The Rorke's Drift VC Discussion Forum
(View Discussion Rules)

** IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL USERS **

PLEASE NOTE: This forum is now inactive and is provided for reference purposes only. The live forum is available at www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum

(Back To Topic List)

Date	Original Topic
7th February 2002	Is This A Goof or Not? By Diana Blackwell When Chard introduces Bromhead to Adendorf, and says he's "From Isandhlwana," Bromhead says, "You've come from there...Is it true?" Which implies that he, Bromhead, has already heard something. But how could Bromhead have heard anything? He just met Adendorf a second ago. Later on, Bromhead tells Chard "Started the barricades though. Managed to think of that." Again, how would Bromhead know to start barricades before meeting Adendorf? Am I missing something here?
Date	Replies
8th February 2002	Glenn Wade Hi Diana! Maybe a cut scene? Possibly a rumour amongst the 24th? Bit of a mystery? I'll keep looking! Glenn
8th February 2002	andy lee You certainly know your stuff Diana, I have watched Zulu over One hundred times and not noticed any of this,you put me to shame. Perhapes following on from the conversation of a Zulu film re-make you would get my vote forthe producer role. One question for you why when you read anything by Michael Caine or see any interview with him why does he say very little about the film. As not only did he make his fame from this Zulu but in my opinion it was the only good film he ever appeared in.
8th February 2002	John Young Diana, Here are the facts, rather than the 'faction', Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead did hear about the disaster at Isandlwana from another source other than Adendorff. In fact whilst Chard was talking to Adendorff a messenger arrived from Bromhead, asking him to come up to the camp at once. One can only conclude that the comment in the film is meant to confirm the information that he already has. On film goofs, has any one seen the soldier bang his head on the wagon wheel in the background, whilst the water is going round, one can almost read his lips on a dvd. John Young, Chairman, Anglo-Zulu War Research Society.
8th February 2002	Gary Laiberty Hi all, Ok, I have one for you. In the 'Hospital' scene. Hook talking to Witt's daughter..."28 days field punishment, do you known what he did,sent my misses money." Be side the fact that Hook had never set foot in Brecon, how did Hook known of Sergeant Maxfield? Sergeant Maxfield was from "G" Company and Hook from "B" Company, NCO's don't give punishment out to other OR's from different companys. Just something to think about. Gary
8th February 2002	Roger Clifton Did you say you were American? It's just that further to Andy Lee's suggestion that you produce the remake of Zulu, I was wondering how you'd write the US Marines into the story.
8th February 2002	Ian Woodason Andy, I agree with Michael Caine himself when he says the role he is proudest of is that of Peachey Carnehan in 'The Man Who Would Be King' 1975 - This is the other 'good film' he has appeared in! At his lifetime achievement award TV program last year it ws the music to this film which he entered to and was one of those which had its stills projected on the wall. The role in 'Zulu' is made by the film far more than the actor as opposed to TMWWBK where the relationship of Sean Connery and Caine is the main focus of the film. All the best, Ian
8th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Hi, guys, thanks for the replies. Andy, I, too, had seen "Zulu" a couple hundred times before noticing this little hole in the story. Thanks for letting me produce the remake. :) Caine does talk about "Zulu" in his autobiography...but he doesn't go on and on about it, which is too bad. John, thanks for the details on what *really* happened. Gary, you're right about the Hook/Maxfield bit. However, I consider than an inaccuracy, not a goof. To me, a goof is a mistake that exists within the closed world of the film itself, regardless of anything that may have happened in the real world. Roger, very funny. You must have me confused with someone else. Best wishes to all of you, Diana
8th February 2002	James Garland Gary, NCOs give out punishments to any junior ORs that they feel like irrespective of their Company. I know to my cost being an ex soldier.
12th February 2002	Julian Whybra As I recall, in the film, a rider is seen galloping off in the background after having talked to Bromhead -this presumably is supposed to be Sibthorpe or Evans or one of those who stopped at the Drift before riding on. Bromhead then meets the NNC officer (Adendorff)talking to Chard and asks him if it's true. QED.
12th February 2002	Diana Blackwell What we see (from Chard's vantage point, by the river) is two riders coming toward RD, riding one dark horse and one white horse. These prove to be Adendorf and his "trooper" (on the white horse) to whom Chard later says "Ride like hell." Eventually the Witts show up, of course, but prior to Adendorf and his trooper, nobody (besides Bromhead) is seen approaching RD.
13th February 2002	Julian Whybra I understand that the implication is there that Sibthorpe, having left the river and Chard, stops off at the hospital and informs Bromhead, leaving it open for him to meet Adendorff later. Anyway, what's the point of all this, this is just a film representation, it was never meant to be accurate. Wouldn't time be better spent discussing what really happened?
13th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Julian, Sorry if I'm being dense, but I don't see Sibthorpe or anybody else leaving the river and Chard. In the film, Chard heads back to the mission station as soon as he sees the riders in the distance, without meeting or talking to them. As for the point of this discussion and time being "better spent" on history....geez, dude, lighten up! For me, examining "Zulu" in microscopic detail is an end in itself. Apparently there are others who feel the same way. If you don't, that's fine--nobody's forcing you.
14th February 2002	Julian Whybra OK Diana. I've just watched the clip. Two riders approach the Drift. Chard gets his men together and returns to camp. Bromhead's out hunting. Chard chats to Adendorff, starts to organize barricades and sends off 'Sibthorpe' to warn Helpmekaar (Ride like hell). Bromhead then appears, presumably having just returned from hunting, sees all the activity and (presumably) asks some NCO what's going on, receives the info, goes up to Chard and Adendorff (with 2 fs) and says Is it true. No goof. Under the 19th-century circs I think "Pshaw, Madam, get heavy" might be more appropriate. (tee hee)
14th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Julian, Hey, I thought you considered this discussion pointless! :) Anyway, nice try, but your creative "presumablys" overlook two details. First off, Bromhead is DONE hunting when he talks to Chard at the river. (Remember, he puts his cape back on & dusts himself off? Note also the dead animals hanging from poles, the leisurely pace of the bearers, the direction of their travel, etc.) Seems likely he gets back to the station before Chard (though we don't see this). Next thing we know, barricades are being built (announced by that horny, bodice-ripping guy in the hospital). But this is NOT Chard's doing because later on Bromhead claims credit for it. ("Started the barricades though. Managed to think of that." Which leaves me with my original quandary. How did Bromhead know to start those barricades?
14th February 2002	Julian Whybra What makes you think he was done hunting? All you saw him do was cross the river - you don't even know which direction he went. Perhaps he'd had a day off the set? Forgotten his lines? Perhaps "Is it true?" refers to which horse he'd heard had won the Cheltenham Gold Cup? I did watch the soldier bang his head on the waggon though! Assa guy that John Young told us about. Laugh? I nearly died.
14th February 2002	Boyd How about the two DIFFERENT rifles used in the 'Hunting' scene. One is deffinately NOT an army rifle, but the other is.
14th February 2002	Boyd There is also the magicaly appearing cartridge boxes and traps on the door to the store room where Rev Whit is locked. The scene at the exit of the burning hospital is time sequenced wrong. Watch for Jonesy's exiting and re-entering the burning building. There are several other editing glitches that I cannot recall as I sit here at work.
14th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Julian, Actually i think it seems clear that Bromhead is coming back from his hunting trip when he meets Chard for the first time...that he's finished with hunting. But I can yield you this point, if you like. It doesn't matter. In fact, if Bromhead continues hunting the problem actually worsens because then he would be gone during the period when he would have had to have started the barricades. Seems to me the goof is real, though I remain open to persuasion. (It should go without saying that goofs in "Zulu" in no way invalidate the film, which is a classic and my most cherished personal favorite.)
14th February 2002	Julian whybra Well on that we agree (except maybe for The Third Man).
18th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Now I'm starting to think there is no goof, because Chard asks "Did the runner bring orders" and Bromhead answers "He brought orders to the commander of this post." I had previously thought the "runner" was Adendorff or his companion, but that would not be consistent with the dialogue and sequence of events. So the "runner" must have come earlier in a scene that is implied but not shown. This would be a hole in the exposition but not really a hole in the story.
18th February 2002	John Young Diana, Come away from the film, for a moment, I knows it's going to hard. Truth is Captain Alan C. Gardner, 14th (King's) Hussars, whilst escaping from the fatal field at Isandlwana had the presence of mind to dispatch a note, by a galloper, to warn the depot at the Mission Station at Rorke's Drift. In addition there were other survivors who passed through the post. John Young, Chairman, Anglo-Zulu War Research Society.
18th February 2002	Diana Blackwell John, Thanks again for your enlightening commentary on the facts. I appreciate your taking the trouble to explain what happened. It is possible that the makers of the film had in mind the very fact you mention. I hope you will not think me argumentative if I add that what the filmmakers may or may not have intended is, strictly speaking, irrelevant to the finished work of art, as are the historical facts. Unlike the majority of visitors to this site, I'm not a soldier or military buff, a historian, a war gamer, a British patriot, or a descendent of a Zulu War figure. I'm an artist and I approach the movie as a work of art. In the same spirit, I would advocate a more widespread adoption of the goof/inaccuracy distinction. The former is internal in reference(e.g., Hook's braces/suspenders going magically up and down), the latter external (he didn't really wear that cute little scarf). You don't have to know anything about the real world to notice a goof, you just have to pay attention to the film. But to notice an inaccuracy, you have to know your history. I still await your verdict as to whether a goof (as opposed to an inaccuracy) is present.
18th February 2002	John Young Diana, I did try to encourage these sorts of things elsewhere on the site. Suchas mentioning 'Jack Hawkins' sprouting a moustache and side whiskers as he decamps from Ulundi. I have a shed load of them, but it seemed only one person expressed any interest. If you are interested I could type them up and send them to you off of the forum. In my humble opinion - no goof, we just didn't see 'the runner'. The same as we were spared 'Miss Witt' & 'John Chard' walking off into the sunrise holding hands! And you don't know how close we were to seeing that scene! Forget Hook's braces, just look for Stanley Baker's belt when he's been wounded - sheer goof. Or zoom in on 'Michael Caine' as he is riding his horse back, after his hunting foray, and see it actually my friend, John Poyner, the Property Master. Keep searching. John
19th February 2002	Diana Blackwell John, Are you serious about Chard and Miss Witt? (Cringe.) If so, please tell me more. I'd love to see your "goof parade" if it isn't any trouble. Diana
19th February 2002	John Young Diana, I am sorry to say yes I'm. I have seen the shooting script and it is there believe me! There's an illustrated American comic book from 1964, and it's there, the comic's printers obviously didn't have the updated script. "Goof Parade" may take a few days - but I'll put it together. John
19th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Whoa, what a trip. At what point in the story did this hand-holding occur, and what was the context? Please tell me the film was not trying to introduce a romantic subplot. You are certainly to be envied for having had access to the script. Can you recommend any avenue by which others (like me) could avail ourselves of the same opportunity? I'd kill for a copy of that comic book! Can you tell me the publisher, author, exact title, etc? I want to track it down! Thanks for all the info, John. Diana
24th February 2002	Steve Lee Can anyone identify the two medals worn by Colour-Seargeant Bourne during the battle scenes? I would suggest they are incorrect
24th February 2002	Eddie Saunders Were they holding hands before or after she slapped him on the face?
25th February 2002	John Young Eddie, After she'd slapped him, the Witts come back with the relief column, which wasn't bad as they were coming from Isandlwana. Diana, Sorry, I have replied to your message of 19/2/02 until now, you've got it - a happy romantic ending, that's where it ended, not with Stanley putting the shield into the ground. The comic was called 'Zulu', with the words 'Hold or Die' as a secondary title. It appeared in 1964, I believe it was produced by the same company that did Classic Comics, in the U.S.A. There was a copy on e-bay a few weeks ago. There are stills on the inside front cover, including one of the cast & soldier extras on location - sadly for you, James Booth isn't there as he didn't go on location. John
25th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Thanks for the info, John! Oh, dear. I thank my lucky stars that that "Zulu" as we know it has no love story of any kind.. But if the filmmakers had to manufacture one, Miss Witt's most logical partner would not be Chard. It would be Hook. (Duh!) Hook is sexier than Chard and he's also unburdened by excessive scruples. Moreover, I submit that there's *already* a sexual tension between Hook and Miss Witt throughout their one scene together. It starts when he enters the room with his pants down and inadvertently flashes her. He then creeps up behind her in mock-predatory fashion and pauses to greet her gallantly and show off the arc of his chest. Miss Witt,announcing that the men are to be evacuated, can hardly take her eyes off Hook, and is visibly disappointed when her words leave him unimpressed. When Hook stands astride Maxfield's body, bayonet in hand, Miss Witt gazes imploringly at Hook with a look that is half "No! No! No!" and half "Yes! Yes! Yes!" Margareta is a passionate girl; at her age, mandatory inexperience must be growing burdensome. You can see her starting to melt. By the time Hook is carrying Maxfield back to bed, Margareta is following him through the room, smiling. She thinks the bit about his wife is cute. But Hook's pride and bluff cynicism offend her, and she leaves the room with (her idea of) a devastating put-down, and then listens outside to the door to hear what he says about her. Notice that when Hook makes his predictably lewd (but true) comment, and the men laughingly suggest him as the agent of the recommended transformation, Miss Witt shows neither indignation nor anger. I think she sort of likes the idea. This suggests a raunchy tryst in the storeroom. Now, isn't that hotter, juicier, *better* than Miss Witt holding hands with Chard?
26th February 2002	Eddie saunders This isn't the first time you've thought about this is it Diana? Stunning observation though! I was just going to post a message about how I thought that the sound of the rifles always "died" too fast when Chard ordered "cease firing" and about whether this was a "goof" or an inaccuracy but after your Hook/Witt number there, I really can't see anyone being too bothered about my rifle noise conversation!
26th February 2002	Diana Blackwell Eddie, You're right (blush!) and thank you. (I also consider "Zulu" a masterpiece of homoerotic suggestion, especially in the subplot involving Maxfield. Which is an *admirable* thing, in my view, although I 'm sure somebody will attack me for mentioning it). The rifle fire dioes die off quickly. If it *feels* too fast, it's a goof, since sound effects are supposed to be timed right. But that doesn't rule out inaccuracy; the film action could also deviate from reality in any number of ways.