# 14, Paths of Glory

At this point it's become apparent to me that I'm, unfortunately, probably not going to meet my deadline. I shall not be deterred, however, and shall continue my regular film viewing for as long as it takes me. And when August 1st rolls around and I'm asked if I finished on time, I'll say, "No no, I still have another month. It's been September 1st all along..."

Anyway, Paths of Glory was the first film about modern war I watched for this project, and from what I've heard, one of the greatest war films of all time. Unfortunately, for perhaps the first time I was disappointed. Don't get me wrong, the film was still great, and Kirk Douglas is always great to watch, but it simply did not live up to my expectations. Now that I think about it, I haven't seen that any war films that I've been a huge fan of. I don't think I went in with any bias, but perhaps the genre simply doesn't interest me as much as I used to think. Oh well. It gives me a chance to give a less than perfect rating, which I'm always thrilled about.

It's hard to criticize this film, really. Kubrick is a wonderful director, and, ironically, I agree with his message in Paths of Glory far more than, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey, even though I liked the later more. In addition, Kirk Douglas is undeniably and rightfully a legendary actor. The characters are humane, and the events genuinely gripping and tragic.

I think what threw me off most was the pacing and composition of the film. Which, once again, is hard to criticize specifically. Somehow, though, it wasn't cohesive. The film was divided into very distinct parts, with the first half or so taking place in the French trenches of World War I, leading up to an impossible assault on German stronghold ordered by the overly-ambitious and prestige greedy officers, while the second part shifts tone, direction, and even characters almost entirely, focusing on the trial of three men unjustly held to trial for cowardice in the failed siege. Something about this shift almost made me feel as if I were watching two entirely different films, and that neither one adequately engrossed me.

I was most impressed by the three men who stood trial, and wished that the story had spent more time on them. Only one of them received more than a few seconds of screen time or story development before the mid point of the film, but they managed to create a genuine call for empathy and sympathy, especially in the last few scenes. The march to the firing range was particularly touching. These emotions were supplemented by Col. Dax's (Douglas) desperate efforts to save the three men who had been ruined by ambition and chance, met with the opposition of his superior, who hid their greed behind a false sense of honor. These dynamics did a wonderful job of realizing the humanitarian and anti-war message of the film, and I understand why it was so controversial in France at the time of its release. The acting was superb, then, and Kubrick's sublime style of filmmaking brought out the humanity of the soldiers and the blind, ignorant greed of the officers marvelously. Coupled with a good script and truly powerful moments, there were moments in the film when the viewer felt true empathy.

Even the first half of the film did a good job building up to the tragedy of the second half, hinting at the fruitlessness of the war that sacrificed men's lives for the sake of the reputation of a few. But besides some isolated, powerful moments, such as the night scouting raid and the assault itself, the first part of the film served as little more than build-up for the second half, and in this way was not satisfying. All of the elements of the film were good, even great, but I just felt there needed to be something more. There was plenty of sympathy in the film, and it rode human emotions very well, but it didn't always cross the line into empathy with the viewer.

Highlights: Superb message and acting, finely tuned character, aesthetic, and ethical dynamics. Moments filled with an honest sense of tragedy and outrage. Beautifully filmed. A well crafted sense of violence against humanity. Great ending.

Downers: Disconnected, lacked an overall sense of flow despite flawless transitions from moment to moment. Did not capitalize on the full potential of its elements. Short lived moments that were all too fleeting. At parts, the build-up and execution were too mechanical, and the impact of what Kubrick was trying to convey fell a bit short.

I know at least one person who would crucify me for this rating, but here it goes.

7.5/10