Zulu Dawn [DVD] [1979]

1979's Zulu Dawn depicts the battle of Islandlwana, a major defeat of a modern British army by Zulus under King Cetshwayo whose troops were armed with shields and spears. The late 1960's and 1970's was the absolute worst time for historical film-making exemplified by the likes of, Anzio [1968], The Charge of the Light Brigade [1969], Little Big Man [1970], The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean [1972], Buffalo Bill and the Indians [1976] and A Bridge Too Far [1977]. Revisionist history and a cynical eye was 'in' so you'll get a character like a newspaper man - in this case, Ronald Lacey - sneering at the idea of Empire and taking the side of the enemy. Believe it or not, the Empire was quite a popular thing. A liberal of the 1970's BBC plonked straight into a film depicting the 1870's. It's difficult to be revisionist about Islandlwana because it was an unmitigated disaster unless you're saying that the British lured the Zulu's into sacrificing all their best men. That clever Lord Chelmsford. There is some more recent history depicted here i.e. the Zulus deliberately luring away Chelmsford's main force in order to attack the weakened camp. Whether you believe that or not is up to you.We'd better start with what's good - the intrigues of Bartle Frere [John Mills], the somewhat chaotic invasion of Zululand, the great folds of earth in front of them, the grassland and the dongas - dry gullies - typical of Zululand, the supply wagons drawn by teams of oxen, the brooding and foreboding majesty of Islandlwana mountain, the skirmishes with Zulu scouts, the British idea of sport or adventure, the discovery of the main Zulu impi and its instant attack, the speed of the Zulu warriors, the overrunning of the rocket battery, the guns turning over, the odd gun in the hands of the Zulus, Durnford's [Burt Lancaster] stand on the river bank, Pulleine [Denholm Elliot] moving the guns to support Durnford, the quartermasters only giving ammunition to their own men, the collapse of the firing line, Melville and Coghill's attempted rescue of the colours and the Zulus carting off the captured guns to Ulundi [during the final credits]. Props too, that the film portrays the settler irregulars, the native irregulars and the native foot-soldiers with their traditional weapons and a red band around their heads.Now what's bad. The aged, Burt Lancaster. He is really terrible with his corny Oirish brogue and any one of the supporting actors - Davenport, Pickup, Jayston - would have done a better job. Durnford would've had a cut glass English accent, not sound like he was from a Dublin council estate. The rest of the cast are fine, even O'Toole. The direction by Douglas Hickox is workmanlike. The film has such a great British cast and yet, most are only in it for a few minutes and Davenport is utterly wasted in this.Next, the inaccuracies: Durnford's men held the Zulus for a while in the river bed but in the film they evacuate it virtually straight away, the firing line would've been even further out and apart than depicted in the film and each company would've stretched out over several hundred yards and they would've been in whatever position they were comfortable in e.g. standing, kneeling or lying down. They were not in a front rank, rear rank formation. If you're being really picky, the cannons are wrong and the rifles are more like carbines but you'd have to be a military historian to notice. One of the two battalions [1/24] had been fighting the Xhosa for a few years and their uniforms would have been faded and constantly repaired not look like they'd come straight off a sewing machine. Veterans also dyed their helmets with tea because bright white helmets made tempting targets for the few Zulu sharpshooters. Lastly, the idea of a 'final sol ution' for the Zulus as spouted by Mills as Bartle Frere is crass in the extreme. There was never any intention of gen ociding the Zulu. The aim was the reduction of Zulu military power and the bringing of Zululand into a South African Confederation.Like all films purporting to be historical, Zulu Dawn has its exaggerations, conflations and inexactitudes [usually for dramatic purposes]. It's not as bad as Cromwell [1970] though and it does give you the gist of the battle, the logistics, the machinations, the arrogance, the over-confidence and the incompetence of what happened that day. It'll never be as good as Zulu [1964] and one feels that if Cy Endfield hadn't died a year or so earlier, he would've made a better job of it than Hickox. Nevertheless, it's a decent watch. Look out for Simon Ward's horse doing a poo. I'd have done one if I'd seen that many Zulus armed to the teeth.The Arrow Academy DVD is in widescreen, not the 4:3 stated on the back of the box. The sound is quite low. Trailer. No English subtitles.

Made Post the classic film “Zulu” , this is the fine recreation of the battle on the day before that encounter - one of the worst ever defeats of a British armed force.Notable for some excellent supporting cast roles including the memorable Burt Lancaster .( can you spot ‘Emmerdale’ actor Christopher Chittell - ‘Eric Pollard” - in the officers corps. ? )

Zulu with Stanley Baker and Michael Caine is one of my favourite films, and I think some make the mistake of judging Zulu Dawn against Zulu. Though they are about the battles with the Zulu on the same day, they should not be judged against the other, but used as companion pieces. Zulu was the story of a small band on British Soldiers, barely 100, who held out against over 4000 Zulu warriors. It is a more personal film, looking at the triumph for Chard and Bromhead against such odds. At the start of Zulu, you see the Zulu walking through the British dead. That is the aftermath of Zulu Dawn. Zulu Dawn is much less person, more sweeping in statement and scope.Cy Enfield co-wrote Zulu Dawn with Anthony Story, some 15 years after Zulu,(Enfield half of the Baker-Enfield team that produced ZULU - and interesting to note Anthony Story was the biographer of Stanley Baker), depict the British Colonialism 'Little England' policy and arrogance that contributed to the downfall of the British troops left on the face of Ishlandlwana in January 1879, the greatest defeat of a modern army by natives. Chelmsford, played perfectly by Peter O'Toole, made the first mistake: divided his forces in the face of the enemy, especially when he had no idea where the enemy was. Secondly, the same arrogance left them to camp nearly 1500 and native levees on the open slope of Isandhlwana without forming any sort of defencive works for protection, despite warnings. They ignored Boer sightings of Zulu in the Valley just beyond, because Chelmsford had it set in his mind they were at Ulundi. The stupid rationing of bullets, the way the quartermaster passed them out, saw the unprotected Brits left without any means of defending themselves.Zulu Dawn is more depressing, because it shows the whole loss of life was so futile, but the film is a beautiful tribute to the soldier of Queen Victoria's Wars, warts, arrogance, stiff upperlip, valour and all.Utterly mesmerising, deeply moving.