MovieChat Forums > Catch-22 (1970) Discussion > Bad Potrayal of Yossarian

Bad Potrayal of Yossarian

posted 15 years ago by Syava
17 replies | jump to latest

After reading the novel several years ago(my favorite novel by the way) I finally got around to seeing the movie. It was decent, but I'm really unhappy with how they decided to portray Yossarian's character. I know his character desperately wants to get out of combat duty, but in the movie he is shown as much more of a coward than he is in the book. The scene where he has no parachute and is yelling is really bad.

He also yells and talks way to fast. In the book I pictures him as someone who spoke slowly and calmly. He says very strange/bizarre things, but they lose their effect when he is yelling it. This is especially apparent at the scene in the beginning when he is talking to Clevinger at the officers club. In the book the dialogue was humorous and made you think "this Yossarian guy is a nutter". In the film; however, he yells all the lines as if he is trying to appear witty and wants attention.

All in all, I don't like how his character was handled.

formerly the IMDB user obviouslyfake

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LeddyBs 14 years ago

I know his character desperately wants to get out of combat duty, but in the movie he is shown as much more of a coward than he is in the book.

I think you're assuming that just because Yossarian is the protagonist, he's a hero. There's nothing heroic about the guy. He just happens to have a modicum of sanity in a world of insanity.

The only time he shows the slightest bit of gumption in the novel is when he's trying to find Nately's whore's sister.

'This is one of the nicest...No, THE nicest army/navy surplus store I've ever seen'

[–] Bry-2 14 years ago

I can't think of anyone better for this role, in 1969/70, than Alan Arkin. I don't know who Heller had in mind when he wrote the novel (if anyone) -- which would have been ten-plus years before, but it would be interesting to know that.

--If they move, kill 'em!

[–] biggles1111 14 years ago

I for one think that Arkin did his part beautifully. He looks pretty much as I'd imagine Yossarian would look like, and to me, he nailed his personality on the spot!

[–] shepardjessica-1 14 years ago

Arkin was great and should have been nominated for Oscar.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] IamTVI 13 years ago

I read the novel prior to seeing the film and I was shocked by how closely Arkin's take on Yossarian resembled the way I envisioned him while reading the book. He looked much the way I imagined the character while reading it, and he behaved similarly as well. It's a great performance

This^^^

All men are jerks, all women are psychotic

[–] SteveResin 12 years ago

Arkin was perfect, cannot imagine anyone else in that role now.

--------------------
Duty Now For The Future

[–] Conquerer13 13 years ago

I agree with the OP since Arkin's performance was not at all how I imagined Yossarian. I don't think Heller saw him that way either by the way the character was written. He just seemed more to himself in the book and a darker, lonelier type of character (with more serious/dark humour).

[–] logicalskeptic 13 years ago

Pavlyuchenko, I agree with you about the humorous conversation Yossarian has in the book with Clevinger, BUT, the one you describe from the movie never took place. Clevinger (among many others) wasn't in the film. Perhaps you're thinking of the Martin Sheen character, Dobbs. Not sure of this , but, definitely not Clevinger.

You depict Yossarian as a coward based upon his (most appropriate) reaction to finding himself in a B-25 without a parachute under heavy ground and air fire from the Germans and all because it has been expropriated by the moronic and ultra-capitalist Minderbinder to help finance the Syndicate? How interesting!

Only two things are actually knowable:
It is now and you are here. All else is merely a belief.

[–] jonchopwood 13 years ago

Listen to Mike Nichols' commentary on the DVD. Alan Arkin (who claimed he totally identified with Yossarian and it was the only character he played that he "fit" right in with) played the role to distance himself from the audience whereas Dustin Hoffman would have played the role to ingratiated himself. Since Nichols had total control after the huge successes of VIRGINIA WOOLF and THE GRADUATE (the latter being one of the top 10 grossing films all time on its release and remained so for a decade), it was his choice to -- to distance the audience from his anti-hero -- by choosing Arkin, who was coming off of two Best Actor Oscar nominations.

-----------------------------------------------
"Why do people always laugh in the wrong places?"
--Lieutenant General Scheisskopf

[–] k00ldude 13 years ago

I didn't like Yossarian at the beginning of the movie. He was too slap-sticky, and reminded me of a whiny Homer Simpson.

Then the scene where he got the medal happened and then he changed and was more like the Yossarian I thought of in the book. I imagined Yossarian as more of a smart-ass who wasn't cowardly as he was standing up for what he wanted. He was desperate, and was the only sane one in an insane world.

-----------
Beatles Song of the Day - http://twitter.com/BeatlesSotD

[–] Prismark10 12 years ago

Arkin was good but just was maybe a bit off target in his portrayal.

Its that man again!!

[–] chitowndale 12 years ago

A lot of his yelling seemed to be because of the background noise. In an B-25 bomber it isn't like in a 727, 737, etc. It is loud and you have to shout to be heard, particularly since the radios and microphones of that time were terrible.
A lot of other scenes were on the air field while planes were revving up, taking off or landing or in town with a lot of people talking at the same time. Virtually nobody in the film talked. Almost everyone shouted.
It reminded me of Al Pacino who almost never did a role where he spoke like a normal person. He shouted almost every scene he ever did. At least Yossarian spoke some scenes without shouting which puts him one up on Al Pacino in most of his movies!

[–] DD-931 10 years ago

Arkin was brilliant in the role, but then he's a brilliant actor in virtually everything he does.

It's not that surprising that some people will read a novel and subtly project their own perceptions onto the role of the protagonist. I've done it myself, and been disappointed by the film version of the novel when the actor chosen didn't fit my own "read" on the character. Best to simply accept the film on it's own terms, since it can never hope to satisfy everyone's mental image of how the novel would work as a motion picture when they read it. I am, however, curious as to what the OP's choice of an actor to play Yossarian would have been.

It would also be interesting as to who would be the best choice to play the character if the film were made today. My choice would be Paul Rudd.

[–] WinonaIsLovely 10 years ago

I saw "Catch 22" when it came out in theaters way back in 1970. ----- Then I started reading the book, which I've read so many times over the years. ----- So just now I put my DVD copy in my DVD player, after I've read all of your messages. ----- To me the movie and book are the best anti-war things ever done. Alan Arkin was fantastic in the movie.😎 ----- Rusty

[–] Squeeth2 10 years ago

Considering the difficulties, I thought Catch-22 was very good and like you, I thought Arkin was marvellous (hence me casting either him or James Mason to play me in "Squeeth 2 - the Movie" ;-)). I thought the makers of Apocalypse Now had the scene where the B-25s take off in mind, when Kilgore's helicopters set off to go surfing.

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.