Catch-22

Rating:
Summary: Zany Film!
Review: Based on Joseph Heller's book, this zany film captures the insanity and absurdity of Army life during World War II. Great acting by Alan Arkin, Martin Balsam, Richard Benjamin, and Bob Newhart. The script by Buck Henry is brilliant.--Diana Dell, author, "A Saigon Party: And Other Vietnam War Short Stories."

Rating:
Summary: Dead on Arrival
Review: Based on the incredibly popular novel by Joseph Heller, sporting Mike Nichols as director, and featuring a first rate cast that included a host of brilliant actors, CATCH-22 was one of the most highly anticipated films of its year. And it proved one of the most critically-despised box office disasters of the early 1970s. Almost every one loathed everything about it.

The story concerns a group of WWII bomber crews and support staff stationed on an island off the coast of Italy, on which they make bomb runs--but this is merely the peg on which Heller hung his savage satire on American beaurocracy. The film version, sadly, keeps the peg but manages to miss the rest. Part of the problem here is that the humor of the novel is deeply tied into the way in which Heller tells his story--and it simply doesn't translate well into film. That aside, Buck Henry's adaptation is an absolute disaster: instead of rapid-fire, it is slow-crawl, and instead of sharp-fanged it is gap-toothed. Mike Nichol's direction is an equal miscalculation, for he approaches the material with an odd sense of detachment that effectively kills even the little bit that Henry's script had going for it to begin with.

Given all of this, the surprising thing about the movie is how well-cast it is and how good some of the performances are. You simply couldn't ask for a better Yossarian than Alan Arkin and the novel's Doc Daneeka might have been written with Jack Gilford in mind; Richard Benjamin, Art Garfunkle, Paula Prentiss, Bob Newhart, and even Orson Wells are among the many who give the film what little force it has. But ultimately, even the best performances in the film can't get the show off the ground. It is dead on arrival. As for the DVD package itself, it isn't anything to write home about either; the film is well presented, but the commentary track is merely so-so and the rest of the package is ho-hum. Although not, mercifully, as ho-hum as the extremely misguided film itself.

Rating:
Summary: To be sane you have to be insane. And Vice versa.
Review: Being a junior in high school and usaslly forced to read, I couldn't put this book down. I actually loved this book. I loved the irony that poured out of this book. And since the book is about and filled with many Catch-22's, I was in literay heaven. During War time, when people were drafted into the war, the sanest thing a person can want to get out of the war. To get out of the war, you have to be insane and proven insane to be granted leave. Frustrating, but that is the Catch-22. But, how can you be proven insane, when your crew, captains, and comanding officers are insane as well? END

Rating:
Summary: Catch-00
Review: By far, this is one of the worst novels I have ever read. Excessively over-hyped as a "modern classic," its little more than a silly attempt at parody. Heller's egotistical love of his own words result in book this is over long and exceedingly boring. The non-linear narrative is little more than a pretentious gimmick while the characters are cartoonish at best and as flat as a piece of cardboard. END

Rating:
Summary: I love this movie!
Review: Catch-22 is probably my all-time favorite novel and favorite movie. I constantly read reviews of the film version claiming that it doesn't quite reach the level of insanity the novel elevates to and that it is clouded and too literal. I know, there are a lot of things that one just cannot believe are not in the movie, like General Peckem or ex-P.F.C. Wintergreen or Hungry Joe screaming in his sleep whenever he is off combat duty again or Chief White Halfoat waiting to die of pnuemonia and threatening to slit Flume's throat ear ot ear or the chaplain's morbid, introverted struggles or Yossarian censoring letters as Washington Irving. But you can't put EVERYTHING in a movie. I love this movie a lot. I think it sort of becomes its own thing, apart from the novel. Plus, it does bring across the main points and feelings of the novel. In fact, I'm surprised how understandingly Mike Nichols directs and the actors act and the dialogue is executed. Just watch the scene near the beginning where Yossarian is arguing with Dobbs, Orr, McWatt, Milo, Aarfy, and Nately about his persecution complex. It comes off like a ballet of words. I don't think this movie is too heavy, as Leonard Maltin reviews in his book, because the novel is heavy. The novel is not JUST a cute farce (which is what makes it so great). I think the movie has the right tone. I also think the actors are brilliant. Alan Arkin, to me, is the only man who could ever play Yossarian. He is Yossarian. The moment of his performance that stands out for me is right at the start when he's stabbed in the side. He gasps, almost comically, in a disbelief, in such a pure shock that he has just, to his knowledge, been killed (and that's the last thing he wants to happen to him ever, literally). He stumbles to the ground wide-eyed after the disbelief and denial fades and stretches on the ground as if the eventual prophecy of his impending doom has been answered and there's finally nothing to do but accept it. Dying isn't an option for him, but they finally got him. He practically looks at the audience and asks "Do yo believe this?" It's like all of Yossarian's contradictions that were written in the novel are mimed in one brilliant moment of acting. And the rest of the cast is great, too. Orson Welles as Dreedle, Bob Newhart as Major Major (his single greatest performance), Charles Grodin as the slimey Aarfy, Art Garfunkel as Nately, Sheen as Dobbs, Bob Balaban as Orr, Buck Henry (who adds some very funny dialogue of his own. "I've never caught a piece of shrapnel...") as Korn, Norman Fell, Richard Benjamin, Jon Voight, Peter Bonerz, and, my favorites, Jack Gilford as Doc Daneeka, Martin Balsam as Cathcart, and Anthony Perkins (forget about Norman Bates) as Chaplain Tappman (name-change). Just listen to Perkins when he tells Cathcart's receptionist who he is, like he detests saying his own name and he doesn't like admitting he's him. "I'm...Chaplain Tappman." Overall, this is a great movie, despite the literary omissions. I think it's a forgotten classic that was never once remembered, and I feel it should get its classic status as a great film adaptation. Let's have a 30th anniversary next year and re-release it in the theaters. Whaddya say, fellas? (I'd give it five stars, but I just don't believe in the five-star system.)

Rating:
Summary: HELLARIOUS
Review: Few offerings add to the lexicon. This is one of them. How can a pilot ground himself because he knows himself to be crazy? Get it? If he knows he is crazy, then he must not be. Because if he is crazy, how could he make such a judgement? Who would believe a crazy man? This argument goes on forever. Compare to Klinger's attempt to get out of the Army by claiming to be queer. Since everyone knows he's not queer, then perhaps he is crazy! But, a crazy man is unable to cook up such a scheme! Therefore, he's not crazy. Perhaps he is queer. Film demonstrates the moronic way in which we evaluate ourselves, and our enemies. Mocks red tape and miltary protocal. And the key figure dies on page seven. (Sorry! Couldn't resist.)

Rating:
Summary: "It's the Best There Is!"
Review: Finally ...... one of those DVD re-releases I've been practically holding my breath for, and was not disappointed. This criminally overlooked gem was trashed by critics upon its release in 1970, and never enjoyed a video transfer worthy of the filmmaker's effort, not even on laserdisc! And as you can see from the varying reviews, the controversy rages on. Which just proves how alive and well and timely a film Catch-22 truly is.

Mike Nichols captures the essence of Joseph Heller's defining anti-war classic quite admirably, with a faithful adaptation by Buck Henry (who can be seen along with a veritable Who's Who period ensemble cast), with an eye as removed and objective as Kubrick, yet at times very visually subjective ..... an approach used to great advantage in his previous hit film The Graduate. All the verbal and ethical contradictions of the book bring its dark humor to demented life, through a kaleidoscopic cavalcade of archtypical characters who make up the living nightmare of one Captain Yossarian, who has decided he can no longer bear to fly the combat missions his superiors have made it impossible to get out of. To get out of flying, he has to be officially diagnosed as "crazy", and must request to be grounded ..... but if he requests to be grounded, then he's not really crazy, and is therefore eligible to keep flying missions. That's some catch, that Catch-22.

This film, like the book on which it's based, is not so much an indictment of the insanity of war as it is a look at how the corporate mentality can find its way into the noblest of causes, and how beurocratic manipulations devaluate basic human principles, which take a back seat to merely "looking good". A timeless theme indeed. This skewed logic is cheerfully accepted by all the story's characters ..... until our Yossarian's eyes are opened to the product of that logic literally disemboweled at his fingertips (yes, that scene was put back in!), and suddenly he is the outsider whose prime mission is to avoid any more missions. Which is not an easy thing to do when Brass keeps adding more after you've completed your tour of duty.

As far as the transfer itself: It has probably never looked better since the original theatrical release over 30 years ago, especially being the first widescreen release of this title, which is the only way to experience it as intended. The transfer team did the best they could with the mono soundtrack, I'm sure, which does get compressed and distorted at times, something we enthusiasts of early films live with.

Mike Nichols' Catch-22 may only enjoy cult status, but it is DVD releases like this (and that other oddball, star-studded 60's curiosity Candy) that make one truly appreciate what is being done with this revolutionary medium. Hey, not all movies can be for everybody. Long live the Anti-Blockbusters!

Rating:
Summary: A good film that should have been better
Review: First, I was upset to see that the Hungry Joe's character from the book was all but not used, and that he didn't even die because of the cat, but instead suffered Kid Sampson's death from the book. Now...

I do admit, this movie is better than I thought it would be. I'm especially happy with Bob Newhart's Major Major, the Chaplain, and Major Danby. My only problem is that many of the characters aren't portrayed to the best of their abilities, considering how well the book fleshed them all out. The best example is Balsom's take on Colonel Cathcart. In the book, Colonel Cathcart is prim, proper, and insane. In the movie, he is simply a crude, crusty old soldier, reminicent of Ernest Borgnine in "All Quiet on the Western Front." Though he is good when interacting with Dreedle. Orr is good in this, but maybe just a touch creepier than he should be. Milo is just wasted, and a little bland. Orson Welles is surprisingly good, but that is in direct effect of the good writing of his scenes.
Alan Arkin gets off to a slow start, but becomes very good as the film picks up speed. The Snowden films are great.

My main problem with the film, however, is that two very important characters from the book are completely and utterly not in the movie: Clevinger and Dunbar. Clevinger, while only in the first few chapters of the book, had a lot of very interesting things to say about Yossarian's behavior, and would have just been a good character to have. Dunbar, on the other hand, actually had a very large part in the book, serving as Yossarian's side-kick. He also delivered the classic monologue about boredom being the key to a seemingly-longer life. A great piece of writing that would have worked well with the rest of the film.
All in all, I suppose the main thing that would have made this movie better is an extra half-hour, so that more of the classic scenes could have been used. But still, surprisingly good.

Rating:
Summary: Weak movie, strong performances
Review: Fools tread in... I have no idea how anyone could HOPE to make a good movie from Catch-22. If Mike Nichols thought he could, he was wrong. He sure tried, though -- I was watching the squadron take off and I asked, how much money did they spend on this? A lot, with over a dozen 1940s bombers in the flick. But they had to cut so much that it just doesn't hang together. It only makes sense because I've read the book.

[Aside: Hungry Joe isn't present at his death -- he's present at Kid Samson's death. I don't understand why they did that.]

On the plus side, the cast is wonderful, with the exception of Alan Arkin, who is waaaay too laid back for Yossarian. Really, it's worth watch just for John Voigt as Milo, Bob Balaban as Orr, and many others. It's like watching "It's a Mad ect World", only not as funny. Come to think of it, why didn't Jonathan Winters get into it?

Rating:
Summary: Worthy of Heller's novel
Review: Growing up in the '60s, I thought that Joseph Heller's Catch 22 was one of the great literary achievements of my lifetime -- and I still do.

When Mike Nichols' film version came out in 1970, I was disappointed. I'm not sure why I felt that way, except that it's impossible to capture the richness and the many layers of Heller's satyric masterpiece.

Just today, I [watched]the recently released DVD version of this film ...for the first time in 30 years. All I can say is, I was blown away. I can't imagine what my 20-year-old self was thinking in 1970 ... this is simply one of the greatest films I have ever seen.

Start with David Watkins' astonishing cinematgraphy ... it's reason enough to buy the DVD version. ...he does more dazzling things in the first 10 minutes than all the multimillion dollar special effects in .... There's one scene midway through the film, when Watkins shoots from in front of Yossarian's B-25 in flight -- with his entire squadron behind him -- that has to be seen to be believed.

Seeing it again, Buck Henry's script is a masterful adaption of Heller's Rabelasian masterpiece. I think he captures the essense of the novel and even makes a couple of useful additions. Seeing the way he uses the comic elements reminds me of Robert Heinlein's explanation of humor: "We laugh because it hurts to much to cry." (from Stranger in a Strange Land, the OTHER seminal book of my youth!)

Alan Arkin's Yossarian is superb -- The highest praise I can give is that it's hard to imagine anyone else playing the role. But the supporting performances are also uniformly excellent -- from Jon Voight to Martin Balsam to Bob Newhart to Jack Gilford to Bob Balaban to Martin Sheen to Art Garfunkel (in his first role). Special mention to Charles Grodin, especially in his final scene after mudering the young girl.

One other performance deserves special mention -- the final film appearance of the great Marcel Dalio. Although only on screen for a brief time as the old man in the Roman whorehouse, his performance is, I believe pivotal to the film. It's the moment where the light, almost farcial tone of the film turns into a dark, Fellinieque nightmare. Watch Dalio after he finishes his conversion with Garfunkel, while Arkin takes over the dialogue and the old man sits quietly in the foreground, saying nothing, but continuing his lecture to Garfinkel with his eyes.

There's so much more I could rave about ....

Pardon my enthusiam. I'm still too overwhelmed by my viewing of the DVD (with a very, very useful commentary by Michael Nichols and Steve Sodenbergh) to sort everything out.

But one of the DVD extras did help me understand just a little bit why the movie wasn't more successful -- it had to boast the worst theatrical trailer ever made.

....