Zulu

Rating:
Summary: The Battle at Rorke's Drift, Natal, South Africa
Review: January 22-23 1879 will go down as one of the greatest and bravest days in British military history.

The battle at Rorke's Drift, or as the Zulus called it "Jim's Place" is magnificently portrayed in this 1964 epic filmed on location in Natal.

Michael Caine perfectly plays the part of Lieutenent Gonville Bromhead, a gentleman and professional soldier who along with Lieutenent John Chard of the Royal Engineers (played by Stanley Baker) masterminded the defence of the small missionary station at Rorke's Drift.

80 men of the South Wales Borderers 24th Regiment Of Foot defended the missionary station and it's 36 wounded men in the hospital against 4,000 zulu warriors.

The Natal scenery and costumes of both the British soldiers and Zulu warriors are a highlight.

The battle scenes were graphically ahead of it's time and the narration by Richard Burton (himself a welshman)certainly adds to the drama that would unfold.

One criticism is levelled at the characterization of Private Alfred Henry Hook, who in the movie is portrayed as a drunken malingerer. He was in fact a gentleman and small landowner who was a well regarded soldier. He was awarded the Victoria Cross for his bravery in evacuating the sick and wounded from the burning hospital.

Overall, as an avid historian on the Zulu War of 1879, I found this a compelling movie classic which has been watched over and over again by me and my 3 brothers( Tom, Chris and Sam)

James Hulston from Sydney, Australia

Rating:
Summary: ZULA stands the test of time for sheer guts
Review: This film is based on a true story about an undermanned British army outpost facing an advancing force of Zulu warriors forty times greater in number.

Stanley Baker as Lt. John Chard, an engineer sent to the post to construct a bridge, takes command. Much out of his element, he commands the infantrymen relying on his dormant leadership qualities and self-doubting fortitude. How he manages that task and if he succeeds or fails is the essence of the story.

The battle scenes of the outnumbered British against the Zulu warriors are spectacularly and excitingly filmed as they try to overrun the compound. From a filmmaking standpoint, it is interesting how the Zulu warriors are portrayed in a more noble fashion than their counterpart British soldiers who are portrayed somewhat in a cliched manner.

John Barry's excellent score brings the intensity of the battle sequences and heroics to an almost euphoric frenzy.

However callous this may sound, Cy Endfield's insightful direction demonstrates to the viewer the uncommon qualities of bravery that can only be brought to fruition through war.

This is an excellent film.

Rating:
Summary: Epic!
Review: One more proof that real (his)story can be better than fiction, providing it's well casted-acted-directed-filmed. When I see some comments,I'm not sure I got the same DVD as everybody -although I got it for the same price- but, besides a couple of minor skippings and the fact it's not widescreen, I found it a real bargain (Just compare with what you'll get from Madacy for double-price), and, after seeing this movie, I never thought for one second I have been cheated.

Rating:
Summary: What a shame
Review: Purchased this DVD and discovered it had horrible skipping problems. After taking it back, Suncoast exchanged it for another copy which had the same problem. This disk will not play on the Toshiba SD-3109 dual tray player.

The movie tells the story of a British engineering unit that gets surrounded by a Zulu army in Africa. Zulu is very accurate historically going so far as to show the need for the Zulu to close with short spears. With its fine acting it definitely is one of the better war movies available.

I would suggest the reader to tape this one from the History channel or buy it on VHS.

Rating:
Summary: Great movie, terrible DVD
Review: One of my favorite movies since I was eight. After having seen it a half dozen times recently on AMC, I thought I would buy the DVD. At six bucks, I thought how could I lose? But don't waste it. This DVD is an awful rendition. Not only is not letterboxed (which I knew when I bought it), but the video quality is sub-par. Worst of all is the sound quality, which is tinny. The magnificent soundtrack is destroyed by this version.

Do yourself a favor and tape the letterbox version off AMC. Also, perhaps someone can tell if the sound and video quality of the widescreen VHS version is any good?

Rating:
Summary: A film that deserves better ...
Review: I would have given this DVD five stars if they had only maintained the theatrical aspect ratio ... this is a truly awesome film with a compelling story, excellent acting and glorious cinematography - that gets totally lost in this full-screen version.

At $6, for what you get - the movie, a trailer, dolby stereo, and the cropped pan-and-scan picture - , the price is about right (and it is nice having at least this copy at home). But a well-transferred wide-screen version (with maybe a 5:1 surround? Commentary?) would be a bargan at four or five times the price.

We can only hope that someone like Criterion is working on putting out a definitve version of this outstanding film.

Rating:
Summary: unforgettable treatment of an heroic action
Review: There has been much said of the mindset of the British Empire at this date, but it was self assured and vigorous, with gingoism many years still to run. Here at last it found a foe valiant and numerous enough to give it pause. This film in my opinion captures the essence of the experience of the common soldier in an action to which his training and character are put to the ultimate test. If you cannot save enough pennies to visit Rourkes Drift, then go to a glen, wadi or canon near where you live - where you are surrounded by hills and stand looking up at them around you and then imagine hundreds of zulu warriors bearing down on you from all sides, and try to feel the courage and faith in comrades,training,discipline,equipment and superior officers which made the men stand and fight and survive. Then walk to the foot of one of those hills and imagine the courage and discipline which it took for the Impis to charge again and again into the disciplined withering fire of a regiment - whose brothers in arms in the not too distant future, albeit with better rifles, mauled and repulsed the flower of the Imperial German Infantry at Mons,with similar disciplined fire. This is the essence of the greatness of the film. You are there - feeling the action unfold around a band of courageous men facing almost impossible odds. These soldiers are no apologists of latter day political analysts wondering as to the reason of their being there, but soldiers of an expanding vigorous empire, sure in their faith of friend and training, in possession of a strong point with the equipment and mettle to defend it to the last. Their faith in the regiment, army and the mystical Queen Empress a background to the camaradie and sense of belonging which only a unit under fire can really understand. It is one of the ironies of combat that any prolonged engagement leads each side to come too value the courage and persistance of the enemy. We can see this developing as the film unfolds. I found this film a moving treatment of the action, its accuracy was impressive and it did capture the frenetic pace of combat interspersed with the boredom and the graveyard humor of the wait until the next attack. As far as I have been able to research the characters were portrayed with accuracy. It is interesting to note that the mindset of the British Army, which would send its men into action, for some years in the future, as brightly dressed scarlet targets and would award 11 V.C.'s for gallantry to officers and men, but to Colour Sargeant Bourne whose calmness under fire and courage in repelling Zulu attacks were accurately portrayed, it awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal, apparently the job description for Colour Sargeant includes heroism which therefore needed no special recognition. One of the ironies of military life which this film gives one a true glimpse of. I most highly recommend this film.

Rating:
Summary: History made and re-told with style..
Review: This is a brilliant, gripping and involving film that excites and enlightens at the same time. It is Michael Caine's first major role and his performance, combined with that of the fantastic Stanley Baker, make this film a true classic. The quality of the conversion is less than perfect, but it is an involving piece and the fact that it actually happened makes it all the more thrilling. The heroism and 'guts' of the 150 soldiers, faced with over 4,000 Zulus, more than comes across and thrills all the way! If you like historical war films, this is an example of true 19th century heroism that has never been bettered.

Rating:
Summary: A Thrilling Story...
Review: I saw this film on the big screen when it was first issued. In those days, film-making was turning toward "realism" -- a parched face, a hot desert, a bleeding shoulder --and I was stunned. Filmgoers had never seen anything like it. I saw it a few months ago, and I am still impressed. This is absolutely one of the best films I have ever seen -- even when compared to the special effects of today.

The action takes place much later than the 18th Century suggested by another reviewer. In fact, the action takes place at the turn of the 19th/20th Centuries, when the British Empire was at it's height -- before WWI. The story isn't just an "action thriller" as some suggest, but poses a question Brits were beginning to ask at the time, "Why are we here?" The film was made just after WWII, when the last remnants of the Empire were collapsing, and Brits were asking, "Why were we there."

The film celebrates the heroism of British soldiers -- all were decorated, some with the Victoria Cross. And it celebrates the valor of the Zulu warriors, a fierce proud people who wanted freedom. The Zulu Nation helped the British film company make the film by playing themselves. I believe the film was shot in South Africa, but it may have been shot in what was then British East Aftica.

This is not "The Alamo." The film takes a hard look at the futility and sadness of killing an enemy you should respect. The British "won" because the Zulu Nation decided to let them live -this in recognition of their bravery.

This film introduced the Great Michael Caine to America, and although younger viewers will not recognize the other cast members, they are all wonderful British actors.

Rating:
Summary: My favorite war movie.
Review: I am a war veteran, but not a combat veteran. People say "Platoon", "Apocalypse Now" and "Saving Private Ryan" are great war movies or have great war scenes in them. I enjoyed all of them, and my favorite "battle scene" was the prisoners "playing" Russian Roulette in the prison camp. That was not exactly a battle scene, perhaps, but it was about men who find guts under fire and men who collapse.

My favorite war movie became and still is "Zulu". Few soldiers, even long time cambat veterans, have ever been through anything like the battle at Rourke's drift. It is an interesting study in courage under pressure or perhaps it is Hemingway's grace under pressure.

It is not as though the men were fighting for anything other than the survival of themselves or of their mates, but what distinguished them is in the face of overwhelming odds, they kept fighting. Sometimes, when the threat is so overwhelming and survival seems impossible, many men must just give up.

I think it is interesting to contrast "Zulu" with "Custer's Last Stand", an event that shared the 1870's with the battle at Rourke's Drift. How could three hundred trained and well armed soldiers be wiped out without at least killing a comparable number of Indians? The Indians had more rifles than the Zulu, and many of them were skilled shots, but if the cavalry had hunkered down and made the Indians come to them, how could they not have left hundreds or even a thousand of their enemies dead? Somehow, the soldiers did not fight well.

Anyway, the story is great and well told. There are so many memorable scenes - the attack on the hospital, the battle of the choirs, the Sargeant Major calling the names of the living and the dead. Even though Michael Caine's teeth look a little otherworldly, the performances were great.

Finally, it also contains my favorite"continuity" blooper. Somewhere in the second half, Baker has his pistol in his hand and he is talking to people. He splits the pistol so the chambers are loadable. Then the scene becomes more of a closeup, and Baker raises the pistol again, and breaks it open again. Oops.