rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
GlennWade


Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 151
Location: Swansea
Reply with quote
Hi All

Thought I'd add my worth Smile

I do not think, in all seriousness, that a modern depiction of Rorke's Drift would make a successful movie. Astounding and heroic as the battle was, to show an accurate version on screen, sticking to the historical facts, would be a bit dragged out. 'Zulu' added to the battle and created a movie that has hooked each member of this forum at some point. In the modern world though, people look for scale. If I was to see a movie about the Zulu War made, I would want it to be a hit. Where therefore does the answer lay? One word..Isandlwana. To think about the possibilities and scale of a modern movie about the most crushing single battle in Victorian History, is enough to make the hairs on your neck stand on end. Forget Zulu Dawn, good film as we know it but all in all, a missed opportunity.
Such a movie is not unthinkable, watch the beginning of Gladiator or the Last Samurai, put Isandlwana in your minds when you see those movies and then you'll see what I mean. The last thing we want to see is a carbon remake of 'Zulu', Isandlwana holds the key to a successful movie, and one day, I hope, we shall see it. Idea

Cheers

Glenn
View user's profileSend private message
re
chiba2000


Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 5
Reply with quote
Sheldon Hall etc. -

Well Alamo was good movie if you ask me, and knowing that the director wanted a realistic feel he tried as much as possible to avoid using lame (cheating) CG effects. I thought the intensity etc in it was very good, that's what I would like to see in future re-makes of ZULU and ZULU DAWN, and the feel of war are horrible and terrifying. I'm not trying to rack down on the two flix, I like both very much (nothing else to watch), it's just that old war movies tend to be so heroic and "clean", which in my mind doesn't make it a realistic "war" movie. Not said that acting ect was bad, but with today�s standards and movie making techniques, I think we could see much better stuff of these two movies. And common, we love the Zulu war stuff, so why not wish for re-makes or alt. versions of these famous events. And why not in one of them include the final battle at Ulundi, a 5000 men redcoat square (I know Four Feathers, but it's a tiny square;) blazing away...would be cool. I'm a sucker for big battles. My two cents... Smile

On a side note, I'm also keeping my fingers crossed that some darn director/producer dare venture into the realm of the Roman Empire and make a huge epic movie with grand scale battles with the Roman Legions. From what I know only Fall of Roman Empire and the opening of Gladiator are the only ones with anything worth mentioning when it comes to Roman warfare.

/Chiba2000 Cool
View user's profileSend private message
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Chiba,

I too quite liked the ALAMO remake, but we weren't enough to make it a b.o. hit, which was my point: nothing to do with the quality, which is another matter entirely, but bucks is the bottom line for Hollywood. For that reason, and bearing in mind that ZULU DAWN was also a major flop, I can't see anyone shelling out the gazillions it would cost to restage a battle that was for the Brits a massive defeat. And don't get your hopes up for another Roman-era epic either, as both TROY and expecially ALEXANDER were b.o. disappointments in the States (yes, I know they were about Greeks and Carthaginians, not Romans, but it makes little difference where Hollywood is concerned - they were both about men in skirts, and there aren't many actors who can carry that off).

But my main point was that your preference for modern "realism" is a taste for one kind of technique over another: "today's standards", as you put it, aren't inherently better than yesterday's, just different, though I can understand why you might want greater "intensity" from your battle scenes.
View user's profileSend private message
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
Sheldon..good points...and check out the recent King Kong...what a joke...I don't know...today's moguls feel that they apparently have to spend the "gazillions" as you note to get out the blockbuster movie but the film just doesn't match its hype. It's almost as if today each and every movie that has a substantial budget gets hyped and hyped and hyped to Olympian heights. Unfrotunately, it's a sickness of movie marketing today. In the hypothetical case that anyone would want to do the Zulu films again I'm afraid it would succumb to it as well...(heh heh don't let the Americans get it!!!!!). In my opinion, perhaps perhaps if Mr. Weir liked a script and a screenplay I'd say that maybe just maybe we'd get an interesting remake (he did wonders with Gallipoli and it wasn't done a big budget))...but let's not hold our collective breath.
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Rich,

Peter Weir, yes... I very much liked MASTER & COMMANDER (my fave film of its year, though THAT didn't do as well at the b.o. as expected either). Haven't seen KING KONG yet - or NARNIA - but the reports I've heard have been decidedly "mixed" and mostly negative.

One of my favourite comments about Hollywood blockbusters was related by Robert Mitchum in a TV interview in which he talked about working with John Huston. He quoted a conversation with the director, who told him: "If they want 'em bad, kid, we can make 'em bad - it'll cost a little more, but we can make 'em bad if they want 'em..."
View user's profileSend private message
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
Mr. Green great line!..I like quotes too they have so much truth to'em.......and here's Sammy Goldwyn..
Why should people go out and pay money to see bad films when they can stay home and see bad television for nothing?

And from Hitch:
"The length of a film should be directly related to endurance of the human bladder" Wink ..............
re
chiba2000


Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 5
Reply with quote
I totally agree on on move re-making it's a hit and miss, but so what, then we can always go back to originals...and there's a chance for even better movies. The only thing I'm scared of in re-making movies that includes large scale battles...that darn CG garbage. Anyways, time will tell. Let's get off this specific matter and let me post you this....

1. What if a re-make of ZULU will be done, whom should play Bromehead anb Chard etc, any suggestions?

/Chiba2000 Cool
View user's profileSend private message
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
What is it about some films being made for the big screen, that sometimes 2 film companies are making a film about either the same subject, or something similar to each other, at almost the very same time. So, although maybe released at different times in the cinema, they cover the same/similar story.

I can only think of two subjects at the moment, but I'm sure there were similar cases. Did it not occur in the 90s, with 2 different versions telling the story of Colombus (is that the correct spelling ?) and also Robin Hood ? (However, there is the chance I might be wrong)

That's like getting 2 versions of Rorke's Drift at the same time, or if the companies decide to make films on similar subjects, we get a version of Rorke's Drift from one company and a version of Isandlwana from another, being released almost together.

Mind you, if that was to happen, there may be quite a few people happy with such a (deliberate ?) coincidence.

Coll
Michael Boyle


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 595
Location: Bucks County,PA,US
Reply with quote
Coll, the Colombus films were produced in the anticipation of renewed interest at the 500th anniversary of his unsuspectedly tripping over the Western Hemisphere and I believe one of the Robin Hood films was "Men In Tights"! Your point does strike a cord with me as well though I can't quite put my finger on it beyond Hollywood's typically trying a short-cut by producing films based on prior success and perceived trends.

As Sheldon pointed out above, had the new "Alamo" (and "Four Feathers" for that matter) been 'boffo' we may have seen a new treatment of both LBH and RD, maybe even a first treatment of Camerone and yet another "Beau Geste", perhaps even another "Khartoum" and "55 Days At Peking". What puzzles me is why no one seems to have thought of following the success of "Master and Commander" with something commemorating the bi-centennial of Trafalgar. (I'd bet many big names would have competed to portray Lord Nelson's interesting life.)

My hope though is for someone to produce a mini-series on the A-ZW from perhaps a perspective somewhere between Ken Burns and Herman Wouk as I fear a regular series would be forced to admit too much artistic license in order to maintain ratings. (I'd hate to see a "Desperate Soprano's Houswive's Big Brother's Survivor's Office in Zululand" sort of thing!) Of course if someone could interest Peter Jackson in a grand trilogy (pre-invasion, first invasion and interim, 2nd invasion and aftermath) then that could be quite the ticket. There would be more than enough fascinating roles to go around though Angelina Jolie might attempt an anachronized introduction of Fanny Duberley as a friend of Lord Chelmsford rather than Lord Raglan!

Best

Michael
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Michael

I hadn't been aware of it being the 500th anniversary, maybe causing two films about Colombus to be put into development. (I think there was also a Carry On film made around then based on Colombus)

The Robin Hood films I thought were made almost at the same time, had Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman in one, and in the other I think it was Patrick Bergen and Uma Thurman, but can't be sure.

I had read in a newspaper or a film magazine in about 2003, that there are/were plans to make a film about Custer's life, obviously including the battle at Little Bighorn. Apparently it was rumoured to be Brad Pitt that would be in the main role. Whether true or not, I don't know. However, at present, Brad Pitt is making a film about Jesse James, so maybe the U.S. film companies are considering historical figures and events for future films.

Beau Geste (the older film - was that Gary Cooper ?) was made into either a drama or mini-series I think in the U.K. (1980s ?) but I can't remember who was in it. What I do remember is apparently they used a quarry (or something - in the U.K. ?) for the desert scenes. Someone may be able to give more details.

Wyatt Earp and the gunfight at the O.K. Corral were covered in 2 films, 'Wyatt Earp' starring Kevin Costner and 'Tombstone' starring Kurt Russell and Val Kilmer.

Don't get me wrong, if 2 films were made at the same time by different film companies about Rorke's Drift, Isandlwana, or both, I would be absolutely delighted.

Trafalgar, I agree, would be great. It was the 200th Anniversary that encouraged me to purchase the Trafalgar Companion book, as well as a CD-Rom which allows you to look around the inside of H.M.S. Victory.

Coll
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
Michael/Coll:

heh heh..you fellows know Trafalgar...I know Trafalgar.....I'd say close to 100% of the posters on this site know Trafalgar but you know if you want to transpose that into the general population I'm afraid the stats would plummet. Most I believe (except the British themselves) wouldn't know what the hell you would be talking about and therefore that's why I think we haven't seen it on the big screen as such. The studios surely shy away from that stuff. Easier to do Master & Commander with an establshed star and director and indirectly referencing all the panache that England showed on the high seas with its great fleet and commanders.
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Rich

There is a good possibility that quite a few people weren't aware of Rorke's Drift until 'Zulu' appeared.

Even 40 or so years on, audiences still might be like many of us, who, after seeing a film about an historical event, want to pursue it more in-depth, ending up becoming enthusiasts of that particular subject.

Not necessarily Trafalgar, but other battles as well.

Maybe a new film about any of the battles listed above, would draw many more people to add to the numbers of enthusiasts already interested in these campaigns.

However, as you say, it all comes down to whether or not film companies want to make movies about these particular events.

I'm still hoping for one or two more about Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift.

Coll
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Coll,

There were indeed two films about Columbus released in 1992: Ridley Scott's 1492: CONQUEST OF PARADISE and John Glen's CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY - or three if you count CARRY ON COLUMBUS! There were also two Robin Hoods in 1990-91 - ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES with Costner and ROBIN HOOD with Bergin - while Mel Brooks' MEN IN TIGHTS followed later. You're also right about the Wyatt Earp movies being released very close together. Among older movies, another example would be OSCAR WILDE and THE TRIALS OF OSCAR WILDE both being released (literally within days of one another) in 1960.

Aside from historical pix, there are also instancesof similarly themed movies arriving - like delayed buses - close together, such as two volcano movies (VOLCANO and DANTE'S PEAK) in 1997, two asteroid movies (ARMAGEDDON and DEEP IMPACT) in 1998, and so on. These do seem, more often than not, to be pure coincidence, with different studio projects just happening to come to fruition at the same time after years of development. A similar clash of two burning-skyscraper movies in 1974 was averted when 20th Century-Fox and Warner Bros combined THE TOWER and THE GLASS INFERNO to make - yes, THE TOWERING INFERNO.

The TV version of BEAU GESTE you recall was made by the BBC in the Welsh quarry they often used for desert-type locations, e.g. planets in DR WHO and BLAKE'S SEVEN, a version of Walter Scott's THE TALISMAN, etc. I don't know if they still use it, but it was a familiar sight on British TV in the 70s and 80s. Beau was played by Benedict Taylor. The main film versions were in 1926 (Ronald Colman), 1939 (Gary Cooper) and 1966 (Guy Stockwell), with THE LAST REMAKE OF BEAU GESTE (Marty Feldman!) in 1977. Time for a remake, methinks... but the disaster of THE FOUR FEATHERS is likely to put paid to that.

Michael,

The reason no-one followed up the success of MASTER & COMMANDER is that it wasn't - a success, I mean. Box-office was considered disappointing for the vast amount of money expended, so no M&C2 or TRAFALGAR is likely to be forthcoming. Movie companies fo sometimes take a chance, but rarely with the kind of huge budgets necessary for historical pics these days. ZULU was, in its day, a relatively low-budget production: $1.75 million compared to the $15 million recently spent on BEN-HUR, $20 million on MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY, $40 million on CLEOPATRA, etc. Today a big picture costs upwards of $100 million to start with and can reach twice that...
View user's profileSend private message
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
You know Sheldon sometimes I just don't understand why the studios feel they need to up the ante all the time as far as budgets for their "next great blockbuster". It's a sickness. From what's going in the business I feel they should pay attention to that a bit more. For example, right now dvd sales have hit the roof outpacing movie b.o receipts. The two revenue streams should give pause to the smart studio mavens who could maybe figure out that good movies can be done on a good budget AND get it back and more at the back end. A new Zulu could be done I think under those circumstances. What do you think er Mr. Mayer???
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Rich,

Unfortunately, the only way today to do the kind of movies we are talking about is expensively, because that is what audiences have come to expect. The alternatives are either CGI special effects (very expensive because of the time involved) or the real thing (even more expensive when extras have to be paid union rates). The sort of ingenuity deployed by ZULU (240 extras standing in for 4,000, with a lot of 'empty' shields amongst the real Zulus) would probably be scorned today as too easy...
View user's profileSend private message
Remake of Zulu
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 3 of 3  

  
  
 Reply to topic