Patton (1970)

 

If you want an example of how one actor can pull a pretty great tour-de-force, then this is one of those classic examples. George C Scott owns this movie, not just because it centres around his character, but also because of his commanding screen presence. But if you have no affinity whatsoever with things that are related to the military or World War 2, then you still should watch this because it is quite an excellent story in its own right about a man who was great at what he did, but pretty lousy at everything else. 

Scott plays the very real general Patton, a commander of tank divisions during the war. The story immediately picks up in 1943 when there was fierce conflict in Northern Africa between the Allied Forces and the German troops under the command of Rommel. Patton is brought in to get the troops back into shape and hopefully to turn the tables in favour of the Allied Nations, which he does. Spectacularly so, in fact.

But Patton is not an easy man to work with or under. He is incredibly strict, which isn't necessarily a bad thing in times of war, but he does forget that his troops consist of people of flesh and blood and he is relentless in his pursuit of glory. It bags him results to be sure, but his ego did apparently did get in the way of him being a nicer human being.

Enter the discussion whether these are good traits for a soldier, but let's do that someplace else, right?

Because Patton tends to say whatever he thinks, he often riles up his superiors, thus preventing him from truly rising through the ranks. He is often reprimanded and his plans (be they sound) are ignored or altered because higher ups don't always want to give him the satisfaction. He is also incredibly pigheaded, which becomes very evident in the assault on Sicily, where Patton pretty much does his own thing, sacrificing many troops along the way. Sure, he gets the result in the end, but at what cost?

He is stripped of his command and used as a flunky, before he is once again reinstated when the fighting in the Belgian Ardennes becomes critical and one of the most brutal battles at the end of the war and Patton is needed to turn the tide yet again. But as always, his brash nature does get him into trouble... 

They don't shy away from the fact that Patton was maybe not the easiest person to work with. Heck, they often want to describe him as someone who belonged in another century, thanks to his views on warfare and battle. This might be so, even down to the slightly oversimplification of finding him to be one of the last warrior poets out there, even down to him believing in reincarnation and thus finding he was present at classic battles throughout history. 

A bit of an egomaniac is quite the understatement.

Yet Scott's portrayal also shows us a man who eventually learns that he is oftentimes his own worst enemy because he never knows when to shut up and diplomacy clearly isn't his forté. Truly a soldier from another time, or as he himself says it: the 20th century is not his age, not by a long shot.

The focus isn't on the battles either. Sure, there are three set pieces in which we are privy to tank battles, but it is a character study first and foremost and in the hands of a lesser actor, Patton would have come across as either a saint or an absolute arsehat. Here, he is a flawed human being who was very good at one thing and horrible at many others, yet always a fleshed out person and that is something that is all too often forgotten in favour of more one sided depictions. 

It helps that Francis Ford Coppola's script is so insanely tight as well.

If you have any interest in the Second World War, then this is pretty much obligatory viewing, but as a great movie about an interesting character, this is also very much worth the watch. If those things don't tickle your fancy, then you can go ahead and find other things to see and enjoy, but I'd still recommend giving this a go.