Cinema Blind Spots: Patton (1970)

We all have films we really, really want to see, but many of them never make it from our Blu-ray shelves to the television, and simply remain on a list for years. As an aspiring film historian, I have read so much about, and seen so many signature scenes from, several important films that, honestly, I sometimes forget to actually watch them from beginning to end. And in other cases, there are pop-culture hits that I have yet to make a priority. So I have decided to use this column as motivation to check off many of the titles I’ve wanted to see for so long. These are my Cinema Blind Spots.

For Blind Spot #4, I thought I would watch Franklin J. Schaffner’s “Patton” (1970), seeing as how April marked its 45th anniversary. “Patton” is a film I’ve heard so much about over the years, and was encouraged to see by so many friends, family, and colleagues. Having seen many of "Patton’s" memorable monologues, and having read about its influential status as an iconic war film, I figured it was about time I moved it from the shelf to the TV.

At the 43rd annual Academy Awards, “Patton” won seven of its 10 nominations, including: Best Film Editing; Best Sound; Best Director; and the coveted Best Picture. It marked Francis Ford Coppola’s first ever Academy Award nomination, which he won alongside his co-writer, Edmund H. North, for Best Original Screenplay. And as if “Dr. Strangelove…” (1964) didn’t place him on the highest of pedestals, George C. Scott was finally recognized for being a truly great presence on screen when he won Best Actor. “Patton” can be found on many best films lists, including AFI’s Top 100 American Films (ranked #89), and one of my go-to critics, James Berardinelli, placed it #1 on his Top 100. So, needless to say, I felt a deep, aching need to see this film, and I would say this is the biggest blind spot I’ve remedied to date.

“Patton” is an epic biopic about controversial general George S. Patton (Scott). It follows his WWII career when he conquered the Germans through North Africa, Sicily, France and Germany. However, although there are battle sequences and politics peppered throughout the film, “Patton” focuses more on the title character, exploring his strengths, weaknesses and overall humanity (or lack thereof).

Scott’s depiction of Patton is really a showcase of his proficient skill as an actor. These qualities are highlighted most when he’s given a beautiful monologue to deliver (thanks, Coppola) where he owns the screen, in some scenes for minutes at a time, and relentlessly captivates us without relief or breaking the tension; and there is almost always tension in his voice. He loves war. He’d die for war: “There’s only one proper way for a professional soldier to die, from the last bullet, of the last battle, of the last war.” He’s a reincarnated, romantic warrior who’s obsessed with tradition, reputation, loyalty and “honor.” He’s a man from another time — “My God, how I hate the twentieth century” — who thrives on constructing his own poetic legacy. The enemy is “horse dung,” and they’re simply in his way to achieving that goal. He is swollen with pride and ego, sacrificing others to obtain what he values, and, in his eyes, everyone is an enemy if they become an obstacle. All of this is conveyed through Scott's performance as he transforms into the infamous, war-torn General with blood on his hands. In sum, Scott is the reason to see this film.

That’s not to say the rest of the cast are throwaways. Karl Malden is great as General Omar N. Bradley. He’s a more level-headed, compassionate counterpart to Patton, who always keeps his men in mind as he leads them to victory. Lieutenant Colonel Codman (Paul Stevens) is Patton’s right-hand man. I loved each and every one of their interactions. Stevens plays this supporting role flawlessly, giving Scott the proper tools with which to be so memorable.

Schaffner’s direction is quite strong, for the most part. There are some incredible set pieces, including a tank attack early on that is nothing short of outstanding. The locations and framing of those scenes (thanks in part to cinematographer Fred J. Koenekamp) really elevate the film for its time. The scenes of corpse-laden battlefields and burning shells of once-destructive war machines really bring home the theme that war is calculated carnage. It's chaos that is justified by human beings who turn it into a science without thought of casualties or property, until forced to see the aftermath of their decisions. This not only happens on the battlefield, but personally to Patton when he walks through a military hospital packed with injured survivors. It's a great scene!

I would be remiss without mentioning Coppola and North’s Oscar-winning script. It is very easy to find Coppola’s influence in the film. One can even see Patton in some of his later characters, such as Col. Kilgore (Robert Duvall) from “Apocalypse Now” (1979), for example. The opening monologue in “Patton” is truly one of the great opening scenes of all time, and deserves a YouTube viewing if you’re not prepared to sit through the film's 172-minute running time.

So, technically, this film is exceptional for 1970, but how does it hold up today? Much of it is timeless, yes, but there are a few elements that show its age. “Patton” blended the visual style of the Hays code era — which had been abolished only four years earlier — with what we would now consider “New Hollywood” grit. This works brilliantly at times, such as the scenes made to look like old, vintage 1940s footage of Patton landing on a beach, but other times it stands out like a sore thumb. This is due in large part to the dated lighting techniques, moments of hit-or-miss dialogue and some actors that couldn’t keep up with the times. When you have expert performances by actors like Scott and Malden, it’s difficult to accept such dated acting from some of the supporting cast. I don’t hold this against the film, per se, because it was a product of its time. When looking at how well it holds up in 2015, these specifics are glaring.

Despite these shortcomings, “Patton” is a time capsule that exhibits the 1950s studio epic aesthetic in a new 1970s style. It’s harsh and honest; a film that truly deserves to be remembered. Although it does not excel in certain areas that I personally value, I greatly appreciate “Patton” for its contribution to film history. It’s a film to know and a blind spot I’m happy to check off the list.

Next week, I will talk about Steven Soderbergh’s “Out of Sight” (1998). Feel free to get caught up and let us know your thoughts on “Patton”, “Out of Sight," or movies you would like to see me check off the list in the comments below.