100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 12. Paths of Glory (1957)

 First, let me point out that noone is perfect, but at least I caught it after I had posted the #1 movie. I would hope if I had gotten to #1 without this movie making the 100 best list, people would have thought I was nuts.

 “Paths of Glory” was Stanley Kubrick’s first great film.  The fact that he also directed “Spartacus”, “Dr. Strangelove”, “Full Metal Jacket” makes a case for his being the greatest war movie director.  The movie was based on the novel by Howard Cobb which was published in 1935.  The teenage Kubrick had read the book in his father’s study.  Kubrick had trouble getting funding because of the depressing nature of the plot.  This problem was solved when Kirk Douglas was brought on board.  His production company took on the task and Douglas was paid 1/3 of the approximately $1 million budget.  He was not in it for the money as Douglas was committed to the project in principle.  The movie was a critical smash, but only a modest success at the box office and predictably did not do well in Europe.  In fact, it was banned in France for two decades.  Incredibly, the movie received zero Academy Award nominations and is not on AFI’s 100 Greatest Movies list!

 The movie is set on the Western Front in France in 1916.  A narrator summarizes the futility of the war up to that point.  It is a stalemate.  French Army Chief of Staff Gen. Broulard (Adolphe Menjou) visits Gen. Mireau (George MacReady) at his chateau.  Broulard orders an attack on an impregnable German position called the “Ant Hill”.  Mireau is at first against the insane, suicidal assault, but Broulard uses flattery and promotion bribery to bring him around.  He does not have to remind MacReady that he will be safely witnessing the attack from a bunker. Mireau visits the sacrificial unit to give the order to Col. Dax (Douglas). Dax is appalled at the senseless order, but Mireau assures Dax there will be only 60% casualties! He threatens to remove Dax and the colonel backs down. The attack fails, of course. Due to cowardice insists Mireau. Instead of punishing the whole unit, he agrees to only court-martial three soldiers. Dax acts as their defense attorney in the trial.

ACTING:   A+                

ACTION:   A+ (6/10) it has two great combat scenes, but it is mostly a courtroom drama

ACCURACY: N/A      

PLOT:  A               

REALISM:    B it’s bit over the top

CINEMATOGRAPHY:   A+

SCORE:   A

SCENE:  the attack across no man’s land

QUOTE:  Gen. Broulard:  Colonel, troops are like children. Just as a child wants his father to be firm, troops crave discipline. One way to maintain discipline is to shoot a man now and then.

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  Howard Cobb was inspired by a newspaper story about an incident in the war where four French poilu were executed for unit cowardice.  After the war, their families sued and two families were rewarded one franc each and the other two got nothing.  It was not uncommon in the French army and others (not including the American army) to execute men to strengthen the will of others.  The scenario in the movie is only indirectly related to the famous mutinies by French soldiers in the war.  The refusal to follow orders to continue wasteful attacks occurred wholesale in the army in 1917 after Nivelle's Chemins des Dames offensive to win the war came far short of the optimistic palaver fed to the troops.  There were some executions initiated by Petain as part of his otherwise empathetic diffusing of the situation.  It is safe to assume that among the 10% of men who were court-martialed and executed, there were undoubtedly some who did not deserve death.  The French government would have agreed with Mireau that the tonic might be harsh for a few, but effective for the masses. 

CRITIQUE:  This was only Kubrick’s fourth film, but you can clearly see the style that made him one of the great directors.  The cinematography by Georg Krause is magnificent.  “Bridge on the River Kwai” took that Oscar, but you could argue that “Paths to Glory” is superior and certainly deserved a nomination.  Speaking of which, although it could be argued that “Bridge” is the overall better film, no one in their right mind would say today that the nominees “Peyton Place”, “Sayanora”, “Witness for the Prosecution”, and “Twelve Angry Men” were more deserving than “Paths”.  Especially those first two!  The movie is famous among film buffs for the long tracking shots (especially the battle scene) and Kubrick’s abrupt cuts.  He is not big on fades in this movie.  The interior scenes with their baroque mise en scenes and the deep focusing are a clinic.  We also get a lot of off-centered shots.  Disconcerting to modern war movie lovers, the film lacks the frenetic cutting used to add to the fog of war.  In “Paths of Glory”, you know what is going on during a battle.  You are not lost or confused.

 The musical score is sparse, but Gerald Fried (who went on to score “Gilligan’s Island”!) encouraged the use of snare drums in war movies.  The closing song was of Napoleonic vintage and ends with the lines:  “Oh please Mother, bring a light /  My sweetheart is going to die”.  Coincidentally, Louis Armstrong had a hit with a version of it one year before the movie was released.

The acting is outstanding.  Douglas is his usual charismatic self, even more so because he was passionate about the project.  His Dax is one of the great anti-authority figures in war movie history and ahead of his time in the genre.  He runs the gamut of that stereotype.  Sarcasm, slow-burns, seething, and finally snapping.  The supporting cast is not intimidated.  MacReady and Menjou are all-time slimy.  Morris (who was a highly decorated ace in WWII) creates one of the great cowards in war movie history.  Ralph Meeker does his best work in an underrated career.  The most fascinating character is Ferol.  The eccentric Carey plays him to the hilt and his scene-stealing aggravated the rest of the cast. He gets one of the great lines in war movie history. After Paris ruminates about how a cockroach has a better future than him, resulting in Ferol smashing it and deadpanning:  “Now you have the edge on him.”  For instance, when he is being led by the Father to the execution and he bites into his arm - that was unscripted and almost got him punched in the face by the bemused Emile Meyer.  Carey was fired towards the end of the 64 day shoot and a double had to be used for the confession scene. 

The movie is not subtle in its themes.  It is an anti-war movie, but it is more appropriately labeled as an anti-command movie.  The battle scene is certainly horrific, but it is only seven minutes and no major character is killed.  The real focus of the plot is the machinations of the generals.  Broulard and Mireau are loathsome, but fairly representative of high command in the war.  Obviously, French high command in particular (Broulard resembles Joffre), but all of the belligerents in general.  It is no secret that the tactics used in the war were pigheaded, but the script enlightens about the use of court-martials to “motivate” the common soldiers.  A related theme is the dominance of the officer class over the enlisted.  Not only are most officers motivated by promotion (as opposed to the poilu just trying to survive), they use their position to wriggle out of culpability.  The only caveat I have with the themes is the ending cantina scene tends to dilute them.  The movie would have been better served ending with the executions.  However, considering the rumors that Douglas had to prevent Kubrick from giving the men a reprieve, it could have been much worse.  Having a tearful singalong by the cannon fodder signals that war goes on.  By the way, contrast the songs at the end of “Paths of Glory” and “Full Metal Jacket”.  ‘Nuff said.  The songs have a similar vibe, though.

How realistic is it in military matters?  The trenches are a little too wide, but that was to facilitate those awesome tracking shots, so all is forgiven on that score.  The night patrol seems typical, although fratricide by a cowardly leader was uncommon.  The main battle sequence is so well done that I showed it in my American History class to prepare my students for their letter from a soldier at the front assignment.  (The other clips are from “All Quiet”, “Sergeant York”, and “The Lost Battalion”.) It took 60 men, eight cranes, and three weeks to turn a German farm into the scarred landscape of trench warfare. Special kudos to the German police officers who were the extras and did some of the best dying in a war movie. The sound effects bear mentioning.  The whining of the artillery shells and the resulting explosions add to the impression of Hell on Earth.

CONCLUSION:  “Paths of Glory” is one of the great war movies and definitely belongs in the top twenty.  It sets out to make an impression and it succeeds perfectly.  Kubrick plus Douglas is a winning combination, as seen in “Spartacus”.  It is more court room and behind the scenes oriented than most war movies, but it does have one of the great combat scenes to balance that. 

Surviving Black Hawk Down (2025)

 

               “Surviving Black Hawk Down” is a new documentary series on Netflix. It tells the story of the Battle of Mogadishu which was portrayed in Ridley Scott’s “Black Hawk Down”. It was produced by Ridley Scott Associates. The series uses eyewitness accounts of American personnel, militia members, Somali civilians, and a Somali who used his camcorder to chronicle the battle. There are reenactments that look as good as the movie.

               The series is a good companion to the movie. You should see it if you have seen the movie. And before you think that Scott’s involvement ensured the series would be Americentric like his movie, it appears to be Scott’s way of rectifying the one-sided view of the battle that his film provided. I do not fault the movie for highlighting the bravery of the American soldiers, but it clearly did not present the other side well. It did have a few Somali characters and one of them is the main villain who gets a Hollywood style death to please the American viewers. The movie is excellent as a battle film and it is accurate. It is understandable that the only background is in the title cards at the beginning.  The series rectifies this by giving the big picture as well as the battle itself. Oddly, the series uses the interviewees to explain why they were in Somali. While the film gives the soldiers a chance to give their viewpoint on the mission, it would have been wiser to have used historians for the background. Operation Restore Hope began with Americans being greeted warmly by the people, which they should have been because it started as a humanitarian mission to help with distribution of food supplies to a starving populace. The series does a poor job explaining what the US military was doing there. It became an example of mission creep as the military was given the additional goal of capturing or killing Aidid. The problem was that half the city viewed him as their leader. Civilians were caught in the crossfire and this added fuel to the flames. And throw in the typical American soldier’s disdain for people living in the Third World. Lessons from Vietnam unlearned.

               The battle is very well presented. Seven Rangers or Delta Force members were interviewed. They are all very candid. “It was terrifying, as well as exciting”. That’s a good summary of combat from someone who went from playing video games to the real thing. And overall, the Battle of Mogadishu is an example of the fog of war as the seven men were very confused as to what was happening to them. However, since they were being interviewed years later, they could explain what they were trying to do that day. One of them was one of the first to Blackburn’s body. It does a better job than the movie in showing the chaos of urban warfare in a city where it was the public versus a small force. One veteran uses the term “a wall of lead”. And another says, “And all hell broke loose.” The viewers don’t have a fog of war because the series uses an animated city map to show where the groups of Americans were throughout the battle. Intercut with the remembrances of the Americans are interviews with male and female Somalians. As an American, listening to the militia members talk about what they considered a victory is eye-opening. They are unapologetic. Hollywood loves revenge and except for the fact that the Somalis greatly outnumbered the Americans, I can imagine a movie where they are the good guys. The series forces you to consider the other side’s view. It is hard not to understand their reasons for fighting. I was conflicted when watching it because my first reaction to the men who relished killing Americans was disgust, but I had to keep telling myself that they had legitimate reasons.

GRADE  =  A

100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 6. Black Hawk Down (2001)

 

BACK-STORY:  “Black Hawk Down” is a film by Ridley Scott (“Kingdom of Heaven”) based on the bestseller by Mark Bowden.  Bowden wrote the definitive history of the Battle of Mogadishu and the events surrounding it.  Ken Nolan adapted the book with input from Bowden.  The movie was filmed in Morocco.  The Pentagon cooperated with helicopters and even provided Rangers to do the fast roping (some of whom had been in the battle).  The movie was a critical and financial success.  It won Oscars for Editing and Sound and was nominated for Cinematography and Director.

SUMMARY:   The movie is “based on an actual event”.  A crawl describes the situation in Somalia leading into the battle.  Scott leads with a quote from Plato:  “Only the dead have seen the end of war.”  300,000 civilians had died in a famine causing the United Nations to send in food shipments.  20,000 Marines were inserted to protect the shipments and the starvation was brought under control.  When the Marines were withdrawn, a local war lord named Aidid who had dreams of ruling Somalia began to make war on the UN peacekeepers.  When 24 Pakastani’s were killed, the U.S. State Department pushed through a UN resolution calling for the arrest of Aidid.  Pres. Clinton sent Task Force Ranger to accomplish the mission.  It consisted of Rangers and Delta Force and was led by Gen. Garrison (Sam Shepard).

               On Oct. 3, a breakthrough occurs when an informant is prepared to finger two more of Aidid’s people.  Garrison outlines the mission to the various leaders (and the audience).  The best laid plans…  Lt. Col. McKnight (Tom Sizemore) points out some possible problems:  daytime negates America’s huge night vision advantage, no armor will be included, they will be going into Aidid’s turf, and the “skinnies’ will be high on katt (the national “I don’t give a shit if I’m shot” drug).  No worries.  We’re Americans and it will only take 30 minutes.  What could go wrong? 

The ingress is in trouble immediately as the Somali early warning system has the militias aping ants swarming from a kicked hill.  The helicopters swoop into the center of the city ala “Apocalypse Now”.  The Delta boys capture the targets at the Olympia Hotel with little difficulty, but things begin to break down when one of the Rangers fast ropes sans rope.  Three Humvees are designated to rush the badly injured Blackburn (Orlando Bloom) back to base.  Everything is going semi-well when one of the Black Hawk helicopters is shot down by an RPG (rocket-propelled grenade.) It won’t be the last. The mission now becomes a rescue mission and most of the soldiers get engulfed by the enraged populace. It’s a modern Alamo.               

ACTING:   A                

ACTION:   A+ (9/10)

ACCURACY: A      

PLOT:  B                

REALISM:   A 

CINEMATOGRAPHY:   A+

SCORE:   A+

SCENE:  the snipers defending the helicopter crash site

QUOTE: Hoot:   When I go home people'll ask me, "Hey Hoot, why do you do it man? What, you some kinda war junkie?" You know what I'll say? I won't say a goddamn word. Why? They won't understand. They won't understand why we do it. They won't understand that it's about the men next to you, and that's it. That's all it is.

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  When I first saw the movie in the theater and then read the book, I thought it was the most accurate war movie I had ever seen.  The research I have done for this post has caused me to back off a little bit on that.  There are inaccuracies, but they are all explainable and acceptable in a Hollywood context.  Nolan and Scott did an admirable job trying to adhere to the book.

               The crawl at the beginning explaining the situation is spot on.  The Rangers/Delta dynamic is substantially as it was, but the movie overplays the rivalry a bit.  In reality, most of the Rangers admired the Deltas.  There was a conflict between the by-the-book Steele and the Delta Force commanders (embodied in the fictional Sanderson).  The mission as outlined by Garrison was correct.  The various potential problems questioned by McKnight and the mistakes made by the individual soldiers with regard to gear are realistic.  Interestingly, other than the brief mention by McKnight, the film does not show that a large number of the Somali men were high on katt and correspondingly unconcerned for their lives.

               The ingress and taking of the suspects is accurate.  Blackburn’s fall, Pilla’s death, and Wolcott’s crash all happened as shown in the film.  The plight of the convoy is realistic.  The movie downplays the confused meanderings for time reasons.  The movement of Chalk 4 / Delta / Rangers to the first crash site is acceptably handled.  The crash of Durant’s bird and the actions of Schugart and Gordon are very well reenacted.  The movie leaves out the support from above by gunships.  Similarly, other than the one awesome run during the night stand at the Alamo, the nonstop efforts of the Little Birds in holding off the skinnies is skipped.

               Probably the biggest fudging occurs towards the end (see “We Were Soldiers”).  McKnight did not lead the relief column and when it arrived, the crash site was under control and not under fire.  The “Mogadishu Mile”was exaggerated because in actuality they did not run all the way to the stadium.

               The biggest discrepancies with the true story is with the characters.  There are about 100 named American soldiers in the book.  The movie pares this down to 39 which is totally understandable.  It was necessary to create composite characters, again for good reason.  The most important is Eversmann.  The movie needed a “star” and Josh Hartnett (coming off “Pearl Harbor”) was tapped.  Eversmann was a good choice for this role, but when the convoy left the Olympia Hotel he and Chalk 4 were on board.  It was Chalk 2, led by a Sgt. DiTomasso, that moved to the crash site.  Some of his men got separated, including Twombly and Yurek, but Nelson (the deafened guy) was with DiTomasso.  Almost all of the Delta guys have fictional names for security reasons, but they seem to be based on actual operatives.  Hoot is mainly fictional for narrative purposes (to act as a point of view), but is loosely based on an amazing warrior named Macejunas.

               The most interesting (and tragic) adjustment was for the Grimes (Ewan McGregor) character.  He was based on Johnny Stebbins who was a clerk that was thrust into the mission (although in reality he was eager to join).  Stebbins, like Grimes, seemed to attract RPGs.  He earned a Silver Star.  The name was changed because before production, Stebbins was convicted of child abuse.

CRITIQUE:  Ridley Scott when he has the right script (“Gladiator”, “Alien”, “Blade Runner”) can be a great director.  He was on his game for this film.  It is hard to imagine the movie being better made.  The cinematography by Slawomir Idziak is amazing.  Academy Awards were awarded for Sound and Editing.  The choice to use the cities of Rabat and Sale in Morocco to stand in for Mogadishu was inspired.  Many of the veterans remarked about how much the sets looked like the real thing.  (Although given the food problem, it is doubtful that the Mog had hundreds of dogs running around.  Watch the movie again.)  The effects are incredible and surprisingly done without a surfeit of CGI.  It is impossible to tell where CGI is used.  Most of the helicopter stunts are real and showcase the amazing skills of the Night Stalkers. Those are real soldiers roping down.

               The score by Hans Zimmer is excellent.  He blends two opposing strains.  There is a techno sound to support the American scenes and North African music representing the Somalis.  In some scenes, like the opening food distribution scene, the two styles meld to stark effect.  Overall, the soundtrack is one of the great war movie soundtracks.

               The acting is top notch from what appears to be an all-star cast.  However, at the time it was not a who’s who list, it was a who’s gonna be who list.  Aside from Shepard and Sizemore, the young cast was on the cusp of stardom.  One fun thing about the movie is recognizing the future stars.  One problem with the movie is you really have to look carefully.  It is not easy to distinguish between the characters even with names inauthentically added to their helmets.  The movie rewards multiple viewings.  On the plus side, no one really stands out because no one embarrasses themselves.  All of the performances are solid.  As per a modern war movie, the actors went through “boot camp” type experiences.  They move and behave like soldiers.

                  The plot has come under some criticism for lack of character development.  This is a misguided condemnation.  The fact is that the film was meant to be about the soldiers, not about a few individuals.  It did not have the same purpose as “Platoon”, for instance.  The closest equivalent that comes to mind is “Pork Chop Hill”.  It is hard to do an accurate account of a battle (which is clearly the intention of the film) and also develop the characters.  You would need a miniseries to do that (like “Generation Kill”).  In spite of time constraints, BHD does sufficient character introductions in the barracks scene.  Originally the movie was supposed to start with the mission so it could have been even less character driven.  Quit complaining.

               Another criticism is of the lack of coverage of the Somali point of view.  This is also unfair.  Considering the movie is a tribute to the American soldiers, it is asking too much that the enemy be given equal treatment.  They could have easily been demonized (and perhaps should have been), but the movie is sympathetic in a fair way.  One of the militiamen (‘sunglasses guy”) is featured in several scenes and gets to shoot down the first Black Hawk.  (He also gets a crowd-pleasing demise.)  Another interrogates Durant and forcefully represents the Somali point of view.  He also gets the best line when Durant turns down a cigarette.  “That’s right.  None of you Americans smoke anymore.”  Overall, the Somalis are depicted as worthy foes.  The movie does not portray them as katt-crazed nuts (which many were).  It also does not show the use of women and kids as human shields. By the way, although the movie struck some as racist because it was an almost all-white force versus black people. In actuality, there were only two black soldiers in the American units.

               There has never been a better movie about modern urban warfare.  The action is incredibly intense and yet may not even equal what it was like in Mogadishu that day.  For instance, there were a lot more RPGs fired.  And the gunships were under-represented.  The depiction of graphic wounds is stomach-turning, but realistic.  The movie does an excellent job on battlefield medicine with the attempts to save Smith being particularly powerful.  More importantly, the film is tactically sound in that it accurately reflects the tactical mistakes made that day. It also is one of the few combat movies that realistically shows that it is hard to hit a moving target, even with a machine gun. And the movie makes it clear that death in battle is often random.

               The biggest strength of the movie is it gets the military ethos right.  It was meant to be a tribute to the participants and that mission was accomplished.  The families of the dead were given some closure.  Schugart and Gordon, in particular, deserved this film.  The film has been wrongly labeled pro-war.  That is ridiculous.  It is pro-military, however.  Obviously the Pentagon felt that way considering the immense cooperation.  That is not to say that the military got a puff piece.  The movie does not sugarcoat the mistakes that were made, but it does not bludgeon us with them either.  I would hope the movie is required viewing at West Point.  God forbid the military should learn from its mistakes.  (Interestingly, although the Pentagon truthfully insists the mission was successful, the movie does not convey that.)  Significantly, the movie also does not take a stand on the policy of sending Task Force Ranger to Somalia.  Or the Clinton decision to turn tail and run after the battle.

CONCLUSION:  This movie belongs in the top ten war movies of all time.  It is also in the top ten most accurate war movies of all time.  It has many of the things I look for in a war movie for it to be considered great and important.  It accurately tells a story that needed to be told (ex. “The Great Raid”), it memorializes soldiers who deserved the accolades (ex. “We Were Soldiers”), it is realistic in tactics and soldier behavior (ex. “ A Walk in the Sun”), and it is entertaining.  It is hard to get those first three and also arrive at the fourth.  You may have noticed that I grade war movies on action using a scale of 1-10.  Surprisingly, many war movies do not have a lot of action per running time.  Once the mission begins, BHD is almost continuous action.  And it’s true, not bull crap. 

P.S.  There are three things I take away from this movie.  1.  America (and the military) puts a very high premium on soldier lives as we got further from the Vietnam War.  It was the biggest firefight since Vietnam and the twenty years had a softening effect.  When the first death occurs, everyone is stunned and the 19 deaths were treated like a disaster.  Imagine that reaction in any of our previous wars.  2. The military cares a lot about its wounded and dead.  Blackburn (the first of many casualties) has three Humvees detached to transport him back to base.  That was 1/3 of the convoy!  3. Our modern volunteer military is very efficient.  Most of the Rangers had never seen combat and were fighting against a lot of Somalis who had.  They gave way more than they got and survived against enormous odds.