Dog Day Afternoon (1975) User Reviews

A 70's classic.

[pedroborges-90881 · 9/10 · 24 April 2016]

In his second and last collaboration with Sidney Lumet, Al Pacino give a amazing performance as a bank robber who don't planned his assault very well, actually do not want to harm anyone and reveal himself as a bisexual.

John Cazale also give a very good performance in one of his last films as a accomplice of Al Pacino character. The film transmits extremely well all the anguish, fear and fatigue of all the characters from the main until the supporting, especially in the parts that are fun. Charles Durning also gives a brilliant performance as the man who tries to bring balance to keep the negotiations between the police and the robbers.

One of the best performances of Al Pacino and one of the best Sidney Lumet films, Dog Day Afternoon is one of the best films from the 70's.

Pacino's legend.

[ChiBron · 9/10 · 21 February 2005]

A brilliant movie, and a mesmerizing Al Pacino. If u thought he was spectacular in GF I, II, and Scarface....then just watch him in Dog Day Afternoon. Quite simply one of the greatest performances in movie history. Definitely my favorite. The depth with which he plays Sonny is such a treat to watch that I lost count of how many times he left me in AWE. There's this indescribable nervous energy to his performance that there's no way he'll leave u NOT feeling sorry for Sonny.

Sadly, for some reason this movie is kinda forgotten when discussing Al's greatest movies/performances. That's because not many people have watched it. So please, if u consider yourself a movie fan, then go rent DDA and watch a fine movie with the legendary Al Pacino performing his art at the absolute peak of his career.

Empathic masterpiece

[apparentlyblue · 8/10 · 19 January 2005]

This high-tension thriller captures the true events of one summer afternoon when accomplices Sonny (Pacino) and Sal (Calzale) walk into a Brooklyn bank, and rob it.

Of course not all goes to plan. An hour later they're still inside and the bank is surrounded. Cops, media, crowds of fans and the FBI are each hanging to Sonny's every word – and why? Because he has 9 hostages as pawns, a bank as his board and all the time in the world to think up a strategy. Inside the bank however is a different story. You can't help but sympathise with Sonny (due to Pacino's terrific performance) as the first-time bank robber who's unprepared, out of his depth, and just trying to think up a way out. Even the audience begin to feel the effects of Stockholm Syndrome as Pacino's character gains our affections. The 'villain who's a nice guy at heart' could have been disastrously cliché but Pacino's portrayal is nothing short of brilliance. Even Sal with his morbid disposition is magnetising as his childlike innocence shines through. Calzale was wonderfully cast as this awkward accomplice, wordlessly following Sonny. A huge success combining the skills of Lumet with the talent of Pacino for the second time in Pacino's best role yet. A true story that's compelling and tragic but most of all tangible – and that's what makes it so powerful.

My Ten Commandments of Dog Day Afternoon! ;-)

[Asa_Nisi_Masa2 · 10/10 · 26 May 2005]

I've watched this film for the third time in a few years last night. Instead of writing a straight review, I'd like to jot down ten thoughts just off the top of my head concerning this exquisite movie:

1) Watching this film will change forever your perception of the bank heist genre, making you question the contrived cinematic conventions these films usually make use of.

2) The source of this film's paradoxical and/or farcical elements spring from life itself, not from film or pre-existing cinematic conventions. Sometimes, the absurdities of life are so great, they dwarf those included in any form of fiction. Without even trying to make that point, this film captures that concept beautifully.

3) Its tone in relation to the homosexual theme is ahead of its time. In fact it's ahead of OUR time, even, in hardly making an issue out of it at all - it just IS.

4) It captures the climate of the 70s in a manner so sober, you'll remember its unshowy yet authentic feel forever.

5) Lumet's film brings to life the concept of the distorting lens of the media and how different groups with different agendas will turn an outlaw into a hero, with far more efficiency than Oliver Stone's brash, bloated, childish and repetitive Natural Born Killers.

6) Watching this film will illustrate to the younger generations exactly why Al Pacino has earned himself the legendary status he probably no longer would deserve with his performances of the last 10 years alone. **SPOILERS**: Just watch those last ten minutes of him handcuffed against the bonnet of a car, where he doesn't say a word, but speaks volumes with his eyes and his soul just oozing out of every frame at the end of the movie; you'll remember those eyes for as long as you live!

7) Watching this film, you'll realise that firing a gun-shot is a BIG DEAL in real life, and that other films make too much use of gun fire in a highly contrived way.

8) All that tension deriving from pointed guns unable to fire a shot OR move away… you realise Tarantino must've taken notes sometime along the way.

9) No genre is old or done too many times before if it's handled with this amount of freshness, inspiration and talent.

10) Watching Dog Day Afternoon for the third time has filled me with the same amount of wonder at the power of truly inspired but unobtrusive film-making as it did first time round.

great character study and a masterful actors' showcase

[kwongers · 10/10 · 18 May 2005]

Sidney Lumet's "Dog Day Afternoon" is one of the most highly enjoyable and wildly funny movies I've ever seen - smart, sharp, complex, witty (and often quotable) dialogue, and superbly acted. Al Pacino stars as Sonny, an optimistic loser who decides to hold up a bank with his friend Sal (played by the late, great John Cazale) to get money for his lover Leon's sex-change operation.

The film is only worked around a few sequences, and may seem overlong to some, but it works excellently because it is held together by the fantastic acting. Al Pacino is astounding as Sonny, and his work here even eclipses the excellent work he did as Michael Corleone in "The Godfather" (and that's saying something, because I adore that movie and his portrayal). Pacino has the facial tics and the energy and the wide-eyed optimism down pat, and his performance is extremely engaging and entertaining. Take, for example, his scene where he rouses up the crowd against the police by chanting, "Attica! Attica! Put your f---ing guns down!" A lesser actor would have made it insipid, but Pacino makes it oddly poignant and hilarious at the same time. (And he was robbed of his Oscar for his role.) The late John Cazale is also superb as Sal, the dopey-eyed follower, the quiet laid-back calm to Pacino's maniacal energy. It's a less flashier role, but Cazale still brings on all the laughs, especially in his deadpan delivery of the line, "Sonny, they're saying there are two homosexuals in here...I'm not a homosexual."

Frank Pierson won an Oscar for his script for a reason - the dialogue is hilarious, sharp, and witty. Many of the lines in this movie are extremely quotable (and you can check some of them out under "memorable quotes"). This is intelligent writing, in the sense that you will laugh and be moved at the same time.

Great movie! It belongs in your VHS or DVD collection. 10/10

Al Pacino is brilliant

[rbverhoef · 9/10 · 13 June 2003]

'Dog Day Afternoon' tells the true story of Sonny (Al Pacino) and Sal (John Cazale). These two guys went into a bank in 1972 in Brooklyn to rob it. They could have been out in five minuted but things went terribly wrong. Instead of a robbery it became a hostage situation. And a media circus as well.

From the first second you will be totally in the movie. Afterwards I wanted to write my review and I was not able to remember how the music was, if there was any. It says something about how much the movie grabs you. The first part is very funny, I laughed a lot of times. The second part is more a drama and a thriller. Great director Sidney Lumet creates a certain atmosphere for the movie that is just right. Pacino in one of his best performances is surrounded by a great supporting cast. He was nominated for an Oscar but didn't win it. He lost it to a guy named Jack Nicholson in a movie called 'One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest'. The chances were probably fifty-fifty and the Oscar went to the better movie, I have to admit that. Still, one of the best performances I have ever seen. With any other actor this movie was a nice one, with him it is a great one.

Pacino and Lumet at their best!

[Hermit C-2 · 10/10 · 1 June 1999]

Al Pacino has portrayed some memorable characters in some classic movies like 'Serpico,' 'Scent of a Woman,' 'Donnie Brasco' and the three 'Godfather' Films. 'Dog Day Afternoon' and Sonny Wortzik belong high on that list.

As the movie opens, Sonny and his two-man gang are nervously waiting outside a Brooklyn bank which they intend to rob. Sonny has a plan all worked out, but after the robbery begins, it quickly unravels. Not the least dismaying development is that the bank is almost out of cash. Shortly after this revelation, police begin to arrive in numbers that would be able to lay siege to a small country (Wyoming, maybe?) This sets up a hostage situation that lasts the afternoon and late into the night.

One might think this setting might make things a little claustrophobic but director Sidney Lumet has handled this problem before; witness his film 'Twelve Angry Men.' The goings-on in the bank itself are fascinating as the moods and relationships of the hostages and their captors develop and change over the course of the long day. Out on the street the crime scene immediately turns into a circus with thousands of onlookers straining at police lines, news media doing everything they can to get close to the story, and a new busload of police arriving every few minutes.

Great performances are all over the place here. This is a tour-de-force for Pacino, even by his standards, as the bungling crook who has instantly become the biggest media star in the city. Sonny may have blown the first role, but he shines in the second. One of Pacino's "Godfather" brothers, John Cazale is excellent is the less-flashy role as Sonny's partner Sal, definitely not the brains of this operation. Events are soon beyond Sal's comprehension and his subtle performance is wonderful. Charles Durning is super as police lieutenant Moretti who works as hard as he can to keep the situation from spinning totally out of control. He's juggling desperate fugitives in the bank, a crowd growing crazier and crazier, aggressive newspeople, and some of his own cops who are ready to end this thing with a bang. When the FBI shows up, the agent in charge (James Broderick) doesn't even say hello to Moretti. He cooly assesses the situation and decides their plan of action, and from that moment on there is a grim air of fatalism hanging over Sonny and Sal.

There are more twists and turns we won't go into here. This is a great work by Pacino, Lumet, and most of the other actors in the film. I loved it.

Another Five-Star Film From the 70s.

[tfrizzell · 14 March 2002]

Outstanding character-study that is unique, interesting, highly-unconventional and definitely brilliant in every way. Two dim-witted bank robbers (Oscar-nominated Al Pacino and the late John Cazale) decide to rob a New York City bank on a summer day in the early-1970s. The robbery is to be cut-and-dry, but nothing goes as planned. Instead of getting away with a load of money, there is only a miniscule amount as the money was transported away earlier in the day. As Pacino tries to burn bank records, a small fire is noticed outside the bank and total chaos ensues. Now the bank is surrounded by the police and the FBI. Charles Durning and James Broderick are among the officials outside the bank as they attempt to negotiate with Pacino to get the bank's employees out safely. It is learned that Pacino is involved in a homosexual relationship with Chris Sarandon (Oscar-nominated) and that his main goal was to steal his share of the money to get Sarandon a sex-change operation. The nervous Cazale is more worried that the media will think he is homosexual than anything else. The film is dark in many ways, very light-hearted and funny in other ways, but always dramatic and tense. As the clock ticks, the realization occurs that this will not end well for the robbers. Sidney Lumet's Oscar-nominated direction is sharp throughout. Based on actual events, "Dog Day Afternoon" is another great winner from the 1970s, Hollywood's second Golden Age. 5 stars out of 5.

Engaging at first, but later runs out of steam

[mattymatt4ever · 6/10 · 22 April 2001]

What can I say about this movie? Pacino's performance was excellent, and he definitely deserved acclaim for his great work in this movie. I also liked Charles Durning, who did a fine job as the hostage negotiator. Sidney Lumet is a talented director, who specializes in intense dramas and is good at stirring up the atmosphere for moments of intrigue.

The film starts out very engaging, with a premise that locks you in. The opening scenes are handled really well. I like how we get to know the characters in the bank on an almost-intimate level. But the film stretches. It stretches itself a little too long, with scenes that could've been considered for the cutting room floor. The intensity just seems to dampen as the film passes the halfway mark. The intrigue is lost, and we're watching soapy interactions between Sonny and his gay lover, as well as his angry wife. The climactic scene is a little disappointing and could've been more exciting.

I wouldn't rate "Dog Day Afternoon" as one of Lumet's best--though it does contain one of Pacino's best performances. There are some memorable moments, but the film--as a whole--is less-than-memorable.

My score: 6 (out of 10)

D Day for Pacino

[MovieAddict2016 · 10/10 · 25 February 2004]

By the time Sidney Lumet's "Dog Day Afternoon" came around he had already learned to let Al Pacino loose. Forget the holdbacks of "Serpico"; here we get a glimpse into the real Al, the actor who would bring Tony Montana to life in the years to come and the same man who provided Michael Corleone with such heartfelt warmth that was lacking in some of his lesser characters.

There's essentially the Al Pacino as an actor and the Al Pacino as a character, and here he's the character, and it works splendidly. Al Pacino the actor comes into play when he is given a recycled script and a talentless director, which has been happening a lot lately, although fortunately his comparison, De Niro, has been lucky enough to generally avoid these blunders of older-age film-making.

This is based on a true story, like "Serpico," only it's better and more involving. It connects with the audience more than "Serpico" because it doesn't jump through the same old hoops; it goes for the long trek and comes off better than it would have had the team behind it been lazy. The clichés are gone and the originality creeps in early on. Watch Pacino indulge himself in character and let the plot sink in. It's more touching than it seems at first.

Pacino is Sonny Wortzik, a Brooklyn man who takes a bank hostage in order to pay for his "wife's" operation. The wife is actually Leon Shermer (Chris Sarandon who was Oscar-nominated for this, his first role in a mainstream film), Sonny's gay lover who doesn't have the money for a sex operation.

The bank robbery was going to be what one of classic cinema's greatest bad guys once described as a quick "in and out," but Sonny gets held up inside the bank and soon he's all over the news and police are standing outside the building with guns drawn. It's like Denzel's movie only better and more original. Oh, and true. This one actually happened and we can tell.

Sonny's partner in crime, Sal (John Cazale), is worried that he'll be treated as a homosexual by the media outside. His fretting is comic relief and one of the connections between the film and the audience. Charles Durning is the frustrated cop handling the situation. His performance is as subtly convincing as Cavale's.

Pacino's performance is exceedingly excellent, manic and energetic. He'd display this same talent in "Scarface" again eight years later; only he would be bashed by the critics for going over-the-top. (Although they really just had problems with the excessive profanity and violence, just like Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" will soon become a well-known classic and people will laugh when they hear that someone once called it the most violent film ever made.)

There's also one of the best scenes of all time in this movie that rivals Montana's Last Stand in "Scarface" or the Baptism Scene in "The Godfather," which involves Sonny speaking on the phone to his "wife," carefully concealing his motive from any listeners nearby. Watch Pacino delve into character here and you're immediately hooked. We like his character because he seems real and Pacino makes him real, and that's why this will go down as one of the best tour de force performances of all time.

Is this Hollywood trying to ease our culture onto homosexuality and sex change operations? Is Hollywood trying to gradually introduce us to gay characters in the hope that the uptight American families will be increasingly invaded by the images of gay men? No. This is Hollywood showing us a true story, regardless of the homosexuality. Pacino could be playing a frustrated postal worker and it would still work because it all settles down to the fact that the suspense and dramatics of the movie affect us, not the background of its characters.

Sarandon's Oscar nomination was more than worthy; here he displays the smarmy talent that would shine through in his characters in the years to come. Prince Humperdink from "The Princess Bride" is equally memorable but less realistic. Here he seems more real, which is good for this film and would have been quite bad for "Bride." We don't like real characters in fantasy tales, do we?

Lumet, who ruined "Serpico" with his bad editing, out-of-place music, clichéd dialogue/events and unnecessary scenes, directs "Dog Day Afternoon" with style and flair and good pacing and a surprisingly heartfelt sense of emotion and care. This isn't exactly a good example of a perfect motion picture but it's pretty close.

Intense but Overlong

[kenjha · 7/10 · 22 July 2010]

This is based on the true story of a bank robbery that went awry. It gets off to an intriguing start, jumping right into the robbery with great intensity and moments of humor, but it soon loses the momentum. It seems the filmmakers had a beginning and an end in mind, but didn't know how to fill the middle. The middle, featuring interactions with the robber's family and gay lover, is just soap opera, causing the film to drag. The film opens with about five minutes of random shots of NYC, serving no purpose other than to pad the running time when it's already overlong. Although Lumet tends to encourage overacting, Pacino is very good and the supporting cast is solid.

Brilliant, Funny, Touching Film.

[yearspew · 8/10 · 7 January 2005]

Personally, this is one of the most touching films I've seen.

The acting is superb, both Al Pacino and John Cazale deliver outstanding and memorable performances as the unexperienced bank robbers Sonny Wortzik and Sal.

I should highlight the late John Cazale's performance of Sal, a character that says more with his face than he does with dialogue. Perhaps the most realistic character ever portrayed on film.

Al Pacino as usual delivers a great performance as was nominated for an Academy Award playing the role of Sonny.

This is a very entertaining film, filled with humor, social issues and moral issues, definitely a must-watch.

WOW!

[mohit_sinsniwal · 7/10 · 1 June 2019]

I've watched this film for the third time in a few years last night. Instead of writing a straight review, I'd like to jot down ten thoughts just off the top of my head concerning this exquisite movie:

1) Watching this film will change forever your perception of the bank heist genre, making you question the contrived cinematic conventions these films usually make use of.

2) The source of this film's paradoxical and/or farcical elements spring from life itself, not from film or pre-existing cinematic conventions. Sometimes, the absurdities of life are so great, they dwarf those included in any form of fiction. Without even trying to make that point, this film captures that concept beautifully.

3) Its tone in relation to the homosexual theme is ahead of its time. In fact it's ahead of OUR time, even, in hardly making an issue out of it at all - it just IS.

4) It captures the climate of the 70s in a manner so sober, you'll remember its unshowy yet authentic feel forever.

5) Lumet's film brings to life the concept of the distorting lens of the media and how different groups with different agendas will turn an outlaw into a hero, with far more efficiency than Oliver Stone's brash, bloated, childish and repetitive Natural Born Killers.

6) Watching this film will illustrate to the younger generations exactly why Al Pacino has earned himself the legendary status he probably no longer would deserve with his performances of the last 10 years alone. **SPOILERS**: Just watch those last ten minutes of him handcuffed against the bonnet of a car, where he doesn't say a word, but speaks volumes with his eyes and his soul just oozing out of every frame at the end of the movie; you'll remember those eyes for as long as you live!

7) Watching this film, you'll realise that firing a gun-shot is a BIG DEAL in real life, and that other films make too much use of gun fire in a highly contrived way.

8) All that tension deriving from pointed guns unable to fire a shot OR move away you realise Tarantino must've taken notes sometime along the way.

9) No genre is old or done too many times before if it's handled with this amount of freshness, inspiration and talent.

10) Watching Dog Day Afternoon for the third time has filled me with the same amount of wonder at the power of truly inspired but unobtrusive film-making as it did first time round.

Boring Movie

[abrahamset · 3/10 · 28 December 2013]

I know I will get bashed for saying that and maybe it is just that I was expecting so much with all the positive hype I was getting from friends and other students but I was definitely very disappointed with watching this movie. There was not much action and Pacino and the other robber were both good actors but it was a bit over the top and there wasn't much interesting action in this. I kind of knew everything that was going to happen so it just seemed predictable that way. I guess maybe it is possible that people long ago told me the best parts of the movie and I forgot about it but knew it was going to happen once I started watching the movie. The scene where they leave the bank is pretty cool with some good tension but other than that I was just really bored most of the time, very disappointing to me because I was expecting such a great movie.

Another Masterpiece from the Golden Age of American Cinema

[Rathko · 10/10 · 20 June 2005]

During the late sixties and into the seventies, the bank heist seems to have become a metaphor for the counter culture rebellion. Bank robbers were no longer the villains, but the heroes, fighting against the capitalist establishment like an urban Robin Hood. Dog Day Afternoon is part of that tradition.

Al Pacino is, as ever, brilliant. He is able to bring charisma, charm and vulnerability to the character of Sonny Wortzik in nothing more than a way of walking, or the way he holds a phone. Troubled, insecure, confused, Sonny makes for a lousy bank robber. And yet, when he steps from the relative safety of the bank building and into the street, before a hundred waiting armed police, he changes completely. He becomes a strong, proud, prowling voice of the working class, goading the police, riling the gathered crowd. In referencing the prison massacre at Attica in 1971, he becomes a voice for the urban poor, and it is a powerful and raging voice that contains the potential for victory and success, even when you know it is doomed.

An incredibly powerful work, very much of its time, and all the better for it. The 1970's was a decade when major studios hired actors for their talent, not their looks or teen appeal. When major studios hired writers proud to take on sensitive political and social issues. When major studios financially backed and strongly promoted movies that mattered and said something. Dog Day Afternoon is the product of that system and as such, could never be made today.

Stand & Deliver...

[Xstal · 8/10 · 10 November 2020]

... which it does, in buckets. Founded on a very interesting true story, embellished by Al Pacino who turns it into gold, albeit not in the quantities his character would have hoped for. With a stonking supporting cast, non better than John Cazale, you'll be drawn into the events presented as if you were there on the day, or afternoon, and quite probably investigate further as the titles start to role. Without question one of the best films of the 70s and one of few that retains its progressive and powerful impact all these years later.

A spark called Pacino

[SoHo1 · 10/10 · 2 March 2005]

It was so freshening and attractive to see His Majesty, Mr. Al Pacino, in this breathtaking movie of 1970s. The first thing that a discerning eye would notice throughout the film is the undying uniqueness of Pacino's originality. This was just another movie destined to reassuring viewers of Al's status of an icon. The movie itself is endearing and entertaining. Though the movie is supposed to appear like a bank robbing, and in a sense it is, but deep in the heart robbing is simply a way to achieve a totally different goal, of course other than money! It is about affection and mutual caring. It's about what situations a person is ready to embark into in order to show how much he cares for another one. And I guess this is the point of the whole movie, which is stylistically decorated with dozes of sarcasm and pleasantry with sporadic undertones of bravery. The characters are all innocent which innocence seems to relate them to each other. What I deem as very courageous here are the thematic elements, homosexuality. I guess the time when the movie was made the society had still been ruled by prejudiced mentalities that could really ruin this innocuous piece of art. For this, I praise the very daring Sidney Lumet, one of my favorite directors. 10/10

Gritty Gray Realism All The Way - A Remarkable Achievement In Film

[TheAnimalMother · 8/10 · 4 July 2021]

There are a few things that separate this film from the average film about not so bright criminals. One, the characters are more realistic in that they are dumb in ways, but they're not entirely dumb. Secondly and most importantly, the film doesn't lean on it's criminals stupidity to create needless or misplaced humor to try to make an entertaining film. Here Lumet relies more on his actors to be more authentic and concentrate on real circumstantial feelings and developing the characters. In the end we have what amounts to by most accounts, the most authentic feeling bank robbery film ever made. This is a film based on a true story and I'm not sure how close to reality Lumet tried to make it, but he sure did create something here that feels very real, and it is also continuously engaging.

Nothing is black and white here, everything is gray. Here we are led to understand the criminals motivations fully, and we cannot help but sympathize with them at least to some degree. This is masterful storytelling put to film by Lumet.

Dog Day is pretty much as gritty of a film as has ever come out of Hollywood. Lumet is a wonder, and a blessing in cinematic history no doubt. Not only is this one of Hollywood's first ever in depth looks from the so called "bad guys" perspectives; But also told so rawly and acted so authentically that almost every person who saw this film found themselves relating to, or at least feeling some compassion for a couple of gay crooks. In 1975, this was a landmark film to say the least. No matter what happens in the world, this will always be an outstanding classic.

8.5/10 .

Smart Puppy

[tedg · 28 April 2001]

Spoilers herein.

This was back when Pacino had control of himself. He's fun to watch. It's an energetic style of acting that has too much `watch me act' quality to qualify for greatness. But enjoyable.

Lumet scalpeled himself to the world class with `12 Angry Men,' where his camera breathed with the same rhythm of the ensemble. Here, he generally lacks that magic, and the writing isn't very tight either.

But one scene is immortal, on my list of the best 50 scenes in not-excellent films. The phone conversation between Sonny and `wife' Leon is great naturalism. This is Lumet and company at their very best. Watch how the framing moves, the conversation unfolds, how we are drawn into the most intimate pathos -- how they help us escape the voyerism of the crowds right outside, and the many others listening in.

This was Sarandon's first film. His excellence here and his mundane career since (including Prince Humperdink in `Princess Bride') may say something about how a director can weave an emotional potential in others.

Didn't quite work (for me)...

[cat_ranchero · 6/10 · 16 December 2012]

Quite a daring film for its day, showing events almost exclusively from the point of view of the robbers. There seems to be a little Stockholm Syndrome going on where the hostages begin to identify with their captors, but this isn't explored too closely. All the performances are very good with Pacino doing some of his very best scenery chewing with Cazale consequently playing it down and very understated (I liked that). It didn't work for me though because I never bought into the stories we learn about Sonny; it's him the film concentrates on mostly. He seems quite savvy when it comes to banks and police/FBI procedures and yet still panics when the police first arrive. I never had any connection with for either of the robbers and so found it quite a bumpy road to go down. Having said that I thought it was well made but certain scenes came across like a bit of an improvised scene in an acting class. I doubt I'd watch it again, but at least it's another I can cross off 'The List'.

SteelMonster's verdict: RECOMMENDED (…just)

My score: 6.1/10

You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

It's just a great movie!

[royal_319 · 10/10 · 28 February 2005]

I've seen this movie and for me it's Al Pacino at his best! The movie has a very simple premise, two guys rob a bank, but everything that can go wrong does. In the beginning the women who work in the bank are afraid, but once the situation escalates into a sideshow, some the women become comfortable with the situation. Basically, the entire movie is in the bank and all types of comedy and drama surrounds it. This is Al Pacino early in his career and for anyone who hasn't seen the movie, I definitely recommend it. Just keep in mind between all the madness you see in the film that this is a true story, and very entertaining!

A Definite Masterpiece

[jzappa · 10/10 · 2 October 2007]

What transfixes me throughout every scene of this sinewy, offbeat film is the extraordinarily pragmatic realism of the hurtles Sonny and Sal confront inside the bank. Not even twenty minutes into the film, we find we're already seeing things absolutely no other crime film has ever included that are astonishing in their dramatic persuasiveness. The head teller and the bank manager picking apart Sonny's plan with him. One clerk's husband calls and asks what time the robbers will be through so he knows if he has to cook for himself or not. While ordering the bank manager to help him block the back entrance by moving a big desk, Sonny asks offhand why he'd hire a diabetic as a guard, and is told in ordinary person-to-person terms what a guard's salary is and why poor old Howard has that job.

And when does Mulvaney the bank manager, played by captivating unknown character actor Sully Boyar, tell hostage-taker he'd like to see his family again but if someone must be taken, take him? When he's helping his captor move a big desk to block the back. They sound like regular working urbanites so caught up in the daily grind of city life that they might as well be making small talk in an elevator. Later, the phone rings, Sonny picks up, it's a sicko telling him to kill 'em all. Sonny hangs up after four seconds, moving on. The female tellers sit and sweat while giggling about the same silly things---"He said the f-word." "Well, I'm a Christian and my ears are not garbage cans."---in the thick of a hostage situation and a media circus. Poignant, real.

Every nuance of Pacino's performance is incredibly realistic. He practically possesses the audience, as we can begin to expect certain things from him and care about him because he's played by an actor who completely subsists as him. At points when characters speak of him off-screen, speaking of things that we are surprised to hear about him, that take us aback and color his image, Pacino has prepared the size for those turning points to fit in. His improvised scenes are exceptional as well, and are in fact some of the most riveting, nail-bitingly intense scenes in the entire film. In such scenes, he is matched by the great actor Charles Durning and Chris Sarandon's becoming fulfillment of his role.

Indeed, this is by far Durning's most riveting performance. He works so well here because in shouting matches with Sonny, he looks and sounds entirely his age, not a movie character. He's fat, middle-aged, tired, just as surprised as everybody else. He runs short of breath, trying desperately to keep up with the pressure cooking higher all around him. As Det. Sgt. Eugene Moretti, Durning epitomizes the thankless job of a police officer more candidly and perfectly than any other movie cop I've ever seen. One of this stunning succession of brilliant scenes is the first time Sonny emerges to talk face-to-face with Moretti in the street, which begins with a protracted pin-drop silence and slowly, steadily, invisibly culminates in deafening, ear-splitting chaos.

Lumet opens the film with a montage of city scenes in NYC with a good getting-up-in-the- morning song like Elton John's Amoreena and with the same indifference ends up on Sonny, Sal and their friend waiting outside a bank in a car, an image that just happens to continue. This is a great way to demonstrate the it-could-happen-anywhereness. Lumet's overall direction of the film is beautiful, indicative once again of the masterful mainstay of cinema in the 1970s. The climactic final ten minutes are ruthless in their steadily unraveling, almost unbearably intense tragedy. It's not only one of the most effective uses of sound to create drama I've ever seen, but everything concludes exactly as it would in reality.

A Good Enough Movie But How Honest Is It ?

[Theo Robertson · 7/10 · 1 August 2005]

This follows a true life incident where two characters called Sonny and Sal rob a bank in New York . Luckily Sonny used to work in a bank because this means that he knows all the tricks like if you use a certain key it'll trip the alarm in the vault and if you take all the notes from a register this too will raise the alarm . Yeah Sonny knows his stuff so why then I wondered did he and his colleagues wear masks ? As his other accomplice gets cold feet why does he continually call him " Stevie " in front of the hostage opening the door and keep calling his partner " Sal " in front of everyone ? Is there anything more incompetent than criminals calling each other by their names while robbing people ? This tends to contradict Sonny as being a pre meditated robber and paints him more as a lovable klutz doomed to failure

This is my major problem with DOG DAY AFTERNOON . It's a film that unreservedly manipulates the audience into feeling great pity for Sonny and Sal . I don't like being manipulated . It's this lack of ambiguity that stops DDA from being one of the best movies from the 1970s and I doubt if the real life characters would recognise themselves as the people in this movie and I feel too much artistic license has been taken with a bizarre true life story

To be fair it's an entertaining and well made film . Sidney Lumet does as good a job here as he did in THE ANDERSON TAPES but it's the performances that really stand out . Al Pacino is the best American character actor of the last quarter of the 20th century and he keeps up his very high standards here but it's an unrecognisable John Cazale who steals the acting show with his very understated performance as Sal

Plodding and predictable

[hall895 · 5/10 · 10 August 2011]

Dog Day Afternoon, in which Michael and Fredo Corleone rob a bank. Just a year after The Godfather: Part II Al Pacino and John Cazale are together again. This time they play two bank robbers, Sonny and Sal respectively, whose robbery does not go at all according to plan. With Pacino in the lead role casting Cazale was probably a mistake. For as great an actor as Cazale was when you see him with Pacino your mind can't help but go to Fredo. Again Pacino's the star while Cazale plays the quiet, somewhat dim-witted supporting figure. It's Fredo all over again and thinking about that takes you out of the experience of enjoying this movie. Then again there isn't necessarily all that much to enjoy here. The fact that Cazale's presence may lead you to think of the Godfather movies is not Dog Day Afternoon's biggest problem. This movie disappoints in other ways. Ultimately, despite a very good performance from Pacino, it proves to be quite a letdown.

So the robbery goes horribly bad and Sonny and Sal find themselves trapped in the bank, surrounded by police, holding a bunch of unfortunate bank employees hostage. And then...nothing. Nothing much of consequence anyway. The movie plods along, incredibly slowly paced, rather devoid of drama. A crowd shows up, television broadcasts the unfolding events live and Sonny becomes an unwitting media star while Sal whimpers in the back of the bank. The story doesn't really move forward. Sonny and Sal are trapped...and they're still trapped...and they're still trapped...and can I get this two hours of my life back? There's a sense of inevitability to the whole thing. Once the situation has been established there are very few potential outcomes. This is all based on a true story but even if you know absolutely nothing about the real-life events it's not hard to guess how this is all going to turn out. Really the only twist in the tale comes when Sonny's wife shows up, revealing the motivation for the robbery. And well, that's quite a twist. So bizarre you wouldn't believe it if it weren't actually true. If it weren't true any screenwriter trying to pitch it would be laughed out of the room. If nothing else at least this provides for a bit of story and character development after all the time spent with Sonny staring at the cops and the cops staring at Sonny and absolutely nothing actually happening. Aside from the introduction of the wife the movie is a rather monotonous, predictable crawl towards the finish line. Pacino is very good but he doesn't have much material to work with. There's not much story here and what little story we have is hard to believe even if it is true. The robbery fails. The movie largely does too.

Underlying Motive

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 19 January 2012]

The late John Wojtowicz whose mad exploit on one afternoon in Brooklyn probably never dreamed his life would result in an awarded picture. But I suppose the Oscar that Frank Pierson won for Best Original Screenplay kind of verified his time on earth. Not to mention the five other Oscar categories Dog Day Afternoon was nominated in, Best Picture, Best Film Editing, Best Director for Sidney Lumet, Best Actor for Al Pacino and Best Supporting Actor for Chris Sarandon.

It all happened to be sure on Avenue P in Brooklyn, the location that the film was shot on 10th Street was not where it happened, just the same borough. But the film sure comes close to graphically illustrating the bizarre carnival of events that happened in the summer of 1972.

Al Pacino playing Sonny Wojcik is a gay man who has left his wife and kids and is now living with a man who has confessed to him he's a transgender individual and the doctors have recommended a sex change for him. The sexually confused Pacino and at that time he was hits on this mad move to rob a bank to get enough money for sexual reassignment. At that time the cost they're talking about is $2500.00 which now wouldn't pay for the scrub nurse. Then as now medical insurance companies won't cover it.

So Pacino goes in with buddies John Cazale and Gary Springer and pulls a robbery at closing time at a Brooklyn bank. They're supposed to be in and out, but these guys aren't professional criminals. One thing leads to another and law enforcement has Pacino and Cazale trapped, Springer having opted out of the crime real early.

Then the media freak show begins, at first with crowd actually on Pacino's side as he gives lip to the law. Then when they find out what is the underlying motive for the robbery, good old homophobia takes over. The cheers turn to jeers when Pacino comes out in the street for the police and the cameras.

Dog Day Afternoon is a key film for the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community in the USA. It's one of the first that explores a gamut of issues like the closet, internalized homophobia, being forced into marriage for convention's sake, even same gender marriage. It's exploitive to be sure, but does have its tender moments as well. The highlight of the film for me is the phone conversation with Pacino and Sarandon who had no idea what Pacino had in mind. Sarandon gave one of the first performances of a transgender person in a major motion picture.

John Wojtowicz, Sonny Wojcik for the film did a stretch in the federal pen for the bank robbery and after he was released I met him. By the time we met, both of us were comfortable in our sexuality, I was most closeted when this incident happened. When we met it was the late Eighties. If I was comfortable, John Wojtowicz was positively reveling in it.

Dog as he was then known because of the film was a character in the Greenwich Village bar scene where I met him. Dog used his celebrity, notoriety if you prefer, to get himself a fabulous share of rent boys whom he paid nominal monies for services. He carried ever ready copy of faded clippings from the crime and some of those dumb kids actually thought of him as something special. As a character Dog certainly was.

When I moved out of New York I didn't see Dog around any more and he died a few years ago. The man had his fifteen minutes of celebrity and worked it to the max. This review is dedicated to John Wojtowicz as one unforgettable individual.