you are currently viewing: Discussion Forum


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


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

(Back To Topic List)

DateOriginal Topic
By Videokiller
Some friends and I recently watched "Zulu" and agreed the film has a strong homoerotic vibe. It begins when Michael Caine first arrives in the movie, flirtatiously tapping himself with his feather. Anyone agree?
24th May 2004Miguel
Man, if they see homoerotic vibes in that scene of "Zulu", I wonder what they will see in "Gladiator" or "Troy"...

No, I don't see anything flirtatious in Michael Caine tapping himself with his feather (that was not a feather, by the way). I rather see it as a good display of his character's upper class demeanor, but that was just my opinion.

Anyway, I'd love to hear what Sir Michael has to say about that!!

Canary Islands
24th May 2004Grant Best
Meanwhile, enjoy your vibes!

24th May 2004Diana Blackwell
Yeah, I agree...but not because of Michael Caine's character and his whisk-tapping! This has been discussed at length before in this forum. You can use the "search" function on this site's homepage to locate the discussion.
25th May 2004Andy Lee

Come on folks this is surely a wind-up. What have you all been drinking! There again being totally in love with Britney Spears I would not know about such matters.

25th May 2004Melvin Hunt
Makes you think doesn't it?
First Biggles and Algy, then Noddy and Big Ears, Batman and Robin. Now Chard and Bromhead. All exposed.
Are you sure that Caine's not just swatting flies?
26th May 2004Michael Boyle
I suppose Homoerotism is in the eye of the beholder but it seems any war movie could fall victim.How about "Sands of Iwo Jima" where John Wayne does the Mexican Hat Dance with a particulary graceless Pvt?
Though the Duke's been dead these thirty years I would hesitate to speculate on that connection for at least another decade or so as he's only six feet under and stood six ft.three!
26th May 2004Alan Critchley

26th May 2004Michael Boyle
If in fact anyone is really interested in this "discussion" may I suggest it would be more appreciated in one of the many film enthusiast forums found the web.
While I've always maintained that every forum can use the occaisonal irreverant thread to lighten things up a bit,I do feel that a sight dedicated to the memory of those honored by their country's highest decoration for valour may not be the optimal location for this one.Sorry Alan I hadn't quite thought this through previously.
26th May 2004Peter Ewart
Thirty years, Michael? Not quite 25, in fact. (Just a little pedantry before Alan pulls the plug ...)

Seriously, though, the topic has come up before and been sensibly debated if I remember correctly. However, in that particular scene wasn't he simply swatting flies or brushing dust from his tunic, or at least giving the impression of doing so, thereby conforming to the rather foppish role which Endfield and Baker had mapped out for him at that early stage of the film?

In real life, as opposed to the film world, it was not at all uncommon for young officers in Victorian and Edwardian times to have a great affection for each other and to show this in their behaviour and correspondence, and this can be seen in many of the surviving letters of the Great War. It was not considered at all strange to "love" a fellow officer whose character and personality appeared to match all that had been held up as fitting, honourable, courageous, dashing, romantic or even beautiful at public school. (That's not to say there wasn't the odd "crush" here and there too!)

We live in totally different times, even though it is little more than a lifespan away, and I think it would be "way off beam" to assume there was anything homosexual (or homoerotic if that's the same thing?) in such a relationship between two young army officers, whether there HAD been any idea of such a thing in the film ZULU or not.

27th May 2004Marc Jung
Would suggest that videokiller is that way inclined, and sees it nearly elsewhere some of the time. British officers have sometimes been portrayed as 'dandies' (Check out 'Waterloo' on Channel Four last week). Videokiller must just love uniforms to boot. I'm with Andy on Britney Spears. Now, her in command, well, let's not go there!
28th May 2004Grant Best
Can't see why not. Spears = Zulu and phallic symbolism. Britney, a good old British imperial allusion.
Would provide a 'fine pair of shoulders' in any remake, and the possibility should not be ruled out. As long as there's enough hetero-eroticism, perhaps Videokiller might not watch?
28th May 2004Andy Lee
If your still out there Mel Gibson please take note I'm not the only one who wants Britney Spears as Miss Witt in your Zulu remake.


28th May 2004Miguel
Hear, hear, Andy!
I'd rather have Britney portrayed as one of the bare-breasted Zulu brides in the initial massive wedding.
Other than a very slight, minor detail, she would do a great Zulu bride, don't you think? A detail, however, that given Hollywood's careless approach to some historical facts, wouldn't refrain the producers to feature her. And in this particular case it would be something that we would all really, really, appreciate.