Zulu (1964)

simply my favourite film. A true story well told.

I wanted to clarify some points from recent reviwers which I hope help exlain some questions. Mainly from Geofbob.

The two Lts. Chard and Bromhead - were new to battle. The reason Chard performed so well may be largely due to the fact that he was an engineer who knew about building defences. The mealie bag wall they build in the film was vital in order to slow up the thousands of zulus.

The victory was not a sure thing because they had guns. The zulus had hundreds of guns capture that morning from the other 1700 British troops that had been killed by the zulus armed with spears.

As to where the Hawkins character went to ? In reality he legged it away from his mission before the battle - later submitting a bill for damages to the British government.

No explanation into the reasons for the battle. No bad thing as the true story of men against men is a worthy tail on its own and any explanation would be open to interpretation - read the history yourself!

One last point everyone enjoys the Men of Harlech scene. Whilst this is poetic license - a very similar incident happened in the Afghan war at the same time. A Btirish regiment cut off and fighting to the end, sang God Save The Queen just before the final Afghan attack - they survived - remember these were very different men from today, no political correctness here and possibly a lot more courage. 10/10

Oh, and by the way Colour Sgt Bourne - very much existed in real life. He was awared the DCM and lived until 1945, the last survivor of Rorkes Drift.

Fmovies: This is an incredible film. While there a few inaccuracies and some dramatic licenses, on the whole the movie follows accounts of the battle accurately. It doesn't vilify the Zulu, in fact it treats them with great respect for their bravery and devotion to their homeland. The bare facts are well known, that Rorke's Drift was the jumping off point for the British invasion of Zululand, and was a hospital and supply depot. It was defended by roughly one hundred men against some 4,000 Zulu. Stanley Baker is outstanding as Lt Chard, the senior officer at the fort, who takes command despite being an engineer officer. Michael Caine is, of course fantastic in his first big role as Lt. Bromhead. Nigel Green is superb as Colour Sergeant Bourne, who received a promotion instead of a Victoria Cross and outlived all the other defenders. The cast of mostly Welsh actors really convey the desperation and bravery of the garrison. The biggest fault with the film is the total misrepresentation of Pvt Henery Hook as a malingerer, in fact he was a good soldier and bravely risked his life to empty the hospital. The scenes of the post before the attack show soldiers at their worst in some ways, especially the treatment of Margaretta Witt. The atmosphere and attitude change when the imminent threat of Zulu attack becomes a fact. Unlike the overconfident officers at Isandlhwana, the inexperienced lieutenants build their defenses and set up ammunition supply to counter the assault. They respect their opponents and understand that they may be the last line of defense against a counter-invasion into Natal. The fighting is spectacularly filmed, highlighting the bravery and resolve of the Zulu and the determination of the redcoats to survive and hold the fort. I was embarrassed to read the comments of certain Americans who have had their brains filled with revisionist political correctness and rooted for the British soldiers to "choke on their own vomit" and die because they were imperialist tools. Just to see this as a record of great bravery (on both sides) and an exciting entertainment apparently isn't enough, they have to spout P C drivel.

Zulu is the true story of the battle of Rourke's Drift between the British and Zulu nations in 1879. Both nations were aggressive, expansionist peoples. The British had pursued trade throughout the 18th and 19th centuries and suddenly found themselves in possession of an empire encompassing one quarter of the world. The Zulus, under the warrior-king Shaka Zulu, had become a society totally devoted to warfare and, with the possible exception of the Spartans over two thousand years before them, the most fearless soldiers the world had ever seen. It is important not to succumb to political correctness here, the Zulus had ruthlessly oppressed other nations in black Africa and caused mass migrations of people, the effects of which are felt to this day. The British meanwhile, had provoked a confrontation with them and suffered a defeat at Isandlwana where modern weapons has proved insufficient against overwhelming numbers of incredibly brave and disciplined warriors. The day after the battle the small British garrison at Rourke's Drift seemed doomed. Just over 100 men plus sick men in the hospital faced thousands of Zulus eager for their share of the glory which their brothers had won at Isandlwana.

The nature of the British Army at this time was not promising. Before Waterloo in 1815 the Duke of Wellington had described them as "the scum of the earth" - rogues, ne'er-do-wells, criminals, drunkards, ladanum fiends, debtors fresh from prison, even lunatics. In 1879 they were not much different. They were incredibly badly paid, their conditions of service were atrocious, they were despised by the civilians, led by officers who often owed their position to aristocratic privilege and money. Sometimes they were booed in the street and refused access to pubs and music halls such was their lowly status. And yet, and yet... they had faced and defeated some of the most fearsome warriors on Earth. The Pathans, Burmese, Afghans, Sudanese "Fuzzy-Wuzzies" as well as Napoleon's invincible Imperial Guard. If they survived the bloody colonial wars they could expect an early death in the work-house, unappreciated by the people whose incomes they had guarded. If you are interested in the Victorian soldiers see Kipling's poems (especially "Tommy Atkins") or read George Orwell's long essay on Kipling or "The Lion And The Unicorn".

This film salutes human beings in extremis. Though told from the British viewpoint it pays handsome tribute to the magnificent courage and honour of the Zulu warriors as well as the British soldiers wondering "what are we doing here?". The best perfomances in the film, in my opinion, are from James Booth as Private Hook, the cynical drunkard turned reluctant hero and Nigel Green as the awesome Colour-Sergeant Bourne. It portrays courage and stoicism which modern people seem to lack; heroism when all seems lost, faith in the regiment and your mates and old-fashioned manliness.

Zulu fmovies. Zulu is the filmed account of the Battle of Rorke's Drift during the war against the Zulu nation in the part of South Africa known as Natal. It's not an explanation of policy as to why the British were in Africa, just an account of 139 brave soldiers successfully holding off 4000 to 5000 Zulu warriors, the fiercest fighters in that part of Africa.

To put in American terms for the rest of us Yanks, the British army was facing the same kind of odds the Texans did at the Alamo. They also were not certain any kind of relief was coming because the day before, on January 21, 1879 the army had sustained a cataclysmic defeat against those same Zulus at Isandlwana. Out of 850 soldiers about 50 of them survived, in no shape to give aid to anybody. It was the British equivalent of The Little Big Horn which had taken place on the American frontier three years earlier.

But on January 22,23 of 1879 the best of that generation in the United Kingdom performed to the max for Queen and country. Stanley Baker and Michael Caine play the two lieutenants, the engineer and the shave-tail from Sandhurst who commanded the troops at Rorke's Drift.

Just a brief bit of research on the internet indicated to me that I saw a fairly accurate account of just what went on for those two days. Zulu combines what is sometimes impossible, good history with good entertainment.

If it's broadcast it's not to be missed.

ZULU steers away from making one side good and one side bad. Okay, we identify with the British troops in the face of insurmountable odds and all that - but you have to admire the ZULU warriors all the more for going up against them unfalteringly and the 'pan' across their fallen bodies isn't so much a moment of joy for the Brits saying "Ha, look how many we've killed of you lot" as opposed to clearly showing what an awful waste of life it all actually was.

The film clearly marks out why the British Army was as good as it was. Organisation. Okay, we got butchered a couple of times, but when placed in a position with time to ready ourselves the British forces where pretty unbeatable. One of the huge advantages being the fact that often we were going up against quite primitive 'warriors' with even more primitive weapons. The whole staying smart, obeying orders and keeping in line, firing in order helped to saved all those mens lives and is a neatly condensed show of arms to everybody out there. Each setpiece of British organisation re-inforces just how good they were, just how well they were drilled and just how murderous they could be with their efforts.

The film clearly marks out why the ZULU forces wasn't quite so good. It wasn't a lack of courage or absence of valour, it was simply down to the fact that they were outclassed weapon and organisation wise. Okay, they made pretty well organised charges and all that, but against rifles that's just cannon fodder. But as is pointed out by the Dutch guy, they're merely counting your guns. The ZULU's in the film aren't daft guys in furry underpants, they're the bravest warriors ever seen (or ever likely to be seen). Well organised forces wilted in the face of British troops during that period, they didn't. The fact they salute the British and walk away merely adds to their nobility and patheticises the British efforts - eventually they would have crumbled, the British would have lost against such odds if the Zulus had pressed all at once. They didn't. They walked away saluting the British effort. That moment alone, with Caine blazing about how they're being taunted and the Dutch guy chuckling to himself struggling to believe what is actually taking place is the icing on the cake of the gradually increasing tension.

For a moment of absolute spine tingling tension you can't beat the ZULU singing being countered by the Welsh Choir of voices. It's an equaliser as such, a moment of contrast and compare between the rigid red suited Brits and the tribal shield clapping chanting.

John Barry's music is a constant presence and always perfectly suited to the moment, I'd be interested to know the content of the ZULU chants though, whether they are authentic (which I figure they are) or simply picked out by the director for looking the most intimidating.

Top film, no insult to anybody.

It`s shameful no-one makes films like ZULU anymore. In these PC dominated times there are those who may view this film as being racist dealing with a heroic battle between white foreign troops against native black Africans during Victorian times. Nothing could be further from the truth. The zulus are rightly presented as being fearless and disciplined warriors ready to willingly die than show cowardice.

The only other criticism a modern day audience can level at the film is the fact that the battle scenes are slightly ungory compared to the likes of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and PLATOON. But so what ? How many other films compete with the excitement and tension of scenes like the soldiers fighting off the hordes of zulus in the hospital building ? Would graphic disembowelment and decapitation improve these scenes ? of course not.

I could go on all day as to what`s brilliant about ZULU , but I wont. But I will say that for me the greatest aspect of the film is John Barry`s score. The fact that he never won an oscar for it just goes to show there`s no justice in the world.

Without doubt the greatest British film of the 1960`s , probably the greatest British picture ever , and possibly the greatest film ever. Let`s hope Hollywood never decides to remake it