Films/DVD Asylum

• No. Catch-22 is the second best book I ever read... - Hepcat 13:35:47 04/24/04 (0)
  In Reply to: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? posted by dennzio on April 23, 2004 at 06:21:03:

  ...but the movie fell way short in my opinion. The way the novel jumped back and forth in time made it almost impossible for a standard film to be made from it. (Joseph Heller once said he could visualize them sitting around down in Mexico with those restored B-25 bombers standing by and thumbing through a dog-eared copy of Catch-22 and wondering what scene to do next).
  
  

  ---
• Arkin was superb. No one can do "neurotic" any better . . . - albee33 18:04:25 04/23/04 (3)
  In Reply to: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? posted by dennzio on April 23, 2004 at 06:21:03:

  I feel that 22 holds up better over time than the slapstick of MASH. I even appreciated Garfunkle and Grodin performances. 22 gave us a "light" taste of the insanity of war before Apocalypse Now came in with pummeling us with both fists.
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Arkin was superb. No one can do "neurotic" any better . . . - dennzio 19:35:02 04/23/04 (2)
    In Reply to: Arkin was superb. No one can do "neurotic" any better . . . posted by albee33 on April 23, 2004 at 18:04:25:

    The conversation between Garfunkel and the old man in the brothel was priceless.
    
    

    ---

    • Arkin is also a hoot in Freebie and the Bean (same era) (nt) - grinagog 21:44:12 04/23/04 (1)
      In Reply to: Re: Arkin was superb. No one can do "neurotic" any better . . . posted by dennzio on April 23, 2004 at 19:35:02:

      Grins
      
      

      ---

      • I liked that one.But it hasn't held up as well (nt) - late 05:53:11 04/24/04 (0)
        In Reply to: Arkin is also a hoot in Freebie and the Bean (same era) (nt) posted by grinagog on April 23, 2004 at 21:44:12:

        /
        
        

        ---
• Re: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? - rico 06:59:35 04/23/04 (5)
  In Reply to: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? posted by dennzio on April 23, 2004 at 06:21:03:

  It's too bad this magnificent film was released within a month of Altman's "Mash", too bad because everyone was expecting another dose of "Mash" which is of course why the film tanked insofar as box office is concerned. There's a "Zarathustra" tribute to Kubrick in there from director Mike Nichols.
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? - Buckeye 10:30:45 04/23/04 (4)
    In Reply to: Re: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? posted by rico on April 23, 2004 at 06:59:35:

    
    Yup, watch it also.

    C-22 for me is a film of "great moments"...the Major Major stuff was pretty funny, but the real laughs come with the visit of General Dreddle (Orson Welles, who really worked it) and his hot secretary...the look on Richie Benjamin's face when he is ordered "shot" is priceless.

    A great cast and a great director, working from a classic book...should have been better, imo, but not an easy novel to film. Still, fun to watch for those great moments...but it's no MASH, imo.

    Regards,

    Gary
    
    

    ---

    • Re: Part of the problem - rico 11:54:07 04/23/04 (3)
      In Reply to: Re: Anybody catch "Catch 22" on AMC? posted by Buckeye on April 23, 2004 at 10:30:45:

      is that's it's a fifties book about a forties war and the film reflects sixties values.
      
      

      ---

      • Not quite - late 15:03:30 04/23/04 (0)
        In Reply to: Re: Part of the problem posted by rico on April 23, 2004 at 11:54:07:

        While it was published in 55, it was pretty much ignored until '62. I feel it was waiting for the audience, rather than the other way round.
        Having lived through the depressingly literal 50's, I feel Heller's book is very much part of the Sixties. Liked the movie, too.
        
        

        ---
      • Re: Good point... - Buckeye 12:09:06 04/23/04 (1)
        In Reply to: Re: Part of the problem posted by rico on April 23, 2004 at 11:54:07:

        
        ...and well said, but MASH wasn't as good a novel (imo), and Altman made it special; Mike Nichols dropped the ball on this one, imo, for one of the only times in his carrer.

        Do you know what year MASH was written? fifties?

        have a good w/e,

        Gary
        
        

        ---

        • Re: The book "Mash" - rico 13:56:25 04/23/04 (0)
          In Reply to: Re: Good point... posted by Buckeye on April 23, 2004 at 12:09:06:

          was published in 1968. Altman's film came out in 1970. There were two novel sequels.
          
          

          ---

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Schiit Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---