I was an extra on this film playing a British soldier.Amazing experience for me.Met all the great actors and the Zulus were incredible.I will never forget these moments in my life.
I think the word your looking for is english upper class arseholes even in the first world war and the second world war putting clowns in charge with outdated tactics and no regard for people lifes will allways end in a loss but not them fuck em
Back in the days (1979) when you couldn't simply computer generate extra soldiers or extra backgrounds. You had to get lots and lots of extras with lots and lots of costumes. Add to that all the military encampments, tents, landscapes -- you have quite a production that looks wonderful even today. No CGI. None at all.
I saw this movie in 1980, in Johannesburg, as an impressionable youngster of 11 years. I felt pity for the British, sort of, but identified with that kid placing the markers as the Zulus stormed from behind him. My grandfather called Chelmsford an idiot when we stopped at Chelmsford dam on the way to Durban. My family had fought against the British in the 2nd Anglo-Boer War, and were left to die in Irene Concentration Camp, so I had more sympathy for the Zulus in 1980. That's NOT the attitude the Apartheid government wanted a white boy to have, but it was too late. My sympathy for black Africans would get me into trouble when I was conscripted into the SADF in 1989. The superb quality of actors from the UK, America, and South Africa is shown in this movie. Can you imagine having to control all those horses and wagons and people on that parade ground near the beginning?
I miss these kinds of war movies, when CGI wasn't a thing yet. Just raw practical talent and participation for all the casts and those brave Zulu Warriors. This is one of my favorites alongside Zulu.
CGI has been a fantastic advancement to movie making. If used correctly its potential is amazing. CGI Movies like Interstellar for instance are brilliant. Don't know why people think it has ruined movies.
The close ups are good but the wide shots are underwhelming. Nowhere near as many Zulus as there should be. It doesnt do the battle justice at all, as well as misrepresenting what actually happened.
Great movie from days gone by,,,,, even spotted phil Daniels in the opening scene ,,,,,,,its all super hero rubbish now and cartoons For mindless Adults?
One of the absolute greatest war films of all time. The background musical score, acting, scenery, and props were all superb. The ending credits with the war hymn was beautifully artistic. Saw this movie first while a young lad living in London in the early 80s, but didn't appreciate its overall mastery as a film until much later in life.
I saw it as a lad when it was first shown on ITV. I had seen Zulu a couple of times with my dad and we rushed home to watch the ITV premiere of this film. I was blown away by its savagery and epic scale. Ignited a lifelong love of military history
@@timkellyD2R it's not historically correct, life for the whites in the natal colony wasn't as Comfortable as it is potrayed, secondly the Zulu people did nor kill without trial & thirdly the Zulu people sure did not fight to the death for the King 's pleasure
Lord Chelmsford should have been held to account for his mismanagement of the expedition. Instead, because of his friendship with Queen Victoria, he faced no demotion.
He partially redeemed himself in the taking of Ulundi, while awaiting replacement, but never served in the field again. It had nothing whatsoever to do with Queen Victoria.
Most definitely so,watched Waterloo couple of days ago,such a classic+the fact all the extras were played by Russian troops in 1970(at the height of the Cold War)is most intriguing although the director was a Russian
He did not have an official commission. He was supposed to be there as an observer. A very stupid mistake got him and 3 others killed. They didn't perform a simple area recon of the area they wanted to rest and have afternoon tea...
I prefer Zulu and private Ryan but I think Zulu is far superior to this you know 200 odd soldiers with single shot rifles against 4 thousand zulus and they defended rourkes drift what a film.
@@jamesmitchell5126 So you prefer movies that portray a victory for the side you like more? The Rourke's Drift was remarkable in the ligh of battle of Isandlwana. And yes, it was a nice example of discipline and defense strategy. But Isandlwana is a beautiful example of arrogance and underestimating one's enemies, which leads to a disaster, which is a message that we always need to remember.
One of the soldiers made a wondéful. Movie when he was about 10yrs old it is about a poor boy and his hawk. It is both funny and sad and reminds me of the grittier side of england.
No war is not honorable there’s nothing glorious or brave about it it is pointless and stupid being proud of murdering hundreds of people is awful war is not honorable nothing is brave about it no one should be proud about a relative dying for nothing
This is a fantastic and thoughtful film. The cunning and bravery of the Zulus is displayed . But in this film it is much more nuanced than previous depictions. The courage of the British went hand in hand with their vanity. All the actors gave wonderful performances. I am very grateful to you for uploading this classic movie onto RU-vid.
You don't start sentences with "But". Liberals like you have to drone on about the "brave Zulu warriors" to make it ok for you to like it. The sly dig at the original film was pathetic. The original film is far superior to this film. Zulu is a far more masterful and beautiful film on so many levels than this film. This film is Yank anti British propaganda
Obi Wan seems to have gotten lost in the clone wars. On a serious note, I just finished a really good book on Isandlwana, this film is an overall good representation of the battle, like Durnfords horse advancing, taking cover then retreating, the missile battery being almost immediately overrun. I do feel it does a disservice to the soldiers of the 24th foot though, who were a well experienced regiment at this point, the Zulus advance was supressed and stalled at several points due to their efficiency with the Henry Martini, they didn't run blindly into a hail of bullets, and when the Zulu reached the camp. the 24th didn't break into a rout, they formed Company squares that the Zulus struggled to break and fought on until they used all of their ammunition and were overcome by sheer numbers.
Wow. What a movie. The home boys certainly had this one. The other really good movie is Shaka Zulu. You don't get to see it very often, especially in the long form, but it's another epic story about the Zulu nation. Thanks for sharing.
This has to be one of the best war films 🎥 ever ! You'll never beat the old ones nowadays it's nothing compared to back then . I always watched this movie back years always love it and it'll never get old or boring.
It depends what war your watching and yes zuzlu dawn is a different war compared to saving private ryan and its older than it to and these days there's more equipment
The British made almost every error in the book in this battle. No defences were built, troops hadn't dug in and prepared fall backs, no range markers set. Ammunition not readily available, in boxes with screwed down lids and insufficient men to open them, general splitting his forces against a vastly numerically superior foe without knowing the enemy disposition. Hopefully this is still studied in military academies under the heading "what not to do when commanding an army".
To think that this battle took place 143 years ago this day is somewhat scary. The time is 10:59AM, to think that the men would be doing their early morning drills and the first patrols would be out scouring the land unprepared for what they would find. To think that all those men would not live to see the dawn of a new day, it really does chill you to your bones.
In 1997 aged 18 I went to these places for a month. Wow! God's country. I felt so at home in the wilderness phase of the expedition and we where miles from any people. This Battle (or massacre) was before Rourke's Drift (Zulu movie) which also went to l. We then built sports facilities for the local school raising £30 000 which was difficult but well spent. What I eye opening experience it was. School cloaed at 2pm but the kids stayed until 6pm. Trying to explain the western punishment of detention to the lad who was helping me for a couple of the days was memorable. He said in English " so if you are bad you get to do more education? " Wow, we at school don't know how lucky we where/are. Maybe we should rethink this punishment as it is saying that education is a punishment! No wonder kids get disillusioned by the education system. These people were poor, but very friendly and always smiling. I would love to go back there to see it again. That area Kwa-Zulu Natal was/is so beautiful. Also the Drakensberg mountains sleeping in caves with wall art on them at 8000ft was staggering the sheer amount of stars you can see sleeping above the clouds with zero light pollution was magnificent. There's so many compared to England's Northern Hemisphere. I asked the universe a couple of times to give me a sign and sure enough it did ( is it sentinel?) I. Sleeping beauty cave on our last night I said to the lad closest to me "at least it's not freezing like last night eh Nelson?" He replied "aye" on his Scottish accent. 1 second after this the winds started and OMG they were so fierce that I put a big stone in-between my legs on top of my sleeping bag to stop me being blown away. Rocks were falling, our equipment was thrown out the cave and about 2 miles down the valley. Coincidence? If so what timing that was. They came down from the peaks of the South Africa and Leshuto border to us. I could write a book on this journey, as it was filled with things that I struggle to put into words to do it justice. I have never been so insightful, clear minded, instinctive, inituative, so at home ever again. Sleeping on the ground to many in the west is insane to them for some reason? My predictions about my life came true also (not in a good way) since 1997 I have been missing a part of me that remains there still today. Our life here now is so far from that place in so many ways. We try to swap nature for man made things (mostly we do not need to) so much still to learn on this subject. Everyone should experience the wilderness at least once in their lives as it awakens something inside us that's dormant in the concrete jungle. Living briefly with the Zulu tribe was amazing, they ambushed us with the assagis (spears) and shields when we were heading towards the village on horse back circling us (all in good spirits) was something else. They danced,cooked food for us and told us stories. Stayed in a Zulu Kral (domed house made of sticks woven) over night once also. I must stop here as this is already a book😂 I doubt anyone has even read this far down? All the white stones that remain on this film location we where shown and told about the last few men who made it up the big rock face we called the sphinx (not sure why) So much respect for the Zulu's who are a mind blowing people. Credo Mutwa has hours of footage on RU-vid he talks about the time before the Moon came here and who brought it. How the Zulu creation story is of beings from the sky is amazing ( all around the world this has happened not all the same things or beings) many different ones have similar stories on this from South America, Africa, Europe and Asia. They all cannot be what we are told are myths? Maybe we as different races,creeds, colour and more each of us are originally from various different star systems? At this point why do most people either switch off or shoot it down and laugh? (Laughing is also a fear response) I don't get that mentality. Anyways I must go ( maybe i should write a short story for what I experienced?) Anyone else had any similar experiences? ❤ North England ❤Zulu Dawn!!! Great to see thanks 🙏
@@eduardselksnis9135 Really? Such a long comment I got sucked in to it! It was)is still so hard to describe to anyone at all (I can never ever do it justice) I don't have the skills. The sheer emotional responses you have, the clarity of mind is unmatched, the consciousness of the environment as it's alive, listening to your instinct (we have lost this in the concrete jungle but still have it) and awareness and sheer amazing unspoiled natural world touches the soul. It changed me. I knew what was going to happen in my life when I got home and it did happen due to being what I feel was being back home. Thanks for replying.
@@eduardselksnis9135 Not everyone gets the opportunity to be surrounded by it nevermind being in the wilderness. As you will know about this, you seem very switched on to it all. I think it should be something everyone gets to experience at least once in their lifetime,it's so rewarding it's life changing. Growth, healing and introspection. The connection we as humans lost to nature is such a shame as it's so healthy. I was lucky but many aren't. Have a great weekend. Cumbria, North England. ❤️
@@checktheskies5040, yes, people value the wild nature (t.i., not touched by anthropogenic factor). Everybody likes clean forests, lakes and rivers. But, to survive and not only, people readily destroy it. Old forest with huge trees are very important for me and they are so few and even those few are logged very intensively and finally will disappear unless something happens with our civilization. Thanks a lot for the good wishes! :) Have a nice week! Riga, Latvia. ❤
Good film, Shaka was good to see before as it shows the build up of the Zulu kingdom. Although I was always interested in the shield types, always the large war shield is shown. Roughly 5 feet in length, is known as an isihlangu and was king Shaka's shield of choice. It was treated in an offensive way by hooking the opponent's shield during hand-to-hand fighting however by this time the umbumbuluzo was mostly used. Also a war shield, but only 3.5 feet in length, and more sturdy than the isihlangu. They were easily held in one hand and were used first in full numbers in 1856 during Cetshwayo's campaign against Mbulazi. You can tell a lot about the warrior and/or regiments from one. Black/mostly black was for younger men but white & grey/all white was for veteran warriors. They also wore the Umqhele that only married men could wear. They could be sprinkled with special mixtures for protection or to make the warrior ‘invisible’ on the battlefield. After battle each shield would be returned to the king as a sign of loyalty and showing you did not lose it. Shaka would severely punish any man who lost his spear and shield during battle. Interesting film to watch.
I like to think of the Shaka miniseries, the Zulu Dawn movie, and Zulu the movie as part of a three part trilogy Shaka Miniseries = Rise of the Zulu Zulu Dawn = Apex of the Zulu Zulu = Fall of the Zulu
I have ancestors from both sides actually and I really respect both, this movie as well a ZULU, is quite historically accurate but not exactly. But still these are amazing movies and you can see that the British and Zulus share one attribute, which is bravery.
In America of all the success white and black have, STILL since slavery even now blacks are last hired 1st fired,voting rights like slavery and Desmond Tutu passed away who for YEARS fought Apartheid.Excuse me are u black or white and yes race matters because im filling u responding with a weapon at ur head, or u under some witchcraft
Yeah there are inaccuracies in Zulu example is Sargent hook the guy in the hospital playing an unruly dodgy geezer when in fact he was a very good soldier and his behaviour was impeccable. I few inconsistencies yes but it’s the feel to Zulu you can’t beat it.
@@jamesmitchell5126Even though I really enjoyed Hooks character in the movie, I felt really bad for him, when I discovered who he actually was. It would have been maybe better if they kept the movie one under a different name and the real Harry Hook could have been implemented as a minor chatacter, similarly to some of the other soldiers in the film.
The Little Big Horn and Isandlwana had two things in common; the natives and the Indians were underestimated and the forces were split. Chelmsford suffered from the theory that he was fighting savages but the Zulus were very clever. Of course the army was still controlled by a bunch of Senior officers who had money and little else.
When in 1876 the news of custer arrived in Britain Chelmsford made a comment at his gentleman's club only a incompetent foolish commander could make such grave error
But Chelmsford was sure he knew where the Zulu impi was due to the recon patrol's information. They encountered around 2,000 Zulus and were certain it was the vanguard of the Zulu impi, and Chelmsford accepted it.
Some officers such as Curling, Cochrane, Gardner, Essex and Smith-Dorrien escaped because they were wearing blue coats. The warriors had been instructed by their king to ignore those who wore blue coats because they were priests (chaplains) or other non-combatants. This fact is mentioned by Smith-Dorrien in his book "Memories of Forty-Eight years' Service". The British Army lost fifty-two officers during the battle, four more than it did during the battle of Waterloo. Lt. Smith-Dorrien is not portrayed in the movie. He played a dramatic role during the battle by breaking open the ammunition boxes and distributing the cartridges, all the while ignoring the protests of the Quartermaster. Lt. Smith-Dorrien later rose to the rank of Lt.-General.
Wow, those sunrise/sunsets and the pristine landscape that the Zulu called HOME. Trying to protect a way of life and culture. Great movie in its portrayal.
It was a patriarchal dictatorship without due process. Im assuming that North Korea and Cuba are appealing to you as well? Begin your "whataboutism" now!
They portray the different strategic war strategies employed by each side. It is not about 'good' vs 'evil' but which side has a better winning strategy.
@@canman5060 well not really, Zulu dawn is about the horrid British defeat at Isandlwana, ZULU really portrays the mutual respect between both sides. Both very good films though.
@@xcrzyyx4831 I'm a patriotic Brit but the defeat at Isandlwana wasn't horrid we absolutely deserved it, we were staggeringly arrogant, completely underestimated our enemy and as it says in the movie Chelmsford committed the cardinal military blunder of dividing his force while not fully knowing the disposition of the enemy.
Unlike todays re written histories, this gives both sides credit for what and who they were at the time! This movie, as well as a few others, such as TORA TORA TORA!, THE LONGEST DAY, and A BRIDGE TOO FAR, gives the small details within the story to understand the epic drama that it truly was! Without losing the interest and action of the Historic Battles themselves! It is the details that make History interesting. Not just memorizing the names, dates, and places of the event! If you enjoyed this movie, watch a movie I believe is called RORKE'S DRIFT! Or at least that is what it was about. it is again another monumental movie about the same battle at the Field Hospital the Zulu Nation came to next! The heroism and respect shown on both sides is inspiring!
The movie you’re speaking of is Zulu with Michael Caine released on the 85th anniversary of the Battle of Rorke’s drift in 1964. That battle took place on the same day as the Battle of Isandhlwana 1/22/1879
Thank you so much. I knew the day as that is my birthday. But I did not remember the year. I showed my children those two movies' years ago back-to-back. I've also instilled within them a curiosity about the History of Africa, Central and South America, and Asia. Places that we are still discovering ancient cultures within. We all know of the Great Civilization of The Egyptians, but one of the kids, is fascinated by the culture developed in Ethiopia. Which may have been around even longer? It's mentioned so many times within the BIBLE's Old and New Testaments, and in Greek and Roman Histories, yet so little is taught. Just goes to show you that if you really want to learn, you have to go out and find it. Education fails miserably in History, so we are bound to repeat it! :( @@kingkillmonger74
This movie is pretty on the nose sometimes, like that awful "final solution" line and the scene where the English boy gets shot. But overall, it's pretty good.
They had sandles even before shaka. They never had to invent them coz they got those through trade. Zulus 1st encounter with whites is not with the british, it was the portuguese. The portuguese wanted ivory, zulus took whatever looked cool as payment
The Zulu's were always building their kraal's next to water so as to have water for both themselves and their live stock. So there would be no need for pibing. You must also remember that a kraal was made so that it could be easily and quickly dismantled and rebuilt again in a new place if events called for it, all of which meant that things such as chairs would only be bulky and impractical because the Zulu people would carry the whole kraal on their backs. It wasn't a primitive thought proces. It as a thought proces carried through centuries of living of the land and the migration of the animals they hunted and the food they collected and the tribes they fought wars against. They adapted and and overcame and actually did invent things, but only those that would keep things light and practical to their way of living. Also, people of the white mans world greatly underestimated Zulu's and other tribes on many points. Wealth as we understand the term was not seen as such by the tribes. They saw it as dead weight and stuff to hold them back if they needed to move quickly. Wealth to them was an abundance of food and water and the health in the kraal. And all of these 3 things would most effectively be secured by living the way they did. it also made for a life where your worries were far less and much easier solved. If conditions sored, you moved the kraal to a place where things would sustain the kraal. Problem solved. You can't do that with a farm or a residential block or whatever else we consider wealth today. Yet we still also consider those 3 things part of our wealth, because without them, we would die regardless of any other form of wealth. These tribes stuck to the simple life that would make sure they could move where there was food and water and plants for medicine to be had. If you really look at the wise choices this made for (among other things it made for preservation of natures resources that we grapple desperately with today), we weren't the smart ones. They were. But in our quest for world dominance and having our sort of wealth that really only make things worse in the final account, we couldn't have them be the smart ones, so we fought them and comitted genoside and enslaved them and forced them to live like us.
My direct ancestor fought in all these wars and was badly shot in hlobane war but because Zulu warriors were becoming depleted and the war was starting to take its toll he was at the frontline in khambula. He survived the anglo-zulu war and went on to fight in Bhambatha rebellion even though he was old. He was killed by government troops as he was deemed the most wanted because they were killing black collaborators and white farmers.
Fantastic movie with a great cast. Thank you for putting this movie on You Tube for us. The General did a very wrong move to have split his force in two.
He had little choice. A recon patrol the day before got itself into a problem when it chose to tangle with large numbers of Zulus late on in the afternoon and had to spend the night cut off in the hills. They feared the main impi would attack them in the morning so they called on Chelmsford for help. He only had 3 options. 1. Ignore their call for help and leave them to their fate. This could have resulted in their annihilation. 2. Send a token force out, which itself might get cut off and annihilated. 3. Send a powerful enough force out and keep a powerful force back at camp, acting on the defensive, to be further strengthened by Durnfords men soon to arrive. Chelmsford chose option 3. Without the benefit of hindsight, this was militarily the soundest option.
Jens Nobel I am 100% correct with what I said. A recon patrol consisting of a couple hundred mounted men and a thousand Natal Native Contingent men encountered a couple of thousand Zulus late on the afternoon before. They were forced to spend the night in the hills, ten miles southeast. By all accounts it was a terrifying night. They expected to be attacked by the main Zulu impi and sent a rider back with a message to Chelmsford, requesting assistance. That was the only reason Chelmsford halved his force. It was militarily sound. He sent a strong force out and kept a strong force back and he reinforced the camp with Durnfords men. There is very little wrong with this decision going by all the information given at the time. It was the recon patrol who told him the Zulus were in large numbers to the south-east. There were no other reports of large numbers of Zulus anywhere else before he split his force and rode out. Zulu Dawn totally omits this crucial historical fact. Don't believe what you see in that film because it is inaccurate to history.
Jens Nobel "that Goddamned quartermaster with his precious lists" Which never actually happened in REAL LIFE. Quartermaster Bloomfield handed out ammunition. The 24th Foot did not run out of ammo on the firing line. The only troops who ran out of ammo on the firing line were Durnfords Natal Native Mounted Contingent. That was Durnford's fault as he didn't even take the trouble to take note of where his own ammo wagon was located in the camp. He was too interested in chasing after Zulus instead of sorting out his own supplies.
One error at the end, Isandhlwana may have been largest defeat inflicted upon the British by native troops, however it wasn't the worst defeat ever inflicted on European troops by native forces; that was the Battle of Adwa in 1896, where the Ethiopians destroyed an Italian army.
@@lyndoncmp5751 I saw a documentary a few years back that stated the way the ammo was packed made it a slow process to open boxes and therefore delayed the distribution. Could be wrong though. ?
@@roymeadows1708 Yeah that's an old documentary. All evidence shows the 24th Foot didn't run out of ammo on the firing line. They received more ammo, and hadn't even gone through their initial supply anyway. When they withdrew back to the camp they were still firing and largely made it back. Some 3/4 of the 24th Foot died in the camp and Saddle area. They can't have made it back there so far from the firing line if they had run out of ammo on the firing line. It's doubtful the 24th fired more than 50 of their own initial 70 rounds on the firing line according to experts like Col Mike Snook. Durnfords Natal Native Mounted Contingent had only just got through their 50 rounds pee man shortly before the 24th Foot withdrew from the firing line and Durnford's men had been firing for longer and more indiscriminately, so it would make no sense that the more professional and more disciplined 24th Foot men had fired more than Durnford's men on the firing line. Obviously the 24th Foot ran out of ammo eventually in the camp when the Zulus overran it and the ammo wagons. Cheers.
I was impressed by the length of time and detail showing the Centre Column crossing the Buffalo River from Rorkes Drift . I was also impressed with the way the main battle was shown as it developed . It showed an overconfident, arrogant , British leadership get its deserved humiliation . As has often happened , the British soldiers fought bravely and well but , with poor leadership up against superb Zulu warriors and leaders , they were always up against it . At the very least , a larger should have been made around the camp . Very well made film .
While Chelmsford's reckless hubris with regard to his decision to directly engage to engage Chetswayo's forces and the manner with which he went about it is inexcusable, I think it could be partially explained by the fact that in the prior year or so, the British garrison in Natal Province had handily defeated the forces of the Xhosa nation via open warfare. Much of that victory was credited to Chelmsford himself, which was like giving the President credit for a booming economy five months after assuming office. That is: he'd come into his own office at the tail end of that war, I believe at a point where it was pretty much as good as won already. The British were under the catastrophic misapprehension that the Xhosa nation-- being socially and culturally similar or same in most respects to the Zulu-- had the same level of enthusiasm for warrior virtue and tactical battlefield skill as the Zulu. **WROOOOOONG!!!** I think Chelmsford later decided to cover his toffy upper-crust ass by blaming Col. Dumford for his own blunders-- blunders that Dumford had, in some cases, tried to counsel him against committing in the first place-- and throwing him under the bus. Being that Dumford was but a lowly Irishman, I don't think many of his peers even wanted to doubt him. Still, while the disaster that was the Battle of Islhandwana didn't not toally wreck Chelmsford's reputation or his status, it didn't exactly put a nice shine on them either.
Superb Zulu NUMBERS not warriors, is what caused the British defeat. And yes, the British were arrogant in ignoring the possible great outnumbering of the Zulus.
To this day, a defensive perimeter is SOP regardless of the situation, in most militaries. It was then. What the CoC was thinking here, is beyond me. I've been exposed to arrogant toxic commands, but never anything at this FUBAR level.
@@markuse3472 British leadership was arrogant and Zulu warriors overwhelmed their opponents.Leadership failed and men paid.S.N.A.F.U. The legions under Varus could attest to failed leadership.
Currently reading Lt. Colonel Snook's _How Can Man Die Better_ and I was surprised to learn just how different the real battle was from the movie version. Like the Zulus carried a lot of their own guns into the battle and for a long while, the Zulus were unable to actually make real, effective charges because the British fire was so heavy and punishing they kept going to ground to escape the bullets.
Agreed. It is the best book ever written on the battle. Much of it is speculative. HOWEVER, the speculation is logical and based on known facts. The movie makes Durnford out to be the hero and while he was no doubt a brave man, much of the tactical failing at Isandlwana was down to his reckless decisions. Mike Snook, with justification, does not go easy on Durnford like this movie does.
Love the music at 50:33 and 50:51 and when they cross the river at rorke's drift very patriotic when Cetshwayo gave his speech to his warriors it gives me chills when the zulu warriors did their war chant
Thank you for this movie. As a Pietermaritzburg resident way back, it was so good to see the Oval in the early scenes. Not to mention The Natal Witness newspaper 💯
Summer is a great time to catch up on all these adventure films. It just seems like the perfect time to watch them. This was the first time for me to catch this one. I really enjoyed it. You can see so many great actors and character actors in this one film. Of course the big stars like Burt Lancaster, Peter O'Toole, John Mills, Simon Ward, Bob Hoskins, Freddie Jones, but also others whose names you may not recognize but whose faces you know. Denholm Elliot who played Col. Pulleine, writing the last letter in his tent at the end, played Marcus the museum curator and compatriot to Dr. Jones in Raiders of the Lost Art. Ronald Lacey played the reporter here and in Raiders he was great as Toht, the Gestapo agent who utters the great line: "You Americans, always overdressing for the wrong occasion". And Nigel Davenport as Col. Hamilton-Brown was seen prominently in 'Chariots of Fire' in '81 and later the same year in Nighthawks with Sly Stallone and Rutger Hauer. Funny, he's insulted for being an Irishman by..Peter O'Toole whose father was Irish and mother was Scottish. He probably loved delivering that ironic line. Also, the parsimonious ammo quartermaster was played by Peter Vaughn who did many TV shows and movies, including Brazil. Sadly, this film didn't quite do so well, and just missed out on the worldwide boom of Anglo/Australia cinema that was to follow only a year later. If it had been made one year later, it most likely would've done much better at the box office. Timing is everything. The Zulu certainly knew that well.
My late mother's grandfather, (or was it great?), served in this campaign and was one of the retinue that guarded King Cetewayo when he was captured soon after Ulundi a few months later.... & he subsequently escaped! My mother was always fond of this snippet from our family history. Many years ago, however, when we watched this film on tv - it was her first viewing & unacquainted with the Isandlwana disaster - she cried out 'GOOD GOD!' in shock & horror as the Zulu broke through the British lines and routed Pullein's column. If, by fate, my ancestor had been involved in this battle.... gosh... 'what if' indeed. I wouldn't be here typing this!
I think this really has improved with age - having first watched it in the mid-1980s, to be honest, it came across at the time as a very routine historical film....but that sense of bluster and over confidence in the film's characters has a real resonance now
Hope someone makes a version that combines this and Zulu together into one big epic movie. Really wish they'd make a third movie that shows the British retaliation I know there's a book series that does just that.
This is the best movie I have ever seen truthfully I have lost count how many times I have watched it I wish there were more movies like this one it's a real classic
The British Army's defeat at the hands of the Zulus at Isandhlwana is in some ways tantamount to the American 7th Cavalry defeat at the battle of the Little Big Horn. Although both were very significant battles , they were only one battle in a long war. The British were ultimately victorious in the Zulu war . The Americans in the Indian war .
Gordon Hall At Isandlwana, Chelmsford split his force only because the recon patrol requested assistance. He ordered the other half to stay put and act only on the defensive. He also sent reinforcements to move up to the camp. I believe Custer split his forces and they all went on the attack, so quite a difference there.
Custer's regiment was split three times. Custer then road off with five companies and split them again what American History refused to say for a half century. Native has close, but better more real accounts. Custer was hit by a sniper. At the river. Therefore wounded and out of action. He was transported to Custer's hill by one of the companies. Two companies a mile away were being wiped out for the men refused to join Custer on the hill for their Captain was wounded. Company C tried a break through, but was wiped out in the charge. However as many as seven broke through. Six horses and men were found by Historical personal some miles away. One account that gives credit to Rain in the Face a Native that one Trooper made it out and got away. This trooper survival was hidden for over a hundred years. Horse had five bullets in it before it died. Two miners about thirty miles away found the Trooper and nursed him for over a year in their cabin. The trooper was wounded. One miner died of TB some months latter. The trooper became a deserter went back home to live out the rest of his life with wife. Wife. Grand daughter shed the light on her grandpa. Many History magazines over the last few decades wrote stories for this Man did serve in company C. 7th cal. Also note that eight other troopers from Custer's Five companies retired back to Major Reno for they had Horse problems before the battle. As for the hill. I am sure that one of Custer's Brothers was in command. With just Two companies making it to the hill was a huge disappointment. From there troopers from one company moved back down the hill while few at all were giving any covering fire from that pindown hell they were in. So the British fought with discipline. I doubt that the five Companies of Custer had a chance. Panic was the deal of that day. The Native sinpers got a lot of them. It did not matter where they rode or stood. The young teenagers rode through the ranks in groups as the main bodies of Natives held them by the bit.
@@gordonhall9871Yes, both sides did in fact split their forces up, Chelmsford twice if you count the 3 columns however that decision was pretty logical. His scouts or recon of the Natal Native Contingent spotted a Zulu Scouting force which they presumed to have been the vanguard of the main Zulu army, he was obliged to send reinforcements as either that or decide not to and have the entire company die. Not only just that but the Zulu force was expected to be small.. which definitely wasn't so Chelmsford decided to aid and hopefully destroy the estimated 5000 Zulu army with about 60-63% of his for es, roughly 1900 and then the events of isandlwana started.
@@patrickmayisa9863Which was the greatest victory? Also who is we? ❤ Have you been to these places before? Is see it as a arse whopping that killed thousands of people. For expansion, exploitation, asset stripping, and land grabs. Fighting with rifles against spears. Take nothing away from the men, it's the systems that bank rolls these expeditions are evil people who care only for money( it's their God imho) Where is all Britains wealth? Because it goes tonthe government (who think it's there own) and the crown (how many hundreds of years of this and taxes have they had now?) Is just wrong. Im not against the Royals but it's time they gave back to the country that has spilled blood sweat and tears for the same family. If they done say charity auction for schools,NHS, care homes just of possessions and then a property they own could sell for how much so you think? Say Balmoral for instance, how much would a global auction take that up to in value? Use that money for said places. We all need education, we use the NHS ( which is being destroyed as I type this) and if we make it then care homes ( the old people who helped us be here today are being treat really bad imho) why would this happen? On a selfish note for then it would gain them a massive respect from a nation needing a immediate boost of everything we need right now. But mainly a sense of belonging and true leadership that don't care for them who pays there wages The public via taxes ( know anywhere else that does this?) Then they give it to all their mates( lodge men priority first) as jobs,grants,banks, energy companies (£8 Billion,why?) contracts, suppliers, whoever they used/use as they swore the same oath to the brotherhood which they serve,and pretend to be so untouchable as police are a huge percentage of the Brotherhood of Masonry. They protect themselves only, many examples from partygate, Hillsborough, Dunblane and so much more is all you need to see to get that this parallel society lies to the rest of us (which is no crime) but being above the law is wrong as it's a kind of knowledge,power and control of the country by people who are protected by one and other. This creates over confident people who some go on to do evil things, some are covered up (see Nicola Bully case) it reeks of corruption and lies. So many red flags there. But this was not the only killing either. Police, Sky news, News papers all make stuff up to suit or hide it away. To name a few here 1. CCTV lies(deepfake), No cell phone pinged by police or location movement and map all smart phones have? Why? Who did she speak to last on her phone? Which was on a works zoom call also.That one caravan near where she was found was never searched by police. The sonar story (Peter told the police to dive there and they did not,why?the men in Black one with the police, seen (by who tho?) So much more here. The fact her husbands business that was going to be going into liquidation(was in Nikki's name) so now that the insurance would payout? Is that not a motive? This case needs a private investigators team on it to go through all this and more. because The UK Tabloids they are in the Lodges as well as there own PR wing (for gov) so they cannot be trusted not to be biased can they? ❤UK. How much do they control our country do you think? I see them everywhere tbh. In everything going here in the UK it's ran by them and there pyramid of degrees/ranking. Have they messed up this once the Greatest country in the world, to it's laughing stock? British empire funded this whole expedition in Zululand and more (what place did the freemasons play in it's undertaking so you think? Read Albert Pikes letter from 1859 or something it's shocking. It was removed fr the British Museum in 1977 because it says about creating 3 world wars to stop people believing in God, and to follow the doctrine of Lucifer! Don't take my word for it, please look it up and read it then think of our families who suffered for this plan from Pike (Mason) to Bavaria to Italian man a leader named Mazaratii (spelled wrong here) who was actually in charge of the Illuminati at that time.( Illuminati aren't a god dam conspiracy theory btw) To awe my Granda suffer until he died aged 80 with complex PTSD which was not a thing you admitted back then. He spoke to me about WW2 only once when of a old photo of mine said straight away that's Antwerp in Belgium isn't it? Them said he was there many times as it was a huge depot after D-Day and Market Garden ( which his younger brother was killed on the 15/9/1944) found with no personal items to send home, not even a body part. My Nan said he drowned somehow? My Grandaa's brother he was only 19 and in a the same tank regiment the Royal Scots. ❤ To all the fallen and their families in every conflict that was man made! 🍾 ❤But who funded these wars? They all put bets on and crash economies for a bet at the drop of a hat? Who funded Hitler's rise? His fuel,oil and money was sent from the USA. A Anglo-American bank helped them along (much profit here) Averill Harriman and Prescott Bush ( yeah them bushes) to name a couple. Providing Nazis with oil and cash for a war. Then when UK was free from a victory in WWII we then went down hill because the US wanted it's money back from us there main allies then pumped it into the countries who tortured,bombs, shot and raped it's way round the world at our allies. So does anyone know why did Japan and Germany (who started it) prosper over the country that has the balls to stand up to them alone? The UK has still never recovered. Did we really lose the war??❤
Overall a great movie. They dont make them like this anymore. Quite a number of historical inaccuracies. Just one for example; The British at Isandlwana were not nearly so well prepared when the Zulu arrived. However, the movie clearly portrayed the supercilious, pig pigheadedness, of Chelmsford, which cost so very many lives. Simultaneously placing Rorke's Drift camp under immense pressure. Chelmsford only went to reinforce them the next day (Only a day too late.)
The movie also incorrectly makes Durnford out to be the all wise hero (complete with Irish accent, which he didn't have) when in fact Durnford was mostly to blame for the tactical errors there, and flouted not only his own orders but the orders given to Pulleine. If Durnford had just got to the camp to reinforce the numbers there and act strictly on the defensive, the camp likely would have held out.
A true classic! The superiority complex of the English commanders is a lesson to be learned! Never underestimate your opponent especially when you don’t have home field advantage.
Zulu Dawn was met with mixed reviews when released . For me , although much more historically accurate than its predecessor , Zulu , it nevertheless lacked the cinematic brilliance of the Stanley Baker/Michael Caine classic .
Thanks for all of your comments. I read them all, and it took longer than watching the movie. "Some days you win, some days you lose, some days the ZULU make a fool of you." Officer, when the Zulus are over-running the camp, "Bugler, I can't remember the right command. Is it the fall-back or retreat command? Bugler, "No sir, it's the run-away command."
I dunno what does this have to do with the modern politics, but I still agree just because the movie is great and it deserves to be seen by more people.
Same I've always pictured myself in that thin red line and what the thoughts would be. Most of them in that scene have the look of fear in their eyes and many of the 1st 24th knew it wasn't going to be an engagement they would win. I have to give CSM Williams credit tho for beating the zulu with his own club. Pvt storey could have survived if he had stayed down and played dead.
Wonderful movie, I wonder if the quarter masters hold up of ammunition while being overun was true. If so , a real help in the loss I think. Anyone know?
They should have given command of the army to Mr Nogs then the outcome of the battle would have been different. One of the last great epics ever made. I saw it in the cinema when it was first released.
I wish they made a third movie titled Zulu Dusk which would be about the Battle of Ulundi (the battle which ended the Anglo-Zulu War). It would make the perfect Zulu War trilogy. It starts with the British getting destroyed at Isandlwana. The middle is about the “turning point” at Rorke's Drift. And the ending would be about the eventual British Triumph at Ulundi.
@@therichestmaninbabylon7942 Well in that case, Zulu Dusk should be about the Battle of Kambula. It’s when the Zulu gave up hope for victory. It would make it the perfect trilogy. Zulu Dawn -> Battle of Islandlwana Zulu -> Battle of Rorke’s Drift Zulu Dusk -> Battle of Kambula
@@Kaiserboo1871Mel Gibson helping a Zulu army carrying spears+ outnumbered 10/1 to an epic victory over the "Henry Martini rifle" carrying British?I can see it now 😊
Does anyone ever watch the opening scene from zulu and wish this film was made in that same style? Don't get me wrong zulu dawn is a fine film, but there is a really different feel between the 2 films, and everytime I sit back to watch Zulu, my first thought in that opening scene is what if they had done the film like this.
There were many heroes on both sides, and the odd idiot on the British side, but the real villains were the British businessmen and politicians who wanted to steal Zululand to enhance their own personal wealth.
But Zululand wasn't stolen. The British didn't take or even settle in Zululand. It remained Zululand. The war was not about stealing Zululand. It was about removing the threat of the Zulu militarily, which was becoming worrying (unnecessarily so).
The closing edits showing what Disraeli stated in parliament "Who are these Zulus.. who on this day have put an end to a great dynasty" considering what has happened to England now, he could have not been more correct. Having been in the military back in the 1970s as a lowly RAF airmen, I was stationed at RAF JARIC and it was just pure fluke it was my job to assist my Sgt in screening up-to-date aerial photographs of Russian mobile nuclear missiles. Of course, I was totally ignored as if I was not there, even now I can't talk about was said, believe it or not at 70 I am still covered by the official secrets act I signed back in 1973. My point, the manner, body language, the style and delivery and attitude of these very senior NATO officers was exactly what Peter O'Toole portrayed as Lord Chelmsford, 110 years later. Not to me, but often to my Sgt, they would ask questions about how old the photos i.e. flight back and processing time, were, clarification of blurred images that had been magnified greatly, in fact the Sgt that Bob Hoskins played reminded me very much of my Sgt at the time. Even though only 18 at the time, I very much got the impression that what was more important was the seniority and not wishing to show that my Sgt knew more than they did by not letting him tell them what they needed to know. I can well record after relaxing they had left my Sgt thinking he was out of hearing distance of me under his breath saying "F****** tools". I am proud of my country, its heritage and culture and being in the services, but it left me and very much the message of this film is that sometimes totally wrong people can end up in positions of authority to decide the outcome of a battle, the death of many men based on the their image, front and self-importance as oppose being the right person for the job. Fifty years later,
The real screw up at Isandlwana though was Durnford. He flouted his own orders and ignored those given to Pulleine. This film portrays Durnford as the all wise hero of the piece. In reality he made blunder after blunder and was the main reason for the disaster.
Totally agree, I don't expect absolute historical accuracy in films as they are mainly entertainment but without any doubt, every decade (I witnessed as an IT Teacher from industry and the RAF) history is no longer being taught as it always was. As such, people in the TV and the film industry do not even have the most basic knowledge of events that happened in the past. Worse still, they see no need to find out as well. @@lyndoncmp5751
The Zulus carried the day this solitary day. The Brits made a lot of elementary errors that could have saved the day. They were so spread out! The damn guy handing out the ammunition was a real dummy. In the long run the British prevailed over the Zulus due to better weapons, troop formations, and battle plans.
In reality there was no lack of ammunition in the British firing line. They still had ammo when the retreat to retire to camp was bugled. They retreated because Durnfords collapse on the extreme right flank compromised their position. If they didn't withdraw the Zulus would have cut them off behind their backs. It was Durnfords decisions which lost the battle.
