Watch Zardoz For Free

Best movie of this year hands down!

Simply Perfect

Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

D as in Dreadful. Not good. Really bad. My review is still too short. I guess it has meaning and important commentary on man's struggle and all that stuff, but no. It's really bad.

This seemingly bizarre futuristic science fiction saga is almost a parable of what it is like to be brainwashed and complacent with whatever new bird-brained idea takes over society. While the story is set in some futuristic so-called paradise, it's almost frightfully current in it's ideal of hiding what truth is simply to live in a completely ideal world. This is a warning in it's message of mind controlling manipulation, showing how those who go against the ideals in this freaky world either end up periodically aging or in complete apathy or facing eternal senility. Sean Connery is suddenly transformed from an earthly, violent world into this seemingly peaceful vortex, all the while worshiping some godlike creature called Zardoz, a stone image that resembles a shark. In this vortex, he's questioned about everything he's been through, analyzed by strange hippy like young people, and pretty much manipulated by them to comply with their ways...or else. Connery witnessed others tried by the vortex leaders (among them Charlotte Rampling) and then finds himself threatened one of their other worldly punishments. I will be honest in saying that it took me a while to figure what the heck was going on, but it quickly became obvious of what was going on. It's a disturbing view of a world free from individuality where only those of a certain like mind (or weak mind) will find the rewards.I'm sure that everybody who watches this movie will get something completely different from it, but for me, it's a companion feature to "1984" to warn us about dimensions of society that are quite disturbing. The world outside this vortex is futuristic, but as we know it, still violent, lustful and abusive of power. Connery is shown raping women savagely, and inside the vortex, there are examinations of mortal sexuality and even a testing of what makes different people become aroused. In that sense, it's a bit gratuitous, but there is a point. The film builds to a strange climax where the world outside attacks the world inside, and Connery and Rampling end up in a cave that shows the passage of time with the most hysterical ending. Hollywood has shown in films such as "Fahrenheit 511", "Soylent Green", "Logan's Run" and "Westworld" that we are heading to grim times, so if seeing these films makes you keep an eye on your newspaper more aggressively, then it has accomplished at least something, no matter how absurd the plot line is.

Ah, you've got to love the 70's. Only in that decade could a film so wilfully weird as Zardoz be released by one of the major studios. This was the decade where Hollywood went left-field and consequently released a large number of brilliantly odd movies. It would probably be fair to say that Zardoz is among the most bizarre. In those halcyon days between the release of the highly popular but highly strange 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and the decidedly more straightforward but astronomically successful Star Wars (1977), what constituted cinematic science fiction was often more conceptual than action-oriented. Zardoz is a pretty good example of this. Its writer and director was John Boorman who had just come off the back of the highly successful, yet decidedly disturbing, Deliverance (1972). The success of that film gave him enough leverage with Twentieth Century Fox that they gave him full control on his next feature, which was of course Zardoz. The result was a highly unusual and distinctive science fiction oddity. On release it seems to have quickly attained something of an infamous reputation. It was considered by the critics as an incoherent and self-indulgent mess. In fairness, it's not really surprising that it attracted such hostility, as while it is a film with lots of ideas, they are presented in a confused manner, with a somewhat muddled plot. However, I think from the point-of-view of today, this can surely now be mostly forgiven and we can appreciate the very fact that this was a sci-fi opus that wasn't afraid to simply let loose and go for it fully, with impressively little regard for commercial considerations.Just recounting a brief synopsis reminds me just how strange the basic story for this one actually is. In the 23rd-century, in a post-apocalyptic Earth, we have a character called Zed. He is an Exterminator, one of the professional killers who eliminate Brutals on orders from a god known as Zardoz, who in turn is a giant floating stone head who spews forth weaponry for the Exterminators to use. Severe doubts lead Zed to stow away in the head of Zardoz and from this vantage point he enters the Vortex, which is the world of the immortal Eternals, a group of fey fops who are guardians to human culture and art. The introduction of this savage mortal into their midst is the catalyst for irrevocable changes in the Vortex.See what I mean? The synopsis reads like madness. This is about as far removed from a high concept movie as you are likely to get. Its story-line is totally out there. But that is a significant part of this film's appeal, as unlike most films this one is highly unpredictable. You just can't really work out where it's going to go next and this is something of a serious plus point in its favour. It considers the ideas of utopia and immortality, and the resultant boredom associated with each. There is maybe a little too much convoluted high-minded dialogue about various matters but some of the ideas connect. It's stylised in that it is the future as seen from the 70's. Some people used the word 'dated' to describe the likes of this. I personally do not like that word and consider it meaningless, moreover I think the look of the future from the point-of-view of the 70's is actually a pretty interesting one and is another plus point for this film. Visually, this one has much going for it generally, with some psychedelic sequences and surreal moments. It's colourful, bizarre and imaginative. In films so offbeat as this acting performances often feel like something of an afterthought but special mention has to be made for Sean Connery who is in a role about as far removed from James Bond as is emotionally possible. He goes around in a deeply unflattering outfit but does so in an impressively committed way, so kudos to Connery for giving such a serious performance in a nappy. Ice queen Charlotte Rampling is also on hand, as is perfectly cast as one of the aloof Eternals; it sometimes feels like Rampling only appeared in cult movies and, well, this sure qualifies as another one. In summary, Zardoz is most certainly not for everyone but it's a movie that grows on you, there really is nothing else like it.

Filmmaker John Boormans' follow-up to "Deliverance" is admittedly not to all tastes. Boorman, who also produced and wrote the film, gives us a one of a kind experience that, ultimately, is better seen than described. Words like "weird" and "provocative" come to mind when viewing it, because it's full of ideas.It depicts a world of the future (the year 2293, to be exact) where a sly master intelligence, Zardoz, has contrived a way to keep unruly lower classes in line. One of the lower class people is an "exterminator", Zed (Sean Connery), whose job is to kill, period. One day Zed decides to seek truth, and hitches a ride in a great stone head, where he's transported to a "vortex", or environment, where the bored upper class, a group of immortal intellectuals, don't know what to make of him. He shakes up their world as much as they shake up his.The most striking element of "Zardoz" is the visual approach. Filmed on location in Ireland, it takes us from one surreal set piece to another, with deliberately stylized dialogue. The cast plays the material with very straight faces. Connery looks fairly embarrassed, and considering the fact that his costume partly consists of a red diaper, one can hardly blame him. (He wasn't too happy about having to wear a wedding dress, either.) Charlotte Rampling, Sara Kestelman, John Alderton, Sally Anne Newton, and Niall Buggy co-star; of this group of actors, Buggy does manage to inject some humour into the proceedings.This is sedately paced and short on action, but it's compelling in its own offbeat way, provided one is able to stick with the story. While it's not likely to be very appealing to a mainstream audience, it's not something easily forgotten for devotees of cult cinema.Seven out of 10.