Zulu (1964)

Zulu (1964)

Comments 2 comments

“The sentries report Zulus to the southwest — thousands of them.”

Synopsis:
In 1879, Lieutenant John Chard (Stanley Baker) — with support from Lieutenant Bromhead (Michael Caine) — assumes command of a missionary station at Rorke’s Drift in Natal, South Africa, where they prepare for advancement of 4,000 Zulu warriors.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Africa
  • Historical Drama
  • Jack Hawkins Films
  • Michael Caine Films
  • Military

Review:
Stanley Baker produced — and formerly blacklisted director Cy Endfield helmed — this colorful historical epic, based on a real-life battle and featuring a cast of 700+ Zulu extras (most of whom were descendants of the warriors). Although the subject matter is inherently problematic — we are asked to watch and sympathize with White settlers defending land they recently stole — the film itself does a masterful job showing events in a reasonably respectful way; while the Zulu warriors are primarily an indistinguishable mass (we never get to know any of them as humanistic individuals), they are at least portrayed as worthy, skilled, reasonable, and insanely brave combatants.

With that enormous caveat aside, the movie is exciting and almost impossibly tension-filled, as we wonder how in the world a tiny group of men will manage to hold off forces 26 times their size, circling in from all directions.

The script — by Endfield and John Prebble, whose original story the screenplay is based on — does a nice job setting us up to understand the complexity of the colonists’ situation. As the film opens, we see missionary Otto Witt (Jack Hawkins) and his daughter (Ulla Jacobsson) observing a mass Zulu marriage ceremony.

From there, after hearing about the crushing defeat of British soldiers at Isandlwana, they are taken to the hospital at their mission station, where we’re quickly introduced to a group of men who are either hurt, malingering, doctoring (Patrick Magee), or keeping camp — and none of whom have any idea what they’re about to be in for.

Hawkins (secretly alcoholic) and Jacobsson are firmly against asking the hospital’s inhabitants to stay and fight — and eventually they’re taken away to safely; but violence for those staying is inevitable, and the majority of the film shows how the entire company (well and sick) manages to hold out (though of course not without plenty of death on both sides).

Note:Jacobsson is the only listed female in the cast of this film, which most definitely does not pass the Bechdel Test.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Michael Caine (in his breakthrough role) as Lt. Bromhead
  • Fine supporting performances


  • Truly impressive battle sequences
  • Stephen Dade’s cinematography

Must See?
Yes, once, but with caution (as noted above).

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

2 thoughts on “Zulu (1964)”

  1. A superb film and a genuine classic based on a true story although as is usual there are embellishments. The female character is, as far as I recall, fictional and added to get a female role into what out to be an all male story. The Zulus are treated with respect by the script so I didn’t really feel anything was particularly problematic; it’s a true story after all. They even go so far as to have the initially ignorant Caine put straight when he displays racist attitudes by the Swiss corporal in the Natal Native Contingent. A key British film of its era and Caine’s first starring role, the one that catapulted him to stardom. As such a must.

Leave a Reply