 |
 |  |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Even with a reasonably accurate film, you must find a way of surprising the audience, at some stage(s).
Do you remember how glad you were when most of the men survived until the morning, the Zulus having disappeared, only for to have them reappear again in force along the ridge ? Not knowing the real story, I expected the end result to be the demise of the defenders, after their gathering of hope that all fighting was over. The last thing I expected was a Zulu salute to fellow warriors. Somehow, scenes such as these, have to find a place in a new film, but possibly less dramatic than the one I mentioned. You want the audience (including historians and enthusiasts) to have a little suspense about the following scene, instead of the usual - " I know what happens next " - which occurs in many films. I don't know what the scene(s) would need to have to compete with the prime example of 'Zulu', but something along the same idea. Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
 |
| |
|
mike snook 2
|
|
Mel
I know exactly how to end a Zulu II and a Zulu Dawn II. But it'll cost you �60,000 to find out. You can have both screenplays for �100,000. Bargain. 
Remember your Dr Johnson - only a fool writes for free!  ( or words to that effect!)
As ever Mike |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Mel
|
|
Mike
Don't sell yourself so cheaply. If you have a screen play that has the appeal of Zulu then it's worth a lot more than that I assure you. |
|||||||||||
|
_________________ Mel
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Mike
Will you take an I.O.U. ?
You have raised an interesting point though. If you were asked to write a screenplay(s), knowing that films would have to differ in some areas to appeal to the wider audience, how and what would you add, to that which you wrote in HCMDB & LWOTF ? You don't have to answer this, I am just curious, if or how things would differ between the books and the films. Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
mike snook 2
|
|
Mel
That's my discounted rate for special RDVC pals!! Coll, It'd take too long to tell - but they'd be balling their eyes out with emotion by the time I'd finished! It's all about characterization at the end of the day I fancy. I think that's why I rather liked John Lee Hancock's Alamo so much better than Wayne's (plus also the hard work of the costume departent which turned out authentic Texians and Mexicans). Hancock's lead characters have very tangible weaknesses in a way that the Wayne, Harvey and Widmark portrayals did not. They are mortal. Wayne's Crockett wasn't. Widmark's Bowie and Harvey's Travis were, each in their way, arrogant, pompous fellers and hence pretty unsympathetic as lead characters. A classic case in point of what I have been trying to get at in this thread is the relative portrayals of the death of Travis. In the 60's history howler Travis dashes down to a defend a breach with his sword, and manages to find two Mexicans who have gone out of their way to humour him by apparently putting down their 6 foot of musket and bayonet to fence with their hangers - a type of sword that was more for show. Finally he gets shot by some other unsporting feller and proceeds to snap his sword across his knee before throwing the basket at somebody. Mercy please - ridiculous! The real history tells us that Travis fell to a head shot defending the north wall. Hancock pads out the history in a way which is not entirely incompatible with it - he has the fatal shot fired by a frightened young recruit, rolling around in the carnage at the foot of the north wall and just loading and firing in the general direction - this utterly insignificant figure, who we have got to know from earlier scenes, kills one of the great American heroes of all time - and he doesn't even know he's done it. Now that's the sort of thing I am talking about - the drama is there, the characters are there, and it is not incompatible with the real history. Lovely reconciliation of drama and history (and all carried out in faithfully researched costumes - I think some of the remarks made above in defence of inaccurate wardrobe border on the daft - I say again why would one set out to get it wrong?!! Your actors have to wear something after all!). Sheldon Crockett's waistcoat is preserved at the Alamo - but I'm sure you know that!! Hope to see a director's cut of Hancock's film one day. As ever Mike |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
GlennWade
|
|
Hi everyone.
This is a really interesting debate to watch. I have to say, in general, that an authentic film of the battle of Rorke's Drift would simply not work. You can argue the toss every way you want but Zulu will always be the definitive story of the battle and if we tried to sell a film's dramatic power on the back of the fact that one of the characters is roughly the same height as his historic counterpart, then the word 'flop' would come marching steadily into view. WE would love to see a blow by blow authentic account of the battle but Johnny Public couldnt care less. As Mel has said, the facts and the sporadic nature of the fighting, coulped with the fact that most of the battle was fought at night, render it unsuitable for a feature film. Isandlwana, on the other hand, is ripe for a fresh re-telling. As many of the men who would be included died, there is little to restrict a writer with regard to personalities and actions. Yes, we know Browne was a complete bastard, I found him quite detestable in my wider examination of him, and we know that Younghusband had the valour of a lion, his men blatantly loved him as they followed him to their death. Coghill, though injured, gave his life to save a friend. Durnford was an undoubtedly brave man who was liable to unpredictability and his flamboyant attire gave him the ability to turn heads and start tongues wagging. Chelmsford was a superbly-mannered veteran general but his pomp and confidence caused the massacre of several thousand men. The scope with these characters is endless and it is for the gut wrenching and epic truth that I firmly hold that this battle holds the only ingredients for a successful film and Rorke's Drift does not need to be touched. Zulu told the story and extended facts, but it told the story, and thats the crucial point. Sapper has mentioned how speical effects could play a role, yes, certainly they should be useful in such a film but I do feel rather sick when they are over used and I find them a lazy alternative to real people. Granted, if we were to see the Zulu army en-masse then they would have to be used but only a small amount. There is nothing more satisfying than watching a film like 'Waterloo' and seeing every extra there has been trained and dressed. Yes, they used some cutouts but that film, for me, it carries more weight than Lord of the Bloody Flies, sorry, Rings. 
I am still writing and researching my screenplay with a friend and if anyone is interested we are now firmly in the writing stage with 99% of scenes decided on and characters developed. If anyone else is having a go, a tip, avoid trying to cram all the officers of the 24th in, it becomes messy and unintersting. We have left a lot of them out. I am no expert on this but when you read enough scripts, watch every historic and military film you can get your hands on, make notes, see what was shite and what wasn't, then it's possible to see what can be done with Isandlwana.
Well, everyone have a splendid Christmas and all the best. Cheers, Glenn |
|||||||||||
|
_________________ Tell it in England those that pass us by, Here, faithful to their charge, her soldiers lie.
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Mike
Thanks for answering my question. 'The Alamo' (modern version) is, indeed, a good film to compare the idea of a new screenplay with. I've watched it several times recently. Jason Patric as Bowie, must be the best portrayal of this famous historical figure, that I've seen on screen. Glenn That's great you're making progress. Good luck with it ! Myself, well, I still like the idea of the story, mentioned in Sheldon's book, about a group of Boer horsemen (as part of the event) - 'The War Horses' - I'm sure the book was called. Haven't been able to trace a copy yet. I'll hopefully secure a copy next year. Alan I've received the parcel this morning. 
Thankyou very much ! I've replied on the forum, as my computer is playing up a bit lately. Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| A bit much ! | |
|
Sapper Mason
|
|
 ,
While this is an open forum with views both sensible and sometimes maybe inflamatory i feel it a bit much to read someone being called " a complete bastard ! ", i wonder how the descendants of that man in question would feel reading that ? . There is suffcient grounds ( i feel ) for a remake of " Zulu " ALONG LINES OF BETTER ACCURACY ! , of course there has to be a fair dose of fiction as well but fiction that holds up , do you concentate on one or two characters or try and tell the whole picture ? , screenwriters and those that produce films would be alloted such tasks . It seems that the events at Isandlwana are more akin to a newer film , is this because " Zulu Dawn " was poorly received ? . Dare we comment on the sacred cow that is Zulu in case it offends ? . There are relevant comments on both making " Zulu " and not making " Zulu " and i hope the ayes have it at the end of the day . Computers and special effects if used CORRECTLY could make for a cracking couple of films or even one called " 1879 " lets say for the point of discussion . James Langley Dalton is often seen as the architect of the defence of Kwajimu so make it around him as the central character then and while not utilising EVERY aspect of the events on the afternoon of Jan 22 1879 i am sure a scriptwriter worth his / her salt could do a decent job in this respect . If it got beyond a script then a remake is on the cards as i see it . That is one individuals opinion ( mine ) and with the i hope wisdom of years lets not sling too much mud about by refering to a dead person as a " complete bastard " and remember the dead cannot defend themselves only the living can . Getting the balance right is what i seek in any POSSIBLE remake of " Zulu " , if made then a comparison can be aired but until this happens ( ? ) we can only speculate if a 2008 version of " Zulu " is better , the same or worse than the 1964 version , " Sapper " |
|||||||||||
|
Last edited by Sapper Mason on Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Rorke's Drift would perhaps be cheaper than Isandlwana - size of set, people involved, costumes, etc. The set (buildings, etc.) could be made full-size, the amount of people (British and Zulu) in convincing numbers, needing less in the way of CGI.
However, I am in favour of an Isandlwana film. Very much so. Durnford, Pulleine, being the senior officers, the 24th, being the main Regiment involved, also the R.A., but whether the other units including Colonial and Native, are covered in any detail next time, we can only wait and see. Personally, I'd like a scene where Melvill has his chat with Durnford, as well as Lt. Scott featuring in scenes somewhere through the picture, particularly in the last stand. Also, perhaps Henderson and what he was experiencing at the donga alongside his commander. That's just a couple of things, but I'm sure I could think of more (without overdoing it ) Roll on an Isandlwana film soon - whether 'Zulu Dawn II' (Mike's), '1879' (Sapper's) or 'Shields' (Mine )
Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
mike snook 2
|
|
Sapper, mon brave, I would advise being a bit careful about getting the Dalton thing out of perspective; that is a very recent line spun by one historian in particular. In my view it was intentionally designed to belittle Chard and Bromhead and look good in the advertising - said chap was particularly after breaking down the popular icongraphy of 1879 and the officer heroes were a natural target.
The upper class toffs were duffers and it took a salty man from the ranks to save said toffs from making fools of themselves. Really? Sorry - but that's the stuff of cliche and not at all what the history actually tells us. Chard and Bromhead were decent enough and able enough fellers, and each of them did a tremendous job in playing to his strengths. Dalton was in the thick of the fighting and set a terrific example, but he was not in the business of making decisions ahead of the line officers. That is not what happened in the Victorian Army - most people who fall for this line, base it on the fact that the two officers were subalterns, but sadly their knowledge is not grounded in a thorough comprehension of the Victorian Army. You and I know that subalterns were often in their thirties, with the RE and RA only just breaking out of of a dead man's shoes system of promotion. Such officers were not in any way 'wet behind the ears. ' I would look up the offending passage but I think the book must have gone on the boiler during the last snow fall. 
Glenn, I am inclined to spring to your defence against an ever so slightly stuffy remark from old Sapper here. A bit of context first. Maori's offence was that he thought he was funny - hence he is much freer in his use of a type of language with which we are distinctly uncomfortable today. But the deeper you go into Victorian primary sources, you will find that he is not expressing sentiments which are in any way unusual by the prevailing standards of the late C19th. They were rascists, in our terms, and, I might say, almost universally so. Perhaps the real difference was that there were degrees of racsim then, whereas today we have more properly adopted a philosphy of absolute prohibition. But there's precious little point you and I as historians operating today cluck clucking about something written in 1879 (though some historians choose to do so). In pragmatic terms it's a fact of life, and it's there in the sources for all to see. I think we generally err in attempting to apply the ethical and moral standards of today to the warriors of yesteryear. How are we to understand their thought processess and decision making, or to comprehend them intimately as human beings if we do? How are we to judge the Philistines or the Hittites today? Are you a Royalist or a Parliamentarian? Would you have liked the Duke of Wellington? Would you have voted for Gladstone or Disraeli? Speaking for myself I just don't know the answer to any of those questions. But closer to home - what part did rascism play in the Isandlwana defeat? Huge I would suggest. What was it made General George Burrows look at 20,000 Afghans across the plain at Maiwand and think 'Yep we can take 'em.'? Rascism and military complacency are often bed-fellows it seems to me. I guess what I'm saying is don't think that Maori was atypical or much worse than anybody else. Have you read his book in its entirety? Have a look around a few more primary sources, perhaps from different campaigns of the era, and you'll see he wasn't much worse than anybody else writing at that time. Was he a murderer? Maybe. Was he a torturer - yes. I think his descendants would have their work cut out to defend his posthumous reputation - largely because he stands condemned by his own hand in a series of pretty feeble jokes. But in this case I suspect you have used the C.B. expression in very much a modern throwaway-line sense - in a way that I have often overheard... For example - 'The RSM's a C.... B.....' - this is usually expressed good naturedly by young men who admire the RSM and would give anything to emulate his achievements. Lighten up, Sapper. It's Christmas!! As Kipling so aptly put it, 'single men in barracks don't turn into plaster saints.' Maori was a C-B. One thing is for sure, he would love the fact that we are still talking about him in 2007.
As ever Mike PS. Sorry forgot to say from the other side of the fence in Maori's defence that you have to read him in full to understand how highly he rated his three isiGzoza companies. Much of his handling of 1st/1rd NNC, which on the surface appears woeful to the modern reader, is grounded in the inescapable fact that he is in command of a failing organization. Disintegration and collapse he knows is just around the corner. So, much of what he wrote was actually grounded in contempt for a body of men he knew were just waiting for a half decent excuse to run, and that was nothing to do with skin colour. He speaks consistently in glowing terms of the isiGzoza indunas. M |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| In my Defence | |
|
Sapper Mason
|
|
,
Dear Mike Snook 2 , as ever relevant input from your pen on this forum. I think maybe Mike you take some of what i say TOO literally ! , i know diddly squat ( well a little then ) about " Maori Browne " , nonetheless he was an officer and many comments have been raised against him , fairly or not is something i can`t really say Mike . When i was an NCO i respected officers even if some were duffers and not up to scratch , i have met my fair share of RSM`S who were monsters as well as good soldiers . The dead cannot defend themselves and look at the swell of feeling raised when Max Hastings mentioned Chard the way he did . Yes i defend a fellow Royal Engineer even allowing for Chards faults , i don`t know if the current descendants of Browne have any feelings about their ancestor or not . I know descendants of some of the men who fought at Rorke's Drift have animated opinions about the way their ancestor ( s ) were portrayed in " Zulu " and so on . I used Dalton as a benchmark , as a " for instance " Mike , i have strong thoughts about Daltons role on Jan 22 nd 1879 and believe the officers DID listen in earnest to the " old sweat " on that day , to what extent i cannot say . Perhaps the re-make of " Zulu " could be set around one or two central characters Mike , it was only a suggestion to kick around the debating table . I respect a good officer and " tolerated " a bad one , look at the variance in the Victorian officer corps , both good and bad and everything inbetween . I take great delight in this topic inspiring so much animated debate and i can assure you my shirt is not all that stiff , inlaid respect for an officer , even " Maori Browne " and i would not use the words , " complete bastard " against anyone , alive or dead . I would like to see you and Sheldon put together a script for a film c " 1879 " and be able to add something positive to that . Enough mud has been heading towards the fan , i hope the rest of the holiday goes well and look forward to " crossing swords " with you again , all the best , " Sapper "  |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
GlennWade
|
|
Merry Christmas all,
Thanks for making my point clearer Mike, it was throwaway as opposed to personal. I have no doubt of the man's sense of duty and bravery but anyone who is a torturer, and a self confessed one at that, is due, and shall get very little respect from me and I should hope from any moral human being. As you say my friend, to defend his repute in this era would be nothing short of foolhardy. I have to agree as well, maybe I am placing 21st century morals and expectations on 19th century colonial activity but I am certain that many a man shuddered at such evil doings even then. So, if I have caused anyone to ruffle their Daily Mail in horror at my percieved profanity, I hope you can re-read it with the knowledge that George Browne was not your run of the mill Victorian gentleman. Ian Knight referred to Browne as 'detestable', but that's why he is our No.1 AZW author, not jumping the gun as I am liable to!
A splendid day to you and I shall return to my beers and surprise gift this year of 'A soldier artist in Zululand'. A veritable literary diamond! Cheers lads, Glenn |
|||||||||||
|
_________________ Tell it in England those that pass us by, Here, faithful to their charge, her soldiers lie.
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Mike
The isiGzoza - I've read about them on several occasions, and they seem to have maintained their warrior traditions - is that right ? They do appear to have been more dependable than some, and makes me wonder if there was a larger amount of them on the British side, would they have given N.N.C. unit European officers a bit more faith in their ability when confronted with the Zulu ? As an aside - About Burrows. Do you give a more detailed description of the man and his actions at Maiwand in your book (portrait photo also) ? Does the battle differ a great deal from Maxwell's version ? Lastly, any more word on the possibility of a C.O.I. transcript in existence, into the Maiwand disaster ? Thanks Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
mike snook 2
|
|
Coll
In fearful haste I'm afraid - running around family and all that - the isiGqoza (sorry - I misrendered it earlier) were Zulus. I'll come back on Maiwand in a day or so if you don't mind. Glenn Good present! (better than mine - but don't tell anybody I said that!) Sapper Good on yer. I could ask you for sources to prove some exalted role for Dalton. But perhaps another day!! Happy Xmas my friend.
Regards as ever Mike |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
| |
|
Coll
Guest
|
|
Mike
I understand. The isiGqoza (right spelling ?) were on our side though(?), unless I've made a terrible mistake ? Maiwand ? - I'll leave until the glorious summer we're going to have in 2008 !
I've got a huge problem with Burrows, but I'll start another topic on that subject later in 2008. It has to do with what I've read about him, and yes, it is compared to Col. D. (put it down to Comparative History )
Thanks for your time and your patience again this year. Your good health. The drinks are on me ! 
Coll |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
 | Zulu film - Colour Sgt Bourne's medals | |
|
||
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.