That was an excellent one.

Sorry, this movie sucks

Fantastic!

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Movie Review: "Zulu" (1964)In late international reception, released by distributing Paramount Studios, Hollywood in June 1964 missing the Academy-Award qualification deadline of December 31st 1963 by miles and also-neglected for another year by its own kind to be only nominated once at the 18th edition of "The British Academy Film And Television Awards" (BAFTA) in awe-striking exotic as detailed South-East-African native tribe pieces of art directions initiated by production designer Ernest Archer (1910-1990), who then eventually won an Academy-Award fo the rarely-known major British production of the Royal-Russian-Tsar-Saga "Nicholas & Alexandra" directed by "Patton" director Franklin J. Schaffner."Zulu" comes along with 135-Minute-Editorial of constant raging tribe of South African warriors opposing naturally by basic instinct the imperalistic attitude of natural-resourcing retrieving as region-securing British Royal Army, here so impressively portrayed by a star-making performance with 30-year-old actor Michael Caine restraining future screen-taking close-up powers to be experienced in Alfie (1966) and "Get Carter" (1971) in favors for also-producing falling short actor Stanley Baker (1928-1976) due to an one-dimensionally written leading character of Lieutenant John Chard by also co-writing director Cy Endfield (1914-1995), who received at that time an overwhelming independently-received production budget for fast-track deliveries toward award-season 1963, taking on pictures as "Tom Jones" (1963), eventually winning Best Picture due to lack of competition, and Magnus-Opus "Cleopatra" (1963) starring Elizabeth Taylor (1932-2011) & Richard Burton (1925-1984), who needed to turn down one of the initial roles due to schedule conflicts, but nevertheless shares some vocal atmosphere in narration post-production additional-monologue dubbing, when the picture unfolds its potential epic proportions in an slow-left-panning after-battle scenario with marching "Zulu" warriors walking through corpses of red-coated British soldiers, only to come full circle after minor-suspense sequences of deadlock situations with foreseen food and ammunition struggles neglected hand-to-hand combats, envisioning the bayonet-slashing black flesh toward inevitable historically-proven victors of a minor group of Royal British soldiers.The out-going high-concept scenario of highly-dramatized real events on January 22nd / 23rd in year 1879, when waves of battle under siege-holding 450 advancely-weaponized colonialists against 4,000 primal-rage-pushing Natives does not fail to attract after more than 50 years in distribution services, but then again becomes a controversially dragging cinematic experience, when the recurring motive "David vs. Goliath" stand-offs in emotionally-superior motion pictures endeavors from "The Alamo" (1960) directed as starred by John Wayne to digital-enhancements of a new age in "300" (2006) starring Gerard Butler & Lena Headey directed by Zack Synder tend to just entertain more these days.© 2018 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

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.

heroic, great, impressive, remarkable. an entire dictionary content for define a film who remains special at each new meet. for performances and for the great script, for stories of each character and for the fight scenes. and for the feel to be eyewitness to a confrontation who becomes, scene by scene, not only epic but with solid roots. because it is the story of an empire and its people, about memories, vulnerabilities and courage, sacrifice and the right answer to a huge challenge. a film about honor. and about war. not only against the Zulu attacks. but against yourself. the admirable virtue of film remains the humanity. the escape from the temptation to be a manifesto. or only a patriotic lesson of history. remaining only a story. about few people, in Natal, resisting to a impossible to stop attack. this is all. and it is enough.

I couldn't but help be reminded of Starship Troopers when I saw Zulu, with the protagonists defending themselves against the enemy attempting to swarm their headquarters. This movie was Michael Caine's breakout movie, well before he was Albert in the Dark Knight trilogy several decades later.I wish there was another movie about the unsung heroes of Zulu. I'm thinking of the support staff who kept the British uniforms clean and crisp amidst the daily battle of war, the chefs who keep up the soldiers' appetites after a hard day defending the fort, the doctors, so many people who play a role behind the scenes. How did the regular food supply get replenished? What did the British soldiers eat for breakfast? A Full English breakfast?