The film Patton was created in nineteen seventy and the director to the film is Franklin J. Schaffner the cast has many of talented actresses and actors such as George C. Scott, and Karl Malden and Stephen Young, along with Michael Strong, and Karl Michael Vogler with many more. The film depicts the story and career of a general named George Patton who is also a tank commander of world war two. The film correlates to our textbook chapter seventeen, “The United States to World War two” and section two “The War for Europe and North Africa” in particular. Both the film and reading material depict George S. Patton's career and achievements throughout world war two. Patton takes place during nineteen forty-two till nineteen forty-five. The film …show more content…
begins with a star striped backdrop and General George Patton (George C. Scott) talking to his troops in a long monologue and then we skip to North Africa in which the united states loses their encounter with Rommel's Africa Corps. After the loss Omar Bradley (Karl Malden) decides that in order to succeed they needed the tank commander then George takes the position and enters to help he is then angry and decides he needs to make a change so he is very strict and sets consequences/rules for his soldiers and he rules with an iron fist. George studies Rommel and Rommel does the same thing for George. The Germans then try to attack the Americans in Tunisia but George predicts this and plans for it which in turn allows the U.S. gain their first victory. The united states then now have two major leaders one being Field Marshal Sir Bernard Law Montgomery (Michael Bates) and the other George Patton. The two have a rivalry and towards the end of the African campaign the two fight for plans for the invasion of Italy. The two of them propose plans but in the end, the field Marshals plan is taken into action which in turn leads angry George to seek vengeance and become better than the Marshal. Italy is finally invaded and the troops begin to fight against Germany and George is forced to guard Montgomery's flank but he isn’t pleased and comes up with another idea and pushes across the land. This doesn’t sit well with the soldiers. Also, Montgomery wins the battle and beats his opponent before he can do anything about it. After this we see George becoming violent and hitting a shell-shocked patient in a hospital and also sending him back to the warfront. George receives a lot of backlashes and explains to his troops in disgust and then runs back. Patton is then called to England before D-day and he believes he's in charge but due to his controversial acts, he isn’t allowed to do anything. George is then allowed to gain a second chance in which he proves that he can do a lot and he manages to push the Germans out of France. At the climax we see the Americans being trapped by the Germans and they need a miracle in order to get out and George manages to pull throw and save the Americans in time although his mouth gets him in trouble soon after and Eisenhower relieves him. In the end, Patton reflects on the impact he’s made. Patton relates to chapter seventeen, “The United States to World War two” and section two which is formally titled as “The War for Europe and North Africa” which states “Despite heavy casualties, the Allies held the beachheads. After seven days of fighting, the Allies held an 80-mile strip of France. Within a month, they had landed a million troops, 567,000 tons of supplies, and 170,000 vehicles in France. On July 25, General Omar Bradley unleashed massive air and land bombardment against the enemy at St. Lô, providing a gap in the German line of defense through which General George Patton and his Third Army could advance. On August 23, Patton and the Third Army reached the Seine River south of Paris. Two days later, French resistance forces and American troops liberated the French capital from four years of German occupation” (U.S. History 574). The film Patton depicts this scene as when George Patton is called to England before D-day begins and he believes he is called there as a leader and that he’s in charge. Although that isn’t the case in which Eisenhower just has him there based on pure desperation. Patton is allowed to redeem himself when General Bradley allows him to attack. Patton then shows all his skills and manages to defeat Germany and run them out of France while gaining ground faster than any of his allies. The textbook furthers supports my claim with the map they show which shows plenty of spots where D-day was fought and a lot of harbors and areas. Overall the film captures George Patton’s importance in the defense against Germany. Another similarity in chapter seventeen, “The United States to World War two”, section two also known as “The War for Europe and North Africa” and the film is the way how General George Patton would react whenever he had won any battles or anything of that nature. For example, in the textbook, it states Patton announced this joyous event to his commander in a message that read, “ Dear Ike: Today I spat in the Seine.” (U.S. History 574). In the film, there are many examples of George being extremely competitive and egotistical with his rivalry against Field Marshal Montgomery. For example, In the film when George and Field Marshal Montgomery is considered both to be the best leaders with equal control; the two have a huge fight for dominance over the plans to invade Italy and when Marshals plan is chosen over Georges he goes all out and he vows to beat Montgomery in anything he does. Another example from the film is when George is forced to guard Montgomery's flank but after already losing the deciding plan of invading Italy George has decided he’s had enough and he doesn't guard the flank instead he decides to push across so he can finally gain some the spotlight and credit he believes he truly deserves and be able to finally overdo Montgomery's plans and dethrone him. However, this isn’t the case and Montgomery beats George to the punch and already wins before George can have a chance to steal the spotlight. Allow there was a lot of similarities in Patton and chapter seventeen, “The United States to World War two” and section two “The War for Europe and North Africa” there were seemingly no differences between the two that were substantial enough to cover.
The reason I believe there are no differences between the film and text is simply that the director Franklin J. Schaffner was trying to relay a story of General George S. Patton which it had done properly in a way that was true to the actual event. Due to this, however, the movie wasn’t able to make really any changes that were significant enough and noticeable, and that would’ve have deviated from the truth and the main purpose of the film itself because they are trying to allow you to gain an insight into how George Patton really was and the achievements he had acquired throughout his lifetime. Had director Franklin J. Schaffner created some differences and bend some of the truth for entertainment he would not have created the movie he wanted to make because it would be something he didn’t care about. The overall purpose was to relay the events that had happened in Patton's life. To conclude the film further enhanced my knowledge on D-day and about who really saved the Americans it was all thanks to George Patton and without him, we would have lost hundreds of
Americans.
Martin Blumesfield's writing of this book is a very interesting book. His way of writing really gets the point across and makes you think like you there. He uses many rhetoric devices to enhance his writing and get what he's trying to do. He uses many similes and figurative language to back up his point of him being there. He has many of Patton's paper and he actually can relate to whats going on through his interpretation of the "Patton Papers." Many say this is the greatest Patton book out there and I agree. The way Blumesfield makes you feel is so real, you can appreciate a good writer when you find one like Blumesfield.
Atkinson argues that the North African campaign was a "pivot point in American history, the place where the United States began to act like a great power militarily, diplomatically, strategically, and tactically" (3). More importantly, he believes that World War II was the "greatest story of the twentieth century, like all great stories, it was bottomless, [and that] no comprehensive understanding of the victory of May 1945 is possible without understanding the earlier campaigns in Africa and Italy" (655). He supports this argument well in over 500 pages of material.
Stewart R. W. (2005). American Military History (Vol. 1). The United States Army and the
Weigley, Russel F. History of the United States Army. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1st Edition, 1984.
Frustrated by the commissioning programs of the time, Sledge begins his journey by resigning from the officer candidate program in an effort to more quickly reach combat. He subsequently volunteers to be a sixty millimeter mortar-man and joins Company K, Third Battalion, Fifth Marine Regiment (K/3/5) of the First Marine Division. It is within this command framework that Sledge experiences two of the bloodiest campaigns of the Second World War...
- - -, ed. "The Anti-War Movement in the United States." English.Illnois.edu. Ed. Oxford Companion to American Military History. 1st ed. Vers. 1. Rev. 1. Oxford Companion to American Military History, 1999. Web. 24 Feb. 2014. .
Sanderson, Jefferey. "GENERAL GEORGE S. PATTON, JR.” Last modified may 22, 1997. Accessed January 4, 2014. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a331356.pdf&ei=tYbHUtv3HcGs2gX2u4HAAQ&usg=AFQjCNFU5EzdWjKlt81w8gh_Bj2UEttaZw&sig2=aAz3jIZg7U6peDzL_i8w9w.
O’Brien, Tim. “How To Tell a True War Story.” The Compact Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. Boston: Bedford St. Martins, 2003. p. 420-429.
Cameron, R. S. (2003). The army vision: The 4th AD in world war II. Military Review, 83(6), 59-68
To write a true war story that causes the readers to feel the way the author felt during the war, one must utilize happening-truth as well as story-truth. The chapter “Good Form” begins with Tim O’Brien telling the audience that he’s forty-three years old, and he was once a soldier in the Vietnam War. He continues by informing the readers that everything else within The Things They Carried is made up, but immediately after this declaration he tells the readers that even that statement is false. As the chapter continues O’Brien further describes the difference between happening-truth and story-truth and why he chooses to utilize story-truth throughout the novel. He utilizes logical, ethical, and emotional appeals throughout the novel to demonstrate the importance of each type of truth. By focusing on the use of emotional appeals, O’Brien highlights the differences between story-truth and happening-truth and how story-truth can be more important and truer than the happening-truth.
A true war story blurs the line between fact and fiction, where it is neither true nor false at the same time. What is true and what is not depends on how much you believe it to be. In the chapter “How to Tell a True War Story” from the novel “The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien, the author provides various definitions to how the validity of a war story can be judged. The entire chapter is a collection of definitions that describe the various truths to what a true war story is. Unlike O’Brien, who is a novelist and storyteller, David Finkel, the author of “The Good Soldiers”, is a journalist whose job is to report the facts. Yet in the selection that we read, chapter nine, Finkel uses the convention of storytelling, which relies heavily on the stories the combat troops tell each other or him personally. Finkel attempts to give an unbiased view of the Iraq war through the stories of the soldiers but in doing so, Finkel forfeits the use of his own experiences and his own opinions. From O’Brien’s views on what a true war story is combined with my own definitions, I believe that Finkel provides a certain truth to his war stories but not the entire truth.
The Web. Blumenson, Martine, and the Patton Papers, (14 March 2014) 2-13-2014) “George S. Patton Jr.” U-s-history.com. Web. The Web. The Web.
One in the movie that I think really sets the stage for Patton’s personality and military success is when Eisenhower calls in General Patton to take command of II Corps and whip them back in to fighting shape (Yeide). Patton shows relentless discipline to the troops. The cook in the Mess Hall walks in without a uniform or helmet and addresses General Patton casually. Patton then commenced an intensive training and discipline program. His men were required to wear their uniform, shave every day, and even wear a tie to battle. Patton’s soldiers without a doubt complained about Patton and his techniques but, it all paid off in 1943 when his forces played a role in the German and Italian surrender in Tunisia (Sturgeon,
O’Neill, William L. World War II A Student Companion. 1 ed. William H. Chafe. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
The film, which is set in 1968, is structured in two main parts. The first takes place in a Marine boot camp, while the second shows the situation on the battlefield in Vietnam. The movie is quite atypical. In fact it does not homologate to the convectional conception of the classic war film. This particular aspect is evident once that the stylistic elements, both aesthetic and thematic, are analyzed. First of, it is pretty much impossible to identify a single protagonist, the hero whose