IMDb RATING
5.9/10
6.4K
YOUR RATING
Sex and love. Some seek it, some need it, some spurn it, and some pay for it, but we're all involved in it. Set on one afternoon on Hampstead Heath, London, this movie investigates the minut... Read allSex and love. Some seek it, some need it, some spurn it, and some pay for it, but we're all involved in it. Set on one afternoon on Hampstead Heath, London, this movie investigates the minutiae of seven couples. What makes us tick?Sex and love. Some seek it, some need it, some spurn it, and some pay for it, but we're all involved in it. Set on one afternoon on Hampstead Heath, London, this movie investigates the minutiae of seven couples. What makes us tick?
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Elle Mckenzie
- Eve
- (as Elle McKenzie)
Églantine Rembauville-Nicolle
- Sophie
- (as Églantine Rembauville)
Nicholas Sidi
- Ludo
- (as Nick Sidi)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This is a beautifully made film, the style is original, simple, and very easy to watch. It's a short film about life and love set on Hampstead Heath, and is without a doubt one of the sweetest films made in a number of years. It has no complex plot, but is interesting and filled with many amusing anecdotes, and will make you laugh out loud at times. Filled with a very talented cast, and many familiar faces (Andrew Lincoln, and Hugh Bonneville being a few of my favourites) this movie is far from dull, and particularly easy to relate to. I have watched it numerous times, with numerous people, and have yet to find someone (male or female) who does not share my high opinion of this film. I highly recommend it to anyone.
Scenes of a Sexual Nature is a very intelligent and subtle film. It is skilfully crafted, beautifully shot and with superb acting. Only the most jaded and cynical could fail to appreciate this film the best film I have seen so far this year.
It is film that has many twists and turns, some more obvious than others, but even the obvious twists are still enjoyable. Not a lot happens in the film, the pace is slow and meandering but not so slow that ones interest is lost and it never becomes dull. The film examines the minutia of various relationships with great tenderness and wit and like they say the Devil is in the detail. It is the small things that give meaning relationships are more often damned or celebrated because of the minutia rather than the big gestures. It is the day-to-day content that either holds relationships together or tares them apart.
This film, which in turn is offers us charm, humour, sadness and pathos, offers no great thrills, shocks or drama (one can't help wondering how many people did not see this film at the cinema because of the title or in deed how many went because of the title and were disappointed not to find what they thought they would) nor any great love story, it is not a film that paints large more like a small water colour but like some water colours it is non-the-less beautifully painted.
All who took part are to be commended.
It is film that has many twists and turns, some more obvious than others, but even the obvious twists are still enjoyable. Not a lot happens in the film, the pace is slow and meandering but not so slow that ones interest is lost and it never becomes dull. The film examines the minutia of various relationships with great tenderness and wit and like they say the Devil is in the detail. It is the small things that give meaning relationships are more often damned or celebrated because of the minutia rather than the big gestures. It is the day-to-day content that either holds relationships together or tares them apart.
This film, which in turn is offers us charm, humour, sadness and pathos, offers no great thrills, shocks or drama (one can't help wondering how many people did not see this film at the cinema because of the title or in deed how many went because of the title and were disappointed not to find what they thought they would) nor any great love story, it is not a film that paints large more like a small water colour but like some water colours it is non-the-less beautifully painted.
All who took part are to be commended.
For an hour and a half I watched some very innocent couples, doing what couples do and... that's about it. Doesn't lead anywhere, there are no real funny moments, just plain British humor that reminds me of my grandmother's humor.
Indeed, a sunny day, people in love, all are different: Some are old, some are young, some are black, some are white, some are gay, some are straight, some are rich, some are poor, some are elevated and some are dumb.
All the dialogue is dull, the action slow, there's no moral of the movie, no event that gathers everything that happened in all that time.
I honestly don't know what I've seen. I'm blank.
Indeed, a sunny day, people in love, all are different: Some are old, some are young, some are black, some are white, some are gay, some are straight, some are rich, some are poor, some are elevated and some are dumb.
All the dialogue is dull, the action slow, there's no moral of the movie, no event that gathers everything that happened in all that time.
I honestly don't know what I've seen. I'm blank.
Hampstead Heath, that wonderful expanse in London is the setting for this delightful comedy. Directed with style by Ed Blum, the comedy brings some of England's most interesting actors together in a film that is as easy to take like a summer in the park with a nice breeze in the air.
We are taken to meet several people that seem to be enjoying their day, totally unconnected to one another. We meet Iris, a widow, whose reaction to Eddy, the older man that asks her if she would mind sharing her bench, is not exactly a happy one. Yet, they seem to have more in common than one could have suspected. They have met because of they have gone to the park on the wrong day.
Then, there is the young gay couple who are seen in the "Men Only" section of the park, talking about their life together and how one would stop cruising other men if they could agree in adopting a child. That proves to be wishful thinking, because when all it's said and done, the same proponent is seen trailing after a hot number to a secluded area to engage in sex, no doubt. One wonders about how realistic his expectations can be.
One of the best vignettes involves a blind date. The two people one sees seem to hit it off well, although they seem to have different opinions on what they expect from one another. There is also a funny sequence involving a couple that meets to what appear to be a happy reunion for a nice stroll, and suddenly a shock comes when she asks him for money for her fee, which has gone up in price.
All the actors in the film contribute tremendously to the enjoyment of it by acting effortlessly in this comedy that seems to be about nothing, yet it reveals a lot of inner tensions in many of the characters.
Best of all, Ewan McGregor and Douglas Hodge as the gay lovers. Eileen Atkins and Benjamin Whitrow make a perfect old couple. Gina McKee and Hugh Bonneville are effective as the couple on the blind date. Contributions by Adrian Lester, Sophie Onokedo, Polly Aird, and Polly Walker enhance the film.
Ed Blum shows a talent for creating people so different that happen to be one day in Hampstead Heath truly believable.
We are taken to meet several people that seem to be enjoying their day, totally unconnected to one another. We meet Iris, a widow, whose reaction to Eddy, the older man that asks her if she would mind sharing her bench, is not exactly a happy one. Yet, they seem to have more in common than one could have suspected. They have met because of they have gone to the park on the wrong day.
Then, there is the young gay couple who are seen in the "Men Only" section of the park, talking about their life together and how one would stop cruising other men if they could agree in adopting a child. That proves to be wishful thinking, because when all it's said and done, the same proponent is seen trailing after a hot number to a secluded area to engage in sex, no doubt. One wonders about how realistic his expectations can be.
One of the best vignettes involves a blind date. The two people one sees seem to hit it off well, although they seem to have different opinions on what they expect from one another. There is also a funny sequence involving a couple that meets to what appear to be a happy reunion for a nice stroll, and suddenly a shock comes when she asks him for money for her fee, which has gone up in price.
All the actors in the film contribute tremendously to the enjoyment of it by acting effortlessly in this comedy that seems to be about nothing, yet it reveals a lot of inner tensions in many of the characters.
Best of all, Ewan McGregor and Douglas Hodge as the gay lovers. Eileen Atkins and Benjamin Whitrow make a perfect old couple. Gina McKee and Hugh Bonneville are effective as the couple on the blind date. Contributions by Adrian Lester, Sophie Onokedo, Polly Aird, and Polly Walker enhance the film.
Ed Blum shows a talent for creating people so different that happen to be one day in Hampstead Heath truly believable.
A sunny afternoon on Hamstead Heath in London sees couples everywhere. Some of them are breaking up with arguments others are breaking up with affection. Some see ogling others as a betrayal, others see it as part of life. Strangers are thrown together in a temporary moment while others come together for the first time in many years. Love and sex play a part in all of it as the sun warms the day in the background.
It was the ensemble nature of the film that drew my attention to it despite the fact that it got mixed reviews. I didn't get round to it in the cinemas but when it came on television recently I managed to check it out. The mixed reviews I mentioned are perhaps understandable because the film itself is the same way in terms of content, quality and success. The "plot" doesn't really flow together because the only tangible connection between the couples is the location however as a device it has potential. The lack of a traditional narrative means that the film really relies heavily on the creation of characters and snapshots to paint a bigger picture of relationships and interactions that will come together thematically in the way that the specific characters do not. Here and there it does sort of do it but too often the scenes are just distracting as stand alone scenes, which is all well and good to some degree but it doesn't work as it needs to.
I could forgive many of the specific scenes lacking meaning but, unlike some reviews, I do see the absence of a wider truth to be a bit of an issue and without this the individual scenes have a lot more weight put on them. Sadly few if any of them can really stand up to the pressure and mostly the film just comes across as fragmented and disjointed with the strongest scenes being amusing or mildly engaging while at worst they are so-so but just seem pointless and far too underdeveloped. It is a shame because the cast is impressive and they have the talent to do as much as the material could have asked of them and it is a shame that the material asks little of the majority. McGregor, Okonedo, Tate, Lester, Strong, McKee and Bonneville are the main people you will recognise but the rest of the cast are just as good (or rather, just as OK) although it is Rembauville-Nicolle that sticks in the mind for obvious reasons which is depressing when you think of the acting talent involved. It isn't their fault and I can understand why so many of them worked on the film for little money but the idea doesn't come through and mostly they are left to try and carry scenes with their performances but little else.
Overall then this is a distracting film that offers intermittent pleasures and interest but mostly fails to offer much in the way of honesty and cohesion. Despite the material the cast do try hard to make it more than it is but with little time on screen and seemingly nobody pulling everyone together in the editing suite I'm afraid it is significantly less than the sum of its many parts.
It was the ensemble nature of the film that drew my attention to it despite the fact that it got mixed reviews. I didn't get round to it in the cinemas but when it came on television recently I managed to check it out. The mixed reviews I mentioned are perhaps understandable because the film itself is the same way in terms of content, quality and success. The "plot" doesn't really flow together because the only tangible connection between the couples is the location however as a device it has potential. The lack of a traditional narrative means that the film really relies heavily on the creation of characters and snapshots to paint a bigger picture of relationships and interactions that will come together thematically in the way that the specific characters do not. Here and there it does sort of do it but too often the scenes are just distracting as stand alone scenes, which is all well and good to some degree but it doesn't work as it needs to.
I could forgive many of the specific scenes lacking meaning but, unlike some reviews, I do see the absence of a wider truth to be a bit of an issue and without this the individual scenes have a lot more weight put on them. Sadly few if any of them can really stand up to the pressure and mostly the film just comes across as fragmented and disjointed with the strongest scenes being amusing or mildly engaging while at worst they are so-so but just seem pointless and far too underdeveloped. It is a shame because the cast is impressive and they have the talent to do as much as the material could have asked of them and it is a shame that the material asks little of the majority. McGregor, Okonedo, Tate, Lester, Strong, McKee and Bonneville are the main people you will recognise but the rest of the cast are just as good (or rather, just as OK) although it is Rembauville-Nicolle that sticks in the mind for obvious reasons which is depressing when you think of the acting talent involved. It isn't their fault and I can understand why so many of them worked on the film for little money but the idea doesn't come through and mostly they are left to try and carry scenes with their performances but little else.
Overall then this is a distracting film that offers intermittent pleasures and interest but mostly fails to offer much in the way of honesty and cohesion. Despite the material the cast do try hard to make it more than it is but with little time on screen and seemingly nobody pulling everyone together in the editing suite I'm afraid it is significantly less than the sum of its many parts.
Did you know
- TriviaThe film managed to attract a cast including so many big names because the individual actors only spent two or three days filming their scenes and the producers offered them flexibility to work around their schedule on other projects and commitments.
- Crazy creditsTwo scenes, at the beginning of the credits, of Tom Hardy and the bull terrier.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Scenes of a Sexual Nature: Making of Documentary (2006)
- How long is Scenes of a Sexual Nature?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- £260,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $429,931
- Runtime1 hour 31 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content