WATCH NOW
War movies are an intriguing type of movie for the film enthusiast. Not for the violence, or for the first-person presentations of events in the film, but because the work depicts particular sentiments toward war during the era and the society in which it is produced. Films made during the war period tend to be patriotic and supportive of the military; films made towards the end of an extended war and in dubious circumstances tend to be dark comedies or scathing satire of the army. In wartime, films can be both, and so do the films from peacetime, but can also mask the attitudes towards the history towards the war – get historical accuracy slashed to bits.
Zulu falls into the latter category. It depicts the battle of Rorke’s Drift that took place in January 1879, being fought in the context of the Anglo Zulu War. With around 150 British soldiers stationed at an outpost consisting of little more than a supply depot, a church, and what could only be generously called a hospital, it took four thousand Zulu Warriors to lay siege to the outpost, and British soldiers were able to fend them off. In the hands of moderately competent people, there’s great drama and action to be had.
But what do the politics say?
One would think, solely based on the time period it was produced, that the film would be a romanticized portrayal of Imperial Britain at its finest; a nostalgic look backing at the days when Britain was a Super Power. Not a chance. Cy Endfield, director of the film, was blacklisted in the “Red Scare” in the 1950s, which is why he fled to Great Britain. Stanley Baker, who produced and starred in the film (he played Lt. John Chard) was an avid socialist. Neither of them would care for the “empire”.
Does this probably imply there is an issue related to race? I don’t know much about British issues during the 1960s, but possibly they were grappling with the same civil rights issues as the US. In any case, while the film was set to be screened in the UK on the 85th anniversary of the skirmish, it would be made available to consumers in the US that summer. If it was supposed to be “debated”, it is something to keep track of, right?
The Zulus were treated in the most even-handed manner possible in most parts of the film. They had no choice; they needed actors to fill hundreds of extra roles in the movie and even managed to get Chief Buthelezi himself to agree to play King Cetewayo. Even the producers showed the cast the same politeness; the butt of the famous joke, the extras were paid in real dollars instead of the cattle used for props in the film. Much of the movie was filmed on site (not very far away from the battle site) in Apartheid South Africa which makes one wonder if the producers explained to the government that unless things were done their way (the acceptable way), they were going to leave the country for good.
I realize some people have expressed an opinion about the film’s “historical accuracy”, ranging from the people in the movie being grossly misrepresented to the type of rifles that were being used. But I have not seen any discussions at all on the accuracy concerning how the mass wedding was portrayed in the first scene. Unless it is absolutely perfect which, considering how the Zulu nation is involved in the movie so, I assume, it is no one really seems to be concerned with the appropriate portrayal of Zulu culture…
The outcome is unequivocal. There’s only one line of “insult” directed towards the Zulus and it is promptly silenced:
Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead (Michael Caine) Damn the levies man Cowardly blacks!
Adendorff (Gert Van Den Bergh) What the hell do you mean. ‘cowardly blacks’? They died on your side. Didn’t they? And who the hell do you think is coming to wipe out your little command? The Grenadier Guards?
In fact, the Zulus are displayed as very proficient and skilled fighters and are a real danger to the British. The attack is called by means of shouts and hand signals, which are visible and heard across the battlefield.
For this set piece, the script orders for the troops to move in unison. They sneak around the bush not making any noise and moving with a lot of precision. The British are a big threat with their advanced weaponry.
As previously irritating, the story takes place in a western setting. Based around a fort which is under attack from the local tribesmen. Numerous mediums have captured this event. The cinematography is what matters most. And for this particular battle, it was done well. The sky was a clear blue, British uniforms were bright red, and the Zulu’s cowhide shields were painted dark brown. These all complement the cliffs of the Drakensberg Mountains. Using these attributes will give us a perfect example of a mass infantry charge being stopped by a volley. What must have captured the audience’s attention the most was Michael Caine. What they did not know was that the real show stealer was Nigel green. He plays Colour Sergeant Bourne and is always seen stealing every scene he is in. He follows orders from Chard and Bromhead and has a strict fatherly aura around him.
To watch more movies like Zulu (1964) visit 123movies
