An order can come from a recognized authority and demand an action that contradicts the judgment of the person receiving it. Kubrick presents this conflict in different situations: an offensive, a nuclear chain of command, and a platoon trying to survive.
Paths of Glory: an order cannot make its objective achievable
In Paths of Glory, the offensive against an enemy position pits the commanders’ will against the conditions the soldiers encounter. The gap between giving an order and carrying it out is no abstraction. Those who must advance are exposed to fire and do not have the same options as those making decisions elsewhere. Evaluating conduct requires considering how danger, information, and the practical ability to move are distributed.
Dax takes part in the operation and later tries to defend the men who are accused. His actions do not amount to a complete withdrawal from the institution. He uses a recognized role within it to challenge the interpretation of what happened. The duty and defense in Dax’s character allow us to examine this tension: maintaining a responsibility toward his subordinates can lead him to confront his superiors while still accepting his own obligations.
The order to fire on their own positions introduces a particularly clear limit. The demand for written confirmation interrupts automatic execution and makes command responsibility something that must be recorded. Asking for a document does not eliminate the risk of disobeying, but it changes the terms of the discussion. The voice giving the order is no longer enough: the person issuing it must be able to answer for the action they demand.
The subsequent proceedings also distribute responsibility. A tribunal can make a political decision look like an individual assessment. The defendants’ subordinate status alone does not explain what they could have done or why they were selected. The film insists on distinguishing impossibility, refusal, and failure. Treating all three situations as a single charge lets the superiors avoid questions about the operation’s design and their own decisions.
Dr. Strangelove: discipline can protect an action no one manages to stop
Dr. Strangelove changes the problem through an organization designed to ensure that instructions are carried out even when communications are difficult. This contingency planning is meant to protect the ability to respond. In the story, however, confidence in procedures allows a destructive initiative to continue while other authorities try to cancel it. The local effectiveness of each step can conflict with the broader need to stop the chain of events.
The bomber crew interprets its instructions within this system. Its members solve problems and keep the mission going, but the viewer has information they do not share. Recognizing their technical competence does not require celebrating the outcome. The film separates the care with which a task is carried out from the validity of the purpose behind it. Doing a job well still does not answer whether it should be done.
Mandrake represents a different relationship to orders. He recognizes that Ripper’s explanations do not reflect a reliable assessment of the situation and looks for a way out. His rank, proximity to the general, and ability to reason do not give him enough control. The study of Mandrake and his limited authority shows how courtesy and argument can keep a conversation open without persuading the armed man to abandon his decision.
The difficulties continue when other military personnel arrive with their own interpretive framework. An urgent request can seem suspicious if it does not fit the mission each person believes they are carrying out. The problem is not that all rules are useless. It is that a rule needs channels for review and recognition of exceptions. Without them, protecting the procedure can block precisely the information that would make it possible to prevent its consequences.
Full Metal Jacket: the group learns how to respond before facing uncertainty
The training in Full Metal Jacket turns coordinated responses into a daily activity. Voices, movements, and repetition make the relationship between order and reaction tangible. Discipline promises to transform different individuals into a unit capable of acting together. That transformation includes mutual dependence: one person’s mistake affects the others and can change how the group treats someone who cannot keep up.
Collective punishment shows that obedience and responsibility are not distributed in a simple way. The recruits learn the consequences of failing, but they are also encouraged to watch and correct one another. When that pressure turns into aggression, it is not enough to point to the instructor as the sole cause or absolve the participants because they are subordinates. The film shows specific actions carried out within a structure that encourages them and gives them meaning.
In combat, decisions do not always find an immediate answer in prior training. Helping a wounded person, holding a position, or advancing puts others at risk. Orders can compete with bonds of loyalty and with partial assessments of danger. The trajectory of Joker as observer and participant lets us follow that loss of distance: commenting on an institution from within does not spare you from having to act when a situation arises that cannot be addressed with commentary alone.
The comparison does not require settling the debate over free will and conditioning. It examines something more specific: how much leeway a person retains in response to a particular instruction. Their information, available means, ability to object, and foreseeable consequences all matter. The three films show that obedience can involve initiative and that disobedience does not guarantee a just response. Responsibility must be examined in the decisions actually made, without treating rank as either an absolution or a complete explanation.
Films discussed: Stanley Kubrick, Paths of Glory (1957); Dr. Strangelove (1964); Full Metal Jacket (1987). Sources: American Film Institute, AFI Catalog, Paths of Glory (1957) entry, synopsis and credits.
View all articles in Themes and Conflicts in Kubrick's Cinema