Latest
SMS Appointment RemindersDarrell Stern: Stop Being Invisible, Become UnmissableFree BooksJoe Rockey: Ghostwriting His BookHow to Turn Your Expertise Into a Book People Want to Read | The Expert MethodWhat’s New at The Writing King: Week of October 25, 2026Challenger Remembrance Day: The Engineer Who Wouldn’t SignJoel Salomon: The Truth About MoneyReddit Is Putting Up a Login Wall. Wikipedia Won’t Be Far Behind.Victoria Chemko: The Body Is the First TechnologySir Patrick Stewart: A TributeA Year in the Bank: ADHD, Face Blindness and the Freedom to Walk Out | The Impossible Puzzles Show, Episode 326A Yale Economist Says We Won’t Be Missed. He Forgot the Bread Line.Walter Koenig: A TributeAI Has Paid Off Outside Tech. Apollo Is Reading the Wrong Scoreboard.I Don’t Post Bad ARC Reviews. I Send the Author a Note.The Little Red Book of Stuff That Works!Your Kids Are Your Own FaultGrow a PairYou’re Broke Because You Want to BeIt’s Called Work for a Reason!No Time for TactShut Up, Stop Whining, and Get a LifeWilliam Bessette: AI Enablement and Child Welfare TechnologyFree Book Planning ToolsWhat’s New at The Writing King: Week of October 18, 2026Ghostwriting by the Numbers: Timelines, Word Counts and the First CallPromising Young Woman (2020) ReviewBillions for AI, Pennies for the Plumbing: AI Companies Should Pay to Keep PHP AlivePHP2Shell: AI Found a 22-Year-Old Crack Under Your Website in Two DaysPetrov Day: The Officer Who Didn’t Believe the ComputerKindle Unlimited Is Now Kindle+. AI Audiobooks Just Joined the BuffetMo Gawdat Says the AI Dystopia Starts in 2027. Read the List, Skip the DatesChina Is Using Bots to Fan the Data Center Backlash. The Backlash Is Still Real.The Society of Authors Signed an Ethical AI Charter, Then Ran From It in Eight DaysWhen to Quit Writing a Book: I’ve Abandoned Dozens, and I’d Do It AgainGetty Images Filed for Bankruptcy. Can You Prove You Licensed Your Book’s Images?Fluff Words: Cut Them From Your Prose, Keep Them in Your DialogueWhere Can Writers Learn Storytelling From Movies? Richard Lowe Publishes 1,226 Film and TV Reviews With Writing Craft NotesWhere Are the Independent Bookstores and Public Libraries Worth Visiting in Tampa Bay? Author Richard Lowe Profiles 44 of ThemWhat Should You Know Before Hiring a Ghostwriter? The Writing King Publishes 57 New Answers, Including What to Do When It Goes WrongWhere Can You Hear Founders and Executives Tell Their Own Stories? Richard Lowe’s Leaders and Their Stories Publishes Every Unscripted Interview With a Full TranscriptAuthor Richard Lowe Publishes Eight Volumes of Enemies of You, a Researched Series on the Forces Working Against Ordinary AmericansThe Jackal (1997) ReviewThe Day of the Jackal (2024) ReviewYour First Novel Is an Apprentice Piece: What Beta Readers and Editors Can’t FixWhen the Cloud Gets Bombed: What the AWS Data Center Strikes Teach About BackupsHuman-Written Book Labels Are Gatekeeping With a FeeThe Enshittification of Microsoft Office: Why I Switched to a Free CloneGlobal Encryption Day: The Padlock Every Writer Depends On

Catch-22 (1970)

TL;DR: Catch-22 (1970) rates 7 out of 10 on the rewatch scale. Mike Nichols’ 1970 Heller adaptation. Alan Arkin as Yossarian.
Catch-22 (1970)
7 / 10

Official trailer

Catch-22 is Mike Nichols’s 1970 American black comedy adapting Joseph Heller’s 1961 novel.

The film depicts US Air Force bombardier Captain John Yossarian attempting to escape combat duty in the Mediterranean theater of World War II by being declared insane. He learns that any pilot who applies for psychiatric exemption from combat is by that act showing his sanity, since a sane person would want to escape combat. The catch-22 of the title is the regulation that traps him. Alan Arkin plays Yossarian. Martin Balsam plays Colonel Cathcart.

Richard Benjamin plays Major Danby. Art Garfunkel plays Captain Nately. Bob Newhart plays Major Major Major Major. Anthony Perkins plays Chaplain Tappman. Paula Prentiss plays Nurse Duckett. Martin Sheen plays Lieutenant Dobbs. Jon Voight plays Lieutenant Milo Minderbinder. Orson Welles plays General Dreedle. Buck Henry wrote the screenplay. Paramount Pictures produced the film on a budget of approximately 18 million dollars, and it grossed approximately 24 million dollars on initial release.

There’s more to enjoy here than the film’s reputation suggests, and I enjoy a lot of it. Arkin is terrific, the cast is stacked from top to bottom, and there are stretches where Heller’s madness comes through perfectly. What keeps pulling me out is the sense that Nichols never figured out how to make the book’s structure work on screen and kept trying anyway.

The film is Mike Nichols’s most ambitious project and the principal screen adaptation of one of the classic American novels of the twentieth century.

The Heller source unfolds through deliberate non-linear chronology, recurring scenes that gradually reveal more information, and extensive black humor about military absurdity. The novel’s structural innovations have made it notoriously difficult to film. The 1970 adaptation handles some of the source successfully and fails at other elements. Released the same year as M*A*S*H, Catch-22 lost commercial competition and critical reception comparison.

M*A*S*H is the antiwar film of 1970. Catch-22 is the disappointment. The Heller source remains canonical. The film remains the principal screen attempt that future productions will be measured against.

The Source Problem

Joseph Heller’s novel runs over four hundred pages and uses non-linear chronology that gradually reveals what happened to airman Snowden.

Each scene gets revisited multiple times with additional detail until the reader finally understands the full event. This gives the novel cumulative power that linear chronology couldn’t achieve. The structural innovation matters for the novel’s effect.

Film adaptation requires linear time. The medium doesn’t support the novel’s gradual revelation technique without becoming actively confusing. Buck Henry’s screenplay attempts to preserve some non-linear elements while ordering the major events more conventionally. The compromise produces neither the source’s structural power nor the satisfaction of a clean linear adaptation. The film captures the Heller voice and atmosphere without delivering the novel’s structural argument. The result is partial adaptation that succeeds within its limits and fails the source’s most ambitious element.

This is my main frustration with the picture. The Snowden revelation is the emotional payoff of the whole novel, and the halfway chronology here blunts it. I’d have gone all the way in one direction, fully linear or fully fractured, and trusted the audience to follow.

For Writers

Some source material can’t be fully adapted to a different medium. If you’re adapting your own work, figure out what the source achieves through structure instead of content, and ask whether the new medium can carry that structure.

Arkin as Yossarian

Alan Arkin plays Yossarian with the desperate weariness of a man who has flown too many missions and seen too many friends die. The performance sustains the film. Arkin avoids overplaying the despair into mannerism. He gives Yossarian the practical determination of someone whose remaining goal is survival instead of any larger philosophical position about war.

Arkin is the reason I’d give it a 7 at all. He looks exhausted in every frame, and I believe his panic completely. When he’s on screen the film makes sense.

The role had been considered for several actors before Arkin was cast.

Heller himself initially questioned the casting because Arkin was Jewish and Yossarian’s specific Armenian-American background carried meaning in the novel. Arkin overcame the initial reservations through committed performance that captured what Heller cared about in the character. Source author concerns about casting can be overcome through particular work that addresses the actual character instead of the author’s preconceptions.

For Writers

Source author concerns about casting may not survive contact with the actual performance. Similar logic applies to adaptation. The actor who appears wrong for the role may prove capable of becoming the role through committed work.

Milo Minderbinder

Jon Voight plays Milo Minderbinder as a mess officer who builds a private trading syndicate that eventually involves contracting with the Germans to bomb his own air base. The character represents the source novel’s argument that capitalism continues to work during war and that profit motive will eventually align Americans with their nominal enemies if the financial terms are favorable enough. Voight plays Milo with the cheerful entrepreneurial energy of an American businessman who sees no contradiction between commerce and warfare.

Voight’s Milo is my favorite thing in the film. That cheerful salesman energy while he’s arranging to have his own base bombed is the novel’s satire landing at full strength, and it’s funnier and nastier than anything else Nichols manages.

The character has acquired particular cultural reference standing through later decades.

The Milo Minderbinder name appears in discussions of American defense contracting, international trade with adversarial states, and other circumstances where commerce overrides national interest. The film’s depiction of Milo’s syndicate negotiating with Germans to bomb the American base has become shorthand for institutional corruption that prioritizes profit over patriotism. The character remains a reference point for later American military-industrial commentary.

For Writers

Specific character names can enter cultural vocabulary through successful portrayal of recognizable types. The same applies to fiction. Characters whose names become reference points are types that later decades continue to recognize.

Craft Note

Mike Nichols had directed Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) and The Graduate (1967) before Catch-22. The director was thirty-eight and at peak commercial standing during production. Catch-22 was the largest budget Nichols had managed. The film’s commercial disappointment relative to expectations affected his later career trajectory. Nichols recovered through Carnal Knowledge (1971) and continued working for decades. The Catch-22 production represented overreach during a period when conventional studio direction was failing to handle major source material adaptations.

Does Catch-22 still hold up?

A 7 from me. Arkin holds it together, Voight’s Milo is as sharp as the book, and the cast is loaded with people worth watching. What costs it the higher number is the structure. Nichols and Buck Henry couldn’t translate Heller’s looping chronology, and the compromise leaves the film without the cumulative punch that makes the novel devastating. Watch it if you love Heller, or if you want to see how far ambition can take a film before it runs out.

Frequently Asked Questions

Should I read Catch-22 before watching the movie?
The novel is one of the definitive American novels of the twentieth century. Either order works. Reading the novel provides essential context for what the film attempts and where it falls short.
How does Catch-22 (1970) compare to M*A*S*H?
Both films released in 1970. M*A*S*H succeeded commercially and critically. Catch-22 disappointed. The comparison favors M*A*S*H but doesn’t invalidate what Catch-22 achieved.
Is the Hulu Catch-22 series better than the 1970 film?
George Clooney produced a 2019 Hulu six-episode series adaptation. The series format allowed more of the source structure than the film accommodates. Both adaptations justify engagement.
How long is Catch-22 (1970)?
The film runs approximately two hours one minute. The runtime accommodates the ensemble cast but can’t deliver the novel’s accumulating structural argument.
What is the cultural impact of Catch-22?
Moderate sustained impact relative to the source novel’s standing. The film failed to match the novel’s cultural penetration but introduced the script to wide audiences.
Is Catch-22 (1970) appropriate for teenagers?
The film contains serious wartime violence, sexual content, and adult themes. Older teenagers can engage the material with discretion.

Sources

About the Author
Richard Lowe, professional ghostwriter

Richard Lowe is a professional ghostwriter and author with 113+ books authored and 54+ ghostwritten. Before writing full time he spent 33 years in enterprise technology, including 20 years as Director of Computer Operations and Technical Services at Trader Joe's. He writes nonfiction, fiction and memoir, and works with executives and experts on books that build authority.

More about Richard Lowe →

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of Richard Lowe and are based on personal experience and research. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional legal, financial, accounting, or business advice. Always consult with qualified professionals before making important business or legal decisions. Richard Lowe is not a lawyer, accountant, or licensed professional advisor, and this content does not establish any professional relationship.