Review of Paths of Glory (1957) by Mike H — 09 Mar 2011

"Stanley, I don't think this picture will ever make a nickel, but we have to make it." -Kirk Douglas.

This early Kubrick work boasts excellent screen composition, a moving story, and one of the most discussed endings in film history. But rather than talk about the ending itself, let's talk about Steven Spielberg. Not to pick on him excessively, but this point bears repeating indefinitely: If you consider Stanley Kubrick to be a humanist, one of two facts can be derived of you: either (1), you've never seen one single Kubrick picture; or (2) you're mentally retarded. Since Spielberg has mentioned on camera on more than one occasion that he has seen all of Kubrick's movies and that they were good friends, it is safe to say that Spielberg suffers from mental retardation. This movie is quite anti-humanist, though the ending, I believe, is humanist. Every other work ever produced by Kubrick is entirely anti-humanist, with the possible technical exception of the ending of 2001, which has a decidedly humanist ending only because the ending of Kubrick's previous movie ended in the world exploding, as did the original script for 2001.

This became a review more of Spielberg than of Paths of Glory. Well... Paths of Glory is excellent, and I think you will enjoy it if you appreciate the context of 1950s cinema production. I am hard pressed to name three movies from the 1950s that are better than this one. Streetcar Named Desire, maaaaybe Sunset Blvd., and... possibly nothing else?