King Arthur, Wizard of Oz, Excalibur, Zardoz and John Boorman

There has to be something more going in this movie as regards King Arthur and the Crusades. There are simply too many references. With this in mind, something else we should look into is the influence of John Boorman. So far, everyone has focused on the Wicker Man influence, which obviously is there. The Boorman influence is more subtle, but I think there is evidence for it. First of all, it’s interesting that Ben Wheatley’s Twitter page uses a picture of the Zardoz (directed by Boorman) gold head as his avatar. Upon further research, I discovered that Wheatley is a fan of Zardoz, and even contributed the commentary to the recent Blu-Ray edition release. In that movie, Zardoz is actually a reference to the Wi(zard)of(Oz). Maybe that’s why there is a rainbow visible when Jay and Gal go to see the client for the first time. They are “off the see the wizard” “somewhere over the rainbow” (or “where the rainbow ends" in Eyes Wide Shut if you like). Considering that Boorman also went on to make a King Arthur movie (Excalibur) makes it even more intriguing.

It’s possible that the name “Gal” is meant to evoke Sir Galahad? Or perhaps it’s meant to sound effeminate, since “gal” is slang for a woman. Perhaps in the eyes of the cult Gal is weak and effeminate, because he still holds onto notions of Christianity while Jay does not. At one point in the film, Jay even says to his wife that Gal is “soft”. There is no contradiction with a pagan cult wishing for the return of King Arthur, as most of the Arthur legends have roots in pre-Christian Britain. The Grail Quest was later Christianized, but originally it was probably a pagan magical object they were searching for. Anyway, he is “crowned” King (of the Britons?) at the end. I don’t think he is any kind of Anti-Christ, but could he be their King Arthur, or just another sacrifice victim?

Here is what Ben Wheatley himself has to say abou Zardoz:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-blog/9730161/Ben-Wheatley-on-Zardoz.html

Ben Wheatley on Zardoz
The 'Sightseers’ and 'Kill List’ director Ben Wheatley explains why John Boorman’s Seventies sci-fi Zardoz is utterly unbelievable.

Zardoz (1974) has one of the greatest opening sequences of all time. A giant head flies down onto some grassy plains where all these guys are riding on horseback, including Sean Connery. Guns shoot out of the mouth of the huge head at the riders. It’s utterly incredible.

The film is known for the amazing outfit Connery wears as the main character. It was very brave of one of the world’s biggest actors to wear a red mankini with thigh-high boots.
Connery plays the character of Zed totally seriously, and pulls it off with such panache. The film isn’t a spoof – it’s serious, psychedelic science fiction.

I like the movie because it’s so bold. John Boorman is such an interesting filmmaker; he did Point Blank (1967), which is a modernist masterpiece and hasn’t dated at all, and Excalibur (1981), which was on similar territory to Zardoz.

I saw it first when I was a kid and it made an indelible impression on me. I went back to it recently because I was curious to see it again and thought it was brilliant. I can’t imagine it was a huge success when it came out because it was just too weird. I think it’s probably too weird even for today’s audiences, but it is thoroughly entertaining.

Zardoz is filled with special effects, which I think are good, but they’re all optical effects, so by today’s standards it looks quite strange. It doesn’t look terrible, though; it is of its time and you just have to accept that.

The film came out when taking psychedelic drugs had seeped into the mainstream, and it’s about as surreal as you could get for a mainstream film. But you couldn’t make a film like this and be on drugs – you have to just have a fantastic imagination.