The Last Days of Patton VHS

This was a very touching movie. I had no idea this was how Patton's life ended.

Excellent sequel to the original 1970 film featuring George C. Scott as General Patton….

George C. Scott reprised what may be his most famous role as General George S. Patton. Unfortunately, this seems to have been a mistake. The sequel has little of the quality of the original movie and even less interest. As biography, it was fair. As entertainment, it was a bore.Scott still manages to maintain the image of the famous general. His bull headedness is present as is his conviction that he is the only savior of western civilization. So to does the impression that for Patton there is no calling more honorable than that of the soldier, even enemy soldiers. This comes out early in the movie while the general was assigned as the military governor of Bavaria. He dresses down some SS prisoners for thei slovenly ways and even they resond to his leadership style. There is a purpose to it, though, he wants them ready to fight under his command should the need to confront the Soviets arrise.Patton's nature puts him at loggerheads with his superiors and the press. Eventually, he is to be releived for cause but fate intervenes in the form of an auto accident. The general breaks his neck and is paralyzed THe second half of the movie deals with his reaction, that of his family and friends and also that of politicians and the press.There is very little excitment in this production. It relies heavily on dialog that could have been better. It also places some reliance on flashbacks which were inteded to demonstrate what kind of a man the general was. Some of these are effective; most are not. In general, it is a fairly boring movie.There is some truth to the argument that the movie has some merit just as a biography. It does a fairly credible job of pointing out the conflicts in play right after the second world war. It aslo depicts the events concerned mostly as they happened. It is still boring.The quality of the DVD also leaves much to be desired. Some of this is because this was a made for TV movie but much of the blame can be laid on the transfer itself. It has a tendency to skips and miss frames. Based on other reviews, I was not the only one to have this problem.If your are a fan of historical biography, this movie may appeal to you. If you want to capture the excitement of the first one, though, you will be disappointed.

After watching the first movie about Gen. Patton called PATTON, I began to read war stories about his exploits in licking the jackboot clicking Hitler and his Nazi army. General George S. Patton was every inch a soldier, too bad he didn't lived long enough to fight and subdue the muderous Jap invaders in the Pacific...!I also read the book, The Last Days of Patton and had watched this minseries on TV. I owned a video. Now I'd just ordered the DVD version. The actor, George C. Scott, appeared tough, profane, aggressive but compassionate - a good and worthy counter part of Patton! However, Scott refused the Oscar for his role in Patton. It was sad that Gen. Patton had to die in this manner - not by the last bullet but by a seemingly foolish accident. Or was it a conspiracy to get rid of this brave and outspoken general, since he couldn't get along with Eisenhower and his hatchet man - Beetle...? Like the movie, Patton, the Last Days of Patton, made initially for TV, remains a classic and ought to be on the shelf of all discriminate viewers. Thanks and happy viewing...

General George Patton was one of the most decorated Generals of World War 2. He was well known for being both tough on his own soldiers and feared by the generals and armies he faced in battle. I remember my father (who served at the end of the war) telling me that he had two fears when he was drafted into the army in late 1944. One was possibly having to be part of the invasion of Japan. The other was serving anywhere under George S. Patton. My half-brother joined the US Navy when he was just 17 (he faked a birth certificate to get in - he was actually barely 15) and he served as a carpenter's mate on a ship in the Italian campaign and later on the final invasion. He met Patton briefly when some bodies of deceased US and British soldiers were being recovered and prepared for eventual transport home. He told me that Patton was a "son-of-a-bitch" - but most of his soldiers seemed to be OK with serving under him. I think this movie was a good follow-up to the more viewed prior movie "Patton" that has become a classic. The general consensus has been that this movie tended to be boring by many viewers - because most of the time Patton is confined to his hospital bed. My experience when seeing the film is that you really feel his pain - not only physical but also due to his being reassigned to a basically meaningless job by Eisenhower and being treated as a pariah by some of the other General officers both above and below his rank. George C. Scott was one of a king - as was Patton - making you believe his pain and yet experiencing his love of both duty and his wife. Patton was quoted as saying that he would likely die the day after he left the Army if he wasn't killed on the battlefield. And that prediction was pretty much true when he was mostly reduced to being assigned to library duty.

Two movies. One on Patton and politics post-war. The other about accompanying. These comments are about the second.Could the second use editing? Maybe. But watching someone you love die is a slow process. An inch-by-inch process. With digital access, we can now watch the long ones in half-hour increments anyway. Is it a great movie? No. Is it worth seeing for those of us initiated in the death watch? Most def. 5 stars. It is like an art house film on a serious existential topic, like Javier Bardem's "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly." It has nothing to do with war and warriors other than in the sense every face you meet is in a war every day. The people who would most related to this will probably never come across it.