• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Has anybody seen the movie "Zulu" ??

it takes place in 1872 between the british and the zulu tribes.

pretty interesting at the end when they fight.


im only watching it casue my bro has to for school
 
I got the DVD. It's pretty poor quality. Not the movie but the actual DVD production. If you go to scene selection, there are only like 3 scenes to choose from... Anyway, if you just want to watch the whole movie, it's a great deal!!
 
heh that is a bomb ass movie..but i hate firing line combat...its soo pointless!...Imagine the Civil war with gurillla tactics 🙂 that would be crazy.
 


<< I think im at the end and i dont like the results

What bs the british soldiers are still alive
>>

You do realize this was a real event right?
 


<< I think im at the end and i dont like the results

What bs the british soldiers are still alive
>>

Huh?

First of all it's a true story and second of all were you expecting the alamo?

Ever hear the expression, "Remember Rourke's Drift!"

You know why they don't yell that going into battle? Because they didn't die...
 
heh that is a bomb ass movie..but i hate firing line combat...its soo pointless!...Imagine the Civil war with gurillla tactics that would be crazy

yeah, i don't understand the fighting like a gentleman crap
 
<< I think im at the end and i dont like the results

What bs the british soldiers are still alive >>

You do realize this was a real event right?>> Yes
 


<< HOW COULD the 100 soliders win against the 4,000 zulus when the 1,200 british before them couldnt??? >>



It's been a while since I saw the movie, but.... The Zulus would have won the battle in the end. But the Zulu-king was so impressed by the bravery of the british that he decided to spare them.
 
yeah and well i know that the gunpowder played a big part in the battle.


btw i dont like what the british were doing back then taking over countries and all
 


<< btw i dont like what the british were doing back then taking over countries and all >>



Sure, but that should not play any part when you form your opinion on this movie. Judge this movie as it is, there's no need to mix up ancient british foreign-policies in to it.
 


<< btw i dont like what the british were doing back then taking over countries and all >>


What, the war for land policy? If you hate the British for their practices then, you must hate a lot of countries. Going to war, gaining land, treating those people poorly...gee, many countries have done that. Does that mean you hate the present-day country? I would hope not...
 


<< HOW COULD the 100 soliders win against the 4,000 zulus when the 1,200 british before them couldnt??? >>

The British forces at Rourke's drift were in a superior defensive position and the engagement on the whole was far better organized than Isandhlwana (the massacre you mentioned). OTOH, at Isandhlwana the Brits committed just about every possible gaffe you could make. Moving alone in enemy territory, and with no knowledge of the location of the Zulu army, they divided their forces in half and sent one group out on a wild goose chase. The remaining forces in camp underestimated size and strength of the Zulu military and foolishly did not form a laager (i.e. circle the wagons and dig in), leaving their camp sprawled all over the face of a prominent hill. They did not employ rear guards (or even lookouts, I believe), leaving a perfect route for about 5,000 of the Zulus to sweep around the hill completely out of view from the main camp and take the British from behind, which also largely cut off their escape route to complete the slaughter.

The biggest Brit mistake, though, was their troop deployment as a whole. Rather than concentrate their firepower into a closeknit array--such as the British square that propelled them to victory later in the war--they foolishly arranged their forces in a *very* sparse formation. There were often gaps of hundreds of meters between companies, and even within those units men could find themselves spread out at intervals of several meters. In such a position, their guns were could do little to stop the charge of 20,000 fanatical Zulus. Furthermore, the defense was not coordinated; the right flank had no idea what was happening on the left and even in places were the lines held (such as the right) individual commanders often found their men isolated by the retreat of a neighboring company and were forced to pull back in turn.

Serious logistical problems compounded the situation. Ammo trains were left far to the rear of the camp so resupply was excrutiatingly slow--even when British troops managed to check the Zulu advance they were often compelled to withdraw for lack of bullets. To make matters worse, the ammo crates required a specific tool to open and these were often nowhere to be found...troops had to resort to frantically smashing at the boxes with their rifle butts to break them open. Worst of all, Individual quartermasters often refused to supply units not under their official jurisdiction so men were sent back to the front empty-handed, unable to find their own quartermaster in the chaos of the battle. It was a total disaster.
 
Back
Top