| |
|
Yar, you be here: Zulu > Customer Reviews Zulu Customer Reviews (34 - 36 of 42 Reviews)Classic British Empire War Film
I love this movie. A young, sexy beast Michael Caine in full droll mode, and beautiful brave Zulus. I think that's the remarkable thing about this film, both the British (technically it's a Welsh Division) and the Zulus come off as being outstandingly brave. And considering this film was made during the height of Apartheid in South Africa, I'm surprised the producers got away with such a favorable view of the Zulu people. The scenery is stunning, glorious locations. And the Zulu people themselves, their remarkable culture... if the scene where the Zulu warriors stop and sing in front of the Brits doesn't move you (talk about shock & awe!), something is wrong with you. The acting is better than average. Michael Caine, arguably the greatest living actor now, is superb in one of his earliest outings. And Oh My is he wonderful to look at. Stanley Baker is also excellent, as is most of the ensemble cast. Nigel Green as the salt of the earth Sgt. keeping the men on their toes is a stand out. Certainly there are moments of cheese, but they're few and far between. This is a very good war picture that sweeps you up and makes you care about the Brits (even though they had no business in Africa) and the fate of this tiny garrison. And it's based on real events, which makes the bravery displayed even more moving. Zulu - Historically Accurate!!!
I strongly suggest that anyone who doubts the accuracy of this film to purchase some books from this very site and READ the many historical accounts that are available about the battle at Rorkes Drift. "The Washing of the Spears" by Donald Morris is an excellent book that covers the history of the Zulu nation. The film has only two minor flaws that I have encountered. One is the character portrayed by Jack Hawkins. I have never read any account that describes an alcoholic preacher visiting before the battle. But the character does add tension to the film and shows the fear that many of the survivors of the battle of the previous day at Isandhlwana felt. The second flaw is the scene where the soldiers form three lines and volley fire into the charging Zulu warriors. Again, I have never read anything like this but what it serves to display is how a well trained and equipped modern (for its day) army could decimate any opponent; which is exactly what happened. The fewer than 150 British soldiers at the outpost withstood a siege from nearly 5000 Zulu wariiors over a 24-30 hour period with 10 hours of non-stop fighting. Why did they stay and fight? Because they had protection and close to 30 of the men were in the hospital with various ailments (some quite severe). If they had left they would have had to carry the sick with them to the next outpost which was over 30 miles away. This film does a fantastic job of portraying the very real events that occured at the battle of Rorkes Drift on January 23rd, 1879. Definitely one of only a few epic-war films that does not rewrite history to suit the big screen. Outstanding re-telling of the 1879 battle at Rorke's Drift
In January, 1879, a column of British soldiers comprised primarily of the 24th Regiment of Foot, South Wales Borderers, was wiped out at the base of the mountain, Isandhlwana, in Natal, South Africa. A large contingent of 4,000 Zulu warriors then moved on to the undermanned expedition base at Rorke's Drift. This movie tells the incredible true story of the subsequent battle, and of the victory of the 90 some British soldiers, many of them sick, who held their post in the face of overwhelming odds. See Donald Morris' definitive book, _The Washing of the Spears_, against which this film account compares most favorably. This neglected classic was filmed at a time when it was still just possible to associate the word "glory" with military victory-- without a sneer. The makers of the film avoid preaching and just let the battle tell the tale of the men of both sides. The British soldiers are not the "good guys" nor are the Zulus "bad guys," and the lone derogatory comment about the fighting ability of the Zulus is instantly rebuffed by a tough Boer cavalryman who says, "And just who do you think is coming to wipe out your little garrison, the Grenadier Guards?" This is a soldier's story about a soldier's fight. Did the Welsh really sing "Men of Harlach" as they manned their mealie-bag barricades? Did the Zulus really render a warrior's salute as they broke off the action on the second day of the battle? It doesn't matter. The film is accurate in the historical basics that really count. Beautifully filmed on location, with an outstanding, stirring score by John Barry, this film features solid but appropriately understated performances by Stanley Baker, Michael Caine, and Jack Hawkins. I hesitate to mention the hideous, politically correct pre-quel, _Zulu Dawn_ which was released almost 25 years after _Zulu_, but any viewer who has the unhappy experience of seeing _Zulu Dawn_ should not be put off from seeing _Zulu_, which shines in comparison. Whether one is interested in military history or a "movie for men who like movies," _Zulu_ is a worthy addition to a film library. From first to last, it is a compelling, superior film.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
© 2004 DVD Booty | Don't Plunder Our Cache of Booty, Matey! Hosting Provided by About Debt Settlement |
