Catch-22
Tags: comedy, depressing, murder, anti war, violence, flashback, insanity, absurd, psychedelic, satire

Plot synopsis:
The plotline follows the airmen of the 256th Squadron while in action over Italy, and their repeated attempts to avoid combat missions that appear to lead to certain death. Their attempts are almost always comical: when an officer refers to the string on a map representing the front line and states that they won't be able to fly if it moves beyond the target, the airmen begin watching the string obsessively until Yossarian secretly moves the string and the mission is canceled. The officer is not amused and assigns them a particularly dangerous mission. The ultimate escape is to have oneself declared mentally unfit for duty, but the Army has made this impossible through the eponymous Catch-22. In spite of their best efforts, most of the airmen are killed over the span of the novel.
The development of the novel can be split into segments. The first (chapters 1–11) broadly follows the story fragmented between characters, but in a single chronological time in 1944. The second (chapters 12–20) flashes back to focus primarily on the "Great Big Siege of Bologna" before once again jumping to the chronological 'present' of 1944 in the third part (chapter 21–25). The fourth (chapters 26–28) flashes back to the origins and growth of Milo's syndicate, with the fifth part (chapter 28–32) returning again to the narrative present but keeping to the same tone of the previous four. The sixth and final part (chapter 32 on) remains in the story's present, but takes a much darker turn and spends the remaining chapters focusing on the serious and brutal nature of war and life in general.
Previously the reader had been cushioned from experiencing the full horror of events, but in the final section, the events are laid bare. The horror begins with the attack on the undefended Italian mountain village, with the following chapters involving despair (Doc Daneeka and the Chaplain), disappearance in combat (Orr and Clevinger), disappearance caused by the army (Dunbar) or death of most of Yossarian's friends (Nately, McWatt, Mudd, Kid Sampson, Dobbs, Chief White Halfoat and Hungry Joe), culminating in the unspeakable horrors of Chapter 39, in particular the rape and murder of Michaela, who represents pure innocence. In Chapter 41 the full details of the gruesome death of Snowden are finally revealed.
Despite this, the novel ends on an upbeat note with Yossarian learning of Orr's miraculous escape to Sweden and Yossarian's pledge to follow him there.

Review: The surreal humor captures the craziness of war in a way - I think - no other movie does.The film was released at around the same time as the somewhat similarly themed "M*A*S*H", and while Altman's movie was a hit, "Catch-22" bombed at the box office.
Despite it's 42 years since initial release, still one of the best films ever made and directed about the insanity of 'creating' war - and the mindlessness and trauma suffered from its consequences of both those conscripted to engage in it and neither more nor less than the civilian victims of it's long-time aftermaths.
But it's an even better movie if you've read the book, and you know exactly what is going on in some of the characters' heads and what is going on outside of the scenes we see in the film.
Mike Nicholl's (1970) film of Joseph Heller's book 'Catch 22' - published 9 years earlier - is set in a US bomber unit during the latter part of the Second World War in Italy.
Buck Henry, who plays Lieutenant Colonel Korn in the film, wrote the screenplay.We find our hero, bombardier Captain John Yosarian (Alan Arkin), as entrenched and battle-crazed as the other confused and confusing members of this unusual army air force unit.
It inspired me to read the book, I watched it again, and guess what, I still loved it.The movie like the book has a non-linear time line which may confuse some people, but if you concentrate you will have no problems following the story (even on the first viewing).
The structure of the film is what gives it such a high re-watch value, each time you watch you'll find something new about it.The stellar cast, give performances which vary in quality, with some of the smallest roles being extremely entertaining, but overall the ensemble delivers the goods.
The direction is tight given the complex structure and the amount of material covered in the book.This film always gets compared to *M*A*S*H*, which is also a good film, but I find Catch-22 provides more laughs while delivering, the more serious, anti-war message.If you haven't watched this movie yet, I highly recommend it..
In 'Catch-22' director Mike Nichols and screenwriter Buck Henry, along with a large ensemble that includes the likes of Alan Arkin, Art Garfunkel, Martin Sheen, and Orson Welles, takes on the challenge of adaptation Joseph Heller's renown novel.
The supporting cast, including Sheen, Voight, Welles, and even Henry himself as Colonel Korn gives able to support to the events of the story, although the main events really encompass around Yossarian.'Catch-22' was released in 1970, three years after Mike Nichols' popular film 'The Graduate' for which he nabbed a Best Director Academy Award.
I read the book by Joseph Heller much later and felt the film and the movie were two different entities, not to be judged the same.There is no way to escape the great lines in this film.
An all-star cast is showcased in this WWII farce centered around a B25 bomber squadron in the Mediterranean.Alan Arkin shines as Yossarian, a bombadier who realizes the hopelessness of ever completing the number of missions required to be rotated out of harm's way; his commanding officers (Balsam and Henry) are constantly upping the number once anyone gets close.
But the flight surgeon (Jack Gilford) declares anyone who realizes the insanity of the situation must, by definition, be sane, and therefore must continue to fly.Lots of interesting side plots, such as War Capitalist Milo Minderbinder's (Jon Voight) excursion into, among other ventures, Egyptian cotton and Natley's (Art Garfunkel) discussions of lasting societies with an old Italian.Austin Pendleton is perfectly cast as the son-in-law of General Dreedle (Orson Welles), a hulking figure of a man whose personal B25 is equipped with whitewall tires.
I know that MASH is Vietnam and this an Italian airbase somewhere in the Med in WW2, but from here-on in, there are big similarities.Alan Arkin has never been better and though I haven't read the book and probably never will, you can tell straight away that he was born for the role.
The stunts are worthy of expensive 'proper' war films and it must have been a very brave film for Nicols to even contemplate making.There's one hell of a cast too, aside of Arkin and Welles - Anthony Perkins, Richard Benjamin, Art Garfunkel, Martin Balsam, Jon Voight and Martin Sheen - that's an invite list to the Oscars!My policy with such off the wall movies is not to try and understand them, unless it comes to me.
Joseph Heller mentions in his introduction to the S & S Classics edition of Catch 22 that John Chancellor went around pasting stickers saying "Yossarian Lives" all around NBC studios in New York after having read the book.One finds this enthusiasm understandable upon first reading of this classic novel (and it is a classic though it is a mess -- which is part of its charm).
There are of course the representations of capitalism, fascism, communism as one would expect from an anti-war film, but its how they are represented that makes the film tick.Watch it for yourselves and delight in its sardonic humour and realise what Catch 22 actually means, a term so commonly used without real understanding.I will certainly purchase Joseph Heller's novel in the near future and hope its better than the film, as this is one film that could be better than its adapted source..
I don't think even Orson Welles could match the brilliance of Heller's novel, but Mike Nichols made a wonderful film with mostly a top-notch cast.
In a book of this scope, you simply cannot include all of the incredible characters, but M.A.S.H. came out earlier in the year and stole the thunder from all anti-war films, comedy or not.
Although now I miss the wide-screen, the impression of high quality filmmaking has not diminished after the years, when I have seen Catch 22 in video.The adaptation by Buck Henry opens the discussion on films based on books: Henry has preserved Heller's spirit, that is --for me-- the most important thing to do when one adapts a work from another source.
And Mike Nichols' excellent direction asserts the autonomy of the cinematic author, who is free to create a different work of art from a literary source.I must add that all the discussion seems rather strange, for no one knows how Heller's book will be appreciated in the 21st century...For me, Marcel Dalio's cameo as the Italian blind man makes sense for the whole film, with his reflection on political and economic empires.
Everybody is very good in this film (among the best, Jack Gilford, Alan Arkin, Orson Welles, Jon Voight and Bob Balaban), and my only regret is that Paula Prentiss' funny recreation of Nurse Duckett is seen only briefly..
It's unfortunate that most university graduates from pre-1980 have heard the expression "Catch-22" but haven't watched the movie or read the book.During one part of the story, Yossarian, the lead bombardier, finds out that they are going to bomb an Italian village that has no stragetic interest to the US war effort.
But if he is trying to get out of flying missions, then he is obviously not crazy, so there is no way to get out.Among the other characters are the Machiavellian Milo Minderbender (Jon Voight), the crude-mannered Col. Cathcart (Martin Balsam), the nervous Maj. Major (Bob Newhart), the robotic Sgt. Towser (Norman Fell), the dorky Danby (Richard Benjamin), the socially awkward chaplain (Anthony Perkins) and the menacing Gen. Dreedle (Orson Welles).
one of the all time classic anti-war movies and one of the rare examples of a movie adaption of a book that actually remains true to the story's action and dialogue.
Everyone is involved in the movie, and taking one character out is like moving a domino.Martin Sheen of "Apocalypse Now" acts in Catch 22, and Art Garfunkel, and Anthony Perkins from the thriller Psycho.
However, there's a catch.Great satire on the insanity and inanity of war, based on Joseph Heller's brilliant novel.
Supporting cast are a who's who of the entertainment industry: Martin Balsam, Orson Welles, Bob Newhart, Anthony Perkins, Martin Sheen (in his third movie), Art Garfunkel, Jon Voight, Norman Fell, Bob Balaban.However, helps if you haven't read the book.
Some people obviously detest this Hollywood version of the anti war black comedy while some people can forgive the flaws I for one have never read the acclaimed novel so I'm only judging the film on its own merits ( Interesting though in no way a shock to realise that the movie's most vocal critics are fans of the book ) but the one thing that is unlikable about the celluloid version of CATCH 22 is the acting style - It's overblown and cartoonish , comical and surreal .
Mike Nichols almost always brings an acute intensity to the style and pace of his movies, and so in this film, the story is told through overlapping scenes, fixated cinematography comprised in several scenes of one long take, blaring and constant sounds, and grippingly animated performances from the cast.Alan Arkin, Anthony Perkins, Bob Newhart, and Jon Voight deliver most of the laughs, all of them somehow assigned to different roles for humorous delivery.
Arkin and Perkins, though their characters are very different, are the livewire physical comedians, Newhart is the gawky neurotic butt of schemes and chains of cause and effect, and Jon Voight is the dry exaggeration of the coldly, proudly capitalizing American entrepreneur.Catch-22 was made in 1970, beginning a decade of the most potent crop of films there would be until the turn of the 21st century, the later spurt of cinematic high points lasting a lot shorter than a decade, for now in America, our films have developed a peculiar pituitary disorder in which the maturity has receded greatly and reduced itself to a childlike state.
Tackling Joseph Heller's celebrated bestseller about WWII insanity must have seemed a monumental task, and director Mike Nichols and screenwriter Buck Henry (reunited from 1967's "The Graduate") should be commended for trying at all, yet the results of this adaptation are bungled, especially when you consider another satire of war, Robert Altman's "MASH", was released the very same year (and probably stole much of this movie's thunder).
It's awfully refreshing to see a film like this; and depressing to realize that even on a tiny screen, with jarring commercials every twenty minutes, it's still a good sight better than most movies coming out today.Director Nichols is a master of creating mood on screen; every scene, every shot even, is carefully aimed to mirror the mood of protagonist Yossarian.
It takes a real talent to synthesize this type of comedy with the pure psychological drama of Yossarian's character, and Nichols pulls it off - the constant flashback scenes, which would be ludicrous in a lesser film (and were even pushing it in the book) are entirely believable and powerful.Of course it doesn't hurt to have a cast stacked with first-rate actors, even in minor parts.
A viewer who hadn't read Catch-22 may be left cold by some of the scenes, though, and that may be the movie's only weak point.Still, this is what happens when every ingredient of a film comes together - a cinematic experience that works on every level.
Although Alan Arkin did a notable job as Yossarian in the 1970 film version of Heller's classic novel Catch 22, much was left to be desired.
Nately's whore never falls asleep, Major De Coverly has no chance to kidnap random Italians or be injured by the old man (Due to Buck Henry's decision to exclude him).The book is indescribably moving while being heartbreakingly funny, this movie does it no justice at all and should probably change its name to avoid the risk of contaminating Joseph Heller's masterpiece.None of the relationships between characters are explained (unless you consider rank) so the back and forth, non linear style which works so well in the book becomes a mish mash of nonsensical imagery/plot line/aborted screenplay attempt which the fans of the film tell you to appreciate as "surrealism".If you would truly like a suggestion, all I have to say is read the book..
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.
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.
You've got to remember, its an uproariously funny book.So aside from the failed attempt to tell any coherent version of Catch-22 in a two-hour movie, the main thing which makes Mike Nichols' attempt such a blasphemous insult to the novel, is its robbing it almost completely of its humour.Another movie was made in 1970 which uses black comedy to expose the insanity of war.
In 1970, MASH and Catch-22 were the main contenders in the unofficial bout of military satire movies, and while MASH ended up making far more at the box office and keeping its acclaim so high that Robert Altman had a sweet career in the 70s (and, arguably, made far greater films), I might be in that minority that prefers Mike Nichols' funny but dark and pretty frightening adaptation of Joseph Heller's novel.
It starts a little shaky with its tone, I should note, as one has to adjust to some of the rhythm of the dialog like the first mess-hall scene with Martin Sheen and Art Garfunkel, or just the tone of the film-making which goes to creative lengths to make cinematic the tone of picture, sometimes in just one shot (the best being when Voight and Balsam walk and talk, and the plane crashes down without the characters flinching).
But at the same time Nichols is also best as an actor's director, and he's assembled a host of familiar faces to film buffs, or just casual moviegoers: Arkin gives a genuine pathos to the protagonist Yosarrian; Sheen and Voight and Charles Grodin and Bob Balaban and Anthony Perkins and Balsam fit great into their supporting roles, filling them with equal parts grounded reality and wackiness that verges on that line of serious and parody; Orson Welles, for his two scenes, almost steals the show from the large cast.It's a mostly superb and underrated work by a director off and running early in his career, working from a highly regarded work of black comedy to as honest an extent as possible (or, rather, it doesn't feel cheating to what would be an adaptation), and it puts you into a whole other perspective of that "Great" war, with foreshadowing to contractor-profiteers and fake missions on civilians and power-hungry brass with total immunity.
CATCH-22 From The Novel By Joseph Heller, is a fantastically made black comedy anti-war classic, From the great Mike Nichol's The legendary Alan Arkin, plays Yossarian, a bombardier, in world war 2, who has had his fair share of anxiety, tries everything possible to get himself sent home, amidst the chaos he's not the only one going to pieces, they are several wonderful character's too many to mention ,which make's this film great is the superb Widescreen Photography from Richard Lester's usual Director Of Photography, David Watkin, who light a lot of scene's in natural light,The Rest of the all star cast include's a pre Midnight Cowboy, Jon Voight,Bob Balaban, Future Director Richard Benjamin, Paula Prentiss,(Mrs Richard Benjamin) Orson Welles,the mighty Martin Balsam, Art Garfunkel(in His debut) Charlie Sheen, in an early role, Jack Gilford, as an neurotic doctor, CATCH -22, Is Ideal viewing along with MASH,.
Mike Nicholl's (1970) film of Joseph Heller's book 'Catch 22' - published 9 years earler - is set in a US bomber unit during the latter part of the Second World War in Italy.
I read Joseph Heller's "Catch-22" at school of my own volition after watching the movie, and at the time, neither made sense.
It helps, too, to understand the historical context of the time the book was written and the movie made, during the Vietnam War.The characters, except for Yossarian, did not seem to be fleshed out adequately, probably due to the necessary condensing of the story, and the recurring scenes with Snowden became frustrating and predictable, again probably a function of my not having read the book.
The only great part in the movie is the character of Alan Arkin (Yossarian) which is very funny and his intention to avoid the flights gives birth to numerous hilarious scenes and quotes.
Catch-22-** (out of 4): All the components of a great film are there: a brilliant novel by Joseph Heller, Buck Henry in charge of writing, Mike Nichols behind the camera, and a cast any director worth his salt would die for.
I've always thought that "MASH," the Altman film released the same year as "Catch-22," was more like the Joseph Heller novel than the film actually based on it.Grade: C.
However, if you've never read the book Catch-22, or if you totally disregard this movie as being based on anything whatsoever, it's really not that bad of a film.
But instead of slating it for being nothing like the original work, I just settled down to enjoy it as a film in its own right.On subsequent re-readings of Heller I found myself picturing Alan Arkin as Yossarian.
It's my favourite movie of all time.Don't be put off by thinking it's a war film.