For me this is one of the best british films of all time, and it's obvious many of you agree. I personally would love to see how a remake, however unlikely this is, it's such a great story that could be retold in many ways, but if it were possible I'd want a very similar style of film with the original characters.
So just for fun I'd like to know who you would all want to see in a remake if it were made today
Lt. John Chard R.E. - Ciaran Hinds
Otto Witt - Stellan Skarsgard
Margareta Witt - Emily Blunt
Pvt. Henry Hook - Robert Downey Jr
Lt. Gonville Bromhead - Ewan McGregor
Colour-Sgt. Bourne - Rhys Ifans
Pvt. Owen - Jeffrey Dean Morgan
Cpl. Allen - Hugh Laurie
Surgeon Reynolds - Peter Mullan
Pvt. Thomas - Stephen Graham
Pvt. Hitch - James McCavoy
Pvt. Cole - Jamie Bell
Pvt. 612 Williams - Eddie Redmayne
One thing is obvious: There should NEVER be a remake of this film. And…in the case that's ever going to happen...Robert Downey Jr.? Really? It's ONLY OBVIOUS THAT IT SHOULD BE AN ALL BRITISH CAST, if not, at least all of them europeans...
shareNo remake - end of.
Iconic films like this MUST have a 100% British cast.
Casting Charlton Heston as General Gordon in "Khartoum" was a bad choice indeed, and spoilt the film for me, especially the American drawl. Even today, can not understand why the producers didn't opt for a British actor.
Plus: virtually all of the cast of Zulu had at least done National Service; they didn't need to have the drill, the discipline, the camaraderie and the attitude of the British soldier explained to them. It came naturally to them as a given, and that shared understanding comes through very clearly. You simply wouldn't be able to recreate that with a modern cast.
shareWell said.
shareWell IF they film the remake in South Africa, Nearly ALL white South Africans served as draftees, didn't they-or did the draft go away with the end of the Apartheid era? Of course the question remains if South African actors can pull off the variety of British accents needed for the roles. AND yes, I know there are a lot of British South Africans (as opposed to Boer South Africans) too.
Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?
Yes, but that's a different army. Different ethos, different spirit. The British army had of course changed enormously between the Zulu and Korean wars, but there was also a lot of continuity. The whole class system, for example, and the officer/NCO relationship, had survived surprisingly intact, and that was something quite special to the British Army; I don't think the role and status of a senior NCO like Colour-Sergeant Bourne, let alone the particular style of leadership he embodies, were precisely replicated in any other nation's army.
shareComing from a British Army family, have to say you have totally nailed it, again, syntinen.
I came here to reply and your reply has made my reply today redundant. Thanks! :)
I remember wrangling over on the KoH board with an Orlando Bloom groupie, who I'm 99% certain was Russian, about the plausibility of a cavalry manoeuvre Bloom's character employed. I remarked that I had watched it with a couple of army sergeants who slated it as ludicrous, and her response was 'Hah! Mere sergeants! What could a sergeant's opinion of anything be worth?' There was absolutely no point trying to explain, even if she was the sort to have listened, which she wasn't.
But I think a whole book could be written on the style of leadership embodied by Colour-Sergeant Bourne (the film one, not necessarily the real one). The way he has tidied away his personal likes, dislikes, feelings, values and beliefs as wholly un-useful to the men and officers with whom he serves, and instead has created, inhabited and offered them a two-dimensional stereotyped persona, always perfectly military, deliberately a bit stuffy and ridiculous so they can joke about him behind his back, and be reassured by the tacit promise that in no matter what horror or disaster they can count on him to be there saying 'Nobody told you to stop working' just as always. Do American NCOs do this? Do French ones? Russian ones?
Incidentally, when I saw A Bridge Too Far it occurred to me that the persona of Lieutenant-General Horrocks as played by Edward Fox (who was working from first-hand knowledge as he had not only had held a short-term commission in the Coldstream Guards himself but also knew Horrocks personally) was an officer counterpart to the role of Bourne. I don't know if you agree with me.
"Mere sergeants"? Countless sergeants have helped young, inexperienced Officers out of many, shall we say, sticky situations! What a truly ignorant woman. Less said about many Russians the better methinks. Yes, no point in trying to explain. Waste of breath.
Bourne - what a character, and yes, quintessentially British. Eccentric in many ways but a stalwart, loyal to Crown, Officers and "the lads". His lines were just superb, and delivered with aplomb. Totally believable for the late 19thC. Only a Brit would appreciate all of that of course, feel sure. Oh yes, there's a book there alright. A splendid character, the very epitome of cool under pressure. Lightly remonstrating with the Private for having a button undone on his tunic as they awaited the Zulu attack was priceless, just so typically British. Great stuff!
It is more than a few years since I watched ABTF and only vaguely recall the Horrocks part. Didn't know Fox had a SSC in the Coldstream Guards - "not a lot of people know that" as Sir Michael Caine might have said! :)
In fact, isn't it about the turn of the CG to have their Colours trooped next month?
Do American NCOs do this?
Lt. John Chard R.E. - Clive Owen
Lt. Gonville Bromhead - Paul Bethany
Colour-Sgt. Bourne - Gerard Butler
Sgt. Maxfield - Jason Isaacs
Cpl. Allen - Sean Bean
Otto Witt - Alan Rickman
Margareta Witt - Emma Thompson
Pvt. Henry Hook - Jude Law
Pvt. Owen - Alfred Molina
Pvt. Thomas - Ewan McGregor
Pvt. Hitch - David Tennant
Pvt. Cole - Christopher Eccleston
Pvt. 612 Williams - Robert Carlyle
Maybe someone could do a miniseries about the entire war, rather than a straight remake. I don't know that the Battle of Ulundi's been shown on film yet.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
Maybe someone could do a miniseries about the entire war, rather than a straight remake. I don't know that the Battle of Ulundi's been shown on film yet.
Good point.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
Maybe someone could do a miniseries about the entire war, rather than a straight remake. I don't know that the Battle of Ulundi's been shown on film yet.
That would be too graphic by far and will not happen.
True, but then Zulu didn't show the British soldiers at Rorke's Drift executing wounded Zulus either.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
Executing mortally wounded* enemy soldiers writhing in agony(who would have died anyway via terrible gunshot wounds)is nowhere near as terrible as butchering camp cooks, auxiliaries, drummer boys, pet dogs and horses.
*If they weren't mortally wounded the Zulus themselves would have taken them home, as they did with the rest of their wounded at Rorke's Drift.
Zulu Dawn, by the way, DID show a British soldier abusing Zulu prisoners, but never once showed anything the Zulus did in an unsavoury light, and for a much more modern and bloodier film there was a curious lack of, well, blood and gore seen at the Isandlwana battlefield after the 24th and their allies were routed. Very very PC.
The film Zulu can be forgiven for not showing British soldiers executing wounded soldiers because it strived to show neither side in a bad light. It didn't show Zulus dragging British soldiers out of their hospital beds and brutally chopping them up outside either.
Zulu Dawn was decidedly pro Zulu.
My point is not moral equivalence but that one omission upsets you and the other does not.
If we're going to complain about "historical inaccuracy" let's go through the myriad ways in which Zulu deviates from historical fact. To be upset that Zulu Dawn doesn't showy the gory details of a battle's aftermath seems rather absurd. I can't think of many movies that do show post-battle mutilation, regardless of their motivation.
I'm not terribly fond of Zulu Dawn myself. Its main raison d'etre is attacking imperialism and it's certainly skewed in that direction. Saying it doesn't "really" depict Isandlwana because it doesn't show the aftermath is ludicrous. Or again, we could go over the many, many ways Zulu distorts what really happened at Rorke's Drift, and say "Rorke's Drift has never been depicted on film." Selective outrage indeed.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
My point is not moral equivalence but that one omission upsets you and the other does not.
If we're going to complain about "historical inaccuracy" let's go through the myriad ways in which Zulu deviates from historical fact.
To be upset that Zulu Dawn doesn't showy the gory details of a battle's aftermath seems rather absurd.
I can't think of many movies that do show post-battle mutilation, regardless of their motivation.
I'm not terribly fond of Zulu Dawn myself. Its main raison d'etre is attacking imperialism and it's certainly skewed in that direction. Saying it doesn't "really" depict Isandlwana because it doesn't show the aftermath is ludicrous.
Or again, we could go over the many, many ways Zulu distorts what really happened at Rorke's Drift, and say "Rorke's Drift has never been depicted on film." Selective outrage indeed.
You only seem to complain about omissions that make whites look bad. Why is that?
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
You only seem to complain about omissions that make whites look bad.
Truth be told I don't entirely disagree with you re: Zulu Dawn. The vehemence of your initial comment certainly threw me off, though. That its depiction of Isandlwana does not show the post-battle mutilations doesn't make it any less "true" a depiction than Zulu is of Rorke's Drift.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
There is much debate regrading both of the incidents surrounding Isandlwana and the subsequent Rorkes Drift. An attempt was made to show good points and bad points. Historically Chelmsford is well reported by various parties. A debate regarding the validity of VCs won post that slaughter goes on. Considering VCs for a moment we are given the heroic behaviour of Colour Sgt Bourne who did not get this honour. The portrayal of this man was very moving in the scene where we are listening to a roll call. He must have played a very major part in this defense. To have anyone over 66 inches tall is really not doing the actual man any great justice as I believe he is very short making his ability to command even greater in the circumstances.
Many parts were played out for the movie to make for an entertaining tale which were not true to the actual character. Hood was shown to be a hood yet reports suggest otherwise.
The recipients of the highest honour will not be denigrated I feel by anyone especially those who have faced down danger of this kind.
Zulus release the spirit from a killed body apparently and we view that as mutilation.
The bodies at the end of battle were allegedly as high as the top of the defences and not as thinly spread as seen in the movie.
It is said that 20,000 shots were used up by the defenders. 400 casualties work out at 500 rounds per kill. Someone was not instructing our brave soldiers too well then. Those rounds would have been very welcome a few hours earlier by those other poor fellows we are told who had go and sign for each round after firing them.
It is wrong to suggest that modern weaponry being used against [savages ] is unfair. Well if my information is correct and you can manipulate a force to take the punishment who knows you could get a victory.
One poster above suggest not wishing to nominate potential actors for roles as indicative of wishing to see a remake. Dont know if he is saying that telling the story was wrong in the first place or the 64 movie was so great.
Many of the heroes of this day did manage to dine out quite well for some time. Not unlike those who charged at Balaclava [anniversary only three days ago ] along with those who managed to pretend to have charged. In the Good ol US they know of this problem with the many survivors of the Battle of Little Big Horn.
I enjoy good adventure yarns for egample the Four Feathers in its frequent outings is always a good watch but we know it is not factual true. We also are now aware that over time things we know to be facts are in a percentage of cases found not to be so at all.
So my nomination for for the hero of Rorkes Drift will be MEL GIBSON who can be a descendant of William Wallace [allegedly welsh anyway] he is also shortish and could be the aging Bourne. He could really assist our already lacking scholars in yet another mashing of historical stories.
My main objection to the story was in fact the pushing of the welsh thing anyway. If interested look up the available muster Rolls for this unit and a surprise might be found there. I think that Paddy Mcginty et al needed to be praised. He outnumbered the Taffs I believe.
A remake would really have to have slaughter on the scale of those Starship Trooper movies. NOT PC at all.
Beautiful Beautiful scenery. There are also documentary's out there of recent times regarding these two days.
If you want most of the truth of this battle read a book by Saul David, Zulu.
Many British heroes have been small men - Nelson to name but one. Height has never indicated leadership, going back as far as THE Alexander!
Point of immediate correction - Wallace was SCOTTISH!
I thoroughly dislike Gibson as an actor and as a person, so let's not go down that road.
MEL GIBSON..... could be the aging Bourne
'Those rounds would have been very welcome a few hours earlier by those other poor fellows we are told who had go and sign for each round after firing them.'
Presumably by this you are referring to the stories of Quartermasters' at Isandhlwana refusing to issue ammunition except to men of their own unit. I this this has been pretty well debunked now, you might do worse than read 'How Can Man Die Better' by Lt. Col. Mike Snook, an account of Isandhlwana by a professional soldier rather than a professional historian. Lt. Col. Snook knows how the army works and what a quartermaster would do in that situation. His book on Rorkes Drift 'Like Wolves on the Fold' is an excellent and convincing read as well, both books are rather more convincing than Saul David's book which was mentioned in another post.
Emma Watson as Margareta
shareThey should NEVER remake this movie!!!!!!!!
shareNEVER - nuff said :)
Half Irish, Half German - hated by all. But at least I'm not Welsh