by Jake Hjort, Contributing Writer
Welcome back, fellow time travelers, to another edition of 20th Century Flicks! This month, in a continued effort to check classic cinema off of my list of shame, I’m diving back to the year 1957 (the same year as last month’s film, Wild Strawberries) to watch Stanley Kubrick’s Paths of Glory. As I carry on with my journey to cover some of Hollywood’s greatest directors, I figured my quest would not be complete without a look-in on Kubrick, another legendary filmmaker whose work I am largely and tragically unfamiliar with.
Set amidst the trenches of World War I, Paths of Glory follows a French regiment commanded by Brigadier General Paul Mireau (George Macready). In order to earn a promotion, Mireau orders Colonel Dax (Kirk Douglas) to launch an ill-fated offensive to attempt to take the anthill (a heavily fortified German camp) that would result in mass French casualties. Unsurprisingly, the maneuver fails, and in order to deflect blame, Mireau court martials several soldiers for cowardice in the face of the enemy. Representing his men in the trial, Dax tries to fight for their lives, only to find himself in a kangaroo court and his soldiers sentenced to death.
It may not be revolutionary analysis, but my biggest takeaway from Paths of Glory is that Douglas is an incredible actor. He obviously has quite a legacy, but to see him oozing with charisma, delivering great monologues, and stealing every scene and that he is in, was genuinely impressive. Amidst a sea of complicated, self-serving characters, Dax is a bright light of idealism that reminds us that there is still hope that there are good people in the world, an earnestness which would have come off as cheesy with a lesser performer. Between Douglas’ acting, and the circumstances that he finds himself in, Colonel Dax is an incredibly easy character to root for, an important aspect for Kubrick to drive home his anti-war messaging.
Unfortunately, I do think that part of the reason that Douglas stands out so much is that none of the other performances really do. Among modern audiences, there exists a stereotype that classic films are plagued by overacting, and although this doesn’t usually bother me, it really rings true here. Maybe it’s due to Douglas’ incredibly genuine performance, or the serious subject matter of the film, but a lot of the other characters feel downright cartoonish at times. Sometimes this services the story, as with Ralph Meeker and Timothy Carey’s performances as soldiers unjustly sentenced to death. However, with other characters such as Mireau, a diabolical mustache twirling villain, the over-the-top acting really takes me out of the film and lessens the impact of the story.
That being said, I cannot deny that Paths of Glory is still an incredibly effective war film. Most often antiwar films focus on the horrors of human nature, and how quickly we can dehumanize and commit atrocities against others simply because we find ourselves on opposite sides of a conflict. Here, however, we focus internally on how we can betray even our own allies in a corrupted quest for power. The film focuses entirely on the French troops — not a single German soldier is seen in the film — but still manages to convey the awful nature of war, not through outright battle but through self-serving bureaucracies and out-of-touch commanding officers. In a way, this is a story that could easily be adapted to a corporate office or governmental cabinet where those on top betray those who they are supposed to lead (In fact, The Wire, one of my favorite shows of all time, is said by its creators to be inspired by Paths of Glory), but setting it amidst the Great War provides a great avenue provides a great avenue for Kubrick’s scathing indictment of war and quests for power.
Speaking of Kubrick, I have to give him immense credit for his great direction and bold decision-making here. To make a film that is so staunchly anti-military takes a lot of guts, especially for a director as young and as early in his career as Kubrick was at the time. It took decades for the film to be screened in much of Europe, and I’m sure that making this closed as many doors for Kubrick as its warm critical reception opened. However, he had a story he wanted to tell and a message he wanted to spread, and I have a lot of respect for him being willing to take a risk and tell it.
Paths of Glory may not be my favorite war film of all time, but it is certainly in the conversation for a place on the Mt. Rushmore of the genre. Between Douglas’ great performance, and the unique and bold story choices, this film offers something that many others do not: a unique perspective on the horrors of war and how it brings out the worst in humanity. It isn’t easy to watch or to process, but I am glad that I did, and it’s definitely one that I’ll continue to ponder for a while.
You can read more from Jake Hjort, and follow him on Instagram and Letterboxd