NO SPOILER!! Was at a multiplex in Sheffield on Monday (not meadow hall) and had some time to kill. This was the film that started earliest that the two of us both fancied. Personal opinion - it does work - it is a snapshot of a place in London which is; and has been a place of sexual adventure. There are some that say the gays have taken over - not sure that's true, but I'm no homophobe, my late brother was gay and died of aids. The essence of Hamstead Heath - it is a meeting place, one that happens to be used as a place of trysts. It is not the cleverest film in term of camera usage, but the makers had to achieve what they set out to do whilst the general public were using the heath in a normal day. I suspect the camera angles were not clever because of the public access required to the heath. Imagine trying to do the same thing as a film maker in central park N.Y. on a low budget with no official backing from the City. These guys probably faced the same problem - remember that when you watch it - it's OK to be clever when being a critic, but remember the constraints they were operating under !!! Cast is superb, it's very British, lottery funded, and the snapshots it provides into peoples lives leaves one leaving the cinema - wondering what happens afterwards - well thats what it did for me - a very British film that probably won't travel well - but WTH !! My only gripe it this - when I told my mum what I'd been to see (and I'm 50 years old) she said - You are too old for mucky films !!! This is a woman who loved Vera Drake - as an explanation of social history!! But her assumption was it was a mucky film - so quid pro quo - anyone looking for a mucky film will see that as a title (or tag-line) and go to see it and come out very very NOT HAPPY - however people like my 70 year old mum, I know would enjoy it, but not be brave enough to watch it; because the title will put her off. So if marketing/distributing people read these comments, think of a new title - it will probably get you more exposure than you are likely to get. That's my take on it - and it was so good I'll be watching it again - because I know I missed so many bits !!! Cheers Chris

Maybe it's the same reason why I don't find Catherine Tate in the least bit funny that I found this movie (by a Catherine Tate writer) so utterly mundane. Seeing the ratings and reviews on here and indeed hearing people speak so highly of the Tate show, it's clear that I'm missing some vital cog in this machine. I mildly respect the 'equity minimum'/profit share approach and that the director re-mortgaged his house to make it happen but that's where my respect for this picture ends. It is spirit crushingly dull, trite, unimaginative, clichéd and in parts offensive. Every movie should contain a lesson and the lesson this film gave me was that life is way too short, fragile and precious to waste an hour and a half of it watching crap.

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.

This film attempts to cash in on the success of Richard Curtis movies, particularly "Love Actually" (which I loved) - a series of disparate scenes following the love lives of various couples. It's a great idea poorly executed. The script tries to be a little too clever and simply doesn't resonate. Most of the acting is stilted which is more a reflection on the director than the actors. The version I saw (on a plane) was called "Scenes from a Park", which is a more appropriate title as not all the scenes were of a 'sexual nature'. I was so looking forward to this movie, but ultimately it is disappointing. Don't bother.

I give it THREE strong STARS* at my scale. Additional comments: I will not comment on budget nor on likes and dislikes. Leaving the house after the movie I felt lighthearted with aftertaste of human nature irony. * --- I suggest an independent approach to rating a movie that I use myself and as it proved to be helpful to my friends. This approach does not reflect any specific quality, like playing of actors or camera work or director or script or even budget. Instead, it ranges the work as a whole indicating its consumer value and time-provedness. The rating can be easily applied to other entertainment articles like music CDs, books or performances thus making the method universal and simple for both using and understanding. It ranges from one to ten stars according to the statements: 1*......... - I started watching but quit before the end. (I left the house) 2**........ - I could hardly sit out till the end. 3***....... - I saw it once. (It's worth watching once) 4****...... - I saw it and would recommend it to my friends. (It's a discovery!) 5*****..... - I would watch it again and could join a company. (Next time I can invite my friends). 6******.... - I can go and watch it many times. (I must check if they sell it?) 7*******... - I saw it and am about to buy a copy. (Happy to have it on my shelf) 8********.. - I saw it and bought it, I enjoy re-watching selected episodes. 9*********. - I saw and bought it - it comes as a source of citations. 10********** - I saw and bought it, the source of all time enjoyment, my favorite. (Next generation will appreciate it like in 10 or 20 years as well) If you'd like to use the method please mention it as "illustris Star Scale"

I loved this movie so much I bought the DVD. It's a gem. I'm not surprised a lot of the actors did this film for almost no money - the script is that good. You can make an analogy to books - this is not a novel but a book of short stories. I personally love short stories - you can almost always flesh out the characters in your imagination and make your own ending. I thought this movie was brilliant - great script and absolutely superb acting. It was a joy to watch from start to finish. This is what acting is all about, this is what movies should be about - not blue screens, endless explosions and CGI characters.

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.

I've seen this movie recently in the Prince Charles Cinema in London when I was visiting the place during a City Trip. I didn't know which movie was playing and the I never heard of this movie. So without any idea what the movie was about, I sit back and enjoyed the movie. The first thing I noticed was the high amount of 'feel good movie'. Everything is sunny, the grass is always very green and everybody is smiling. The plot isn't very spectacular, just some people who fell in love, are in love or needs love. But it's the humor what makes it special. Every character is interesting and never bores. Everyone can recognize himself in some sort of way in one of the characters. When the movie ends, you leave with a smile. That's for sure!

I read a lot of the reviews and comments that people here typed about this movie, i can't understand how they say it was awful etc... But that is why they say we all have different taste, i just got done watching this movie and i loved it, the movie is very touching, beautiful scenery, funny, entertaining, i read some guy in here made fun of the camera on how it was filmed etc.. ?? I have no clue why he would say that, because the camera the view all of it was perfect, this is why people should watch a movie and judge it by themselves and not always go by what people say, because you might enjoy it as much as me and my family did, the actors and actresses did an outstanding job on this film, so my advice is give it a try you will be impress Loved it!!