Stanley Baker is supposed to have wanted to make this movie so badly that he used his own money for the production.This is not surprising since the the story of the defense of Rorke's Drift was a staple of British schoolboy lore (in pre-"Cool Brittania" days) . The 1879 battle pitting some 100 or so soldiers of the South Wales Borderers against some 4,000 Zulu is the stuff of Victorian legend and resulted in the award of 11 Victoria Cross' to the defenders. Given these facts it's a wonder that Baker chose to distort the historical record to the extent he did. The film is a rousing good story and many of its major distractions, qua film, arise from the historical departures. The clearest example is the ridiculous inclusion of Jack Hawkins and Ulla Jacobson as the Rev. Otto Witt and his daughter. Neither of the persons were present at the battle and their portrayal in the film is a gross distraction fom the building tension of the approach of the Zulu impi. The characterization of Private Henry Hook as a malingerer and tippler goes beyond goes beyond historical license into the realm of slander. Hook was nothing like the film portrayal and was one of the heroes of the battle. The gratuitous inclusion of some trendy anti-war allusions by Surgeon Reynolds and by Bromhead and Charde only adds to the feeling that that historical record is being tortured. "Zulu" is a decent depiction of the battle proper but the cautious viewer should not be fooled into believing that this is good history.
