This movie actually isn't bad...It's just a series of good sci-fi metaphors and honestly there's a lot being said in this movie. Obviously the 70's low budget nature is very silly to look at but I mean I don't see how that makes the content entirely bad. The ideas and themes were clear and interesting enough to keep my attention throughout. If you can't see past the silliness (which definitely does add to the entertainment value) then I think you're being immature.
Though essentially best known for Sean Connery running around in a red diaper, I'll give full marks to Zardoz for its ambition, a dystopian SF film by way Jodorowsky and in the vein of 70s musicals (Tommy only comes out the next year), but this is no Holy Mountain. It LOOKS interesting, and it's obviously ABOUT something, but it's at once too opaque and personal to director John Boorman, and not enigmatic enough. On the face of it, it's Campbellian - a primitive man (Connery) discovers knowledge and kills his god, sending him spinning to "civilization". That civilization of hedonistic and effete Eternals (the satire of communes has passed its expiration date, but I think we can relate with the general feeling) is stagnating because it has lost touch with their primal selves... or something. It's just not quite clear what the film is trying to say exactly and who it is attacking. If the Wellsian Eloi, then why make the "Brutal" hero a mass murderer and rapist? And if the film is generally misanthropic, well, ouch, you hurt my innate humanism. Ultimately, while Zardoz is intriguing, it feels like a symbolism for symbolism's sake and never really comes together for me.
Never mind the movie, story and etc. I was just shocked by the reality that Sean Connery looked like an old man then and he still does as if there had been no 40 years gap.
It seems like they gave Sean Connery lines with a lot of "s" 's in order to accentuate his speech impediment. "Shed, for Shardoz." "Shtay closh to me. Inshide my aura." "Nietzshshe."
Wow what a bad movie. Just garbage and boring. Not worth the running time. Fun seeing Sean Connery in a very hilarious outfit and taking his role very seriously but the film is just hard to follow because of how boring it is and the acting ranges from ok to downright terrible. Most on the terrible side.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 15
dpanter
Epic. If you ever run into Sean Connery, tell him this is your all-time favourite movie and keep a straight face.RosePlantQueen
Gun good, penis bad.dajmasta94
This movie actually isn't bad...It's just a series of good sci-fi metaphors and honestly there's a lot being said in this movie. Obviously the 70's low budget nature is very silly to look at but I mean I don't see how that makes the content entirely bad. The ideas and themes were clear and interesting enough to keep my attention throughout. If you can't see past the silliness (which definitely does add to the entertainment value) then I think you're being immature.onedarkdog
I have it on good authority that sean connery was not paid to act in this movie, because he didn't.Siskoid
Though essentially best known for Sean Connery running around in a red diaper, I'll give full marks to Zardoz for its ambition, a dystopian SF film by way Jodorowsky and in the vein of 70s musicals (Tommy only comes out the next year), but this is no Holy Mountain. It LOOKS interesting, and it's obviously ABOUT something, but it's at once too opaque and personal to director John Boorman, and not enigmatic enough. On the face of it, it's Campbellian - a primitive man (Connery) discovers knowledge and kills his god, sending him spinning to "civilization". That civilization of hedonistic and effete Eternals (the satire of communes has passed its expiration date, but I think we can relate with the general feeling) is stagnating because it has lost touch with their primal selves... or something. It's just not quite clear what the film is trying to say exactly and who it is attacking. If the Wellsian Eloi, then why make the "Brutal" hero a mass murderer and rapist? And if the film is generally misanthropic, well, ouch, you hurt my innate humanism. Ultimately, while Zardoz is intriguing, it feels like a symbolism for symbolism's sake and never really comes together for me.Sojourner
Don't know why, but i love this one.Zeus-Incorrigible
love how bold boorman is to just sorta abandon any kind of thesis statement by the end of this movie and instead have it coast by purely on vibes.El Screaming Bandito
What the hell did I just watch?hyperform
Never mind the movie, story and etc. I was just shocked by the reality that Sean Connery looked like an old man then and he still does as if there had been no 40 years gap.bklooney
It seems like they gave Sean Connery lines with a lot of "s" 's in order to accentuate his speech impediment. "Shed, for Shardoz." "Shtay closh to me. Inshide my aura." "Nietzshshe."Shingwauk
It was painful to watch Sean Connery and Charlotte Rampling in this flick. I can't call it a film.ExPtreize
Bi...Zardoz...withrowd
My name is Zed.samoan
Wow what a bad movie. Just garbage and boring. Not worth the running time. Fun seeing Sean Connery in a very hilarious outfit and taking his role very seriously but the film is just hard to follow because of how boring it is and the acting ranges from ok to downright terrible. Most on the terrible side.ChrisReynolds
Sean Connery wonders around an illogical future that looks like a 70s hippy commune, looking as bored as I felt watching it.