cast. Mike Leigh assembles a cast that may not reach Thewlis’ great heights, but give in remarkable performances of their own. Lesley Sharp is absolutely incredible as Louise, the former country-girl trying to make it in London, and move past her younger days in Manchester. When Johnny shows up, Louise is thrown into a pit of despair caused by her memories of Johnny. Sharp sells this character so well, and her good-hearted nature stands in stark contrast to the far more cynical nature of the film as a whole. Katrin Cartlidge is an absolute revelation as Sophie, the broken and beaten friend of Louise who simply wants to live her life as best she can. Her final moments in this film are absolutely heartbreaking, and she was truly extraordinary in it. Greg Cruttwell is brilliantly terrifying as the deviant sexual predator that weasels his way into the lives of the main characters and mainly serves to contrast Johnny, showing that underneath his sheen of arrogance and misogyny, Johnny is just a broken idealist, whereas Sebastian Hawks/Jeremy Smart is just a purely malicious figure. Major kudos to Claire Skinner and Peter Wight, who make an extraordinary impact, even if their characters aren’t the most extensive. Each and every performer in this film leaves an indelible impression.

Naked, on the surface, is quite an anomaly. The style of this film is dreadfully bleak and lifeless – Dick Pope’s cinematography, while gorgeous, is austere and highlights the grimy underworld that exists within any big city. It is a film where the audience is forced to be shown the most hideous and grotesque features of humanity, and the shockingly bleak nature of this film makes it seem like a disturbing, hopelessly depressing ode to the negative side of life. However, despite the style, it is still an endlessly warm film, with some moments of genuine good heart. I do not condone Johnny’s actions, but I did find that as this film progressed, layers of Johnny’s personality were stripped away, revealing him as a far more tender and endearing figure than initially seems. This film has a profound philosophical impact, as well as a deeply wicked sense of humor that is buttressed by the scathing social critique this film offers us.

Naked is a beautifully philosophical film, and even if it deals with issues of class-warfare, it also has an overarching theme of being deeply and truly meaningful and sets out to examine human existence. Johnny walks around London imparting his obscure and abstract views of human existence and forces those around him to be subjected to his sometimes tangential and incoherent ramblings. Johnny cannot make a straight point, and he always has some “bigger” idea to justify every action. Johnny remains an interesting case study for the burgeoning psychological analyst or philosopher. He is a character full of complexities and nuances, and even by the end of this film, we cannot truly understand who Johnny is, where he came from and where he is going. That is the true beauty of a film like Naked, it is a film about a variety of characters all searching for a meaning they know they can never find.

I have heard arguments towards one particular aspect of Leigh’s films, in terms of comparing him to other actors. Leigh is what one could call a “city filmmaker” – and his view of London is often compared to the way Rome is depicted in the works of Federico Fellini, or how Yasujirō Ozu casts a specific eye on Tokyo, or Woody Allen’s relentless adoration of New York City, or John Waters’ loving tributes to Baltimore. Leigh, like many of these filmmakers, may stray away from the central point in some of his films, but he is never better when looking at London society. Leigh also frequently changes his social lens, showing different strata of the city – the happily suburban working-class in Life is Sweet or Happy-Go-Lucky, or the high-class excesses found in Topsy-Turvy, or the working-class embraces of Secrets & Lies, Vera Drake and All or Nothing. Leigh clearly loves London (who wouldn’t? It is an amazingly remarkable city) and he casts an unflinchingly beautiful eye on the city in his films.

Naked is a panoply of oddities – a bitter, cruel and cynical look at the working class in London and how our past can influence our present and shape our future. Naked is a huge leap from some of Leigh’s other work, and serves to be the darkest film Leigh has ever made, and I doubt he will ever make a film as bleak and twisted as this again. The fact that such a disturbing film can come directly after the eternally feel-good Life is Sweet is surprising, but a solid reason as to why Mike Leigh is an absolute genius filmmaker. Naked is my favorite film of all time. A raw, bleak and beautifully made film that never strays far from its philosophical core. David Thewlis gives one of the greatest screen performances of all time, and the supporting cast is absolutely wonderful. It is not an easy film to watch, but it is one that is dumbfoundingly good.