Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Zardoz (1974)
#1
This thread could be redundant, but a crazy film like this deserves recognition; it is nearly on-par with a Jodorowski flick, except with an unfortunate amount of exposition, which nonetheless doesn't keep the movie from being some sort of classic. Great images, unintentional and intentional humor, thoughtful and stupid ideas clash alike...this film is definitely not boring. The Dark Backward, which I had previously commented on within this forum, looks much poorer after watching Zardoz soon after.

EDIT: Hm, this post was made with haste, and I don't think it deserves the Jodorowski comparison very much, though it does deal with similar themes, if Zardoz had a more abstract narrative I think more would be able to enjoy it...
Reply
#2
hooker boot forever.

The movie is so stupid it works. The whole life with out death is meaningless is so much BS. Death has meaning, but not in the way most people seem to think. Peter F. Hamilton in Pandora's Star handle what death would mean to such people a lot better then stories like Zardoz. Beside that major stupidity it death has no meaning then life has no meaning BS, got a lot of really net ideals.
Reply
#3
PS I love the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbGVIdA3dx0
Reply
#4
This movie is my ultimate guilty pleasure. I know it's pretty terrible, but I love it nonetheless. It's a failure, but at least it's an interesting failure. Best of all, it is without a doubt the product of a very singular vision, though definitely a deranged one. The comparison to Jodorowsky is an interesting one, though I don't know if I fully agree. I can't really articulate why, other than to say that Jodo's films, weird as they are, tend to work, whereas this one really doesn't (beyond the level of a bizarre curio).
Reply
#5
Sweet movie. I watched it at a movie marathon with friends. The kid who chose to show it did so based on the comments of a friend who said that Zardoz was crazier than The Holy Mountain. He and everyone else at the marathon quickly realized that this comment was seriously untrue, though it's still a sweet movie.
Reply
#6
Zardoz is good!

Happy 80th birthday Mr. Connery, keep slappin hoes and stickin it to Eternals.
Reply
#7
I watched this for the first time a couple of weeks ago, it's not good, but it entertained me in a "holy shit this movie was actually made" sort of way.

Plus it taught me that the "Penis is evil! The Penis shoots Seeds, and makes new Life to poison the Earth with a plague of men, as once it was. But the Gun shoots Death and purifies the Earth of the filth of Brutals. Go forth, and kill! Zardoz has spoken."

I'm going as the Zardoz head for Halloween this year.
Reply
#8
There's not enough words in the world to describe my love of this film.


I can watch that final sequence forever.
Reply
#9
Crazy stupid awesome. Its like John Boorman took a freshman philosophy class to fill a Gen. Ed. requirement, and it blew his mind. Still, this movie more or less made Beethoven's 7th. Fun fact: Tarsem Singh used the same musical piece during the intro to The Fall. So he gets a pass for his atrocious Cell.

I'd like to think that this movie couldn't be made today, but a lot of independent film makers could probably come up with some even crazier shit, run it thru Final Cut Pro, and shop it around to some of the niche labels.
Reply
#10


Just re-watched no to long ago. It a really smart scrip, hurt by really weird production choices. The biggest problem with the story for me is the time line. I get were he get the 300 years from, as that is the life time of most civilizations. Civilizations don't last long, because people don't live long, following generations lose sight of the parents objectives, although people can lose sight of their own objective easy enough. I still feel that a 3000 year time frame for their state of civilization would be better. I do think that the story is good example of; the son of perdition site in the house of the Lord.




Anyone else feel that an immortal civilization would be more Glacial in it decline, then say a mortal civilization?

Reply
#11

I scrolled through this thread and I'm fucking beside myself with amazing disappointment no one has uploaded THIS picture.


IF ever a movie can be adequately reviewed by an image, this is it.  The answer to "should I watch this movie?" is THIS picture.


Reply
#12

Also, Sean turned down GANDALF because "he didn't get it".  But he 'got' fucking ZARDOZ?

Reply
#13
A[quote name="Chief Hallorhan" url="/community/t/115203/zardoz-1974#post_3785547"]Also, Sean turned down GANDALF because "he didn't get it".  But he 'got' fucking ZARDOZ?
[/quote]
Only thing that makes sense is that, by the time Lord of the Rings rolled around, it wasn't the 70s and he wasn't doing LSD anymore. Other than that, I got nothing..
Reply
#14
AI can imagine Connery furrowing his brow over the LOTR script. "What'sh thish rubbissh? None of theesh men are wearing diapersh at all!"
Reply
#15

I don't know this guy, but I kind of think we COULD be casual friends.  Not 'everyday' friends, but a guy you sort of know who makes you laugh and gets all your strange references.  You NEVER want to go to his fucking pig sty apartment, but he's a solid wing man when everyone else is busy.  He's also UP for anything, if you're in a strange mood.


Reply
#16
AI love that, last I heard, Boorman hadn't disowned Zardoz (he's great on the commentary). Nor should he. It's a singular experience, really like nothing else because while you can sense the intelligence and artistry behind the camera, it looks like the trashiest, dumbest dystopian fantasy film ever.

I actually saw Zardoz before Point Blank or Deliverance, but after Excalibur, and I found it so odd and queerly compelling that Boorman instantly became one of my favorite filmmakers. I don't even bother defending it, my only answer to criticisms of the film is that I'm just glad that there were enough good drugs left in the 70's to allow it to happen.
Reply
#17

It may be a weird acid trip, but it also a smart one. The move is a real dichotomy, but it is also about the dichotomy of human nature.

Reply
#18

My favorite John Boorman movie, and that's saying something. Despite the trippiness, I actually get everything about this movie and the point it was trying to make.

Reply
#19

Someone is awesome:



Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)