A film that was WAY ahead of its time, and the final scenes are pretty powerful stuff. Plus, you can never go wrong with Kirk Douglas. A film everyone should see, especially war movie fans.

This isn't a war film - it's an anti-war film. As such, it's completely subordinated to making it's point and portaits all characters as single-dimensional, good or bad. Having said that, it's a great work of cinematography with very powerful filming.

I'm not a big fan of Kirk Douglas, but he's good here. However, the true star of the movie is George Macready. Although I despise his character's ideas about war and honor, I understand his motivations -- in no small part thanks to Macready's performance. Kubrick's direction is also very good, although the movie, like his other pre-Strangelove movies, isn't as readily identifiable as a Kubrick movie as his later work.

With aesthetics somewhere in between classical Hollywood and Kubrick's blossoming, tenacious awesomeness, this film excels at both and then some. Actually, it probably works so well just because of that: his cynicism is here, but it's constantly in conflict with humanistic idealism, making every scene taut and horrific. The battle scenes are also amazingly done. Basically, it is all brilliant.

I like Kubrick. This is great anti-war statement.

I think this is one of few movies that doesn't exceed or miss anyting.

Simply stunning. Kubrick provides a harrowing look at the internal mechanics of the military organization. He manages to avoid treading the all too familiar ground of many war movies--the straightforward rejection of the violence and cruelty of war. We know war is violent. We know war is cruel. Kubrick is not one to craft something so simple. This film is a complex drama that defies the boundaries of conventions, while showcasing them with dazzling effect. A masterpiece.

This is the perfect anti-authority film. Perfectly geared to make you bristle with indignation.

I think the word "horrific" describes this movie perfectly. The battle scenes, even though they're over fifty years old now, are absolutely horrific in their depiction of a hopeless attack. The lack of any compassion from the jurors? Horrific. The focus on personal success at the expense of any of his men from General Mireau? Horrific. The complete apathy of General Broulard to the loss of human lives who's only concern is the perception of the army? Horrific. This film is a masterpiece.

The acting is wonderful, the cinematography is wonderful, the plot is wonderful, the music is wonderful, the themes of injustice and corrupt officers and anti-war are wonderful. The only charge you can really level against it is that it doesn't have the operatic magnificence of Kubrick's more acknowledged work. But what you get instead is his most concise, to-the-point film. Every minute of it is devoted to moving the story forward, nothing feels potentially superfluous or ostentatious.

The last scene! *awe*

Along with Dekalog Five (Thou Shalt Not Kill), contains one of the most diturbing executions in cinematic history

Whether it's showing us the front lines of battle or the lavish general's quarters, Paths of Glory always excels in its drama. The intense, harrowing battle footage is complemented perfectly by a story of a man's complete disregard for these horrors that the soldiers must face. Kirk Douglas and George Macready give outstanding performances, but I was more surprised by the memorable scenes with the minor characters. Don't miss this.

191

Kirk Douglas is excellent in this one. Paths of Glory is one of the best anti-war movies I have seen.

An incredibly bleak tale of dehumanization in warfare. Kubrick's directing talent begins to emerge in this early work but the real winner here is the spartanly constructed design -- every moment is used to further the plot.

One of the great anti-war films. You never get tired of it

It was with Paths of Glory that it became obvious Kubrick was one to keep an eye on. It's powerful in every way. The acting is vigorous, the cinematography elegant, and the narrative hard-hitting. In general, Kubrick's style may not have completely developed to post-Strangelove levels, but it still works to make this one of his earliest masterpieces.

Great, but not quite as concise as Kubrick's later films.

This isn't your typical war movie, it's more about politics than actual battles. It was refreshing to see this movie after watching all the other 'war' movies.

Who's brave? What is sacred? Where lives the honour? What is the path of glory?