I'd hazard the guess that most American male Baby Boomers who read more than a few novels read Joseph Heller's Catch-22, and pretty much all of us knew what "catch-22" was -- not just the epitome of contradictory demands but particularly the Yossarian could not get sent home for being crazy because his not wanting to go on more bombing missions showed that he was not crazy. Flyers who went on without complaint were in some ways crazy, but could only be processed out if they asked to be... and if they asked that proved that they weren't crazy.

Can you make a movie out of that? Yeah. Could anyone have made a great movie from Heller's sprawling and highly repetitious novel? I don't think so. Riding the success of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?" and "The Graduate," Mike Nichols tried and failed with a large budget (he joked that he commanded the sixth largest air force in the world while shooting the film near Guaymas, Sonora on the east side of the Gulf of California (sometimes called the Sea of Cortez), a formidably talented cast, and the brilliant innovative camerawork of David Watkin (Help!, Chariots of Fire, Out of Africa).

I have a special affection for the movie "Catch-22" because, when I lived in Tucson in the mid-1970s, I went to the beach where the movie was filmed many times. The runway was still there (and probably remains visible today), and, reportedly, some of the sand had been shipped in for the movie. The movie begins with the sun rising over Teta de Cabro (goat teat mountain) and ends with a long, complicated helicopter shot following Yossarian after he jumps out of a hospital window, crosses the runway on which a parade is marching away, runs into the water while inflating a small, bright yellow life raft and then pulls farther and farther away, showing the bay and dry Sonora desert mountains.

I'd think that at least admiration for the technique of the opening and closing scenes would be stimulated even in those who have no nostalgia for the location. Throughout the nearly two hours of running time, there are many very long and very complicated shots. The shot of a tight formation of bombers taking off into the camera is astounding (and I learned, very dangerous for those on the planes, though the cameraman was relatively safe with the longest lens then available). The Götterdamerung-like bombing of the base conducted from the control tower by Lieutenant Milo Minderbinder (Jon Voight) is a major set piece, showing the way for the explosions that fill Hollywood blockbusters from the last two decades.

And Alan Arkin seems to me to be perfect for and as Yossarian (though I keep wondering how a bombardier can have the rank of captain--I don't recall if this rank inflation derives from the book).

Yes, the richness of the book is lost, as is generally the case with screen adaptations of novels, especially of novels with lots of admirers. There are a number (too large a number!) of scenes that can only make sense to those familiar with Heller's novel. For instance, in the movie, the audience does not know who Hungry Joe is, though we see his macabre fate (I swear that when I saw "Catch-22" long ago in a theater, we saw it twice, but there is no mention of this on the commentary track.)

Obviously, the movie was presold (to my generation, particularly those a bit older than I was) as an already known property. The basic dilemma, the catch-22, is there, as is Yossarian shedding his clothes, receiving a medal "out of uniform," taking to a tree, and many other scenes and lines from the novel.

Somehow, the whole is less than the sum of the parts. In 1970 I liked the movie more than many other viewers did (even before having associations with the location). I thought that the movie was underrated and the book overrated. As I remember, the second half of the book seemed largely to repeat the first half.

The movie has two distinct halves, too, though the second does not repeat the first. Like "The Graduate," the first half of "Catch-22" is comic, the second half is more serious, and each ends with the hero running away. I like the first halves (of "The Graduate," and both book and movie Catch-22) more than the second halves.

Plot-spoiler alert

The second half of the movie "Catch-22" is in many ways a fairly conventional (even maudlin) war movie that shows the warriors ogling women in the street and falling in love with a prostitute (Art Garfunkel's Captain Nately with Gina Rovere). The unreasonable (at best!) commanders (Martin Balsam and Buck Henry) are more corrupt (corporate?) than usual and the kind of contracting out that is prominent in W's Iraq was unusual in 1970 (and 1944), but anguish about the death of comrades is what the second half of Mike Nichols's "Catch-22" is mostly about.

Yossarian's trying to tend to "what's his name, the new gunner" (Snowden, played by Jon Korkes) is a flashback that recurs throughout the movie, though extending further into the traumatic event in its recurrences. After Nately and Yossarian stop Lt. Dobbs (Martin Sheen) from shooting Col. Cathcart (Balsam) and Lt. Col. Korn (Henry), Nately dies in the inferno Lt. Minderbender organizes, and this leads to the stabbing that is shown at the very beginning of the movie (by an assailant whom Nichols acknowledges was unrecognizable, even when the scene is repeated near the end, with most of the movie flashbacks of the wounded Yossarian).

End plot-spoiler alert

When I watched the DVD of "Catch-22," I thought that most of the characters were types, with the only real exception being Anthony Perkins's diffident chaplain.

Watching it again (subtitled) with the commentary track of Mike Nichols responding to questions and wonderment from Steven Soderberg (Traffic), my appreciation of most of the performances -- particularly those of Balsam, Marcel Dalio, Garfunkel, Sheen, and Voight -- increased. I remain disappointed that Paula Prentiss had practically no screen time (though providing the first full-frontal nudity in a mainstream Hollywood movie).

The problem with the movie is not the acting, though Nichols admits that Arkin had good reason to be frustrated that Nichols was so preoccupied with technical aspects that he was "not there" for the actors (actors frustrated at long waits in the hot sun in an isolated location with no amenities). A major problem is the usual one of having to jettison most of what made readers love a particular novel, including the richness of character development.

The directors discuss the difficulties of what Nichols did with the long and intricate takes and having to manage an air force as well as a group of talented actors. Nichols does not say that he shares my opinion that the second, Rome-heavy melodrama half is inferior to the first shot-in-Mexico comic half, but does say that audiences started to balk at the surreal hospital scene in which a family that has flown in from America to see the son who has already died visits Yossarian (instead -- one cog in the war machine substituting for another, even to the family that bred the cog).

Nichols is blunt that "Catch-22" is not and was not his kind of movie, lacking subtext. (His kind of movie is about complex characters in complex relationships.) He and Soderberg mention that the privatization of the military (by the M&M syndicate) was prescient. Since they recorded their commentary track in 2001, it has become clear that Milo's way has become the Halliburton/Blackwell/Cheney/Bush way. Moreover, skimping on what the combatants need (parachutes in the movie, armor on Humvees and body armor in Iraq) and the extensions of extensions of extensions of tours of duty at which Yossarian rebels are prominent features of the adventures in Iraq to which George W. Bush has consigned the Nateleys et al. of the 2000s.

Nichols also recalls that the intricately choreographed shots did not appeal to audiences the way the loose, improvisational Korean war comedy Robert Altman pulled off (M*A*S*H) did -- and that soon critics were beating "Catch-22" with the example of "M*A*S*H. (Nichols also says that he saw the script for "M*A*S*H" before Altman got the project and that pretty much everything that made the movie work wasn't in it.)

Nichols stands by his decision to eschew a musical score, fully cognizant that music telling the audience what to feel would have enhanced its popularity and made it seem less abstract a portrayal of combatant stress and burn-out. He has a great story of censorship absurdity and some good Orson Welles and Bob Newhart stories, too.

For anyone interested in the making of movies -- particularly big movies with large forces and long takes -- the commentary track makes the DVD of "Catch-22" indispensable. Many commentary tracks are entertaining, most tirelessly laud cast and crew. The only ones I recall being as candid about what didn't work are those Robert Altman recorded. Soderberg was very well-prepared to talk to Nichols about the movie and makes insightful comments as well as asking good questions. The two seem to have enjoyed the conversation, and I enjoyed listening to it, coming away with a better understanding both of what Nichols achieved and what he was trying to do in some scenes that did not work for me.

There's also a trailer for the movie (and for "The Passenger") and a photo gallery, but it's the commentary track that makes this a great DVD. I'd rate the first half of the movie 4-star, the second half nearly 3-star (, the first ten minutes and the final long take 5 star,) and the commentary-track close to 5-stars, which by my complex rating algorithm comes out 4. The movie is almost certain to disappoint those who love the book, but it's difficult for me to imagine anyone interested in the craft of making big-budget movies who would be disappointed by the Nichols and Soderberg commentary track.

And I wanted to add that in addition to commentary tracks, a great advantage of DVDs that is especially important in this instance is the ability to replay scenes that go by confusingly fast (interfering with the rhythm of "Catch-22" in particular is not a problem, since its flow is often problematic).

© 2008, Stephen O. Murray




Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD