scrobble.life
← All reviews
Movie

Movie review : PATHS OF GLORY [Stanley Kubrick, 1957]

Review by @mandibil · 3338d · of Paths of Glory

Stanley Kubrick is one of those giants of the artform, that is impossible to get around. His output is not that great in quantity, but that is absolutely balanced in quality and diversity. His ability to master genres across the board is his greatest genius in my opinion. An absolute genius, even if you do not like his films, you have to admire this ability. His early efforts maybe be a bit overshadowed by his later masterpieces, but at least one needs to be held up and put in the spotlight.

A regiment of soldiers in the french trenches of the first world war, are chosen by their general Mireau (George McReady)to lead a suicidal offensive against an enemy stronghold. Their commanding officer Dax (Kirk Douglas) finds that they are up against an impossible problem and that his men starts to retreat to avoid certain death. Mireau is pressured from ambitions higher up the hierarchy, and is affraid to loose his authority and position, if he disappoints. In his rage he orders friendly fire on his own men to force them to charge, but the line of command will not accept this.

After the failed offensive attempt, the disappointed general needs to finds some scapegoats for the failure, to remove guilt and responsibility from himself. He demands three arbitrary soldiers from the regiment, picked for a court martial. to be trialed for disobeying orders and cowardice. Dax knows how things work and uses his position and influence in an attempt to save the scapegoats from the firing squad. The whole of the military is fixed upon finding the poor soldiers guilty as charged and the only opening Dax sees, is the fact that the general ordered firing on his own men.

This is what I would call a clean cut movie. It is unsentimental, unnationalistic and rather objective. In this regard it is quite unique, i cannot think of any other war movie that is as documentaric without loosing its storytelling momentum. The strictness of the storytelling makes it feel a bit short. I was left with the feeling that when I was fully absorbed with the central motif, it was almost over. Therefore a feeling of a slightly underdeveloped set of characters is inevitable. But at the same time there is something satisfying with the swiftness and the driving force of the fast development, that fits this war theme so well. Time is of the essence and death is final and inevitable.

The cinematography is timeless and hits the right note, in balance between our prejudices of these trenches and the individual soldiers experience. We do get a good way under the skin of the foot soldier and his nearest officer and the potential traps with cowards among everyday men forced to become heroes. We do also get some very personal and emotional performances by the unlucky soldiers and the complete madness of the illusion of violence as a solution for solving problems... is all too obviously catastrophic. A particularly impressive performance by Mcready as the harsh general must be mentioned.

Kubrick is not as expressionist as he would later become in Dr. Strangelove, which is tons more antiwar and completely black humored throughout. This is Kubrick at his most basic and stringent form. The black and white is phenomenal and if you get theopportunity I have heard that cinephile high def restorations should be awesome. I have a decent dvd version though. It comes very recommended, if just short of a masterpiece. I would have preferred deeper developments of the characters. In the third act.

IMG_5303.JPG

Rating: 8/10

Comments · 1

  • @whatageek(75)· 3338d

    Kubrick is a genius, not only is he a talented filmmaker, he managed to do so with some many different genres.