Zardoz: When an Actor Requires Payment and a Director Needs Oversight

      Jack Gayer explores the cult classic 1974 Sean Connery sci-fi film Zardoz...

      I’d love to see more films featuring a slightly out-of-shape, middle-aged actor in the lead role. These characters should be hairy, clad only in a bandolier and possibly a bright red diaper. They must sport a Fu Manchu mustache, thick sideburns like Wolverine’s, and a long ponytail. Because representation matters. It should also be made clear early on that this character is a brute and a rapist, lacking charm or likability.

      If this scenario has ever crossed your mind, you’re in luck, as Zardoz (1974) fulfills all those criteria. It’s a film so self-involved there are three brown eyes staring at its own navel. Why would anyone agree to star in such a ridiculously pretentious movie? Who could possibly come up with it? And why would anyone fund its production? As with many aspects of life, the answer is money. Choices are made because someone made a lot of money off someone else—or they were in need of cash.

      It’s misguided to think that just because someone created a successful film, they should be allowed to go all out on their next project (Heaven’s Gate (1980) comes to mind). When a director sees themselves as an intense artist, a star who’s desperate for cash, and a studio that believes unrestrained artistic liberty will translate into profit, that’s how you end up with a Zardoz. It’s a psychedelic sci-fi film that is undeniably entertaining but as profound as a Bazooka Joe joke is funny.

      Not enough has been said about this film, but it's time to correct this oversight. A critical reassessment? Certainly not, as the movie is awful. What’s necessary is an exploration of a film that seems to have a lot to convey; similar to Billy Madison’s reflections on wayward puppies, the only wisdom to be extracted from Zardoz is an understanding of the bizarre circumstances that led to its creation.

      While some films provide enjoyable entertainment and humor (even if their funniest moments aren't intentional), others are painfully earnest. And when these films fail spectacularly, it’s even more amusing. Zardoz, with its inflated self-importance, is a case in point, and we have writer and director John Boorman to thank for that. But first, let’s take a look at the leading man, Sean Connery, who plays Zed.

      Connery, in need of work (and funds), came across the script for Zardoz, which features a floating head proclaiming, “The gun is good, the penis is evil!” It would require Connery to don a wedding dress in the climax (amazing) and portray an all-around despicable character. He thought, “What a unique approach to the sci-fi genre. I must do this. The Matrix (1999)? Lord of the Rings (2001-2003)? Forget them,” Connery remarked later. But this gem? Yes, please.

      Connery referred to Zardoz as “one of the best ideas [he’d] stumbled upon in ages,” as he mentioned in a 1974 interview for Films and Filming. It wasn't just the exciting script that captivated Connery; it was also the opportunity to act again, regardless of how little he would earn.

      As noted in Sean Connery: A Biography by Christopher Bray, Connery received $200,000 for Zardoz—a mere fraction of his fee for Diamonds Are Forever (1971). Yet, after his time as Bond, he wasn’t swamped with offers, leaving him with little choice but to take what he could get. According to the biography, he even requested to stay with Boorman and his wife during the filming of Zardoz. He contributed to his accommodations, paying the director just 7 pounds a week, an amount Boorman remarked was reminiscent of payments from the 50s.

      The biography notes that while Connery didn’t chip in for the customary single malt whisky at Boorman’s house—which Connery insisted the director partake in—he did help by ensuring all lights were off each night. Connery, the original environmentally conscious celebrity. The director also dismissed Connery’s chauffeur at the actor’s request. Connery would share the costs (150 pounds) with Boorman and opted to drive himself. It raises the question: just how financially strapped was Connery? After all, he did star in Zardoz.

      Bray’s biography also praises Connery’s co-star Charlotte Rampling (Consuella). Did she have an interesting take on her rape scene with Connery? Oh, absolutely. Rampling reportedly joked with the director that the assault “was all over way too quickly.” Why did Rampling choose to be in Zardoz? She claimed the script was like “poetry.” Fair enough,