The German scenes ironically show that the enemy (the Germans and Rommell) actually had more respect and admiration for Patton than the American brass did.
Rommel hardly knew him Patton never faced him in North Africa or Tunisia or even Italy Rommel had gone back to Germany And I believe Rommel was forced to commit suicide before Patton had even got into stride
Perhaps the enemy viewed General Patton by his aggressive actions and respected his unpredictability (audacity). Where SHAEF had to "manage" that with his propensity to step out of line (high command-wise).
Patton is my favourite movie of all time. I have seen it many times since the 1970s, owning it on VHS, DVD and the Blue Ray. I don't find it too long at all. It won 8 Academy Awards including Best Movie, Actor, Director and Screenplay for a reason. It is history done as art and is brilliant.
My husband says that he watched this movie when it came out in 1970 and it became one of the best movies he's ever seen. George C. Scott gave one of the most riveting lead roles in history, and made the movie special. George Patton himself had a high pitched weak voice versus Scott's gruff aggressive delivery, and said in interviews that he worried that he did justice to the role. He certainly did as he won the Academy Award for best actor (even though he refused to accept the prize in person at the Awards). A must watch in our view.
@@LearningaboutMovies You're not kidding. My husband(he's 70 now) said he has watched it at least 30 times over the years and never gets tired of seeing it. That says alot! He also says he likes the movie's length . How could this airing happen?
well, other than buying the equipment yourself, it'd have to be shown at a film festival or something. If I could ever get to a huge number of subscribers who cared, I'd put one on, but I dream. I doubt this movie will be re-released in theaters, though. Even during the pandemic summer, we got Back to the Future and Indiana Jones, not Patton or 2001 or Lawrence of Arabia, legit big-screen fare.
I had forgotten about this film but after stumbling across the Diary of a German Soldier on RU-vid and watching all 7:17 minutes straight through, I thought of the excerpt from Patton’s poem, Through a Glass, Darkly, that Scott recited, and looking for the clip came across your offerings and critique. I am grateful to you for what you’ve done here. My father was in North Africa and on up the Boot during The War in a B-25 and I have deep feelings about the plight of the common foot soldier down through history and still today, as we yet find him sacrificed by those who start wars but never taste their own blood or the desperation of war’s futility. But I’m just an old idealist who longs for peace among all peoples.
EXCELLENT review. You hit on so many important points that contribute to making this a truly great film. I do, however, disagree with your conclusions. I believe this is one of the greatest films of the twentieth century. Scott's acting is perfect, a master class in becoming a character, and the German scenes are very important for giving a much more objective view of Patton, his abilities and his importance in the war than that held by the Allied bureaucrats. They show us that Rommel is likewise bedeviled by mindless bureaucracy, in his case the rigid megalomoniacal decisions of the fuhrer. As for its length, this is one of those films you can spend hours watching and never feel the time go by.
When my dad was in the navy during WW II Patton came aboard ship when he was just a two star general to ask for some food for his men. The executive officer said he would see what he could do for him; my dad knowing Patton's importance just watched close by. My dad, when he saw the movie would always make comments here and there throughout the movie which he liked.
The thing about Patton is that he understood war is sometimes necessary, and rather than worrying about being hurt or killed, pushing as aggressively as he did and getting his troops to overwhelm the enemy and achieve swift tactical victories reduced the number of lives lost on both sides. He showed dignity and respect even for the enemies he fought against directly, because he would want the same show of respect and decorum if he was on the losing side. It’s also interesting how this movie is so relevant today. We had a choice in 1938 whether to try and stay independent and out of the quagmire that has always been Europe’s constant squabbles, we could side with the Germans who were constantly screwed over by England, France, and Russia in their attempts to keep any form of healthy economic competition in Europe down, or we could support the English-French push for a “globalist world order”, and throw our resources behind our Allies and Stalin’s Soviet Union, which couldn’t fight the Germans without a major influx of cash and equipment. Fast forward to 2023, and what have we done? Through the decades, we keep funding globalists and being the personal prize fighter for every nation that wants to enforce a centrally controlled world government, trying to interfere with territorial disputes, and making those nations who want to be independent out as the enemy. There’s a reason Patton was dismayed by this globalist, bureaucratic ideology, but like so many, he couldn’t intellectually argue against it in a way the general public could understand.
Patton was strong-willed, confident, assertive, and independently-minded, everything modern women don't want men to be. Young men should watch this film, make males men again.
Excellent review! I was a child when this movie first came out, but even then, I was in awe of George C. Scott's performance. Thanks for reminding me to watch it again.
Two important facts about Patton your review should mention. First and most important, Omar Bradley was technical advisor and his opinion of Patton shapes the chacterization. Second, the film was largely shot in Spain with the Spanish Army. The bombers look like Heinkels because they are Heinkels. Unfortunately, the tanks are American made M-48s with no attempt to disguise them.
@@LearningaboutMovies You're welcome. Knowing that, you will notice how Bradley is always the consummate professional in the film, and a representative for the ideal Army officer. "I do my job because I've been trained to do it." Scenes that occur where Karl Malden is present read like Bradley told the writers exactly what happened. They also might be in Bradley's postwar memoir, which is in the credits along with a Patton bio. The greatest flaw in the film is how it portrays the Germans as being in awe of Patton and admiring him. All evidence is to the contrary. The film presents an American Army view of what they thought the Wehrmacht thought of the American Army. Of course, much of that data was unavailable to the screenwriters, for all kinds of reasons. Perhaps that explains the FUSAG episode a bit better.
Specifically to the point, Bradley didn't think too highly of Patton in his later years. Also, Chester Hansen, Bradley's aide-de-camp and ghostwriter of his memoirs was heavily involved in the movie. Hansen and Bradley both had complicated and conflicting emotions regarding Patton.
People talk about the equipment in the movie not being accurate, but to me, this movie is about Patton and not so much about WW2. And in that, this movie is an outstanding success.
I expect Hollywood or any artist to make historical errors that aren't really errors, because absolute perfection in terms of historical accuracy is never the point of historically based art.
Hello David here from Sebring Florida USA 🇺🇸 I have been a movie buff for over fifty years and I thought this was was fantastic! One one best example’s of a anti-war movie I have seen. So scary that 45 likes this movie and he showed a clip from it before his rally. See you at the movies 🍿
The actor who played Monty was probably more true to the real person. If you hear actual recordings and film footage of Monty, you will see how he utterly nailed it.
I disagree about the scenes with nazis. Not boring at all. They spoke in German which gave a lot of authenticity but also another perspective of Patton by the men he was at war with. That adds a lot of dimension to his portrayal. What did his enemies think of him? Very good question.
Yeah, current US generals look weak and pathetic. They should, if nothing else, read Machiavelli. Patton would tell them to read ancient literature for about five years before even giving another order.
This was my childhood. I was 7 when this movie came out. We played " Patton" war games with neighborhood kids after school. I highly recommend George C Scott movie " The Last Centurions " and the TV movie of the early 70's " The Flim Flam Man". Both are excellent.
General Patton was a tough WW1 Veteran who kicked ass in WWII who smacked a soldier for being a little sissy. General Patton is an American Icon who deserves all the respect of every branch of our military. This movie tells his story well and the Germans were afraid of Patton.
I've seen this movie several times. I own it as well. I never think of it as being too long. I believe it I'm remembering correctly this movie was filmed in Spain. Spain at that time did have a lot of WWII Tanks and things lying around.
This film's strengths is on the performances particularly on the lead actor. George C. Scott's sympathetic, unflinching portrayal of the titular general in this sprawling war epic is as definitive as any performances in the history of American biopics. I give this a 9.2/10. Its kinda wierd that Scott refused to accept the Best Actor award at the Oscars back in 1971. Overall the film is one of the greatest for sure. 😊😊👍👍
Back in the '90s, I saw a restored 70mm print of this at the Academy theater in Hollywood. Karl Malden (who played Omar Bradley) gave a speech beforehand. The picture quality was so good that I thought movie technology had actually gone DOWN in the years since!
What makes this movie great is it takes an extraordinary person and portray him more as a Shakespearean tragic character. Patton is somebody so passionate and larger than life that he almost feels separated from reality. Slapping a beleaguered soldier to him is daring while he was in the wrong and being at war is comforting to him while it is has dire consequences. It blurs the lines quite well.
On the contrary, the Nazi scenes were some of the most important...For example, when Captain Stieger tells Rommel about his wealth, etc., and a frustrated Rommel breaks in somewhat angrily "Der Mensch!"...also, at the end where Stieger realizes that the absence of war will kill him...singularly superb and part of eternal greatness of this movie. My favorite...
@@LearningaboutMovies 9:27 "There's a lot of scenes with Germans and Nazis in their headquarters just talking, they're just frankly boring and unnecessary."
The idea that Patton was assassinated is not so outlandish. Back when this movie was made, my father used to say the same thing. The theory is Patton was stopped by communists in the State Department and OSS because of his desire to clear Eastern Europe of the communists and "kick their asses back to Russia where they belong". And isn't it interesting how some years later, another larger-than-life, prima donna general - Douglas MacArthur - would be fired by Truman for essentially the same thing, only in his case over Red China? They couldn't murder MacArthur was well, as it would have been too obvious, so Truman fired him instead.
I couldn't tell if the movie was acknowledging that theory or not. It does declare him a Cold-War hawk before it was fashionable, and maybe when doing something could've made a difference in the number of Eastern Europeans killed by the Soviets.
@@LearningaboutMovies That's what I was wondering. Where does the movie hint he was assassinated? Are you referring to the line where General Smith says the phone line could be tapped?
@@LearningaboutMovies - The end of the film doesn't depict him disappearing. But the last scene does contain several things which make for a poignant ending nevertheless: 1) Even though in many ways he was the man who saved Europe, Patton is not being honored in a triumphal parade with the hoopla and fanfare he rightfully deserves (and to emphasize the point, in the narration, he describes just such parades held during Roman times). Instead, he's alone walking his dog in an abandoned field, just like any other ordinary individual. 2) There's a shot of a windmill spinning around. To me, the spinning windmill invokes the repetition of history and the theme of reincarnation, which we hear of numerous times throughout the film. 3) The very last line in Patton's narration is "All glory is fleeting", whereupon the film ends. Coupling this with the humbleness of the scene, to me it serves as a reminder of how Patton's contemporaries and perhaps history as well have denied this towering figure the recognition he was due. One could argue that it was the result of Patton's personality flaws (As General Smith tells him in one scene: "Remember, your worst enemy is your own big mouth."). But regardless of the cause, we're left with a bit of sadness that this brilliant general was denied the accolades he worked so hard to earn and so richly deserved.
You mentioned all the tanks. It was filmed in Spain and the tanks were supplied by the Spanish Army. That's why they are all contemporary (to the 1970s) American tanks (some painted with German insignia), instead of actual WWII vintage ones (which were pretty rare in the world at that time - just as they are now). This technique was common in the '60s and '70s, except for few exceptions (like "Kelly's Heroes"), where they made a real effort to use period American tanks and mock up passable looking German ones. Now, of course, they can do anything with CGI and the tanks in WWII movies look accurate.
12:31 I generally like this review. But you say Patton was "a screwed up idiot"? Hardly. That may have been the conclusions made by the so-called "peace and love" crowd during the Vietnam days, but they were never right about ANYTHING, and still aren't today, either.
Interesting movie. Strong script, great lead acting, clunky direction at times. Would like to see this remade with the same script and lead (yes, I know…) but directed by a Christopher Nolan or Paul Thomas Anderson. Not sure there’s anyone in acting today that could play Patton like Scott does. That sort of shows us that men like Patton, and Scott, just aren’t made for these times…
First, I think its very interesting to see the german segments and hear them talk about their intel on Patton - Second, young people today dont have the dam patience to sit through a classic movie like Patton which is a huge piece of our history but they do have the patience to sit at a game console for hours on end as well as live on social media every minute of the day. These young people if drafted wouldnt last 30 seconds obeying orders of a general like Patton.
US Army today desperately needs a Commanding no nonsense Fearless Generals like George S Patton and Julius Caesar. Hello from India Oh i know a lot about Wirld War 2 heroic stories or stories of carnage hope horror of holocaust n War in the Pacific Europe Africa Italy Asia n Burma. George S Patton Triumph n Ordeal is the book to read n Patton 1970 is the movie to watch.
I do think there is a certain irony to the movie Patton. As this video points out, this film was released in 1970, which was during the height of the Vietnam War era. I was just a kid at the time, but I very much recall people in the anti-war crowd in those days pointing to this film as an example of how barbaric military generals could be, and how Patton was 'so awful' because he loved war, as the film tells us in several places (e.g., Bradley chastises Patton for loving war, and Patton himself admits it while viewing the aftermath of recently-fought battle). But fifty years later, the Vietnam anti-war movement has long ceased to exist, and whenever this movie is shown today, it becomes almost a total glorification of the man and his military achievements, almost as it would had it been released immediately after World War II.
@@LearningaboutMovies I agree, but again, that's looking at it through contemporary eyes. At the time when this film was released, a number of people were viewing it as a vehicle to disparage war and warriors.
Until two days ago, I had never seen 'Patton', but I'd wondered why during the height of the Vietnam War the Hollywood left which hates the military, would declare 'Patton" the greatest movie of the year. I got my answer. Patton is portrayed as a bloodthirsty vain hyper-religious simpleton who valued glory and attention more than the lives of his men. This theme was drilled incessantly during the movie, and tritely so. Good movies show, rather than tell. But this movie told. Repeatedly. "Patton isn't a good guy". Also irritating was the constant praising of Omar Bradley as the more reasoned sensible general. Of course Bradley was an advisor to the movie and hated everything about Patton. Thirdly, the movie portrayed Patton as a religious nut, and a hypocrite at that. Why, he could say a prayer over one man, then two seconds later slap a shell-shocked soldier. So that was Hollywood's shot at Christianity. In short, Patton embodied everything the left hated; competence, religion, conservatism, and anti-Marxism. No mention at all that Patton was the ONLY one who correctly predicted that giving territory to the Soviets would come back to haunt the world. So this is why it won the Oscar. It pushed the anti-military anti-religion leftwing agenda. I wanted to enjoy the movie, and at times I did. But I just couldn't stand the relentless character assassination of this great man by Hollywood.
what's amusing is that many commenters here have come to the opposite conclusion: Patton is pro-military-man who is screwed by a giant bureaucracy. It honors a "great hero." You saw this movie very differently than they did.
@@LearningaboutMovies I guess I look at many things through political glasses, specifically when it concerns the culture shapers. I bet most people's perception of Patton comes from this movie. This whole things reminds me of Donald Trump. By every measure a forceful and competent leader, he has been reduced to a caricature by the leftwing opinion shapers. Fortunately, like with Patton, most people see the good.
I've read multiple books about Patton. This is a fair treatment of the man. He was brilliant. He was driven. He was at different times brilliant and misguided. There is no hypocrisy between mourning a dead soldier and slapping someone he thought was a coward. We really didn't understand shell shock and ptsd well yet. The fact is war breaks some men so badly that their entire body just quivers and twitches for decades afterwards. The longer the war, the shelling, the death, the more men break. It's not in their control. Patton did his duty.
Oh and they did Patton a huge favor by having George C Scott portray him. In reality, Patton had a high-pitched voice and would have come across poorly on the big screen if portrayed correctly. It feels like you are projecting a bit. Oh.. and Patton was a great soldier but Eisenhauer was a professional soldier. Read *his* biography. Amazing man. And he worked for Patton at one point. Felt he owed Patton.
WWII fighting were accompanied by great Propagnada wars on all side, using films, print media, music, movies. We have a war going on today globally, it takes place mostly in the arena of propaganda, information and programming of the earth population. Human beings are highly prone to programming, they have perfected the art of suggestive programming since WWII. It is sad that the smartest humans who are supposed to be the eyes and ears, guardians for our people, have been fooled to help maintain this illusion.
you're welcome. English translation: "I remember seeing this film when I was a child, I loved it, simply a masterpiece, thank you very much for your review"
