While Zulu is one of the most famous war movies to come out of the 1960s, and there are many reasons to watch it, if you don't usually like that genre, you probably won't like it. Similar to the plot of 55 Days at Peking, one of my all-time favorite war films, this movie follows a small group of British soldiers, grossly outnumbered by the enemy, who try to hold out as long as possible.Among the soldiers are Lieutenants Stanley Baker and Michael Caine, as well as Nigel Green, James Booth, Neil McCarthy, Ivor Emmanuel, Paul Daneman, and Glynn Edwards. While sometimes Stanley and Michael differ in their views of how to command the troops, Jack Hawkins rants and raves of the virtues of peace because he's a missionary. Jack's daughter Ulla Jacobsson tries to help among the wounded men, but since she's the only woman in the movie, sometimes she doesn't get treated very fairly.It wasn't Michael Caine's first movie—I saw him in a movie from 1957—it was his first major role, so the studio gave him a large "introducing" credit. If you're a Michael Caine fan, and you can tolerate a long, tedious war film, you might want to see him two years before his overnight stardom from Alfie. Even if you're not particularly a fan, but you want to see him in an extremely handsome role, he looks particularly dreamy in Zulu.All in all, I was pretty bored—when I wasn't drooling over Michael Caine, that is. The film wasn't nearly as interesting as other war flicks I've seen, and even Richard Burton's official sounding narration wasn't able to save it.

When "Zulu" opened in Sydney in 1964 it had one of those big premieres that military epics received back then: searchlights, red carpet, a band and guests wearing medals. Shortly after, I took my brother to see it. "Zulu" ticked all the boxes for us.From Richard Burton's opening narration to his listing of the names of the Victoria Cross winners at the end, we were rapt.As well as the battle, those bare-breasted Zulu girls did not go unappreciated by a couple of young lads. You didn't see a lot of that sort of thing on the screen in those days. The filmmakers obviously got away with it under the old National Geographic Magazine rule of it's OK if it's the natural attire of the culture, it didn't stop them being hot though.The film still stands up even if the censorship of the day kept it relatively bloodless. Demonstrations show what a round from a Martini Henry rifle can do to a watermelon, no doubt it would have had the same spectacular effect on a human head. An assegai in the belly would not be as clinical as depicted in the movie either. But the best bits of the film were often the tense scenes waiting for things to happen and the one where the men drown out the Zulu chant with "Men of Harlech". I haven't a drop of Welsh blood, but that scene always puts a lump in my throat.The film is classy. Breathtaking photography, terrific performances from top to bottom and an awesome score by John Barry; music to perform heroics by.The film was a hit in Australia, but something unexpected happened not long after. In 1966, D Company, 6th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment found itself surrounded by up to 2000 Viet Cong in a rubber plantation at Long Tan in South Vietnam. There were 108 of them, about the same number as the 24th Regiment at Rorke's Drift. They held off attack after attack. Instead of mealie bags they brought down artillery fire, but the fighting was at close quarters as they held their perimeter. By the time help arrived, 18 of them were dead (17 at Rorke's Drift) while the enemy lay dead in the hundreds. Controversially, there were no Victoria Crosses although more than one was earned. Years later, the company commander likened the battle to Rorke's Drift. But I wonder if while the battle was on, did it flash through the minds of the blokes who had seen the movie that what they saw depicted on the screen they were now experiencing for real?Would anyone make a film like "Zulu" today? Possibly it would be just too un-PC. Most battles on the screen these days are fought vicariously through intergalactic stormtroopers or by the denizens of "Game of Thrones".However, historical rights and wrongs aside, I still think "Zulu" rocks; it's simply an exceptional piece of filmmaking.

Zulu is one of my all time favorite films. My dad took me to see it when it first came out in the '60's. It's a film I watch at least once a year, but this year I have watched it twice over the holiday due to the poor TV schedule. The interplay between the main characters is extraordinarily good. Jack Hawkins, who plays the vicar and Nigel Green are my favorites. But there are many scenes with other characters that lead up to the main event, the Zulu attack. This film is based on an actual historical event in Africa and it's as well to be aware of them. The great thing is that IMDb carries information concerning the back story for making the film and the actual historical characters. If you have not seen this film, it is heartily recommended.

Zulu is in my opinion the best war film ever. A small contingent of British soldiers hold out against a massive Zulu army in 1879. It's a true story and pretty accurate though understandably some liberties were almost certainly taken by the film makers. I have rarely seen another film that doesn't waste a single scene. The pacing is perfect, the battle scenes although not as bloody as modern day epics are well done and it entertains from start to perfect finish. There are so many memorable scenes and characters that this is one film that really does repay repeated viewings. For me though what really elevates this film above most others is the acting. Rarely can any film have encouraged such strong performances from every member of the cast even down to the smallest part. Stanley Baldwin is great, Michael Caine puts in a career best performance, William Booth is charismatic as the wayward Hook but for me the highlight is Nigel Green as Colour Sergeant Bourne the embodiment of an British soldier. Zulu is a triumph of film making from start to finish and I am amazed that such a good film doesn't earn a higher rating than 7.8 on here. My children both under 10 have just watched it and loved it, for a film that is 50 years old that it great testament to it's class and staying power. Simply one of the best films of all time.