this movie came out when i only had money for James Bond movies, but this has Sean Connery, so i got sucked in. at the time it was truly bad. Sean's outfit looked completely humiliating. see the reviews from Wikipedia below. it's also interesting that there hasn't been a remake with so much CGI that you can't make heads or tails of it. at the time i vaguely got the idea of ruthless mortals and bored to death immortals. then there was Sean in that outfit, unfit for human visualization.
looking back, this was a project for Sean similar to what "mosquito coast" must have been for Harrison Ford. both movies are a waste of time that somehow become memorable.
see the whole article, skip the movie. the 70s was a strange time for movies.
Pauline Kael of The New Yorker wrote that the script "lacks the human dimensions that would make us care about the big visual sequences" and burdened the actors with "unspeakable dialogue," and also remarked that Connery "acts like a man who agreed to do something before he grasped what it was."[32]
In 2013 Will Thomas of Empire Magazine wrote of Zardoz "You have to hand it to John Boorman. When he’s brilliant, he’s brilliant (Point Blank, Deliverance) but when he’s terrible, he’s really terrible. A fascinating reminder of what cinematic science fiction used to be like before Star Wars, this risible hodge-podge of literary allusions, highbrow porn, sci-fi staples, half baked intellectualism and a real desire to do something revelatory misses the mark by a hundred miles but has elements — its badness being one of them — that make it strangely compelling."[33]
...
No comments:
Post a Comment