I really love Dog Day Afternoon. Every year or so, I make a ritual of it to revisit this film, and on each viewing, without fail, I find it more and more wonderful, and its complexities as a subversive crime drama are only made more clear, as well as this film’s position as the darkest of comedies. Dog Day Afternoon is a film that has become a part of the hallowed halls of New Hollywood, and one of the most influential crime films ever made (and it is perhaps the best of the decade it appeared in, which is a tall order considering that decade brought us films such as The French Connection, The Conversation and The Godfather and The Godfather Part II, but its a sentiment I will relentlessly defend, for reasons I will outline below), and while it may have its flaws and prove to be a challenging film at times, it is ultimately a distinctive and brilliant film with several aspects that define it as a masterpiece, or something resembling such.

Its a hot day in 1972, and everyone is trying to just spend the rest of the dog day afternoon of Summer in tranquility and without much disturbance. However, for a small bank in Brooklyn, they are about to spend the rest of the day in quite a compromising position, as they soon find themselves in the midst of a brutal war-path by amateur bank robbers Sonny Wortzik (Al Pacino) and Salvatore Naturale (John Cazale) who intend to execute the operation rapidly and neatly, without any fatalities or complications. It seems like a standard heist, but obviously there are complications and the result is eight hours of a media frenzy that brings a multitude of people into the circus surrounding the bank, where Sonny negotiates with desperate police chief Moretti (Charles Durning) while trying to keep their hostages (who do not seem like hostages, as they grow quite fond of their captors) calm. Through the variety of demands and negotiations, secrets about the intentions behind the robbery are exposed, and the humanity behind these individuals prove that they are far from the archetypal criminal usually seen in these kind of heist films. Yet, this is redundant information, because Dog Day Afternoon doesn’t only contribute greatly to the genre of crime cinema – it helps define it. There isn’t much need to analyse the film in a technical way, so I’m rather going to hopefully explore some personal feelings towards this film and how it has changed by perception of cinema, and continues to do so every time I revisit the film.

First of all – Al Pacino, what can one possibly say about Al Pacino? I have long believed in two facts to be unequivocally true: Al Pacino is the greatest actor of his generation, and he is also the best actor who continuously chooses awful films, especially in the more recent years of his career. These contradictory ideas constantly influence the other from being entirely true, and every time I see the magnificent failure Pacino has agreed to star in, I remember Dog Day Afternoon, which is a performance that is so complex, nuanced and simply brilliant, it more than justifies Pacino’s more recent laziness in choosing equally-great film roles (not that they are all complete duds – there are some great films in there, just not at the same volume as Pacino’s earlier career, where it was a string of incredible films). Many point towards something like The Godfather trilogy or Serpico or another one of his films as being Pacino’s best film (although I am entirely sure very few people think his best performance is in Scent of a Woman. It certainly is his most performance. Hoo ha). Yet, I still stand by the fact that Dog Day Afternoon is his finest hour, where he creates a performance that allows him to make use of his trademark rage and anger, as well as being able to express far more subtle emotions. This is not “this whole court is out of order” Pacino – this is a performance where the actor’s strengths are exercised to their fullest capacity, where his performance oscillates between angry and explosive, as well as quiet and suble, and perhaps even a little humorous at times (I’ll talk about the comedy of this film a bit later on, an important aspect that is all too often forgotten when considering Dog Day Afternoon as a subversive crime film). It is the seminal Pacino performance, because for fans, it is a deliriously brilliant example of why we adore him, and for the unconverted and unimpressed, it shows Pacino taking full control of a character, and creating something never seen before, and good enough to possibly change the mindset of those that just are not that interested in Pacino. You can say whatever you want about Pacino’s recent career, but in the 1970s, he was certainly on a streak that is almost impossible to match, where he stood head-and-shoulders amongst his peers and (subjectively) came out the clear champion.

Talking of unmatched streaks, this was one of the very few films John Cazale appeared in before his tragic and untimely death. Despite appearing in only a few films over a period of a few years, Cazale left an indelible mark because those five films were seminal masterpieces The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, The Conversation, The Deer Hunter and of course Dog Day Afternoon. However, this was not the only reason for the impact Cazale left, as through these films, he managed to convey the fact that he was truly a magnificent actor, and someone who occupied the niche role of being a character actor with legitimate star-power, as evident in his dynamite performances. He was a master of subtly, while also simultaneously being able to emote in a way that was aggressive without being artificial. Sal is a complex character, and one that I initially found frustrating, as Dog Day Afternoon clearly sets its focalizers on Sonny and seemingly ignores Sal and refuses to develop him beyond merely being a mysterious sidekick. Yet, I soon realized that there was not a lack of development, and Sidney Lumet actually did something beautifully unique – the best development for Sal was very little development, because the mysterious and enigmatic nature of the character is far more fascinating. His motives and morals are not known, nor should they be known. Sal draws viewers in, and his shockingly calm and detached demeanour is a great counter-performance to Pacino’s far more expressive (yet not in any way less nuanced and subtle) performance. I don’t necessarily want to focus on the potential that Cazale had, or memorialize him and his career through this review. That is a task for another time, but it is still important to note that Cazale was wonderful here, and his performance may be a lot more quiet than Pacino’s, but it is in no way inferior.

There are a few thoughts that occured to me on the most recent rewatch, one of which I have alluded to already, and a thought that is not primarily seen as being truthful, yet it is still impossible to deny when watching this film – Dog Day Afternoon is a dark comedy. Right from the outset, the absurdity of this film is heightened, but not to the point where it is actually notably humorous. It takes serious subject matter and uses subversion of expectations, as well as exaggeration of situations, and finds the inherent humor in them. As soon as the bank robbery begins, we encounter progression of story that is both shockingly disturbing as well as oddly hilarious in a very twisted way. None of the events in Dog Day Afternoon are played for laughs, but it is understands that the heist-gone-wrong narrative is painfully dull if it doesn’t have some self-awareness of its own inherent comedy. Pacino also doesn’t help the case of this film being entirely serious, as his performance as Sonny is often gleefully over-the-top and wonderfully offbeat in many ways. The structure of this film lends itself naturally to situations of levity through the central conversations between Sonny and Moretti, as the situation escalates to being almost ridiculous – the moment where Pacino orders pizza for the hostages is both humanizing as well as ludicrous and very strange, in a way that may not deter us from seeing the social and political overtures of Dog Day Afternoon, but also from taking this film completely seriously. In no uncertain terms, Dog Day Afternoon is an important and serious film, but it is one that has a keen sense of humor through its understanding of its subject matter.

Another thought is the compassionate lens through which this film views the two main characters – I cannot think of any crime film that humanizes the criminals quite as much as Dog Day Afternoon. It isn’t defensive of them, and it notes how rash and hasty they were in their decision, and the lack of planning that informs it – yet it does not entirely revile them, and it shows them as being human without being heroic. As a whole, Dog Day Afternoon subverts the entire crime film genre in a number of ways – the criminals are not heartless, violent psychopaths (although Sal might be, but we never actually know what fuels his actions), the police are neither imcompotent boobs nor are they malicious law-makers. The hostage crisis in this film cannot even logically be called a “crisis”, as the victims seem to be enjoying the media frenzy as well as the company of their very eccentric but ultimately (and strangely) endearing captors. The enigma-pursuit-resolution structure of crime narratives is present here, but it is heavily subverted in favor of the unique and far more fascinating structure of the film.

Dog Day Afternoon is a wonderful film – shocking and often incredibly funny, it features great performances from Al Pacino and John Cazale, who use their chemistry to create a couple of bank robbers that are far more human than previously represented in other films. In addition, Charles Durning and Chris Sarandon are also very good and often lend the comedic gravitas to this film that is sorely needed when it appears a bit too bleak at times. The subversion of the crime genre is notable, and the result is an entertaining and riveting film that may appear to be a bit of a slow-burner at times, but ultimately proves itself to be one of the most extraordinarily complex and brilliant crime films ever made. I adore this film, and I will always recommend it to others, as it truly is a great piece of New Hollywood cinema, and filmmaking as a whole.