Paths of Glory (Stanley Kubrick, 1957)

"See that cockroach? Tomorrow morning, we'll be dead and it'll be alive. It'll have more contact with my wife and child than I will. I'll be nothing, and it'll be alive."

Introduction

Paths of Glory in a double-bill with Dr Strangelove would be incredible. Whilst one deals with the politics of the Cold War and the atomic bomb, Paths of Glory deals with the complete injustice and unfair accountability of soldiers during war time. These two films, alongside Full Metal Jacket, clearly establish Stanley Kubrick's anti-war stance. Kubrick has said the following about politics - “The great nations have always acted like gangsters, and the small nations like prostitutes" and the muddy, messy nature of the fights depicted in Paths of Glory do not depict the 'Glory' of battle, but the horror. It is no surprise that Spielberg has noted how Paths of Glory is one of his favourite Kubrick films - and you can see the influence it has on Saving Private Ryan and, more recently, War Horse. Both War Horse and Paths of Glory are set during World War I and while War Horse plays down the injustice - clearly depicting the English as "Heroes" whilst the Germans are "Villains" - Paths of Glory portrays the French against the Germans and boths sides are as despicable as the other. Now that I mention it, the enemy of the German opposition is never seen!

Patriotism

Colonel Dax (Kirk Douglas) quotes Samuel Johnson early in the film to his superior General Mireau (George Macready) - "Patriotism...is the last refuge of a scoundrel". Mireau is the scoundrel and his simplification about an attack on the Ant Hill - comfortably noting how "25%" of soldiers will die during the first wave of the attack - highlight this from the start. What begins as an attack crossing no-mans land in the first act changes dramatically after the plan fails as a whole regiment refuses to leave the trenches. It is clear that the soldiers would not survive if they got past the wire. General Mireau argues that the soldiers who did not leave the trenches (and the soldiers who retreated) showed "cowardice in the face of the enemy" and should be shot. Mireau believes that if the soldiers followed their commands they could have taken the Ant Hill whilst Colonel Dax believes that it was a completely flawed plan from the outset and it would be suicide for the soldiers if they followed the order. Mireau counter-argues that if that would have been the case, so be it. The soldiers should have followed the order. Three soldiers are chosen and placed on trial to set an example.

This is a fascinating conflict to discuss. In war, it is expected that all soldiers follow every order they are given. Even if the order is suicide. General Mireau, a man in a position of power, is responsible for the death of many men and this strikes a direct parrallel with General Jack Ripper (Sterling Hayden) in Dr Strangelove - as he attempts to start a nuclear war. Unlike Ripper, Mireau is not portrayed as a mad man - he is not locked away in a room pushing buttons. Mireau is a senior officer who defends his case and argues his views successfully - his superior General George Boulard (Adolphe Menjou) respects him. Boulard and Mireau are cut from the same cloth and understand the expectations of the senior ranks - whilst they both see how expendable the soldiers on the front line are. Colonel Dax on the other hand is between the two - he fights alongside the soldiers on the battle field and also takes orders and discusses strategies with the Generals. This perfect place in the ranks of the army is what makes him such a fascinating character; uncorrupted by the upper ranks and understanding enough to respect the soldiers and their duty to society. To top if off, he is a lawyer outside of the war and clearly understands the word justice.

Technical Skill

The way Kubrick shoots the trenches is incredibly atmospheric. The camera seems to be squeezed amongst the men and walks through the long, narrow gutters. You cannot help but consider the awful conditions these men were kept within. So many men are seen as Colonel Dax is walking through these trenches, we know that he is thinking the same: These are not merely pawns in a game of chess - these are men with wives and families. Ironically, it is General Mireau who asks the men about their families - "Do you have a wife?" and stating how "Your Mother would be proud". These are empty comments and when he approaches a man who is shell-shocked this pseudo-kindness changes as he calls him a coward and immediately removes him from his post arguing that his fearful attitude will "spread" amongst the men.

Furthermore, the use of lighting by cinematographer Georg Krause is haunting and moody. Especially within the sequences whereby the three accused are in prison. As the priest offers to give the soldiers their last rites, the lighting is sparse and creates a religious and classical atmosphere. Contrasting these sequences with the expansive and affluent mansions and dance-halls shows how divided the soldiers and their superiors are. General Boulard is never on the battlefield and even Mireau who is on site, is clearly at a safe distance. The soldiers on the other hand are only seen in small, cramp trenches, bars and cells. This only changes when the three men are on trial themselves. Hinting at the only access to these places is through illegal and corrupt acts.,

Relevant Today

It finishes as Colonel Dax is offered a promotion - his effort in supporting the soldiers and making Boulard aware of Mireau's actions to kill all Paths of Glory clearly establishes a context that highlights the ugliness in war and the injustice in the actions expected of others. Unlike reality, in Paths of Glory, Colonel Dax leaves the room without the promotion having made his stand -

General Broulard: Colonel Dax, you're a disappointment to me. You've spoiled the keenness of your mind by wallowing in sentimentality. You really did want to save those men, and you were not angling for Mireau's command. You are an idealist... and I pity you as I would the village idiot. We're fighting a war, Dax, a war that we've got to win. Those men didn't fight, so they were shot. You bring charges against General Mireau, so I insist that he answer them. Wherein have I done wrong?
Colonel Dax: Because you don't know the answer to that question. I pity you.

Dax leaves the room and watches the soldiers in a bar, blissfully ignorant, watching a German singer - for a moment - whisk the men away from the horrors of war. Horrors they should not see.

A-Z #30: Bridge on the River Kwai

You can pick up hundreds of DVD's for a round-pound each - it doesn't matter. Its never about quantity, its about quality. A-Z is my way of going through my collection, from A-Z, and justifying why I own the films... or you can tell me why I should sell 'em

#30 - Bridge on the River Kwai 

Why did I buy it?

I swear, my Dad has so much to answer for my interest in film. As much as he might despise the film-obsessive attitude I have, he has much to answer for. Akin to Ben-Hur, this 3+ hours epic film was a favourite for those Sunday afternoons. I never knew the importance of the film until many years later - David Lean directing, winning Best Picture at the Oscars for 1957, alongside winning big at the BAFTA's and the Golden Globes.

Why do I still own it?

 

Because the story is fascinating and, dare I say it, incredibly unique. Alec Guinness is captured and, as a Prisoner of War, is ordered to build a bridge and takes so much pride in the bridge that he doesn't realise that he is ultimately helping the enemy. An awesome finale - "my god - what have I done" before, Guinness falls on the lever.

But is it too big and sprawling? Maybe you don't need so much David Lean?

Remember - you can always email The Simon and Jo Film Show directly using this email: simonandjoshow@gmail.com

We are also on Twitter  and Facebook.

Det Sjunde Inseglet/The Seventh Seal (Ingmar Bergman, 1957)

"And when the Lamb had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour" (Revelation 8:1)

Introduction

'The Seventh Seal' pushed Swedish cinema into the forefront of filmmaking in the 1950's - though not his debut, it was nevertheless a springboard for Ingmar Bergman. I have known of this film for many years but have delayed watching it because my initial preference is for Hollywood - but I do try to know my international cinema. Since reading Mark Cousin's 'The Story of Film', I have found that Hollywood often uses techniques and styles straight from World cinema - think John Woo and The Matrix, bringing Kung-Fu into Western Cinema. Think 'Easy Rider' and 'Five easy Pieces' and the French New Wave. Once successful international, Hollywood remake and repackage it claiming it as its own. So, I find it wholly neccessary to research and give credit where credit it due- so, knowing that before Star Wars there was Kurosawa's 'The Hidden Fortress' and before 'A Fistful of Dollars' there was 'Yojimbo'. Bergman has been incredibly influential also - specifically on Woody Allen - who has always been quite honest about Bergmans influence (E.g. at the end of 'Love and Death', there is a dance of death parodying 'The Seveth Seal'). This was on at the Barbican in London during a 'Directorspective', which - I must admit - I shall take advantage of in the future. Indeed the Barbican cinema is really quite a brilliant venue and I thoroughly recommend it. But, without further ado - a review follows the synopsis of - 'The Seventh Seal'...

Quick Summary

"A Knight and his squire are home from the crusades. Black Death is sweeping their country. As they approach home, Death appears to the knight and tells him it is his time. The knight challenges Death to a chess game for his life. The Knight and Death play as the cultural turmoil envelopes the people around them as they try, in different ways, to deal with the upheaval the plague has caused." - brought to you today by John Vogel via IMDB.

What I Reckon

There is one scene in this which reminds me of a painting by Hieronymus Bosch - 'The Garden of Earthly Delights'. In an inn, Jof (Poppe) gets involved in a fight with other people in the pub - ugly, intimidating characters. A 'local pub, for local people' it appears. The beer is spilling all over the floor and pigs run rampant. Jof is asked to dance as a bear and everyone bullies and cheers him on - Jof is terrified, but does manage to escape. Set in the middle-ages (Bosch's triptych was completed in 1503-1504) and the disgusting people and pigs specifically give me the idea of some sort of hell. But I would imagine this is the point. Bergman appears to indicate that Religion itself is just fear and comes about simply through the fear of death. So this complete humiliation for Jof is the hell we have built on earth - we know of fear and we know of humiliation, how that feeds into an eternity of damnation is our own making.

I believe the Death character does not indicate there is a God - let alone a Christian God - as he knows no answers, he merely represents the idea of Death itself and the 'game' we play to put it off. Though Antonius Block (Von Sydow) seems to have a realistic and sensible outlook on faith - I know no proof of God, but I am keen to search for him. Block has returned from the crusades, the death that has no-doubt surrounded him forces him to question his faith, while his squire Jon (Bjornstrand) takes his stand. In his eyes, death sucks but life is life. Make the most of it. Hence his hypocritical attitude when finding Lisa (Inda Gill) - "I won't rape you, but you have to make food for me ... forever.". Thene again, this is the middle-ages, I guess you take what you can get.

Visually, it is stunning. I will no doubt say this about Ridley Scott also, but Bergman seems to frame each and every shot, using the black and white contrast to accentuate the characters features. You could freeze every shot and blow it up and frame it. Even the opening shot of the clouds dispersing is beautiful - like an explosion straight into your face, cut to the crashing waves...

The big one was Gunnar Fischer's cinematography. In black and white, Fischer showed deep shadow and strong light, showing deep contrasts on every shot - Death, with his white face and black cape - seemed to still stand-out when needed, but also blend in when neccessary. With a huge interest in Woody Allen, I have to admit you can see that Bergman's style has influenced his work - though I think Allen feels that 'Cries and Whispers' is a superior film.

Having only watched it this once, this is only my initial impression of the movie. I assume it gets better in time. I knew, going into this that it often appears on Top Ten Movie lists - specifically the BFI and Andrew Collins 'Top 25 Films You Must See', so was more than aware of a positive judgement of the film, but it can often be difficult when you are of a generation brought up on Spielberg, N64's and U2. Opposed to - say with Woody Allen - Bergman, Dostoevsky and 1940's Jazz. One bar I always try and raise for these films is whether I think the director anything else - and was unsuccessful in getting his vision across. For example, I am a big fan of film scores and epic John Williams themes, and - obviously - that was not the case here, but then again did Bergman want a John Williams score (not that he could - 1957 ... he could have got Herrman, if Herrman was interested in low-budget Swedish movies at the peak of his success - "Sorry Hitch, I'm going to bail on 'Vertigo' to join Ingmar in Sweden") - the highly religious-connotations associated with madrigal singers and big brass Nordgren chose, belting out fear, suited Bergman's film better. So my preference is beaten away by an awareness of what Bergman wanted to achieve. He tackled a huge subject - fate, death, life, God, and placed it within the plague-ridden middle England. Most people would assume that this is a rubbish idea - to exapnsive a topic set in an uninteresting context - but alas, the context enhances the themes, pitting the main topics in a world whereby death is on the doorstep. When put so close to death, maybe thats when we turn to God. Whether that means there is a God is a different question.

Many people seem to assume Bergman is afraid of Atheism - I don't think so. I think the film firmly states the problem man-made, man-influenced forms of religious control is bad (which, in my opinion it is) and - in fact - whether there is a God is anyone's guess. The short discussion Antonius has with his wife when he finally arrives home is brief - but could easily be a conversation he has with God when coming to faith. Note how, when Death arrives, he is 'converted' - praying for mercy that we do not see come. But then - are we supposed to?