Paths of Glory
-What is it that drives some leaders to corruption and others to heroism?
I think that many leaders are driven by what they feel with benefit them as a person. If the leader will not benefit from it, then they will be resistant to ideas being given to them. If it does benefit them in some way, then they may be resistant at first, but then they will look out for themselves instead of the greater good of the people. This, I believe, drives some leaders to corruption. Other leaders are driven by what they feel will benefit the greater good of the people. They will look at a situation and see if it will hurt or benefit others, then they will look at what they feel is the right thing to do. For example, Colonel Dax would not let General Broulard bomb his own people because he felt it was unethical and it wasn't the right thing to do.
This drives some leaders to heroism.
-In what way does this film portray the thin wall separating justice versus injustice, the rational versus irrational, or right versus wrong?
When it came down to three people being picked to go on trial for not going out of the trenches to get killed, I felt that was very wrong. They may have been in a war, trying to get the anthill, but to be punished for showing fear on the battlefield, or trying to save your own life so that you can go home to your family, it is very irrational. If the two generals would've gone out into the trenches and fought the battle they were telling the others to fight, they probably would've done the same thing. There's no way they would get out of those trenches...