Stuck with me... but the movie kept it's distance

Rating: 7/10 (14 February 2019)

If a movie really sticks with you, that counts for something. If it does, there was something in the movie that made me think and reflect. The problem with Paths of Glory is that I'm not sure what it was...
But let me start from the beginning. Paths of Glory comes with a great reputation (and it is always difficult to live up to a hype) and an impressive rating here on IMDb. The movie, a clear anti-war movie, shows the aftermath of an futile attack on a German stronghold by the French army somewhere along the trenches in the first world war. To be clear, this is no war/action movie, it is almost all about what happens after. The general responsible (hoping for yet another promotion) is furious. After trying to have his artillery fire on his own lines (to get them moving), he "settles" to have one from each company put on trial for cowardice (after initially demanding that a hundred be put on trial - and this is a general that takes pride in being "a soldier - one of the men"). The men's colonel, who personally led the attack, protests vehemently and demands to defend the men during the trial. The trial is of course a sham, the outcome decided from the beginning.
Futility is a common theme. The futility of the attack - thousands of lives sacrified for nothing, with no hope of success. The futility of the trial and hopelessness of the men - chosen just to make an example. The disdain of the higher officers for the enlisted men (one genereal thinks it unfair to compare the enlisted men dying to the newspapers critique the officers suffers (which he thinks is worse)). The anti-war message is clear. And finally, the ending scene, where the enlisted men leers and howls at a poor captured German girl that is made to perform for them. Is that the message? That everyone, even the common man, kick downwards on those who are weaker? The men start to sing along in the end, a significant change - but what does that mean?
To be fair, I wasn't that impressed when the movie ended. But then the thoughts started. What was the point really? Is everything depressing, or was there hope somewhere? And then I realized how expertly Kubrick has manipulated my thoughts and emotions throughout the movie with his choice of scenes and camera positioning. In that regard the movie is a directorial masterpiece. The movie, almost without me noticing, planted seeds of thoughts and questions, but offering no answers.
But herein also lies the movies greatest fault. By the same questions that made me think after, built a distance between me and the characters during. There were no real accomplishements, almost no characters to build a relationship with and feel for. I can't say the movie was very entertaining at all. By entertaining I don't mean I have to laugh or wonder at the effects - but I do expect to be engaged by the movie. Be dragged into the movie by the story. I actually wasn't with Paths of Glory, there was that distance.
And in the end, the real masterpiece manages to do both. I don't think Paths of Glory quite lives up to it's hype. Or is it that I expected too much out of it because of the hype?