Patton 360

There isn't much about Patton's family background or his home life but that's okay. Nobody gets as well known as Patton because he was a good husband who collected stamps or something. His family in Pasadena, California, was well to do and he married into the local aristocracy. That's enough.

It's a finely detailed description of the battles Patton was involved in, beginning with the 1942 landings in Morocco. There is some combat footage, most of it from elsewhere, and several talking heads with often fascinating anecdotes. (The first night ashore at Morocco was very cold and the men made mattresses out of crushed corn flakes boxes and covered themselves with the flattened cardboard containers.) There is a good deal of footage and still photos of Patton himself, sometimes smiling, usually frowning. (He practiced that baleful scowl in front of the mirror.)

On his dash through France, Patton's forces were brought to a halt by a shortage of fuel. The documentary keeps referring to it as "PATTON'S fuel." But it belonged to the Allies, not to Patton. And in "The Struggle For Europe," the prominent Australian correspondent Chester Wilmot suggests that Patton managed to bootleg some of the fuel destined for Montgomery, without caring that it might be needed elsewhere. The film makes it sound as if Patton were being robbed, and I found that (and other sleights of rhetorical legerdemain) irritating. It's supposed to be a topical biography, not a hagiography.

And the series is marred by the same pointless directorial decision to always show some sort of motion on the screen, as if aimed at an audience weaned on MTV. If an aging survivor tells a tale, the background sparkles with dots and lines that come and go like a Fourth of July display. Few shots last longer than a few seconds. And the narrator's intonations ("supersegmentals") project a contempt for the enemy, as does the writing itself many times. American soldiers may "draw back" or "withdraw" but the Vichy French "lose heart and retreat." So far, in the first episode, it's as much a "Life of the Saints" as a biography. Commentators agree that Patton was destined to be a soldier. Patton's father is quoted approvingly, something like, "I've got the power; now you get the glory." As if there were glory in mutual destruction. Patton's son served in Vietnam and said -- whether he meant it or not -- that he "liked to see the arms and legs fly."

I obviously don't think Patton deserves quite the adulation shown by some of the military talking heads. He entered the war just at the time the Allies were beginning to win and the Germans beginning to be overwhelmed. No question about his intelligence or his bravery, but what would he have done in defense? It was a question he never had to answer. Robert E. Lee was a great general. In some ways, Dwight D. Eisenhower was a great general, even though he never was at the head of a tank column. As an historical figure, Patton seems incomplete, and sometimes vain to the point of fanaticism.

He believed that one must keep the enemy on the run and thus justified his obsession with attack. (His Naval counterpart was Halsey, colorful figures both.) But what would Patton have done if he'd found himself on the defensive or, worse, having to withdraw? Would he have been clever as his counterparts on the battlefield? Or would he have begun issuing orders like, "Retreat not one millimeter," as the aggressive enemy leader did?

The Germans were expert at withdrawal under fire. Before they retreated from a defensive line, they had marked every important position for mortars and artillery. Before leaving, they even planted mines in the bottoms of fox holes that they themselves had just occupied. There is no reason to either believe or disbelieve that Patton would have been so adept at retreat.

Patton was a successful warrior, known for his tendency to kick butt and get things moving. We'll never know if he'd have been quite as skilled at other kinds of warfare, as Rommel and Kesselring were. The Allies took Sicily but not before the Germans managed to slip the cream of their troops (plus their equipment) across the Strait into Italy. The Japanese were adept at secret withdrawals too, at least at Guadalcanal and the Aleutians, where their disappearance came as a surprise to the American troops.

Not to belittle the series. It's surprisingly candid both about the battles and about Patton's character. Some of the talking heads are permitted to express their disgust as well as their pride in having served with him. The reserved Bradley didn't like him much. But there's no doubt about Patton's singular ability to handle certain kinds of tasks. And the film gives us details of unspeakable trauma in battles that most of us have never heard of -- Troyen, for instance. Despite its weaknesses it deserves applause.

I've seen the movie "Patton" countless times, but this series so far (after viewing two episodes) takes Patton's battles and breaks them into fine details. It's interesting to view how difficult things were for him, far more than depicted in the movie.

The movie opens up after the U.S. defeat at Kasserine Pass. The first two episodes of this series, however, goes way back before that, showing the triumphs and difficulties that Patton had in North Africa before and after. It details Kasserine Pass, and several other battles with great graphics, and accounts from soldiers still alive today.

To date the series has been more about Patton's military tactics, feelings and actions as a soldier, rather than him as a personal man. So, don't take this series as a documentary on Patton solely. It's about his battles, and what he had to do to help win the war.

Clearly piggybacking off the original Battle 360 (the story of the aircraft carrier Enterprise), this is a shallow attempt at a cash in on it's contemporary's success.

There was obviously very little to no real research done about the stories that it wants to tell. And considering this is an alleged documentary, it is beyond disappointing, it is actually quite insulting to the servicemen involved.

It is clearly a quick, cheaply put together effort, that makes no attempt to engage you like the first series.

I would strongly recommend watching the first Battle 360, however quit while you're ahead. There are so many more informative, interesting, and educational documentaries that you could spend your time watching rather than this.

I am somewhat disappointed in beginning of the show where Patton lands in North Africa. They don't talk about what was Patton doing in trying to get his southern and northern pincers off the beach. They only talk about Patton trying to get his central force off the beach. If the French had a Rommel or Napoleon, Patton's two forces would have been crushed, and then Patton would have to withdraw his central force. Patton was pretty lucky that help came to his forces in the nick of time; otherwise, the British would have a lower opinion of the American soldier's fighting ability.

They did not seem to comment on Patton slapping the soldier too much.

Big history fan.

Big Patton fan.

Big fan of trying something different.

NOT a big fan of people who can't control their urges to colorize, pixelize, and otherwise "-ize" every single frame. Map coordinates going on forever. Narrator's faces spliced up in quick cuts. The same CGI shown over and over (wasn't too good the first time). The cribbing of Goldsmith's theme (pay for it for cryin' out loud so you don't have to "almost" use the music).

I did like the dissection of the tactics and concentrating on elements that don't always get attention, but the "look at me, I have a computer" enhancements made me cringe. A few (very few) of these effects were interesting, but this show was relentless.