Zulu

It is only natural I suppose for an avowed socialist such as Stanley Baker to have formed a professional bond with two of Hollywood's blacklisted liberals. Some of Baker's best work is for Joseph Losey while 'Zulu' is the finest and most commercially successful of his collaborations with Cy Endfield.

Adapted by John Prebble from his own article, it is shot on location amidst the grandeur of the Drakensberg Mountains in glorious Technirama 70mm by Stephen Dade, has one of John Barry's strongest scores, excellent editing by John Jympson, especially in the battle sequences and boasts a strong cast.

Stanley Baker gives his customarily earthy, no-nonsense performance as Chard whilst Michael Caine in his breakthrough role as Bromhead has ironically been obliged to disguise his cockney roots and has never been quite as effete. Caine was originally considered for the part of Private Hook which went to James Booth whose performance ranks as his finest filmic hour. The requirements of film have dictated that Hook be portrayed as a thief and drunkard whereas in reality he was by all accounts a model soldier. Marvellous support from the imposing Nigel Green as Colour-Sergeant Bourne although the original Bourne was a mere 5' 3''. Patrick Magee impresses as Surgeon Reynolds whilst the superlative Jack Hawkins steals his scenes as the missionary Witt(wisely eschewing a Swedish accent)

Since the film was released there has been a seismic historical shift and nations have been forced to come to terms with their colonial past. One observer has noted that this is essentially 'a cavalry Western in which white men kill indigenous people in order to steal their land and are deemed heroic for doing so.' Empire-making has become synonymous with ethnic-cleansing.

Despite is dramatic licence, glaring inaccuracies and ideological flaws this film is a well-constructed, stirring, Kiplingesque tale of derring-do and individual bravery that has deservedly remained a perennial favourite.

.

I have read others comments with interest, particularly those complaining about small bullet holes. Well it was 1964, and to be truthfull, do you need gore to explain a true event?

Anyway - a couple of facts about the story which were not depicted correctly. Cetewayo did not order the attack. In fact he ordered his men NOT to attack, but a head strong son ignored him.

The tribute song at the end of the film, did not take place, the Zulu just disappeared into the night.

Now, having said that, and having read the books and seen the film (x number of times since I was 15 (in 1968). I had the opportunity in 1998 to travel to Rorkes Drift and stand where the soldiers stood to face the Zulu.

The foundations of the hospital building has a museum built over it full of interesting stuff, the small grave yard to the fallen soldiers, and the grave stone remembering all the dead zulu are thought provoking.

But what strikes you most is how small the area was in which the soldiers held their ground, with Zulu firing on them from the hills behind and charging them from 3 sides. As you stand inside foundation stones marking the site of the walls etc, the hairs stand up on the back of your neck, and you wonder just how you would have reacted facing up to such a huge army, charging down on you.

If you are a Zulu film fanatic, and should you get the chance - go there. And take time to visit the site of the film Zulu Dawn, where the Zulu attacked the garrison camped at the foot of a hill BEFORE moving on to the small unit at the Drift. White stones mark where men fell, kept bright by dedicated Zulu staff.

22nd January 1879, Rorke's Drift. Natal Province. On that day an epic battle was fought between 4000 Zulu warriors and approx. 100 British soldiers.

Now I have noticed many of our American cousins have made remarks in their reviews of Zulu, to the effect that the soldiers were nasty-pasty British Empire builders and that they all deserved to choke on their own vomit, however the film does not try to justify the Zulu War or it's origins so I will not either, suffice it to say that you shouldn't be expressing assumptions and opinions on nineteenth century political attitudes with such an obvious twenty-first century viewpoint. They are two very different worlds which cannot be compared.

This film is beautifully shot and scripted, and the the John Barry musical score keeps the battle scenes moving well. It seems to makes the sometimes long periods of heavy fighting pass by quicker. Barry took authentic Zulu songs and chants and added the dramatic score around them to make an original and haunting theme which still ranks as one of his greatest film score offerings.

Stanley Baker is fantastic as Lt. Chard, the Royal Engineer who is able to use his skill in successfully fortifying the little hospital outpost against the onslaught of the foe.

Micheal Caine plays Lt. Bromhead the professional line soldier and upper class officer who after a little whining and grumbling accepts his position of second in command and fights valiantly in the battle. It was this film that propelled Caine to international stardom, so powerful was his performance.

Other noted cast members include James Booth as an excellent but inaccurate Hook, and Nigel Green as Colour-Sergeant Frank Bourne the typical Victorian Sergeant-major complete with side whiskers and moustache.

The Great Jack Hawkins who did not like the character he played or his work on the film, portrayed Otto Witt, the pacifist missionary with a drink problem and again it is another performance worthy of an award. It was upsetting however to hear in his voice, his wonderfully clipped speaking voice, the early effects of the throat cancer which had by this time plagued him for three years and which was eventually to lead to his death.

Also special mention to Richard Burton, who narrated the whole show. He truly had one of the best dramatic voices in the world and speaks his lines beautifully.

It was also good to see the Zulu's portrayed with dignity and honour rather than just mere savages with bones through their noses. They were a brave and strong opponent that day and they are deserving of tribute as much as the British.

The basis of this film is taken from historical fact, although certain characters and events have either been altered, erased or just plain fabricated for dramatic purposes. I hope that should any producers in the future be foolish enough to attempt a remake of this classic epic, they will put historical accuracy first and Hollywood sensationalism second if at all.

Enough has been said by others regarding the blatant slander of Private Henry Hook, so I will not elaborate on it, save that it was a gross slur on the bravest of men. I hope should the film ever be remade his honour will be restored and his gallant deeds on that day be portrayed accurately.

To quash further popular myths none of the film is shot on the exact spot at which the battle took place, (the real Rorke's Drift was in fact about 60 miles from the location shoot.)

The regiment in question did not become the South Wales Borderers until two years after the battle and was at the time a Warwickshire Regiment. They were however based in Brecon which is where the Welsh connection was born and would explain why there was a higher amount of Welsh nationals attached to it.

Despite this the regiment consisted mainly of Englishmen and only about 12 percent were in fact from Wales. With these demographics being how they are I can assure you, "Men of Harlech" would not have been sung at Rorke's Drift, (at least not without the culprit being bayoneted by an Englishman with ear-ache.)

Lt. Chard himself was an Englishman having been born in Plymouth into an established and respected Somerset family. This being the case, I find it funny that although Stanley Baker never refers to Chard as a Welshman, he none the less seems to revel in promoting Welsh pride at ever opportunity. Of the eleven V.C's won in the battle, only three of them were awarded to Welshman so why the big Welsh message Boyo?

Also the final salute made by the Zulu's did not occur. When they re-appeared on the hill they returned with the sole intention of finishing off the gallant soldiers at the outpost, but decided against it when they noticed a sizable relief column approaching Rorke's Drift from the south.

Finally, a few people have made references to Colour-Sergeant Frank Bourne, wondering whether or not he really existed and if so why he was never awarded the V.C. for his conduct on the day. Yes, he really existed and yes, he did fight at Rorke's Drift. He was in fact recommended for a Victoria Cross, but told the powers that be that he would rather have a promotion instead. This he was given along with a D.C.M and an O.B.E. He was the last surviving veteran of Rorke's Drift when he died on V.E. Day 8th May 1945 aged 91 and with a rank of Lt. Col.

For more historic information about The Battle of Rorke's Drift and it's combatants, I recommend you visit www.rorkesdriftvc.com.

I watched three videos the other night: Belly of the Beast, Kill Bill#1, and ZULU. Belly was better than most of Seagals efforts lately, Bill had a bigger budget but was pretty ordinary, and last,at about 2am, I watched ZULU. Sure I was tired, but I soon got my second wind. The others, while more graphically violent, numbed my senses, wereas ZULU stimulated them!!! Who cares that the deaths were stylized (little gore) and there were no four-letter words...... While I can remember very little now about the first two, images dialog, music and camera from ZULU are still with me, days later. A sterling effort, you actually CARE about these people. This movie could not be produced today to this quality - even by the best in the world. A classic: five out of five. (loved the "colour seargant" character!!

When "Zulu" opened in Sydney in 1964 it had one of those big premieres that military epics received back then: searchlights, red carpet, a band and guests wearing medals.

Shortly after, I took my brother to see it. "Zulu" ticked all the boxes for us.

From Richard Burton's opening narration to his listing of the names of the Victoria Cross winners at the end, we were rapt.

As well as the battle, those bare-breasted Zulu girls did not go unappreciated by a couple of young lads. You didn't see a lot of that sort of thing on the screen in those days. The filmmakers obviously got away with it under the old National Geographic Magazine rule of it's OK if it's the natural attire of the culture, it didn't stop them being hot though.

The film still stands up even if the censorship of the day kept it relatively bloodless. Demonstrations show what a round from a Martini Henry rifle can do to a watermelon, no doubt it would have had the same spectacular effect on a human head. An assegai in the belly would not be as clinical as depicted in the movie either.

But the best bits of the film were often the tense scenes waiting for things to happen and the one where the men drown out the Zulu chant with "Men of Harlech". I haven't a drop of Welsh blood, but that scene always puts a lump in my throat.

The film is classy. Breathtaking photography, terrific performances from top to bottom and an awesome score by John Barry; music to perform heroics by.

The film was a hit in Australia, but something unexpected happened not long after. In 1966, D Company, 6th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment found itself surrounded by up to 2000 Viet Cong in a rubber plantation at Long Tan in South Vietnam. There were 108 of them, about the same number as the 24th Regiment at Rorke's Drift. They held off attack after attack. Instead of mealie bags they brought down artillery fire, but the fighting was at close quarters as they held their perimeter.

By the time help arrived, 18 of them were dead (17 at Rorke's Drift) while the enemy lay dead in the hundreds. Controversially, there were no Victoria Crosses although more than one was earned. Years later, the company commander likened the battle to Rorke's Drift. But I wonder if while the battle was on, did it flash through the minds of the blokes who had seen the movie that what they saw depicted on the screen they were now experiencing for real?

Would anyone make a film like "Zulu" today? Possibly it would be just too un-PC. Most battles on the screen these days are fought vicariously through intergalactic stormtroopers or by the denizens of "Game of Thrones".

However, historical rights and wrongs aside, I still think "Zulu" rocks; it's simply an exceptional piece of filmmaking.