En el contexto de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, un soldado intenta que le den por loco para poder dejar de volar misiones.En el contexto de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, un soldado intenta que le den por loco para poder dejar de volar misiones.En el contexto de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, un soldado intenta que le den por loco para poder dejar de volar misiones.
- Nominado a 2 premios BAFTA
- 6 nominaciones en total
- Nately
- (as Arthur Garfunkel)
Argumento
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesSecond unit director John Jordan refused to wear a harness during a bomber scene. While giving a hand signal to another airplane from the tail gunner position in the camera plane, he lost his grip and fell 4,000 feet to his death.
- PifiasWhen Major Major begins talking to Sgt Towser in his office about when others can see him, a portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt can be seen hanging on the wall behind his desk. Major Major then walks away from, then back to his desk twice more, and each time the portrait is seen, it has changed - from FDR to Winston Churchill to Joseph Stalin. This was an inside joke, done intentionally by the filmmakers to further emphasize the dream like state of the film.
- Citas
Old man in whorehouse: You see, Italy is a very poor, weak country and that is what makes us so strong, strong enough to survive this war and still be in existence, long after your country has been destroyed.
Capt. Nately: What are you talking about? America is not going to be destroyed.
Old man in whorehouse: Never?
Capt. Nately: Well...
Old man in whorehouse: Rome was destroyed. Greece was destroyed. Persia was destroyed. Spain was destroyed. All great countries are destroyed. Why not yours? How much longer do you think your country will last? Forever?
Capt. Nately: Well, forever is a long time.
Old man in whorehouse: Very long.
- ConexionesFeatured in Film Extra: Richard Benjamin (1973)
- Banda sonoraThe Stars and Stripes Forever
(uncredited)
Written by John Philip Sousa
(played by military band in the final scene)
However, upon viewing the film, I was quite impressed and happy with it. I'm not an unrealistic person, so I understand that they had to cut out scenes and characters and subplots to condense it for the film. Overall, of course, it lost some of its greatest moments which are in the ironic humor of the narrative style of the book. But it was not a bad film at all. In fact, I thought it was one of the best adaptations I have seen. I think almost everything you see on screen happens in the book.
Apart from that, it was extremely well casted. The characters were just as I have envisioned them in my head while reading the novel (except that Major Major shrank about a foot... but that's not matter, because Bob Newhart was great anyway). The cinematography was beautiful, the acting was awesome (Alan Arkin was perfect), and the flashbacks to Snowden were done stylishly and surrealistically.
Basically, it's a good movie. But it's an even better movie if you've read the book, and you know exactly what is going on in some of the characters' heads and what is going on outside of the scenes we see in the film. Overall, I think this is the best anyone could have done with this adaptation, and I applaud the filmmakers for that.
- solojones
- 18 ene 2003
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
- How long is Catch-22?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idiomas
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Trampa-22
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 18.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Duración2 horas 2 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1