Kubrick made two films about war, 1957's Path of Glory and 1987's Full Metal Jacket. I don't understand why "Full Metal Jacket" was filmed when "Paths of Glory" was already filmed, the previous one was obviously much better.
I watched Path of Glory and Lawrence of Arabia before and after. "Lawrence" portrays a war hero, and "Path of Glory" shows the dirty, cruel side of the war behind the hero.
The title of the film is ironic, and we all know that the Road to Glory was paved with countless deaths.
In the eyes of different people, war has different meanings. To politicians, war is nothing but a game; to generals, war is nothing but a means to glory; to ordinary soldiers, war is nothing but when to eat bullets.
The film focuses on a small scene from the war: 3 men are responsible for a failed attack order and are ultimately executed by shooting.
They are not at fault and should not be held responsible for this failure. It was the stupid order to be responsible: why should the soldiers be sent to death when they knew they could not take down the enemy camp?
At the end of the war, for these soldiers, it will become meaningless. All they think about is whether they can survive tomorrow and whether they can be reunited with their families. Compared with these, what is the point of killing unrelated strangers on the opposite side?
patriotism? As Samuel L. Jackson said, it was only the last refuge of the scoundrel.
May there be no war in the world.
View more about Paths of Glory reviews
