Patton, released in 1970, is definitely a product of the Vietnam war debates of the 60's. The left perceived the film as an indictment of Patton in particular and the warlike militaristic mind in general. The right saw it as the exact opposite, the glorification of a rugged individualist and a great American. Reportedly, Patton was Nixon's favorite movie; he screened it before ordering bombings in Cambodia. Each side derided the other for having such an "incorrect" view of the film. Perhaps the only thing both sides could agree upon was that Scott's performance in the title role was stupendous.
Does it lean to the left or the right? Hard to say from the personnel involved. I'm sure that nobody would call director Schaffner (Planet of the Apes) or screenwriter Francis Ford Coppola a right-wing firebrand. On the other hand, much of the film's screenplay was based on an account by General Omar Bradley, who also served as the film's senior military adviser: certainly he did not insert anti-military messages into the film's final mixture.
So whence this ambiguity? Perhaps it is that the filmmakers simply tell the tale and allow the viewers to decide for themselves. There is no omniscient narrator: we are simply shown Patton's actions, as well as those of his admirers (Rommel, Bradley) and detractors (Montgomery). Patton's most famous deed, the slapping of the soldier suffering from fatigue, is indeed shown, but non-judgementally. The director does not try to tip the scales either way in this scene.
For those who consider Patton a dangerous figure whose patriotism verges on madness, there is much in this film to reinforce that idea: slapping the soldier, his xenophobic hatred of Russia, his attempts to win personal victories at the expense of the British and to the detriment of his own troops. On the other hand, we see how his aggressive attitudes gave his men the training they needed, and may have saved many lives, how his aggressive attacks helped bring the war to a quicker conclusion and in effect, saved thousands more lives. For the left, he was anti-authoritarian, for the right, he was an individualist. A new man for all seasons.
Regarded purely as a film, Patton scores high marks. It has made such an indelible impression on the American public that there is probably not one adult out of a hundred who can hear the name of the general without seeing images of George C. Scott haranguing the troops while in front of a gigantic American flag. George C. Scott simply is Patton. Though he has performed capably, sometimes brilliantly in many other films, it is Patton for which he will be remembered, which elevated him from talented character actor to singular cultural icon.
Apart from Scott and Karl Malden (who plays a humane and reasonable Omar Bradley), none of the performers in the film are well-known. Just as well, as then we are not distracted celebrity-watching, as in The Longest Day. The screenplay, by Coppola and Edmund North is a very strong one. Although the plot does threaten to become routine after a while, with a pattern of brilliant military victory followed by atrocious faux pas, the dialogue has taken on the status of legend. There are probably thousands of people who can recite Patton's opening monologue almost word-for-word.
Patton, one of the last great World War II movies, came out around the same time as the last westerns. Both genres had grown somewhat unorthodox: the westerns with Clint Eastwood as a new anti-hero, Patton as a "salute to a rebel" (the mostly-forgotten subtitle of the film), along with salutes to other rebels in movies like Catch-22 and Kelly's Heroes. As Westerns have had a minor renaissance in recent years, it is hoped that the same will happen for World War II movies. News of the upcoming Saving Private Ryan by Steven Spielberg and The Thin Red Line directed by Terence Malick tend to justify such hopes.
In my opinion, Patton has no political agenda. It neither praises nor buries the general. Significantly, it does not present Patton as a Nietzschean superman, freed from normal standards of morality. It was not the general who was larger than life, but rather the age in which he lived. Though in the film he does not seem to always think so, Patton was indeed the right man at the precisely correct moment in history.
Four stars
Copyright 1998 by Dale G. Abersold
