Dalbert Pringle (Movie quote) - "So, tell me - Is a zebra a white animal with black stripes, or is it a black animal with white stripes?" Even though I definitely found this 1985, British, "art" film to be something of a "hit'n'miss" production, it was its very striking camera-work by French cinematographer, Sacha Vierny, that certainly helped to elevate it to a position that set it well-beyond the realm of being considered just purely mundane entertainment.Surreal, eccentric and bizarre (and, yes, at times, quite puzzling) - "A Zed And 2 Noughts" definitely had me wondering, often enough, what kind of a curve director Peter Greenaway was going to hurl at me next with this weird and somewhat disturbing tale of obsession with decaying flesh and the amputation of body parts.Certainly not a film to please everyone (and certainly not a film with a gripping plot-line) - I, for one, thought "A Zed And 2 Noughts" was well-worth a view simply for the freakish biology lesson that it quite cleverly wedged into its wacky, little story (all at no extra cost).

Sergeant_Tibbs Having seen Peter Greenaway's The Cook the Thief His Wife & Her Lover, I knew I was in for an intense sensual experience with crude symbolism and even cruder people. A Zed & Two Noughts is a film about symmetry, about its dependence and complimentary tendencies, accidental/natural or intentional/forced. The twins become obsessed with the search of purpose in randomness and therefore especially the meaning for coincidence and symmetry. Although they come up empty handed, there are some profound ideas in there, with nine months for a baby to be born and then nine months for a body to decay. The arresting visuals reflect the use of symmetry with elaborate sets designed as reflections. It has a David Lean level of lushness as the cameras glide through the elegantly coloured sets, as well as featuring time lapses of decaying food and animals, closeups of painting and nature documentary footage, narrated by David Attenborough.Although it has shocking drama and daring tragedy (a woman voluntarily having a second leg amputated then regretting it, a dalmatian shown rotting) it does have a key sense of humour that keeps it from being dreary. It mostly comes from Greenaway's obsession with obscenities clashing within upper class etiquette, particularly with sex, which gives the film more shock value though is never vulgar for the sake of vulgarity. It has an incredibly haunting score by Michael Nyman, who also did the one for The Cook the Thief His Wife & Her Lover, and this one may be even more intense due to the films freakish nature. Of which the script is full of twists of turns of phrases and wordplay to apply to the bizarre scenarios in the film, which isn't always as intelligent as it appears to be. The film has a bad habit of relying on characterisations rather than characters, and it took far too long for its protagonists and primary supporting characters to be fully fleshed out and developed beyond caricatures. It's main downfall is it's far too urgent. Scenes are rushed and sequences hurried with barely any scenes properly savoured enough to soak in the flavour of the film. It gives the film a vignette feel which I didn't think the film needed and a resolution without real closure. Though I guess this exactly fits into its theme of chaos and the meaning of it all.8/10

Terrell-4 How does one define oddness? I'd suggest by starting with two words: Peter Greenaway. You can also use those two words to define "Unique cinema visions," "total control," "beautiful views" and "don't mess with me." Greenaway is his own world, and you're either eager for a visit or you'll insist on staying off the space ship. I'd suggest you prepare for your visit by packing away any compulsion you might have to explain things...such as his meaning, his importance...all those categories, lists and twos of things...and your own squeamishness. "I don't make pictures that have a sell-by date," Greenaway once said. That's especially true of A Zed and Two Noughts, where a good many of the things we'll see have long passed their sell-by date. We start the movie with a double death in a car crash by a zoo...death by swan on a lane called Swan's Way. The wives of our two zoologists may be gone, but their husbands, twins and formerly joined twins Oswald and Oliver Deuce, will lead us on an exploration of grief and decay, illustrated by their stop motion movies. We will meet a beautiful amputee, soon to have her remaining leg off by a mad surgeon, probably for issues of symmetry. In addition to wet decay, we'll enjoy vomiting, frontal nudity, Vermeer, Greenaway's magnificent color palette, black and white animals, a white mare named Hortense, several interesting fetishes, plus the movie's unique chapter headings: Mercury, Apple, Prawn, Fish, Crocodile, Swan, Dog, Zebra and Escargot. Black comedy, indeed. I'll admit I don't think I understood a thing about A Zed and Two Noughts. I started to read what some critics and fans have offered by way of analysis and found much of what they had to say, from my point of view, largely incomprehensible, too detailed or too dull. Greenaway is chilly, controlling and all about style layered heavily on top of substance. He can make Stanley Kubrick look loosey-goosey. I found a Zed and Two Noughts, in a perverse kind of way, enjoyable. I suspect that's because Greenaway comes up with such odd, intriguing and often disturbing visions. They can almost make you forget what the devil he's getting at. For me, Prospero's Books is a perfect blend of style and story; The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover is an almost perfect match of style and story; The Draughtsman's Contract is an amusing overlay of manners, murder, style and story. But A Zed and Two Noughts? Well, I found it chilly, sometimes uninvolving and often amusing. I enjoyed it, more or less, most of the time. (I occasionally used the fast-forward button). If ten people can tell me what the movie means, beyond the old standbys of death, grief and snails, I'll bet I'll read ten wildly different opinions. That's no particular criticism of either Greenaway or the film.

spockaholic To those of you who think this is an intelligent film, I say wake up and smell the rotting carrion. This flick is about as intelligent and subtle as a suicide bomb. There are a lot of ostensibly clever puns, but Greenaway feels the need to smash us over the head with them, like a bad comedian who keeps repeating the punchline with "did you get it? did you get it??" Take the title for example. A zed and two noughts. Mildly clever. But Greenaway feels the need to bash us in the face with it, with (literally) neon signs saying ZOO throughout the flick. Peter, I think anyone with a heartbeat gets it, OK? Similarly, he grosses us out to no end with disgusting rotting corpses. Again this is his way of saying "Gross, eh? Are you grossed out? Are you grossed out? How bout I throw in a penis? Now are you grossed out? A naked fat chick?" This is not cinema. This is not intelligent expression. It's abstract, visceral "potty art". People who think farts are funny will think Greenaway is intelligent. Avoid this film, and while you're at it, avoid all Greenaway films. They're all the same.