No PC and no swaggering Yanks: A salute to Zulu on its 50th anniversary

[damngrumpy]

Actually the Americans made the money before entering the war selling
what they could to who ever they could. The American entry into the war
was a positive step but the naysayers dominated the debate and the
Nazi sympathizers like Lindeberg held it up as long as they could.
As for comments made about Zulu and no swaggering Americans nonsense.
The Brits in places like South Africa were the most arrogant people on the
planet. The British almost subscribed to the superiority of divine right for
Gods sake and it was their downfall.

 

[Walter]

Why would this allegedly excellent movie tell so many lies?

Same reason "Argo" is full of lies.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Big dummy.


It was a movie about Americans... not Brits.


Love how you said British Empire troops and not Brit troops.


Commonwealth troops and Americans had to bail the Brits out once again.

Go easy on him, Eagle. It can't be much fun being the useless dregs of what was once the greatest empire the world has ever known.

 

[Goober]

I blame the historically ignorant morons who believed such a thing without checking up first.

In fact the film Zulu got other things wrong.

It is a commonly held belief that after the Battle of Isandhlwana, the Zulus removed the Martini-Henry rifles from the bodies of the dead British soldiers and took them to Rorke's Drift. It was here, they say, that the Zulus used the British Army's own rifle against its own men. Again, the primary source for this myth is the film 'Zulu'.

This, put simply, could not have happened as it was impossible for the Zulu regiments attacking Rorke's Drift to have used Martini-Henrys for the simple reason that they had formed the reserve at Isandlwana; they did not take part in the attack, and certainly did not have time to loot any rifles there before advancing on Rorke's Drift.

Rorke's Drift: Popular Myths [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Directors- writers -movies have artistic freedom- Do you think all movies are factual- Star Trek is not real.

 

[Cliffy]

Directors- writers -movies have artistic freedom- Do you think all movies are factual- Star Trek is not real.

What?!!! You're just messing with my head!

 

[BaalsTears]

Yanks have quite the imagination.

Please don't call me a Yank. I no longer self-identify as such.

 

[Goober]

What?!!! You're just messing with my head!

I can always look forwards to a great reply from you Cliffy
How is your son doing. Grandchildren yet??

 

[Cliffy]

I can always look forwards to a great reply from you Cliffy
How is your son doing. Grandchildren yet??

He seems to be doing great. No children though.

 

[Goober]

He seems to be doing great. No children though.

That is good news then.

 

[Blackleaf]

Big dummy.

It was a movie about Americans... not Brits.

Love how you said British Empire troops and not Brit troops.

Commonwealth troops and Americans had to bail the Brits out once again.

There were almost as many British troops as American troops taking part - 62,000 British troops and 73,000 Yank troops. There were three times as many British troops as Canadian troops.

The Canadians, of course, failed to capture ALL of their final D-Day objectives on Juno Beach.

The American landings on Omaha beach came the closest of all to failure, and the foothold gained there was much smaller than planned and the most tenuous of all the beaches. The Americans may have performed better there if they'd actually taken up the offer of British floating tanks rather than wanting to do things their own way.

So I'd say the British were the most effective of all during the Normandy Landings.

 

[EagleSmack]

There were almost as many British troops as American troops taking part - 62,000 British troops and 73,000 Yank troops.

11,000 more Yanks saving your butts... Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of Yanks are battling on the other side of the world carrying the fight to the Japanese.

YOU FAIL

The American landings on Omaha beach came the closest of all to failure, and the foothold gained there was much smaller than planned and the most tenuous of all the beaches. The Americans may have performed better there if they'd actually taken up the offer of British floating tanks rather than wanting to do things their own way.

It was also the most opposed. The Brits as always were given the easy mission while Canadians and Americans were given the tough mission.

And it was never close to failure... Omaha was taken and that was that.

So I'd say the British were the most effective of all during the Normandy Landings.

Least effective by far and it was a war that the Brits started.

And Saving Pvt. Ryan was a fictional movie about Americans finding another American in Normandy. Why should they have put Brits in the movie?

The Canadians, of course, failed to capture ALL of their final D-Day objectives on Juno Beach.

.

Canadians achieved all their objectives on D-Day but had to withdraw because the Brits didn't and their flank was in the air. This became common throughout the Normandy Campaign... Brits not achieving objectives and moving far to slow for hard charging North Americans.

You'll find a lot of films nowadays which are factually incorrect. The Americans, for example, are quite at making movies which credit Americans for doing something which, in real life, were committed by others (as already mentioned in the article, by watching The Great Escape you wouldn't think that no Americans actually took part in the real-life escape and that it was almost an entirely British piece of derring-do).

Its why they are called movies.

Take Transformers for example. In the beginning they show the British Beagle II Mars Rover starting to transmit from the surface of Mars and a Transformer crushes it.

Transformers 2007 Teaser Trailer - YouTube


When in fact Beagle II wasn't even a rover and the Brits smashed it into the surface of Mars due to their incompetence. The Brits couldn't even land a simple probe on Mars never mind a rover.