In 1957, Stanley Kubrick directed a movie that would change the face of war as no one had seen before on the silver screen. Inspired to bring the novel by Humphrey Cobb he read in his school days to life in live action, Kubrick embarked on a journey to reveal the seedy underbelly of war that few people dare to think about. Paths of Glory sparked much controversy across the nation, and even in other countries, temporarily hindering the careers of Kubrick and the lead actors involved. However, when this taboo lifted, it only revealed the truth and irony of the film's message.

The movie starts with the proposition by the French General Staff to take a stronghold of the German forces on the nearby battlefield. The General in charge does not believe this to be a wise decision at first, realizing his troops that would be assigned such a duty would be far underpowered in comparisons to the enemy. However, the General above him makes the suggestion that such a victory would guarantee a promotion in rank, and suddenly the task becomes far less impossible.

The film takes a subtle, and realistic by today's standards, approach to the telling of a war story. The characters drive the plot forward without prompt from the external enemy, but rather from the inhumane judgments and justifications of their own seats of power. A depth exists in every private, general, and rank in between, along with the interactions between them. This is why the movie is a popular choice for teachers to assign their students to analyze and write about it for critical thinking.

Despite the colonel's best efforts to rally his troops and fulfill the order given by the general, everyone in the company feels a looming sense of failure. Made concrete by the quick slaughtering of just about every man who leaves the trench, many stay behind, positive there is no way to win. The observing general then accuses the regiment of cowardice, and three men are chosen to take the blame for the French failure. The judgment that ensues is the main motivation for the story, and just like the attempted attack, takes the characters down a dark journey in which no one can see a light at the end.

Though black and white footage may simply appear to be a technical limitation of the past to many who see an older film, it is still a respected medium for its drama and contrasting power. The emotional pull of the scenes in Paths of Glory are masterfully integrated with the lighting, darkness playing into the emotion of fear and anger, patchy light mixed with dark to portray doubt and suspense, and bright white to reveal the overly clean and opulent.

One technical issue that many in today's audience may notice is the tendency of the characters to pace around the room during thoughts and speech, sometimes to an unrealistic extreme. The reason for this is to keep the feeling of motion alive while characters are set in lengthy conversations. With the limited ability to move the camera itself due to the touchy nature of lighting at the time, shot diversity depended on the actors' theatrical movements and gestures to stay interesting.

By following the story of three soldiers doomed to death by their superiors for unjust causes, the French and many other European countries banned the movie for many years before cultural policies on such material loosened. Film critics acclaim it as the first challenger to the idea that war is completely honorable and glorious. The ironic and emotional journey the plot takes leave audiences with both warnings and questions about those in power, and the motives behind making enemies out of those who should be allies.

Although Paths of Glory did not make a large profit upon its release, it remains a potent classic in film history for all time. Teachers of many liberal art subjects show the film to their students to discuss the moral dilemmas and valiant versus selfish motives. While many war movies may have their glory day come and go, the underrated tale of Paths of Glory sticks around as a time honored classic any film appreciator should see.