jay cocks of "time" called the film "visually bounteous", with "bright intervals of self-deprecatory humor that lighten the occasional pomposity of the material." nora sayre, in a 7 february 1974 review for "the new york times", called "zardoz" a melodrama that is a "good deal less effective than its special visual effects"... a film "more confusing than exciting even with a frenetic, shoot-em-up climax." charles champlin of the "los angeles times" was generally positive and wrote that its $1.5 million budget was "an unbelievably low price for the dazzle on the screen and a tribute to creative ingenuity and personal dedication. it is a film which buffs and would-be film-makers are likely to be examining with interest for years to come." 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."