A Zed & Two Noughts

After two brothers lose their wives in a car crash, realize that death is the most fascinating part of life. They constantly photograph animals in a state of decomposition. This celebrates the fact that for every unique life there is a unique death and it should be glorified as is life in all its forms. Greenaway seems the exact opposite of Lynch. Lynch takes the ordinary and makes it extraordinary. Greenaway takes the extraordinary and attempts to make it appear ordinary.

I first saw this film when it came to British cinemas in 1985. Now, in 2010, I've just seen it again. 25 years ago, as an impressionable film school student, I was both baffled and fascinated by its multi-layered imagery and anarchic themes. Greenaway was my hero then for he had mastery over cinematic form and a unique style that I had never seen before. Added to Michael Nyman's powerful, pulsating music, this film gave me the shivers and also left me breathless. Looking at the film today, it seems barren of emotion (intentional) and laboured. I struggled to sit through the film, and luckily, as I was watching it at home, I could get up at intervals to make tea, have a cigarette, and look out the window. I made the effort to watch Greenaway's patronising director's commentary and 'introduction' to the film, but it still left me with the feeling that I had largely wasted two hours. I may have learnt something about sumptuous photography and resonating soundtracks, but A ZED AND TWO NOUGHTS left me cold, sickened and bored. In 1985 this film may have caused a stir, being made in the negativity and economic/cultural stagnation of Thatcher's Conservative Britain. I remember that was not a good period to live through. A film like this might have caused a sensation among cinema-goers, as it is certainly original. But that is its saving grace.

This movie has no respect for audiences or for storytelling. It has no narrative and only exists only to show dead animals decompossing. My film teacher had us watch it and it was painful. Really awful. Avant-Garde garbage. This is a movie for artsy types only. I dont think real people would like it. Beware of naked guys with snails all over them

A rewarding post modern film about life and decay and the effects of a single moment on a person's life. Great sets and photography by the legendary cinematographer Sacha Vierny, this film makes you ultra aware that you are watching a film, or a sort of theatrical filmed piece. Greenaway is an aquired but very rewarding taste, and no other director makes films as he does. A disturbing somber film for serious fans of modern cinema. Greenaway is a must in your education of film.

Greenaway's obsessions with lists, wordplay, coincidence, sexuality, the surreal, and the explicit (not to mention the "conventionally used" ones like men and women, birth and eating and death, physiology (formal and psychological), and abstraction) come to a head in this film. A bizarre mileau of fancy digressions and focused narrativity create a film which is perhaps too obtuse for first time viewers but is, as far as I'm concerned, the best way to initiate oneself into the "world" of Greenaway.

The film begins with the sound of a car crash. The next frame unfolds to show us a white car with a swan embedded in its windscreen, and a woman shouting out in agony. We can also see two women in the back of the car motionless. Who are then imposed on to a newspaper headline: SWAN CRASH TWO DIE, it says. The deceased women were married to twin brothers, zoologists Oliver and Oswald Deuce. After the accident they grieve at the bedside of the stricken survivor of the crash, a lady named Alba Bewick, who has had her leg amputated. At first they blame her for the accident, then later start to both sleep with her. Most of their time is spent photographing dead animals and plants. Some of these are shown decaying quickly, accompanied by good music from Michael Nyman. Also around the zoo is a prostitute named Venus De Milo, who the brothers both use. A strange figure named Van Hoyten. And also the film features the only feature film appearance of the English comedian Jim Davidson, who will be familiar to viewers in England. He plays Joshua Plate, an assistant at the zoo. Eventually Alba has her other leg amputated, and also has twin babies by the Deuce brothers. Yes, she claims they are by both of them. It then leads to a tragic conclusion. It is a fascinating film to watch. Beautiful to look at, as always with Greenaway's films. It offers the viewer many layers and textures to explore. Each scene is delicately structured. Something different. Watch it again and again.

Two zoologist twin brothers lose each of their wives in a freak car crash involving an escaped swan from the zoo. They become obsessed with understanding death, and the creation of life. They study decaying objects, creation films, and trifling details of the accident & the days events that led to the crash. They seek answers with the zoo's prostitute and the one-legged woman (who is the sole survivor of the car crash). Beautiful scenes, and memorizing music. The first time I saw this film I was screening it for the staff at my theatre. Everyone but me left to see something else. I could not take my eyes off of the screen. It was amazing. This film may sound a little morbid, but it is about two people dealing with death in his own way. Maybe I liked it so much because I too recently lost some loved ones just prior to seeing this film. I have seen it numerous times since, and I even bought the tape. Do NOT miss this film!

ZOO is a film based upon the symmetry involved in nature. Two brothers (born as Siamese twins now separated) both lose their wives in a car crash caused by a pregnant swan flying into their car. It turns out that both women were expecting. The two brothers both mourn the passing of their wives and unborn children and become increasing obsessed with life and death, particularly the transition between the two states. The Brothers happen to both work in a zoo as vets and use the zoos equipment in ever more bizarre experiments to observe the process of decay via time lapse photography (the results of which are shown frequently throughout the movie). The film progresses via a series of well thought out scenes, the visual content of which are more important than either the action or the plot. Greenway continues to explore the necessity of symmetry in nature and also its artistic merit. This however, is a subterfuge for the real meaning of the film, which is the realization of man that he lives alone in a Godless and empty universe where life and both its beginning and ending seem purposeless. A visual feast but a little pretentious.a bit like this message really.

take puns & sex, a hopeful obsession with twos, and then... a few great formal compositions, but by no means as interesting as belly of an architect, that is to follow, and ultimately nothing.

Peter Greenaway is arty. Painfully so. However he readily admits that this film is "self-conscious", "manufactured" and he says that all cinema is probably as "artificial" a form as you can get. This film is beautiful to look at. Greenaway was inspired, visually, by paintings of the mid 17th century, particularly those of Vermeer. Almost every shot is composed like a painting. Many of the shots are symmetrical, walls are filmed flat so that the horizontal lines are parallel with the top and bottom of the frame. Objects are placed on tables as if subjects for a still life. Lighting is used in an alternation of light, shade,light,shade receding to the back of the picture, which is a signature of the type of 17th century, Western art that Greenaway is paying homage to. The substance of the film follows weighty themes, all of which are explained in great detail through the director's commentary: evolution, light and twin-ship. What is lacking is emotion. This is a cerebral film. Your emotional reaction to it will be through the imagery, be it beautiful or repulsive. You will not engage with the characters on an emotional level. You'll find them hard to relate to. The performances are stilted and amateur theatrical. It is fortunate, then, that Michael Nyman provides a fantastic score (present on almost every scene and almost outstaying its welcome) which prevents the dialogue (the script leaves a lot to be desired too) rendering everything flat. Rent this if you enjoy visuals for their own sake, if you wear spectacles and if you like holding your chin in your hand and frowning. I qualify on all those points, so I enjoyed it a great deal. Extra points for an extraordinarily thorough director's commentary on the DVD which serves to pull out all the hidden depths. Though one could make the point that an explanation that adds so much extra understanding leaves you feeling that the film failed adequately to convey much of what was intended. DVD easter eggs (worth seeing): http://www.dvd.net.au/hidden.cgi?movie_id=10484