I always wondered about George C. Scott. He won the Academy Award for Patton (1970) and then he made many proclamations about how Hollyood sucked. Instead of banking his success into some better roles, he did several crappy horror movies and some odd films and never saw the light of stardom again. Patton II could have been a decent movie in the hands of a studio if it had been done shortly after the original. Instead, it was done as a TV mini-series back in 1986. Even though Patton was killed shortly after the end of WWII, it is hard not to notice that in The Last Days of Patton, G.C. Scott looks like he is about 70 years old and has aged 16 years since Patton (1970). The Last Days of Patton shows a moody, insecure person who was hoping Eisenhower would give him another command. It is kind of creepy. If you have read Patton's autobiography and some books about him; it is easy to see where someone could portray him as a neurotic. However, considering the career that Patton was in, and the life that he led; it would stand to reason that if Patton were such a soft-touch that he would not have reached the levels of success that he achieved. The Last Days of Patton seems to have been written by Eisenhower and the people that did not really like Patton. It is almost the antithesis of Patton (1970). After seeing The Last Days of Patton, I analyzed the poor man's life based on what I had read and seen; and General Patton dropped several notches down on the list of Statesmen and anti-heroes. The message of The Last Days of Patton seems to be: "He was not a flamboyant, rebellious, politically incorrect leader; he was a sad, sick old man."