"Remake of Zulu" Topic

Hi all,

I just wondered what folks thought of the idea of a remake of Zulu, what would be the merits, if any?

Not that I think there is much wrong with the original film as a film, but could it be made even better now?

James

sacrilege

do not touch

Yeah, I can just see Jessica Simpson in the Michael Caine role so they catch the 'correct' demographic!!!!

Zulu is one of those few perfect films which should NEVER EVER but messed with!

i don't know if i'd go as far as "sacrilege" but i agree – DO NOT TOUCH!

the trend in hollywood to make a remake "better" by forcing a romantic angle or making the explosions bigger and adding lots of flash would diminsh the film – and perhaps demean the heroics of the soldiers involved. besides, who would be able to do the voice over as well as Richard Burton?

i have the feeling that no one who makes movies these days that actually see the screen would bother realize it was an historical event nor do the least bit of research to get it correct – probably give the British cowboy weapons!

Of course if Mel Gibson directed the Zulus would win

"You were only supposed to blow the bleeding asengais off !"

Leave it well alone, its an absolute classic. Even a few seconds of the music, and you are there. Watch the remake of the italian job and then decide.

Speaking of which, Amazon.com has two versions of it on DVD—as far as I can tell, the only differences are 1) the cover, and 2) widescreen vs. fullscreen. Does anyone know if they are otherwise identical?

I tried to post links here, but got "exceeds maximum length" error message!

Thanks.

no,no,no,no! Leave well enough alone!! The modern day filmmaker is a politically correct dumb-a** who panders to a public that's as historically enlightened as a hall closet!!!!!

I never want to see this subject brought up again!

Sacrilege!

Now remaking Zulu Dawn…hmmm…

Zulu zombies! Dawn of the Zulu dead!

It's a good film but not very tru to the real events. Hook was not the same in real life as he was shown in the film. So a remake would be ok IMO.

A remake of Zulu Dawn might be a winner (could even include Rorke's Drift.)

Never! Knowing Hollywood they'd probably bring Michael Caine back for a cameo as Bromheads father or something ridiculous…

It was made well enough the first time, why bother with a re-make?

Ray

imagine a new ZULU made by hollywood…

Dreamwork and walt disney picture present:

"once upon a time in the magic kingdom of zululand, the good and honest king Cetshwayo…."

director: ridley scott (good zulu and evil redcoats) or peter jackson (lots of numérical zulu and politically correct end)…

casting: broomhead : owen wilson or elija wood in peter jackson's cut
chard : Mel gibson…
Cetshwayo : morgan freeman
and a lot of good actor… and of course a lot of money !

but it's the morning, i wake up and this nightmare is over…

i prefer let you think about this sentence of Beaumarchais
"vous ecriver juste mais vous penser de travers…" a good description of your movie industry dealing about historical subjects.

Pat

not to mention the zulus would be portrayed by 45-50 year olds for accurracy.

Hey – if you really want us Brits to look bad there is only one choice for Cetshwayo – Mel Gibson.

Now that would be a movie!!!!!

No!

Leave well alone.

Think of all the other re-makes that have been appalling- The recent Four Feathers springs to mind as does The Alamo.

There is nothing wrong with Zulu Dawn either, both are excellent films.

Agreed!! I love Zulu, but have no faith in anybody in Hollywood to do it justice.

Hollywood today would film an Impi with 10 Zulus and CGI graphics. No Thanks.

How about a movie depicting events at Blood River? Plenty of Zulu, wagon train (kind of a Western hook for US audience), dramatic male /female drama as they fight off the attacking hordes etc. etc.

Oggie

DO NOT TOUCH. Unless you took the plot and turned it into a fantasy genre film, say, made it scantily clad Amazonian women fighting gorgeous British female models in pith helmets, red coats and white cotton panties. For grins, through in a handful of male captives of the Amazons that all the women are fighting over….and now I'm awake. Darn.

I'd buy that for a dollar!

How about a movie about the battle at Ft. Ridgely, Minnesota during the Dakota Uprising of 1862?

Ft. Ridgely was the "Rorke's Drift" of the American West. A rag-tag assembly of militia and US Army regulars sucessfully held off assaults by a far larger force of Dakota warriors over a period of several days.

See link

GuruDave wrote: "Ft. Ridgely was the "Rorke's Drift" of the American West."

Except that the Santee Dakota weren't anywhere near the Zulus at attacking defended positions. Or any kind of concerted effort.

As for remaking "Zulu" (which has plenty of its own 'political correctness', just not recognizable as such to most Americans, and certainly not as bad as "Zulu Dawn"), I agree that Hollywood couldn't be trusted to do it right.

The biggest change needed in my book is the elimination of the missionary and his daughter. Not only was Witt not present at the battle, but he had sent his family away a couple of days earlier – and his oldest daughter was seven or eight!

"Speaking of which, Amazon.com has two versions of it on DVD—as far as I can tell, the only differences are 1) the cover, and 2) widescreen vs. fullscreen. Does anyone know if they are otherwise identical?"

Hyunster— as I recall, the one released earlier was by a fly by night company, and although one could find it for around $5 USD at Media Play, it apparently was a horrible transfer in which they had butchered the sound of the film. Since Zulu won an Academy Award for Best Sound, this is certainly a more serious problem than one would initially think. Get the one released lated (around 2003, I think) by MGM Video and you won't be disappointed. It cost a few bucks more, but it's worth it!

Hey, the Alamo remake was tons better than the John Wayne version.

Then again, no one accused anyone of "remaking a classic" in that case. Except maybe diehard John Wayne fans.

Again, a loud "NO!" vote on remaking "Zulu."

Mind, the film has virtually nothing to do with the actual events. The constant close combat almost certainly never occurred (except in the "Hospital"), and was primarily a shooting match.

The point being, if the movie were made "right," NONE of the usual wargames crowd would like it.

See what happened to the new "Alamo?"

I rest my case.

NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, yes, yes, yes! I'd like to see a more historically accurate movie. I studied this battle while at Staff School, and was amazed at how far from history the movie strayed.

Oh, come on now. It wouldn't be THAT bad. Just think of the possibilities….

Ashton Kutcher as Bromhead.

Colin Farrel as Hook.

Sean Astin as Chard.

John Cleese as Colour Sgt. Bourne.

Chris Rock as Cetshwayo.

But think of the possibilities!

[Warning, I don't mean *any* of this, keep your fingers off the stifle button!]

The long, heart-wrenching speeches from the Zulus about how they just want to live in peace, hate killing, and are forced into this war by the imperialist Eurpoeans!

The sympathetic Zulu warrior with a new child at home who just wants to survive, and who almost makes it!

Angelina Jolie, or somebody, as the missionary's sister: she's come from England to bring back her insane brother, but after he brings a bad name to anything Christian he gets killed and she's free to marry…

The dashing English second in command – a solid guy who knows imperialism should have limits. The commander pushed too far in his desire to kill the dark skins, leading his poor troops into this awful ambush. Luckily he is killed and the young second-in-command can take over. At the end his troops have the opportunity to kill the Zulus to the last man, but he is not vengeful, he wisely refrains, and he gets to run off into the sunset with Angelina Jolie, or somebody.

Plus, the original Zulu has no chase scene, which I think means that technically its not a "movie." You need one and the beginning and one at the end, otherwise what you have is a "film," which, as we all know, are for girls.

Yes, considering all Hollywood failed to do in their first attempt at Zulu, they need have a "do over" coming.

When I reflect on what everyone has said about the new Four Feathers, Troy, Alexander, and whatever that one about the crusades was called (I don't see a lot of movies), its clear that Hollywood has masterd the accurately portraying historical events in an even handed way, showing us the heroism, introducing us to cultures different than our own, I can't wait to see what Hollywood could do in 2005 with Zulu.

After all, they'd never simply drape a paper-thin historical veneer over whatever whacky views the director currently holds dear. Plus, acting has never been better than it is today.

So I eagerly look forward to the new Zulu, which I will be sure and tape off cable and watch after I see Pearl Harbor.

Andrew

Whatever you do, do not let Gibson near the film!

I agree with Don on this, maby a valid documentary on it at least. Zulu stands on its own though and no remake would ever take away from it, nor surpass it.

An interesting fact, in Zulu the part of Cetewayo was played by (forgive spelling) Mangosutho Buthelezi who is now THE paramount chief of the Zulu Nation

@ Nazrat, re: DVD—

Thanks very much!

maybe the chase scene could go like this……..

Corporal Nicholas Cage is doing his Elvis impersonation in the camp PX at Ishandlwana when the Zulus attack. Surrounded, he fights them off with his Martini Henry electric guitar until numbers tell.

At this point he jumps into Lord Chelmsfields red Ferrari and heads off heroically to warn the garrison at Rorkes Diner chased by Zulus on trail bikes and black HUMVEES.

He finally gets away by jumping the unfinished bridge being built by Lt Bromhead (Ben Stiller).

Johnny Depp plays Hook, largely reprising his role in Pirates of the Carribean. He wanted to play Zulu called Edward Assegaihands in the Tim Burton version of the movie.

Steven Segal plays the cook, an ex Navy Seal kept on by Lt Chard (Samuel L jackson).

The Zulus led by Kirsten Dunst attack to the strains of "Oh Mickey You're So Fine".

The plucky Royal Squelch Herbacious Boaderers duck down and the Zulus are decimated by US Marine Gunships which pop up from behind the wall of McDonalds cartons……..

…And I haven't had anything to drink yet.

What about Micheal Caine reprising his role as London gangster Jack Bromhead "Oi Cetshwayo you're a big man but your out of condition, with me it's a full time job"

Hey I liked the new Alamo ! But no more hollywood remakes can't they come up with any new ideas?

No, No, No, No.

"Chris Rock as Cetshwayo." Just shoot me now.

(Formerly, The Evil Overlord Bob.)

How about instead of remaking ever bloody movie you make more movies from the same era about adjacent battles, etc.

Nice one Bugsda!

Mark

The Zulu were forced into war by Imperialist Europeans.

You can't improve this one. It's perfect as it is.
Go find another battle!

Good film but not perfect, let us begin:

Facing Colour of 24th to dark, should be grass green
Helmet Plates worn on white helmets should have been plain stained with tea or dust.
Both Bromhead and Chard had full beards at the battle.
Colour Sergeant Bourne wears his sash over the wrong should and also his rank badge on the wrong arm.
The Zulus are using Marini-Henry rifles the formation that attacked Rorkes Drift would not have had said rifles as they were in reserve at Islandwana and got board and went off to attack whatever they could find.
Also in the end narration Richard Burton calls the 24th Regiment of Foot the South Wales Borderers but during the battle they were the South Warwickshire Regiment.

Just a few points.

AndyBrace, a perfect example of why wargamers should not be allowed to review films/movies. A textbook example of "Wrong Tank Syndrome".

I agree with the OFM! Jeez, lighten up, guys. Regardless of the supposedly incorrect fiddly details, the movie's terrific! And in no way in need of an update.

WHY DON'T THEY REMAKE MOVIES THAT SUCK?

Because the only way to make what they are doing on their own look good is to destroy the classics. If everything is dreck, then the biggest pile is the best.

WHY DON'T THEY REMAKE MOVIES THAT SUCK?

They do…and they still suck.

Zulu is perfect & I believe Michael Caine's first movie because credits say introducing Michael Caine, also you can't beat Stanley Baker & Nigel Green. My only major complaint about the movie is the Martini Henry Rifles have absolutley no recoil, they could have at least faked it. The only 2 people that I would allow to remake it, is Ridley Scott or Mel Gibson.