Hulu's Catch-22 works better than it should, but it never finds a way to live on its own

Variety

George Clooney's involvement in the Hulu miniseries based on Joseph Heller's classic novel "signals the star’s ambition, and his pragmatism," says Daniel D'Addario. "The archetypal movie star executive produced the series, appears in it, and directed two episodes, and he has come to TV for a reason: It’s a way to surmount a tricky piece of the American literary canon, but to do so with the benefit of six hours and streaming-service money. If only TV could make Catch-22 perhaps only TV would be foolhardy enough to try. The new series works better than it should. It elides some of the worst of the novel’s degradation of women, streamlines as best it can the most verbose of the vignettes and builds out Yossarian — played by Christopher Abbott in a performance that announces the leading-man arrival of a long-simmering talent — into a character whose angst we feel. Yet the series, in thrall to and in the shadow of one of the most sharply written novels of its era, never finds a way to live on its own. What works, here, works well," including Abbott's performance. D'Addario adds: "If Catch-22 is unfilmable, it’s because those who are in a position to remake it are well-established enough not to understand the spirit of unpleasant, desperate mania that propels the novel relentlessly deeper into violence. Hulu’s Catch-22 is elegantly, carefully made. This is, perhaps, its greatest departure from Heller’s novel, and the reason why it feels quite so at war with itself."

ALSO:

• Catch-22 ends up being something to admire rather than enjoy with any depth of feeling: "Too often the funny moments evoke an appreciative nod — 'Hm, that’s funny' — rather than actual laughter. Too often what unfolds onscreen is beautiful to the point of chilly; TV as very expensive diorama."
• Where Mike Nichols’ Catch-22 went for a sketch-comedy approach, the Hulu version conveys the humanity under the veneer of savage absurdity and gives each episode a distinct shape
• Christopher Abbott is a more likable, conniving, morally challenged, philosophical Yossarian than Alan Arkin was in Nichols' 1970 movie
• Catch-22 has moments that make for an entrancing experience, but it's not quite wild enough to join TV's elite satires
• Catch-22 is exceedingly well done and urgent in a time when government gobbledygook has trumped all previous notions of unbelievability
• George Clooney’s adaptation is immediately impressive with a cohesive, arid palette and shots ranging wildly in scope from resonant closeup to sweeping landscape
• Why Catch-22 might appeal to teenage girls