MovieChat Forums > Zulu (1964) Discussion > Any truth to this?

Any truth to this?

posted 11 years ago by Bad-Show
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm trying to decide wether to get the Blu Ray (of which arguments still rage wether DNR has 'ruined' the picture quality). Someone on Amazon said this:

"In one of the most thrilling scenes Swiss Corporal Schiess, nursing a bandaged leg, leaves the relative safety of the hospital and launches on a solo rampage, bludgeoning Zulu warriors with his crutch and bayoneting them left, right and centre. Coming to Chard's rescue at the crucial moment, as John Barry's rousing music soars, Schiess's wild killing spree culminates in a quite extraordinary climax with his turning triumphantly to the camera, laughing deleriously at the slaughter with a hideous and terrifying glee. I don't remember anything quite like it in the whole of cinema but now the memory is all that is left because the Paramount censor has taken it upon himself to clean up not just the print but also its content. Now, as Schiess, facing away, begins to turn towards the camera, the scene suddenly breaks off to Chard, lying wounded on the ground, depriving the sequence of its disturbingly deranged conclusion. Why? Has Paramount taken fright at the prospect of a lawsuit brought by a sensitive Swiss soul, objecting to the portrayal of one of his countrymen as a goggle-eyed maniac, revelling in bloodshed? No idea, but the Paramount 90th anniversary "special edition" DVD of 2002 suffered the same cruel cut."

Now, I guess I've not seen that scene, unless it was shown on tv maybe. I've only got the DVD. Can anyone verify the veracity of this fellows claims? And would you reccommend my upgrading to the BR?

[–] david_colbourne 11 years ago

[–] gregorioos 11 years ago

I saw Zulu at the cinema and remember the scene very well, the deranged grin on Schiess's face as he turned to face the camera. Marvellous! That is the only time I've seen it as it is always cut from any television transmission and from the dvd releases!

You appear to be right. In the movie Schiess seems to be screwing up his courage in the hospital and then begins revelling in the slaughter, ending in a look of mad delight when he turns to the camera.

Maybe the guy who edited my DVD just didn't like Swiss coppers, but whatever the reason half of Schiess' mad rampage was missing. In the final shot where Chard is fighting off two Zulus, Schiess kills one but there are two bodies on the ground. Maybe the other Zulu just died laughing.

[–] nickm2 11 years ago

Well, I doubt the Swiss were disturbed given their history of supplying crack mercenaries to various European Armies; don't they have a statue in honor of the Swiss Bodyguards who died defending Louis XIV?

[–] Bad-Show 11 years ago

So it's always been cut...how strange. Would you reccommend getting the Blu Ray or is the quality as bad as some folks claim? (DNR, waxy looking faces etc)

[–] deeveed 11 years ago

You know from what I've read about the making of the film (Zulu With Some Guts Behind It) the film we see today could have been made more explicit if it wasn't for the filmmakers' concern that the film had to go though a rigorous "checking" process when it came to the bloody mayhem scenes. For example, when examiners looked over a possible scene which was a shot of the buggy being pulled over the body of a fallen warrior, it was noted that they have "trouble with the shot". It was this and other shots that came to the filmmakers attention from the film examiners and made them give thought to work out how they would do certain scenes after getting the comments. The "bayoneting" scenes did get alot of attention. From the looks of, the film always had an aura of 'censorship' surrrounding it.

[–] jozedxyqk 11 years ago

I've got the blu-ray and I much prefer it to the DVD. To be fair, I'm in the States and the DVDs available for Zulu in the US are absolutely awful transfers. Mine looked like it was ripped from VHS, much like my DVD copy of Cross of Iron. Absolutely shameful.

I've got the UK import for the blu-ray and it's a much, much better transfer. It's crisp and clear with significantly better audio quality, though very much so digitally remastered. Big time DNR, here, almost no grain at all. I don't think the faces look too waxy in particular (though they do, a bit), but the lack of grain does show in the faces/skin of the actors, as well.

I'd definitely recommend it if the only alternatives are one of the Region 1 NTSC US released DVDs, both of which suck. If you've got the Region 2 PAL, which I heard was a better transfer, then I think it'd come down to personal preference over film grain vs DNR.