The Gloriful Apocalypse

"War. War never changes"

When people think about war they often think of a handful of things that go along with it. Tragedy, Honor, Death, Destruction, Salvation, and Duty to name a few among other. Now I have never been in a war, and I probably never will be. But I like believe I have read and studied enough about it understand the basic emotions and conflicts it elicits. Often during during war the conflict of Duty v Conscious takes place. What your told to do vs what you ought to do. A lot of war movies play on this to the point where it's almost a cliche. But if the trope is done well enough, it can leave a powerful impact on the viewer.

One of the most celebrated war films of the last century is Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now. This visually stunning war epic follows  Cpt. Benjamin Willard in the Vietnam war as he takes on a mission to hunt down a rouge Colonel who has taken his men to Cambodia. We see from the start that duty is being questioned by a fairly high ranking individual going completely off the grid. Willard is tasked to keep the mission as secret as possible, presumably because the US Govt would like to keep such a high level mutiny off the public radar. During his journey, Willard witnesses many things that cause him to question his own duty, the death of bystanders, deaths of his own men, and the shadiness of the military's own top brass. The film's conclusion resonates the questionable morality that comes with blind duty, but it also reflects the torture and pain soldiers go through when they are simply asked to do their jobs.

Now when I would tell most people I would compare Apocalypse Now to a Stanley Kubrick film, most people would assume it would be Full Metal Jacket, Kubrick's war film that is also set in Vietnam, also one of his most famous. But instead I'd like to use a lesser known Kubrick film and one of his first, Paths of Glory. This film follows the consequences that befall French soldiers during WWI who are, at the command of an eager General seeking quick promotion, tasked into a suicide charge against a well defended German anthill. After heavy losses, some men begin retreat from the battlefield, with one company refusing to leave their trench at all. Condemning them as cowards, their General court martials three soldiers as an example, if they are found guilty the penalty will be death. The soldiers commander, Colonel Dax, is determined to defend them in court, risking his own life as well. In this film we see what happens when a man is pinned against his duty to his higher ups, who this case were not concerned for the well being of their men, and his duty to underlings, his duty as a leader. Even facing his own death, Colonel Dax did not waiver his own duty to protect his soldiers, even against the likes of his own commander. The film also the conflict between duty and one owns self-interest. In some cases obviously one should choose their duty, but Paths of Glory argues that in a situation where the duty being tasked is pointless and is only out of the self-interest of someone else, you are a not a coward for protecting your own life.

Both these films portray a man who is tasked to perform a duty given to him out of self-interest by their commanders. While Apocalypse Now follows the man who does his duty, despite the moral ambiguity, and his own internal conflict with it before and after, it contrasts with Paths of Glory, which shows a man who fails his practical duty of following orders, but maintains his moral duty to protect his men and the consequences he must face from doing so. Both these films are made by two of best American directors that have graced the world of cinema. These two masterpieces are essential to anyone who yearns for a deeper understanding of war and the personal and moral conflicts soldiers must face.