Editing Paths of Glory (section)

===Reviews in the United States, 1957{{endash}}1958===
Despite the film's harsh reception in Europe by various governments, French war veterans, and media outlets, in the months after the motion picture's initial screenings in the United States, reactions to Kubrick's production featured in American newspapers and [[Trade magazine|trade publications]] were generally positive. Nevertheless, perceived deficiencies in the film's structure and content were expressed by some of the nation's leading reviewers in 1957 and 1958.

====Issues with "colloquial English" dialogue====
In his December 26, 1957, review for ''The New York Times'', [[Bosley Crowther]] credits Kubrick for creating a visually "terrific", highly intense picture. In particular, Crowther draws attention to the story's execution scene, which he describes as "one of the most craftily directed and emotionally lacerating that we have ever seen." He does, though, also identify two "troubling flaws" that he saw in the film, one being within the "realm of technique", the other within the "realm of significance":<ref name="NYT"/>{{blockquote|We feel that Mr. Kubrick{{snd}}and Mr. Douglas{{snd}}have made a damaging mistake in playing it in [[wikt:Special:Search/conversational|colloquial]] English, with American accents and attitudes, while studiously making it look as much as possible like a document of the French Army in World War I. The illusion of reality is blown completely whenever anyone talks....<br>As for the picture's significance, it comes to an inconclusive point. Its demonstration of injustice is like an exhibit in a bottle in a medical museum. It is grotesque, appalling, nauseating{{snd}}but so framed and isolated that, when you come away, you are left with the feeling that you have been witness to nothing more than a horribly freakish incident.<ref name="NYT"/>}}

The absence of any spoken French or suitably accented English dialogue in a highly focused portrayal of French soldiers continued to be a point of debate in American critical analysis of ''Paths of Glory''. Philip K. Scheuer, who wrote about films for the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' from the 1920s to 1967, was another reviewer who addressed the issue again in the newspaper's January 16, 1958, edition.<ref>[https://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8w37zj1/entire_text/ "Philip K. Scheuer papers"], Special Collections, [[Margaret Herrick Library]], Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Beverly Hills, California. Retrieved archive profile July 24, 2022.</ref><ref name="Scheuer">Scheuer, Philip (1958). "Views Diverge on War Film: Question of Foreign Accents Raised by 'Paths of Glory'", ''Los Angeles Times'', January 16, 1958, p. B11. Retrieved via ProQuest, July 25, 2022. {{ProQuest|<!--ProQuest data goes here  --> }}</ref> In a follow-up discussion about the "controversial war picture", in a commentary subtitled "Question of Foreign Accents Raised by 'Paths of Glory{{' "}}, Scheuer cites the style of speech used in the film and the screenplay's "weak" ending as two reasons he omitted the production from his "selection of 1957's best".<ref name="Scheuer"/> Like Bosley Crowther, he found the "[[linguistic]]" aspects of the dialogue wholly distracting. "In 'Paths{{' "}}, Scheuer writes, "the actors all...employ ordinary colloquial English{{snd}}much of it, I felt, delivered badly{{snd}}although Adolph Menjou, being of French descent, did convey a certain quality of Frenchness," adding, "The others were simply Hollywood types."<ref name="Scheuer"/>

====The film's "grim" plot====
The overriding tone of the motion picture also evoked comments about the picture's marketability, namely its scant appeal to a very large segment of moviegoers. "Grim" is the word that frequently appears in contemporary reviews of the film, an adjective understandably applied given the story's brutal subject matter, and a word still commonly used even in complimentary assessments by critics. In its March 18, 1958 edition, the ''[[Chicago Daily Tribune]]'' summarizes the release as "a grim, forceful story, presented in blunt, unvarnished fashion, entirely lacking in the customary cliches, deftly directed."<ref>Tinee, Mae (1958). "Film Indicts 2 Soldiers of World War I", ''Chicago Daily Tribune'', March 18, 1958, p. a5. Retrieved via ProQuest, July 25, 2022. {{ProQuest|<!--ProQuest data goes here  --> }} The name of this reviewer, "Mae Tinee", was a [[pen name]] used over the years by a series of film critics working at the ''Chicago Daily Tribune'', a name derived as a humorous reconfiguration from the word "[[wikt:Special:Search/matinee|matinee]]".</ref> Whitney Williams, a critic for ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'', previewed the film six weeks before it opened at the Fine Arts Theatre in Los Angeles. In his review, which was published on November 20, 1957, Williams anticipates limited interest as well as limited box-office revenue for the picture:{{blockquote|"Paths of Glory" is a starkly realistic recital of French army politics in 1916 during World War I. While the subject is well handled and enacted in a series of outstanding characterizations, it seems dated and makes for grim screen fare. Even with the Kirk Douglas star name to spark its chances, outlook is spotty at best and will need all the hard selling United Artists, which is distributing the Bryna production, can muster.<ref name="Variety57a">"Whit." [Whitney Williams] (1957). [https://archive.org/details/variety208-1957-11/page/n169/mode/2up "Paths of Glory"], ''Variety'' (New York and Los Angeles), November 20, 1957, p. 6. Retrieved via Internet Archives, July 25, 2022. Within the film-crew credits that Whitney Williams provides with his review, he states that he previewed the motion picture on "Nov. 12, '57".</ref>}}
''[[Harrison's Reports]]'', an independent and advertisement-free film review journal in 1957, agreed with ''Variety'''s critic and in November expressed doubts too that the "World War I melodrama" would be successful commercially after its general release in January 1958.<ref name="HR57">[https://archive.org/details/harrisonsreports39harr/page/n219/mode/2up "'Paths of Glory' with Kirk Douglas, Adolphe Menjou and Ralph Meeker"], review, ''Harrison's Reports'' (New York, N.Y.), November 23, 1957, p. 188. Retrieved via Internet Archive, July 30, 2022.</ref><ref name="AFIa">[https://catalog.afi.com/Film/52321-PATHS-OFGLORY?sid=225103ca-2d02-437e-ab6c-3af952b60f25&sr=10.723185&cp=1&pos=0 "Paths of Glory (1958)"], production details, catalog of the American Film Institute (AFI), Los Angeles California. Retrieved July 26, 2022.</ref> "Just how it will fare at the box-office is a matter of conjecture", ''Harrison's'' stated, characterizing its central theme as "a grim and unpleasant study of man's inhumanity toward man".<ref name="HR57"/>

====Views on the screenplay's ending====
Edwin S. Schallert, a fellow critic of Philip Scheuer at the ''Los Angeles Times'', also attended the film's first screening in Los Angeles on December 20, 1957. The following day the newspaper published Schallert's evaluation, which begins by classifying ''Paths of Glory'' as "A minor contribution but an interesting one to the war effort on the screen".<ref name="Schallert57">Schallert, Philip (1957). "'Paths Of Glory Evidences Power In Its Court-Martial", ''Los Angeles Times'', December 21, 1957, p. B3. Retrieved via ProQuest, July 26, 2022. |{{ProQuest|<!--ProQuest data goes here  --> }} </ref> Next he describes the drama's storyline in some detail before addressing specifically the film's final scene, which he found odd and disconnected in its presentation so soon after "the grim gray execution". "Susanne Christian", Schallert writes, "is seen as the German girl forced to sing to a huge body of [French] troops right at the end of the picture{{snd}}a peculiar sort of payoff for the miscarriage of justice to which the whole gathering of men seems to be oblivious."<ref name="Schallert57"/> He then concludes, {{" '}}Paths of Glory' is a commendably sincere picture, very well told for the most part, though it does not fulfill itself in the best screen and entertainment terms. It is practically like a documentary."<ref name="Schallert57"/>

The review in ''Harrison's Reports'' addressed the ending as well, maintaining that it was the "picture's one weak spot", was "difficult to understand", and "leaves one with a feeling that it is inconclusive".<ref name="HR57"/> The journal then offered its own interpretation of the final scenes. From ''Harrison's'' perspective, as Colonel Dax is returning to his quarters after his confrontations with his superior officers, "he notices his soldiers enjoying themselves in a cafe. It disgusts him to think that they had so quickly forgotten their executed comrades, but he compassionately realizes that life must go on."<ref name="HR57"/> Whitney Williams in ''Variety'' also commented about the film's finale, noting that it "ends so abruptly [the] audience is left with a feeling of incompletion."<ref name="Variety57a"/>

Other assorted critics in newspapers and trade publications viewed the film's ending and the production's significance cinematically far differently than the cited critics at the ''Los Angeles Times'' or the reviewers for ''Harrison's Reports'' and ''Variety''. Richard Gertner of the New York-based trade paper ''[[Motion Picture Daily]]'' was one of them. He, unlike Edwin Schallert, did not see ''Paths of Glory'' as a "minor contribution" to the genre of wartime portrayals. Nor did he find its closing scenes "peculiar"; but instead, "poignant".<ref name="Gertner57">Gertner, Richard (1957). [https://archive.org/details/motionpicturedai82unse_0/page/n269/mode/2up "REVIEW: Paths of Glory"], ''Motion Picture Daily'' (New York, N.Y.), November 18, 1957, pp. 1, 7. Retrieved via Internet Archive, July 28, 2022.</ref> After viewing what he termed "a brilliant and arresting film" only a few weeks after its world premiere in Munich, Gertner highly recommended it to his readers, many of whom were theater owners.<ref name="Gertner57"/> He then advised those motion picture "exhibitors" not to misjudge the film's content in advance:{{blockquote|Technically, this is a war picture, but any exhibitor who promotes it as just another action film will be making a serious mistake. Its exciting battle scenes and the suspense of a subsequent court martial assure it of appeal in that market. But it also has deeper and stronger elements under the surface that will attract customers who like strong drama....Just as exciting as the physical events are the ideas about war and men that Kubrick trenchantly puts across{{snd}}about military discipline, the [fallibility] of those who carry it out and the futility of attempting to fight [it]. These are timeless ideas{{snd}}relevant to any war. Let us hasten to add, however, that this is no "message" picture. The theme is implicit to the story and the characters.<ref name="Gertner57"/>}}
Finally, in contrast to Philip Scheuer's omission of the production from his "selection of 1957's best",<ref name="Scheuer"/> Gertner ends his appraisal emphatically: "No doubt about it{{snd}}'Paths of Glory' is one of the strongest dramas of the year."<ref name="Gertner57"/>

====Opinions regarding Kubrick's direction and editing====
In spite of issues being raised in various reviews about the film's manner of dialogue, its anticipated marketing challenges, and its ending, in the United States in 1957 and 1958 there was near universal admiration expressed for the directorial abilities and technical expertise that the 29-year-old Kubrick exhibited in the production. Jay Carmody{{snd}}the drama critic for ''[[The Washington Star|The Evening Star]]'' in Washington, D.C., and winner of the [[Directors Guild of America|Screen Directors Guild]]'s "Critic of the Year" award for 1956{{snd}}commended Kubrick for directing a "film with sting" and doing so with "chilling [[wikt:Special:Search/incisive|incisiveness]]".<ref>Carmody, Jay (1958). [https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1958-02-27/ed-1/seq-18/#date1=1957&index=2&rows=20&words=Kubrick&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1959&proxtext=Kubrick&y=18&x=28&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1 "Keith's Film Takes a Wry Look at War"], ''The Evening Star'' (Washington, D.C.), February 27, 1958, p. A-18. Retrieved via Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers, online archive, co-sponsored by [[NEH]] and the Library of Congress, July 25, 2022.</ref><ref>Hailey, Jean R. (1973). "Jay Carmody, Longtime Drama Critic", obituary, ''The Washington Post'', June 20, 1973, p. C9. Retrieved via ProQuest, July 27, 2022.  {{ProQuest|<!--ProQuest data goes here  --> }}</ref> At the ''[[New York Herald Tribune]]'', critic [[William Zinsser]] judges the film to be "outstanding" in his December 26, 1957 review and describes Kubrick's direction and editing as first-rate. "His scenes", Zinsser observes, "are vivid and well composed, and he knows the art of cutting{{snd}}the scenes make their point, with economy and bite, and move on."<ref>Zinsser, William K. (1957). "'Paths of Glory'", ''New York Herald Tribune'', December 26, 1957, p. 14. Retrieved via ProQuest, July 25, 2022. {{ProQuest|<!--ProQuest data goes here  --> }}</ref> Even at this relatively early stage in Kubrick's career directing feature films, he had already gained a reputation in the motion picture industry for commanding all aspects of his projects and being, as one colleague described him, "'meticulous with everything, from scripting to editing'".<ref>Baxter, John. [https://archive.org/details/stanleykubrickbi00baxt/page/36/mode/2up ''Stanley Kubrick: A Biography'']. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1997, p. 37. Retrieved via Internet Archive, July 28, 2022.</ref> What is notably missing, however, from Zinsser's comments or in other contemporary reviews about the quality of the production's "cutting" are any allusions to Eva Kroll, the film's credited editor, and to her contributions in helping to construct or at least refine the end product.<ref name="AFIa"/>