Sean Connery Starred In A Terrible Sci-Fi Movie To Escape His James Bond Legacy

Any James Bond fan will know that playing 007 was a double-edged sword for Sean Connery. The working class Scot had taken the long road to acting by way of a short-lived Royal Navy career. His life changed when he was cast as England's greatest spy, turning Connery into a global megastar. But it also came with its share of drawbacks, and the actor was never shy about advertising that fact, even going as far as to famously complain to The Hollywood Reporter that he had "always hated that damn James Bond" and that he'd "like to kill him."

While Connery would become much more grateful and positive about his time in the tux in the years since he retired from the role, by the early-70s he was tired of being associated with the franchise, and decided to prove his worth as a performer by playing against type in several movies — some of which were great, and some of which, such as 1974 sci-fi fantasy "Zardoz" were not.

Originally set to star Burt Reynolds, the movie, from director John Boorman, saw Connery play a perpetually half-naked enforcer for an eternal race that rules over enslaved humans in a post-apocalyptic future. As the actor saw it, this would prove to be exactly what he needed to break away from Bond. Or, as Boorman recalled in a Little White Lies interview, "Connery had just stopped doing the Bond films and he wasn't getting any jobs, so he came along and did it." The actor himself was a little less glib about it. Speaking to the magazine Films and Filming in 1974, Connery said that "Zardoz" was "one of the best ideas [he'd] come across for ages" and claimed to have been "gripped" by lack of "space ships and rockets" in a sci-fi movie. "What does interest me is the possible development of society in centuries to come," he continued. "The way different levels and types evolve in the script is intriguing and refreshing, and could well be true."

Ultimately, most viewers and critics didn't find quite as much depth in "Zardoz," though the film has developed a cult following in the years since its release.

Sean Connery used the 1970s to break away from Bond

The 1970s proved to be a particularly crucial decade for Sean Connery, who having become beloved for his portrayal of Bond was more eager than ever to escape any sort of typecasting. Despite more than proving his talents in films from the '60s such Alfred Hitchcock's "Marnie" (1964) and Sidney Lumet's "The Hill" (1965), Connery seemed determined to move as far away from Bond as possible. But he had to start by revisiting that very character. The actor took a deal that would see him return as 007 in 1971's "Diamonds Are Forever" but only in exchange for production company United Artists allowing him to make two movies of his own choosing (and a hefty salary he donated to his own charity).

Only one of those movies would actually materialize after Connery's grand vision of a "Macbeth" movie that he was set on directing was canceled. The film that did emerge from the UA deal, however, was almost an anti-Bond. Sidney Lumet's "The Offence" debuted in 1973 and featured Connery as jaded British Detective Sergeant Johnson, who kills a suspect during an interrogation and must confront his personal degradation during his own interrogation for the murder. Not exactly one-liners and shaken martinis, then.

"The Offence" was well received and remains Christopher Nolan's favorite Connery movie to this day. But two years later, the Scottish star would squander some of his post-Bond prestige with another movie that was not well-received at all. "Zardoz" was directed by John Boorman who two years prior had overseen the seminal "Deliverance." But his 1974 sci-fi adventure would be nothing like that. It starred Connery as Zed, a member of a race of enslaved mortals known as Brutals who leads an uprising against the elite Eternals, in a plot that sounds eerily similar to that of John Travolta's "Battlefield Earth," which to this day remains one of the worst movies ever made. "Zardoz" wasn't quite as bad but it wasn't far off.

Zardoz was a spectacular failure — but at least it wasn't Bond

The story of "Zardoz" is set in a dystopian future, and follows Sean Connery's Zed, who spends a lot of the time clad in what was basically a red bikini while sporting an impressive mustache and ponytail combo. After Zed renounces his role as Brutal Exterminator he tries to free his people from their worship of the Eternals and their giant stone idol, Zardoz. He sneaks his way onto Zardoz before he's captured by an Eternal named Consuella (Charlotte Rampling). While in captivity he learns how the Eternals function and manages to bring them down, falling for Consuella in the process, who gives birth to their son. If that sounds a tad confusing, that's the simple version. If you really want to get into the weeds of this misguided sci-fi effort, you'll have to watch it, but be warned, this is a film which Roger Ebert could only describe as something that "will certainly age you by two hours."

Not only does Connery look distractingly ridiculous throughout the movie in what several outlets have described as a red "diaper," the dialogue in "Zardoz" leaves a lot to be desired. One of its most infamous quotes "The gun is good, the penis is evil!" is a good indicator of the kind of thing to expect here. Still, as John Boorman recalled in a Vulture interview, while 20th Century Fox "didn't do anything" to promote the movie, having "lost heart very well," "Zardoz" did manage to attract "quite a number of disciples." That said, the director did have to acknowledge that the movie was "never successful anywhere." He also remembered how the special effects-laden finale of "Zardoz" sent Connery into a rage. The actor almost assaulted a camera operator after the poor bloke exposed the film of an entire scene involving extensive makeup, forcing Connery to perform it for a third time. "Sean [...] went after this camera-loader and nearly killed him," said Boorman. "It took three grips to restrain him." Given how obviously degrading this movie was, I'm sure Connery had more on his mind in that moment than a ruined scene. Still, it certainly wasn't James Bond, and in that sense it was sort of what the actor was looking for.

Recommended