BOOK / MOVIE: Catch-22 (1961 / 1970)

                Complex novels can be difficult to bring to the screen.  Mike Nichols (“Charlie Wilson’s War) took on one of the more difficult novels when he decided to make “Catch-22”.  Joseph Heller’s novel is nonlinear and full of bizarre characters and labyrinthian dialogue.  Buck Henry wrote the screenplay and Heller assembled an eclectic cast.  Paramount gave Nichols a big budget and he used part of it to get 17 vintage B-25 Mitchell bombers.  Six months were spent on the camerawork for the bombers alone.  This required 1,500 flight hours.  Unfortunately, little of the footage made it into the film as it is not an aerial combat movie.  It is an anti-war satire that is often compared to “M*A*S*H”, which was released the same year.  It was this coincidental release that probably contributed to the box office failure of “Catch-22”.  The increasing unpopularity of the Vietnam War seemingly left room for only one successful war satire and the public chose “M*A*S*H”.

                The movie opens sans music over the credits.  The drone of bombers covers a conversation between Capt. Yossarian (Alan Arkin) and Col. Cathcart (Martin Balsam) and Lt. Col. Korn (Buck Henry).  We don’t know what they are discussing, but soon after Yossarian throws away his bombardier wings and is knifed by a mysterious person.  The movie then flashes back to how Yossarian got to this moment.  Yossarian is suffering from PTSD due to an incident involving a wounded gunner on his bomber.  He is also frustrated by Cathcart’s continual bumping up of the number of missions required to go home.  The standard is 25, but the colonel gradually moves it to 80.  Yossarian believes his only hope of survival is to be declared insane.  In an iconic scene, he discusses this option with Doc Daneeka (Jack Gilford).  Doc explains that Yossarian cannot be removed from combat because of Catch-22.  To be flying these dangerous missions, you would have to be insane.  But if you proclaim that you are insane, it means you are sane because you realize how dangerous things are.

 

                The movie pares down the numerous arcs of the book to a manageable few.  Yossarian’s character is the glue that holds together the arcs.  Henry has created a mostly linear plot, with intercuts of Yossarian’s wounded gunner incident playing out periodically.  While many of the scenes are vignettes fleshing out the supporting characters, there is a central arc involving Lt. Minderbinder (Jon Voight) creating a black-market syndicate with the cooperation of Cathcart.  This manages to incorporate two of the movie’s themes:  even in war, America remains a capitalist country and the higher you go in the chain of command, the more incompetence and corruption you encounter.  This is exemplified when Minderbinder arranges to have their air base bombed in order to unload surplus cotton.  In another scene, the squadron is awarded medals by Gen. Dreedle (Orson Welles) for a tight bombing pattern even though Yossarian had the bombers drop the bombs in the sea.  Cathcart convinces Dreedle that they must avoid the bad publicity by proclaiming the mission a success.  Yossarian receives his medal in the nude.  Scenes like this harken to the insanity of the Vietnam War, even though the movie is set in WWII and the squadron is based on an island in the Mediterranean.

                “Catch-22” deserved better than it got when it was released.  It has become something of a cult classic since then.  People now appreciate the game effort to bring an unfilmable book to the screen.  Henry did a good job adapting it and Heller commended the script.  Henry was faithful to the dialogue of the book and some of his own lines had Heller wishing he had thought of them.  Henry eliminated many characters and switched some of their dialogue and experiences with other characters.  Most of these changes and omissions were wise cinematically.  The ensemble cast does a fine job and the casting was spot on, with the coup being Orson Welles.  All of the main characters are familiar and appealing comedic actors.  Arkin is fine as Yosserian, but Voight shines as Milo.  The nature of the absurdity does require the actors to lay it on a bit thick at times, especially in a silly scene involving Dreedle’s WAC.

 

                Nichols brings some flair that is missing in “M*A*S*H”.  The cinematography is noteworthy with special mention going to the take-off of the bombers (followed by an awesome crash that does not cause the scheming Mindbinder and Cathcart to even flinch) and the pyrotechnical fireworks of the bombing of the base.  Cinematographer David Watkin uses a stationary camera and avoids the hyper-cutting of modern war movies.  The aerial scenes are quality over quantity and the interiors are authentic-looking. The editor did some nifty transitioning between scenes.

                  “Catch-22” is not for everyone and it is easy to see why it did not do well in 1970.  It is not a typical war comedy.  You have to bring some intellect to the table and be in the mood for satire tinged with absurdity.  It has some shock value.  Shocking for a 1970 big budget picture, there is full frontal nudity provided by Paula Prentiss - of all people!  To be fair, we also get Arkin’s ass.  You get to see Martin Balsam sitting on a toilet.  The big reveal about Snowden’s cause of death packs a punch.

THE BOOK – Spoiler alert!

                The novel is much more complicated than the movie.  Heller uses a nonlinear structure.  Although Yossarian is the main character, different characters get their own chapters.  The movie certainly is a good alternative for reluctant readers as Heller has a challenging style that requires focus on every sentence.  It is not a book you can peruse.  Some of his sentences contradict themselves purposefully, for instance.

                Henry decided to construct his screenplay in a linear format, with the exception of flash backs to handle the Snowden incident.  The scenes he chose to depict are faithful to the book and borrow much of the dialogue.  Some characters have been eliminated.  For instance, it is a different doctor that gets Yossarian to masquerade as the dying son for his visiting parents.  In the book, the room is darker which is the rare scene where the movie is more absurd than the book.  Henry was forced to remove some back-story which can lead to some head-scratching.  The movie replicates the decapitation of Hungry Joe by McWatt (Kid Sampson in the book), but leaves the impression that Doc was on board the plane and is now dead and a ghost.  Novel readers know that Doc is only officially dead because he was having his name put on flight manifests to fulfill a requirement.  Henry makes more significant changes in the last part of the film.  Dobbs wants to kill Cathcart and enlists Yossarian’s aid, but they do not carry out their plan. The bombing of the base is the same, but there is no shooting.   Nately and Dobbs are killed when their bombers collide.  The movie surprisingly does not support the tenet that the missions are dangerous and deadly.  On the other hand, Henry does a good job developing Milo into a fascist/capitalist hybrid.  He added the scene where Yossarian visits the brothel run by M&M Enterprises trying to find Nately’s whore.  This allows Henry to add the best line in the movie. 

            Milo:  Nately died a wealthy man, Yossarian. He had over sixty shares in the syndicate.

                Yossarian: What difference does that make? He's dead.

                Milo: Then his family will get it.

                Yossarian: He didn't have time to have a family.

                Milo: Then his parents will get it.

                Yossarian: They don't need it, they're rich.

                Milo: Then they'll understand.

The biggest change Henry made was with the ending. In the book, when the Chaplain informs Yossarian about Orr’s escape to Sweden, Yossarian plans to go to Rome to get Nately’s whore’s sister.  As he leaves the hospital, Nately’s whore tries to stab him and misses.  The end.  It is safe to say that Henry’s decision to have Yossarian row to Sweden in a raft was brilliant.

CONCLUSION:  There is something to be said for both the book and the movie.  The book is challenging reading, but the satire is brilliant.  Heller wrote one of the great anti-war novels and it is the rare one that is humorous.  It is not for everyone, however.  It is too long and tends to hammer its themes.  The characters are not likeable, including Yossarian.  The movie smooths the book’s edges.  It keeps the foundation, so it is a good option if you do not want to read the novel.  Seeing a crack acting ensemble personify the characters in the book is a kick.  And the movie has the B-25s.  It also has some memorable scenes and leaves you with the image of a man rowing in a raft to Sweden.  Nichols and Henry deserve more credit than they got.

BOOK  =  B

MOVIE  =  B