How could a movie so huge in scope and so fascinated by its subject be considered an anti-war film? The simple truth is that it's not--Patton is less about World War II than about the rise and fall of a man whose life was literally defined by war, and who felt lost and lonely without the grand-scale pursuit of an enemy. George C. Scott embodies his role so fully, so convincingly, that we can't help but be drawn to and fascinated by Patton as a man who is simultaneously bound for hell and glory. The film's opening monologue alone is a masterful display of acting and character analysis, and everything that follows is sheer brilliance on the part of Scott and director Franklin J. Schaffner.

Filmed on an epic scale at literally dozens of European locations, Patton does not embrace war as a noble pursuit, nor does it deny the reality of war as a breeding ground for heroes. Through the awesome achievement of Scott's performance and the film's grand ambition, Patton shows all the complexities of a man who accepted his role in life and (like Scott) played it to the hilt. --Jeff Shannon

Patton [Blu-ray]

• The Longest Day [Blu-ray]
• A Bridge Too Far [Blu-Ray] [Blu-ray]
• Battle of the Bulge [Blu-ray]
• Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World [Blu-ray]
• Tora! Tora! Tora! (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)
• Midway (Collector's Edition)
• Battle of Britain [Blu-ray]
• The Sand Pebbles [Blu-ray]
• The Hunt for Red October [Blu-ray]
• Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid [Blu-ray]

I gave one to a buddy, and both DVD's were bad about half way into the movie. I want to buy another one, but dont want to get my hopes up and be let down again. Chestie Puller was also a true hero. IM in Iraq and it takes a week or so to get a DVD. I wish I could find a movie about him. I got two patton DVD a while back, it's the same picture as on this DVD. Patton was a true hero.

Well worth the money if you really enjoy this movie. They really did an awesome job of creating the blu-ray version of this movie. I really like this classic and the blu-ray movie is a must for any Patton fan. I could not be happier with this blu-ray version. Wow. The audio and video are excellent.

After I purchased this version 2.35 aspect ratio to find out that the 2 disc is the letterbox original version that is the 2.20 widscreen. a very good war film one of the best. I purchased this film after patton 2 disc and found out that it is not 2.35 aspect ratio but 2.20.

Have you heard of DNR, or Digital Noise Reduction. THAT's detail and picture quality. Just atrocious. I'm not buying Patton on BD until they 'fess up and 'unfix' the thing. In Sweeney Todd, the worst thing is they only applied the DNR around the nose and cheeks/under the eyes. THAT'S what you should be seeing, colour grading and tone aside. HD, and certainly the original 70mm film, is capable of showing this.

I give the film four stars (in case you were thinking i'm just being mean and unhelpful) and the Blu-ray one. On purpose. Not this rubbish. Look at Depp's face in the Pirates movies. HD and Blu-ray are supposed to let you see a film as ACCURATELY to the original as possible. Look at Jennifer Connelly's face in Hulk where you can see pores and fine hair, peachfuzz and so on.

Because people want to see things looking 'clear' and 'high-def' like HD video and digitally originated cg/3d movies, the studios are 'scrubbing' the pictures electronically to get rid of the grain. It's just ludicrous. The thing is, picture detail cannot be separated from the grain and the chemical reaction when the film is exposed. In case you didn't red those others (and there should be MANY more critical reviews of this movie's quality), here it is in a nutshell. So what you get is a halo effect around the edges, and/or LOSS of fine details because when you erase the grain, you erase the high-frequency detail. Detail on chemical film is inseparable.

Then look at something like the Dark City BD, where it's been erased (even though she's younger there). They also use a technique called 'edge enhancement' to artificially sharpen the picture by increasing areas of high contrast like edges. They didn't even put grain back over the top to match the rest of the picture - and the most ridiculous thing of all is that in Sweeney Todd Depp and Carter are SUPPOSED to look drawn and tired and lined. You've been robbed and don't even know it. 70mm film has less noticeable grain due to its large negative size.

DNR is the devil, to be melodramatic about it. The remaster is AWFUL. Now go and look at Patton again. See how 'blurred' it looks. Compare it to another 'war' movie, Blackhawk down. Look at Karl Malden - where are the pores of his skin. You've been duped.

Film has grain. And they DON'T do it to other characters. I won't even start on how many filmmakers use coarser grain to make the tone/film literally more 'gritty'. Oh no it isn't great picture quality. I have to agree with the very few that have called Fox on its despicable job with the picture quality on Patton. Yes Patton is older, but it was shot on 70mm and there should be plenty of detail so you can actually compare the two differently aged films.

Its a wonderful movie with awesome picture quality. The Patton Blu-Ray release is a fantastic remastering. By far one of the best picture quality Blu-Ray releases I've come across to date.