Z
Style
- Auteur-driven
- Inspired collaboration
- Melancholy
- Wildly romantic
- Deliriously surreal
- Rebellion!
- Canonical classics
- Of-the-past
- Pop Art
- Vanguard cinema
- Neorealist
- Avant-garde
Wall
Displaying 4 of 6 wall posts.
jeffreyreeser
26Jan13
Z- I am very curious. How could you give Patton 1 star? Please explain. Thanks.
-
-
Z
4Feb13
In addition, the film lacks complexity and depth. It is too admiring of Patton and seems more interested in using him as a symbol of military strength than in exploring what drove the man. George C. Scott is a powerful actor and cuts an imposing figure as Patton, but the character remains a cipher. He was a brilliant military strategist, but beyond that I have no idea why I should care. "Old Blood and Guts," is a thoroughly distasteful person whose reputation is based on being willing to sacrifice as many men as possible to achieve his larger strategic goals. I also feel the editing of the film is terrible. When I become acutely aware of how scenes are cut together while I am watching a film something is definitely off. The battle scenes are not convincing on any level. The quieter dialogue driven scenes come off like a bad stage play. I give Scott credit for doing what he can to hold the film together, but for me it was simply not compelling or interesting.
-
jeffreyreeser
4Feb13
I see where you're coming from. I actually thought Patton was a very likeable character. I will agree that the forces motivating Patton were unclear and more importantly, unexplored. To some degree, I admire the singular nature of the film, but it's clear that what he is really "battling" is his home life- since he seems to be avoiding it to such a degree. I didn't mind the editing. I thought the battle scenes were effective, but not necessarily coherent (as are most "war scenes" in my humble opinion). My main criticism of the film is the content of the 2nd act. Yes it was amusing to watch him be indelicate, and often cruel to the people in his environment, but was questionable as the dramatic centerpoint of the story. I thought the film was often very moving. Yeah I can see what you mean about the acting, but again didnt bother me. Sometimes I felt the acting style was conducive to the overall style of the film. See Schaffner's "Papilion" (unless you already have) and that may give you a better idea of the aesthetic goal of the direction. Papilion is a better film, IMO.
-
Favorite Auteurs
Displaying 10 of 107 auteurs
Wants To Watch
Displaying 4 of 198 films
