n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Mark is bored with the continuing student strike on campus. His friends get arrested and he goes to bail them out of jail. Instead, he is arrested. He is released and buys guns with his friend. During a campus protest, a policeman is shot. Mark flees the scene and steals a small plane. He's flying over the desert and Daria driving her car. He lands and joins her.It's a little too free form and amateurish especially considering Michelangelo Antonioni as its director. It could trim some of the first half. Sometimes, it looks like a student film. It's almost halfway before Mark and Daria get together. The leads do more or less student level acting. They are hippie-rama and the embodiment of that newfound free-spirit. It's fine to have a road trip through the desert and suddenly, there is a hippie sex orgy in the dusty landscape. As a narrative film, it is a meandering slow jog. It's not surreal enough to be a hippie psychedelic fantasy. I wouldn't say it's beautifully filmed but the desert setting is compelling. At least, that's better than the real estate office. The explosions montage as a finale only serves to punctuate how lackluster most of the movie is. The box office was an unmitigated financial disaster. It's a little better than that.

Michael Medved had Zabriskie Point down on his list of 100 worst films. But just looking on the critical reaction here there's a lot who feel he was harsh. I'm not one of them however though I've seen much worse.The main problem here is that Michelangelo Antonini chose a pair of non actors for his two young leads, symbols as they were of a new generation that was to reform all before it. The problem is that for long periods of this film Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin are on screen together. Put it simply, they couldn't act. I've seen better from high school plays.Zabriskie Point is a waste of time for people like Rod Taylor, G.D. Spradlin, and Paul Fix they've all been far better. Zabriskie Point should be seen as a reminder that even big budget films can have a dearth of acting.

They must worked hard to promote this production, it's still available. Apparently, minds behind this project tried to tell us something but the fruit falls far from the tree.If they wanted to create an anti-system (i think "capitalism" in this case) message and influence people, they sure managed to do exact opposite.But what can you do? There are billions of human around the world and being a pretentious, self-righteous hippi director is always free of charge. Speaking of this movie, it seems that they even awarded him with enough money and production opportunity.Don't even have a thought about watching this hippi crap with lame messages.Shame to everybody , who especially have role to produce that earth-orgy scene.

Before having seen this I had seen six other Antonioni movies ("The Passenger" being my favorite). Each of the six had some merit, so I was unprepared for this unfortunate effort.The movie starts off well enough with a fictionalized account of a student protest. I was a young man at the time of the student protests against "the establishment" in the late 1960s, and I think the specific account presented here is not far from some actual events at the time. From a distance of forty years hence, it might seem that the group discussion that opens the film among young activists arguing about tactics, and what makes one a true revolutionary, is far-fetched, but such meetings were not uncommon. I remember people I knew at the time would talk about "when the revolution comes," rather than "if the revolution comes," without any consideration of the fact that there wasn't going to be a revolution, at least not one in the style that they perceived.Once the main character, Mark, gets fed up with what he is seeing and hearing and takes off on a personal odyssey the movie leaves the realm of reality. There are too many plot holes to enumerate. Could Mark sneak onto an airport in broad daylight, appropriate a single engine plane (with the keys in it no less) and take off on his journey? And he tuns out to be a stunt pilot too? I think it can be stipulated that the movie is not concerned about appealing to the logically inclined, which does not necessarily make it a bad movie, but there is little to appeal to any frame of mind I think. The two lead actors are embarrassingly bad, even for non-professionals, and Rod Taylor gives his usual wooden performance. Maybe director Antonioni chose the unknown Mark Frechette to play the role of Mark since he has some physical and personality traits similar to Peter Fonda and Antonioni envisioned himself making his own "Easy Rider." I suppose the audience is being encouraged to identify with the free spirited and spontaneous Mark as opposed to the crass, materialistic, oppressive society that is presented, but the two extremes are drawn in such a heavy-handed manner that I felt bludgeoned by the message. Then there is the dialog that is so flat that I can't remember a single line. Apparently Sam Shepard shares some of the blame for that. There are some nude sex scenes which I guess are tossed in as a sop to the free love movement that was advanced by the counterculture of the 1960s. The scenes of young people rolling around in the desert having sex just felt odd to me. I think maybe Antonioni realized he was making a dog of a movie and some soft core porn might help at the box office. Or maybe in late middle-age this is how Antonioni contrived to be around some naked youngsters.The only positive in this for me was the beautiful cinematography of the Death Valley California landscapes. At least Antonioni's talent for the use of color is in evidence in the landscape scenes, as well as in the final explosion shots. I would have better appreciated Antonioni's making a travelogue than this thing.A good part of this movie takes place in Death Valley which contains the lowest point in the United States. This is fitting since I think this movie must also mark the lowest point in Antonioni's career.For a good understanding of the major themes of the 1960s in the United States, see the documentary "Berkeley in the Sixties."