MovieChat Forums > Paths of Glory (1957) Discussion > Is this flick still watchable?

Is this flick still watchable?

posted 15 years ago by iMaas
47 replies | jump to latest

For some reason it ends up in a lot of top 10 war-movie-of-all-time-lists.
Just curious if it's still watchable after all these years.

To give you a general idea what I liked: Saving private ryan, The bridge on the river Kwai,
Band of Borthers (I know it's not a movie), la vita e bella, das boot & schindlers list.

What I didn't like: Flags of our fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, Enemy at the gate, The thin red line and Pearl Harbor,

And what I loved: Full metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, Jarhead, the pianist and Deerhunter.

So, should I watch Paths of Glory because it's good and it withstand the test of time?
Or is it a must-see because I'm such an avid war movie fan? Or not at all?

I don't need a signature!

[–] simonkevnorris 15 years ago

It's certainly worth watching at least once. I just happened to watch it again on on DVD today. I have seen the movie several times before - I first owned it on VHS.

Although there are fighting scenes in the movie it's not just a war movie.

It's certainly a movie that will withstand the test of time.

I don't agree with you about Letters from Iwo Jima and The Thin Red Line as they are both excellent movies. I know The Thin Red Line can be a tad slow at times but it was an excellent story.

[–] jellobiafra2000 15 years ago

It's not only watchable, it should be mandatory.

My top 100 films http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNEyqzd1_GU&feature=fvw

[–] jeffarey 12 years ago

How right you are jellobiafra

The way Kubrick shoots this film is ridiculous. I don't know if it will ever be out of date. The whole time I'm watching it, I'm just thinking to myself, "how does he make his picture so clear; every image so vivid and detailed; his camera so mobile?" Even now, with all of the technological advancements that have been made in film, his style of navigating through the trenches is hypnotizing.

and that is just my opinion on the aesthetics ;)

Top notch - give it a watch!

[–] npanou 11 years ago

The movie is decades ahead of its time. If i didn't recognize Douglas i would have sworn it was made years later and just coloured black and white for effect- like Schindlers List. Incredible.

[–] TheAnimalMother 14 years ago

My top 3 war films are:

#1 - Paths Of Glory
#2 - Full Metal Jacket
#3 - Apocalypse Now

Since you love my 2nd and 3rd, I really can't see why you wouldn't love this film. Kubrick films hold up over time perhaps better than any other director ever. This is definitely a must see if you like war films I think. Truthfully I went into this film not expecting a lot from it, because it's an early Kubrick film. However I was pretty blown away by it. It really is my favorite war film ever, and I grew up in the 80's and 90's, I'm not that old.

I must say that I did really enjoy Letters From Iwo Jima quite a bit though, a very solid war film in my view. I would even go so far to say that it's a better film overall than Saving Private Ryan. The only great part of SPR in my mind is the opening storming of the beach, which is basically just an update of the beach storming from The Longest Day. Just my opinion.

My body's a cage, it's been used and abused...and I...LIKE IT!!

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 12 years ago

I know you said it is just your opinion and you weren't arrogant about this, but why in the world would you feel that Saving Private Ryan is great only in the D-Day scene?

[–] TheAnimalMother 12 years ago

Well I'm far from the only one who feels that way. I just don't think Saving Private Ryan is really that good of a film. I'm not big on most Spielberg films. Just my taste I suppose, he is mostly just a popcorn director in my mind. Rarely ever does a Spielberg film make me think much or really engage my emotions. The Color Purple is by far his best film in my view, and of course Schindler's List is very powerful as well. However he rarely delivers that kind of punch with most of his films. Don't get me wrong, he's made a lot of entertaining films, but few of them are great according to my personal tastes. Now Kubrick is another story. All Kubrick films are excellent food for thought and self exploration of the heart and mind. Kubrick films always pack a punch, and some of them pack far more than just one good punch.

My body's a cage, it's been used and abused...and I...LIKE IT!!

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 12 years ago

Why did you feel the need to say you are not the only who thinks that way? Full Metal Jacket has an imdb score of 8.4 and a metascore of 78/100, as opposed to Saving Private Ryan, which has an 8.5 and 90/100. Does that prove anything? Are you suggesting that it is okay to like or dislike a film only when numbers are on your side? It's not like most people dislike Saving Private Ryan, and I'm pretty sure those scores are not based only on the first 20 minutes. Although you are not being arrogant at all, I'm still taking a defensive position here because I've always felt like this "Saving Private Ryan is not good" thing is just a meme, product of the internet hipsters.

I know you purposely didn't elaborate on why you think Saving Private Ryan is not good, and you just gave your opinion that Spielberg is too "popcorn", but still, I'll take the lead here and say that I disagree with every single criticism I've read about it. In fact, the most prominent criticism I've read seems to be "this is not a true story", which doesn't seem to bother anyone else regarding other war films, like Apocalypse Now.

About the film being too "popcorn", I disagree. The film's artistic merits don't lie on its story, but on its gritty realism expressed mainly through its direction, cinematography and acting. Before Saving Private Ryan there was NOTHING like it. Not one single war film had such realistic battle scenes and that's a BIG merit in an of itself. The characters and acting are some of the best I've ever seen, not because the actors showed great range or something, but because they acted and held conversations precisely like real normal people do. Saving Private Ryan is simply the most realistic war movie I've ever seen, not because of its story, but because of absolutely everything else. That, in my opinion, makes it the best war film ever made, even if its not the most complex. The story may be popcorn, but handled amzingly well, except for some things here and there.

And I reiterate, I know you are not being arrogant about this, but Saving Private Ryan is OBVIOUSLY not a bad film, and it is tiresome to read some people in here (a minority mind you) saying that it is a genuinely bad movie (I know you didn't say that btw).

I guess it all comes down to what makes a great or artistic film. You seem to think a film can't be an artistic achievement when it isn't full of subtexts, but I think a film can be such an artistic achievement for different things, not just its complex symbolisms and messages.

[–] TheAnimalMother 12 years ago

What the hell are you talking about? Your suggestive reasoning there of my comment is boarder line insane. And did you suggestively try to label me an internet hipster? The only reason I said I wasn't the only one who feels that way is because it's a well known common criticism of the film...and you asked me about it. As far as ratings go, other peoples ratings mean little...if anything at all to me. I'm glad you love the film. I'm not so big on it, and I've given it a few chances. I'll end it at that.

About your last comments. I like complex, or elaborate thought provoking films, sure. However I do also really enjoy some very simple films.

My body's a cage, it's been used and abused...and I...LIKE IT!!

[–] FloydIsGod 12 years ago

Jaws cannot be f'd with

[–] TheAnimalMother 12 years ago

No doubt! I have a lot of respect for Jaws as well. Surely one of Spielberg's finest.

My body's a cage, it's been used and abused...and I...LIKE IT!!

[–] flaiky 14 years ago

Definitely. It feels very ahead of its time.

[–] gdd55 14 years ago

I just watched it this morning and I have to say it holds up very well. It's on my top dozen war films.
Not necessarily in order:
1. We Were Soldiers

2. Saving Private Ryan (primarily for the first few minutes)

3, The Longest Day

4. Band of Brothers

5. Das Boot

6. Paths of Glory

7. Hamburger Hill

8. Lawrence of Arabia

9. The Red Badge of Courage

10. Battleground

11. Once an Eagle (Miniseries. Good luck finding it, Great book )

12. Twelve O'clock High

[–] oldblackandwhite 14 years ago

I never pass up a chance at a favorites list. Mine is kiltered by an unshakeable predudice that most movies made much after 1970 are garbage because of a radical and (in my oppinion) negative change in cultural and aesthetic outlook.

1) The Big Parade (1925)
2) All Quiet on the Western Front (1930 version)
3) The Longest Day
4) Tora! Tora! Tora!
5) Edge of Darkness
6) Paths of Glory
7) The Red Badge of Courage (1951 version)
8) The Train
9) War and Peace (1968 Russian version)
10) Grand Illusion (French 1937)

Honorable mention: Waterloo, The Heroes of Telemark, The Fighting 69th, The Road to Glory, The Crusades (1935 C. B. DeMille opus), All Quiet on the Western Front (1979), The Colditz Story, North and South: Part 2, Fraulein Doktor, The Girl and the General, They Were Expendable, In Harms Way, The Last Valley (has to be best movie about the 30-Years War -- anyone knowing another, please tell me), Beachhead, many others.

Gone With the Wind is not primarily a war movie, but its unforgettable portrayals of the wounded in the Atlanta railroad yard, women and children fleeing into the night in a burning city with nothing but the clothes on their backs, and women sitting and wondering what has happened to their loved ones is perhaps what war is really all about.

He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good... St. Matthew 5:45

[–] MVainn 13 years ago

All the war films being thrown around and no Patton? Are you people serious?

[–] Smokebowls 14 years ago

I'm sorry but how does someone love jarhead and dislike letters from iwo jima?

[–] Pegasuspizza 14 years ago

Pretty hilarious....."FOR SOME REASON....."......

"is it still watchable?"...........LOL

LOL

[–] cattard-1 14 years ago

.

This film is a MASTERPIECE! It totally deserves all the praise it has gotten over the years and much more than that. However, please note - this is not an action/adventure war movie. This is a brutally honest comment on the absurdity of war. THIS IS NOT A WAR FILM BUT AN ANTI-WAR FILM!

In my opinion, the only other anti-war film which I regard as being on this level is Jean Renoir's La Grande Illusion.

.

[–] HowVeryUnDudeofYou 14 years ago

I would say most war films are by definition anti-war films. Almost all of them harp on the brutality and absurdity of war.

[–] Tenakoto 14 years ago

The emotion and acting is awesome in this film, very realistic for its time, I really liked "All Quiet on the Western Front" (1930 film), its old but it still effected me, and the cinematography is outstanding, check it out.

[–] smarques5 14 years ago

The worst for me was the actor playing the role of private Ferol. The scene in which Ferol is crying while advances to the firing squad and the priest tries to console him is laughable: typical Hollywood *beep*
Adolphe Menjou, on the other hand, was superb: he was born to play roles like that.

[–] Errington_92 14 years ago

I'd say that Paths Of Glory is still relevant today in terms of presenting authority as corrupt individuals, abusing their power to protect themselves and blaming others in weaker positions for their mistakes.

"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".