March 12th: Zulu

Why do we fall down, sir?

Zulu

Released: 1964

Directed by: Cy Endfield

Starring: Stanley Baker, Michael Caine, Jack Hawkins, Ulla Jacobsson, Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi

I really love historical epics. Especially war films. I love the action and the energy and the recognition of the damage of war on the spirit and souls of a people. While I enjoy them, films like Westerns and others basically from the point of view of colonists are impossible for me to root for the protagonists. The British colonized Africa. To expect the native population to simply be only subservient to them is frankly disgusting but was the expectation.

Films about colonialism usually present colonists heroically, while often insensitive to the native populations. It is how the films portray the natives that make a difference. Zulu does its best, especially for a 1964 film, to present the Zulu as a brave and respectable people, though not with the same technology as the British. Multiple times when called “savages” or “cowardly”, the response is one of disdain. There battle tactics are explained. The Zulu are presented as fearsome warriors dedicated to protecting their people, rather than an evil horde of savages.

Stanley Baker plays the lieutenant in command, Chard. He is an engineer and in command simply because of the date of his commission. He is focused on protecting the men in his charge. His subordinate, by only months, is Bromhead, played by Michael Caine in his first major role. Bromhead is an upper-class and arrogant man who doubts Chard’s abilities at first but eventually falls in and serves well. Both put in very good performances.

This film would have been better served providing more of the Zulu perspective. Explaining why they were defending so fiercely. Maybe have some named characters. It would have made an already very good film, great.

Small Observations:

• The build up to the battle sequence is incredible. The Zulus banging on their shields. Then chanting intimidatingly. The sound design is better than I have heard from any film of the time. I read that Peter Jackson tried to replicate this in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. I can see the similarities.
• The historical inaccuracies, which are an inevitable occurrence in a historical film, are fine to take in a few instances like the age of characters. But portraying the missionary as a pacifist who was on good terms with the Zulu when he really was not only kicked out of the kingdom but worked with the British Army. That’s a little contrived.
• Two performances that I want to recognize are Nigel Green as the Colour sergeant Bourne and James Booth as the historically inaccurately portrayed Private Henry Hook.
• When describing and portraying Zulu battle strategy, it is clear that research was done and respected.
• The singing scene between both by the Zulu and the Welsh is haunting and beautiful. The Zulu salute song is also beautifully sung but is a bit historically problematic. Almost making it seem the Zulu said, “Oh, it’s ok, we were even” when in reality the technological advantage of the British was overwhelming and honestly unfair.
• MCU actors: 0

Overall Rank: A

A very well done epic. If not for primarily focusing on the colonists’ perspective and a few frustrating inaccuracies, this would go from very good to great. Recommended.