After reading the book Catch-22 by Joseph Heller and watching the movie by Nichols, it seems as though they had similar goals but Heller was way more effective. This goal that they both shared was to make fun of bureaucracy in the military and ridiculous war is. Heller achieved this goal and it was clear, his position on war and the bureaucracy involved. Heller’s position was that military is filled with bureaucracy and too many loop holes that aren’t needed and finds the whole system that is set up stupid. Also, throughout the story Heller clearly displays his unhappiness with war. Nichols did a poor job in expressing this ideas of Heller and did not capitalize on the whole point of the story. Although, it is hard to fit a book into a two hour movie, Nichols left out many…show more content… The movie by Nichols didn’t show every situation that Heller used. An example of how Nichols shorten the book and loss some of the meaning to the story happened in the beginning. Joseph Heller started the book with Yossarian in the hospital faking being sick, the movie doesn’t show this scene. This was an important scene because Yossarian was able to escape work by faking that he jaundice. In the book that part was an example of how soldiers were able to take advantage of the system and showed Heller’s disapproval of the military and the system that is put in place. This was an important scene that was left out. This is an example of how Nichols has removed some of the satire that Heller used to show the ridiculousness of bureaucracy during that part of the story. A big part of the story that was left out in the movie was part about Washington Irving. In the story Yossarian used the alias Washington Irving when censoring letters and kept changing his identity, he later changed it to Irving Washington. This part wasn’t in the movie and it was another key part that Heller used to show how