Dog Day Afternoon: A Humorous Take on the Original Source - Essay Example

Dog Day Afternoon- a Humorous take on the Original Source A crime scenario usually expected to be replete with much threat, tension, intimidation and violence if somehow could be turned out to be a hilarious and mirthful drama, then it is certainly bound to catch the attention and admiration of many viewers. The 1975 crime scene drama Dog Day Afternoon, the cinematic adaptation of the article The Boys in the Bank by PF Kluge and Thomas Moore, exactly does that, by dressing an actual attempted bank robbery into a humorous episode, attended with all the commensurate buffoonery, foolhardiness, and mirth. There is no denying the fact that though the actual article by Kluge and Moore has more of a serious flavor with undertones of humor, the cinematic version that is Dog Day Afternoon, tends to be a more jovial take at the original source that transports a regular New York bank robbery into a jovial snippet from what may be called the general life in the 70s. The thing that needs to be understood is that the truth often happens to be stranger than fiction and a piece of the real life may seem bland and regular, whether in literature or cinema, and especially more so if it does not intend to unload a moralistic message. The article The Boys in the Bank by Kluge and Moore could readily be taken to be a regular media report that does has elements of humor, though overall it comes out sans any message or moral. Thereby, it gets really feasible to understand that the biggest challenge before the director Sidney Lumet must have been to garnish the plot and theme presented in the written source that has its share of humor and absurdity, into a movie that is rich in emotive appeal and clownish action and dialogue. It is a fact that literature and cinema happen to be two disparate media, and a film adaptation of a literary work could simply cannot be expected to be true to its genre if it is not able to imbue the plot inherent in the written text, with action and dialogue that highlights the overall content and makes it more gripping and riveting. In that sense Sidney Lumet has indeed been successful in contriving an admirably funny reel version out of Kluge and Moore’s work. Though the movie tends to adhere to the actual text in terms of content and plot in more than one ways, still it manages to eke out the hilarity through evincing slight changes in the plot. Hence, no wonder the central character in the movie that is Sonny Wortzik, so immaculately played by Al Pacino nowhere comes out as being so rabid, so discernibly sexually deviant, emotionally on the edge and temperamentally violent as his counterpart John Wojtowicz in Kluge and Moore’s written text. In fact, on a more pragmatic level, Sonny Wortzik positively comes out as being a fumbling, edgy, cute and likeable bank robber who in a strange and absurd way carries a comic charm and appeal ensuing from his physical play and childish comments as he blurts out in response to a journalist’s question, “I’m robbing a bank because they got money here. That’s why I am robbing it (Lumet 45:20).” The cuteness inherent in the screen presentation of John Wojtowicz that is Sonny Wortzik and the sense of loss and confusion evident on Sal’s visage nowhere makes them come out as battle hardened Vietnam veterans, who could actually kill people if the need be unlike their textual counterparts who blatantly acknowledge that “they would kill us if they had to (Kluge & Moore 4).” In consonance with the actual plot, the story opens up with a bank robbery planned and performed by Sonny and Sal. Though, one can certainly acknowledge the fact that to begin with Sonny comes out as edgy and blatantly threatening, seeming almost willing to shot anyone that dares to curtail his plans, in apt imitation of John Wojtowicz presented in the article on which the movie is based. However the viciousness and grit associated with Sonny tends to melt beyond this point, bringing him out as a soft and sensitive character that is quiet unlike the persona of John Wojtowicz as presented by Kluge and Moore. Once the planned robbery goes awry and Sonny realizes that he could no more pull on with his plan, the character starts to take a completely unexpected twist, nowhere seeming as headstrong and vicious as the actual John Wojtowicz as depicted in the article by Kluge and Moore. However, one thing that really rhymes in both the article and the movie is the fact that the hostages in both the cases do evince a sense of understanding and admiration for the actual robbers. In the movie as it is in the article the hostages soon begin to evince sympathy for Sonny’s cause who is committing a robbery to be able to pay for his partner’s sex change surgery. As in the article, throughout the movie Sonny is shown as really nervous and profusely sweating, surrounded by an army of law and order officials, FBI agents, media, general public and the friends and loved one’s of the hostages. The movie did indeed pick up most of its essential raw material from the article. Sonny very much like John Wojtowicz, comes out as being tense and nervous like a hunted animal, always worrying that he will get his head blown off any minute. However, the one way that Sonny tends to differ from John Wojtowicz is in the sense that he nowhere comes out as being blatantly flamboyant or evincing any peculiar mannerisms to convey that he is a homosexual. Essentially speaking Sonny comes out as a compassionate and loving character that is trapped in a wrong spot at the wrong time. Than there are other twists in the cinematic version that make the overall outcome more jovial and laughable. For instance in the movie, the loss of nerves evinced by one of the three convicts that is Stevie, as soon as Sonny draws out the gun, imbues the movie with a funny and somewhat absurd kind of viewer expectation right at the start. Than the coming down of Howard the bank guard with an asthma attack makes the things seem really ironical in a funny way. The macabre and jocularly rabid John in the text comes out in his cinematic avatar as a somewhat vulnerable Sonny for whom, “After every crowd-riling outburst, there’s a tender moment where he considers his actions as they impact his friends, his family and his hostages (Lovell 1).” The other way that the movie storyline tends to differ from the article is that Sal comes out as being imbued with a discernible tinge of criminality that totally stands in contrast to the character of Sonny. Yet, in the article Sal is nowhere presented as being innately criminal and vicious in his scope and intentions. As compared to Sonny, Sal comes out as being visibly creepy and vicious, even when he quietly sits with the hostages as Sonny negotiates with the cops. Thereby Sonny comes out as a foil to Sal, unlike in the article, a crude, impatient and edgy criminal who yet refrains from engaging in any form of blatant cruelty with any of the hostages. Thereby, the cinema version of the article by Kluge and Moore somewhat softens the characters and makes them come out as being fumbled, confused and sensitive so as to make them more likeable and acceptable to the audience. As compared to the static tone of the article, the movie is well paced, racy and replete with action and drama. Works Cited Dog Day Afternoon. Dir. Sidney Lumet. Warner Brothers, 1975. Film. Kluge, PF & Moore, Thomas. “The Boys in the Bank”. Print. Lovell, Wesley. “Review: Dog Day Afternoon (1975)”. Cinema Sight 11 April 2011. Web. 15 February 2014. Prewriting 1. The article on which the given film is based does not seem to have any explicit moral accept to convey as to how seemingly ordinary and regular individuals may end up being a criminal or a convict. The movie more or less tends to replicate this theme. However, the characters in the movie are more funny, charming and benign that come out as being confused and hesitant individuals turning to crime to better the personal aspects of their life. The characters in the movie come out as being inherently likeable and charming and nowhere happen to carry the aggressiveness and edginess of the characters mentioned in the article. Though the actual article does convey the bank robbers as being funny and nice to the hostages, the article fails to convey the jocularity and absurdity inherent in the characters in a way the movie manages to do. Overall the cinematic version does score over its textual version in the sense that it is more palpable and emotively provoking, which the textual version simply fails to do. The article comes out more as a regular media report that does refer to the funny side of the bank robbers. However, the movie does actually bring out the charm and humor inherent in the central characters that are the bank robbers. 2. The tone of the article is more or less running and matter of fact. The article happens to convey the drama inherent in a bank robbery and tries to convey the peculiarities inherent in this crime by trying to bring out the funny sides of their personalities and the hostages’ opinion of the two bank robbers. Thereby, the article though being interesting does fail to bring out the drama inherent in the scene with the reality and intensity that the movie manages to do. The overall tone of the movie is humorous and hilarious. The sensory appeal associated with the movie make the piece more dramatic and engaging for the audience. 3. The article happens to target the regular readers interested in a funny report, while the movie happens to target the cinema goers interested in experiencing a hilarious and somewhat jocularly absurd snippet out of a regular New York life. Since the movie version happens to carry an audio visual aspect to its rendition, it relies more on action and dialogue to convey humor. 4. The authors of the article under consideration are PF Kluge and Thomas Moore. The screenplay for the movie is written by Frank Pierson. In a way though the movie is based on the article by Kluge and Moore, it is Pierson’s screen version that is more impressive and life like in a cinematic context. 5. Actually the film far exceeds in fulfilling the audiences’ expectations who have actually read the article on which it is based. The characters in the film are more lifelike, charming and likeable. The film is indeed interesting and gripping. Read More