DOG DAY AFTERNOON Reviews

Mixed-negative from Matt Windman at AMNY - "The production ends up straddling two audiences without fully satisfying either"

DTLI Consensus: This stage adaptation of the beloved 1975 crime film bungles the heist, leaning much too far into comedy and resulting in an ill-advised and tonally incoherent play.

7 negative (including the NYT), 7 mixed, 1 positive.

https://didtheylikeit.com/shows/dog-day-afternoon/

Updated On: 3/31/26 at 01:01 AM

‘Dog Day’ Drama: Broadway Playwright Briefly Kept Out of Rehearsals

"A week before opening night, tensions spilled over offstage, with the show’s producing team temporarily prohibiting Stephen Adly Guirgis from entering the theater."

"Making a new Broadway show is often stressful. At “Dog Day Afternoon,” a stage adaptation of Sidney Lumet’s 1975 movie about a Brooklyn bank robbery and hostage-taking, that stress became so intense that the production’s Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright was prohibited from entering the August Wilson Theater for three days over the last week.

The show’s producing team told the playwright, Stephen Adly Guirgis, that he was no longer welcome at rehearsals after tempers flared on Friday between Guirgis and Mark Kaufman, who runs Warner Bros. Theater Ventures, an entity that is among the play’s lead producers.

The argument and the aftermath were described by three theater professionals with connections to the production and knowledge of the events, but who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were seeking to protect their relationships with those involved.

Asked for comment, the playwright and lead producers issued a joint statement saying that “the process of creating and producing a new play is always a passionate one.”

“Stephen has finalized his script after implementing all his changes, as is customary, during previews,” they said. “We are all committed to maintaining a respectful environment for everyone involved and remain very proud of what’s onstage.”

The subject of the dispute is not entirely clear, but the show was continually revised throughout the preview process, which began March 10 and involves performances for paying audiences as well as ongoing rehearsals to incorporate changes. There were tensions over the show’s running time (it is now two hours and 15 minutes long, including an intermission, which is shorter than it was at the start of previews) and its tone (early previews leaned into comedy, while the film was primarily suspenseful)."


https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/25/theater/dog-day-afternoon-broadway-stephen-adly-guirgis.html

Updated On: 3/31/26 at 01:34 AM

Already have tickets to go with my husband and friends. Hope we can still enjoy it at least somewhat.

Holdren's review in Vulture is a good read as always, though, as someone who found it to be one of those shows that's perfectly entertaining without actually being good, I feel like she's being very generous.

Did Dog Day Afternoon Get Away With It?

https://www.vulture.com/article/theater-review-dog-day-afternoon-broadway-bernthal-guirgis.html

"Bring too much of that hyperspecific tone along with you to the August Wilson Theatre, and comparison may indeed prove the thief of joy. But let Stephen Adly Guirgis’s play introduce itself on its own terms, with its firm, enthusiastic handshake and garrulous demeanor (Guirgis has never been a playwright of few words), and the experience quickly endears itself. This time around, under Rupert Goold’s actor-forward direction and with Guirgis’s distinctive voiciness, the story has more in common with the canine of its title — there’s a little more swagger, sweetness, and slobber, a little more desire to please. But please, and move, it does, largely on account of its good heart."

Oof, these reviews killed any interest I had in this show, and I didn't have much to begin with. They confirm what I already suspected -- there's no "why" to this show. Why this film, and why now?

The film, while tense, is also hilarious.

Many reviews characterized as "mixed" struck me as decidedly negative. Arguably, only Jessica Hecht emerges completely unscathed (though a couple of reviews questioned the value in expanding the role thus). In the Monday a.m. quarterbacking, one might wonder whether a full - and in some ways semi-literal - adaptation was wise. A tighter "close-up" on the film's characters, without the revolve and large company required to put a screenplay on the stage, might've been more ambitious. I realize this post is presumptuous in its rearview mirror speculation, but since many heads are being scratched over the failures here, let the guesswork begin, dramaturgical and otherwise.

MasterThespian 2: Want to check in on Dog Day. Has anyone attended recently? Any further tweaks (or improvements) since the reviews came out? Or is it locked in and it is what it is? Thanks.

I attended last week. I liked Act I which I thought had a good number of laughs. I loved the New Yorkness of it along with the performances by Bernthal, Hecht and Kostroff. The set is terrific as well. But then we get to Act 2 which was just so painful. I actually felt bad for Jon Bernthal who was working his butt off and then he had to prolong that excruciating phone call with Leon. A phone call in movie works because of close-ups, etc. On stage, not so much. Jeez, I literally never thought it would end. The guitar solo that I read so much about in the preview thread is most definitely still in and shouldn't be. That character should have been cut but is alive and causing pain. Moss-Bachrach has a completely forgettable role.

Thanks. Was really hoping for a different response, but sadly these reviews fit right in with the rest. Too bad. Had such high hopes for this production.

I hate the reception this is getting, I was planning on sneaking off to the city with the girl I like this summer to see some shows and wanted to see this. The announcement made me watch the film for the first time and it was instantly in my top four, but now I don't think I want to see this. I believe in 'screw opinions, form your own' but good lord this is. just bad.

lilpunkin said: "I don’t understand how this was bungled so badly. Especially since (as pointed out upthread) it’s been in development for years. I heard that Rupert was only hired to direct fairly lastminute which is also odd. You’d expect the director to be involved throughout development."

No one took into account how much its success depended on its being a movie. Sal probably said no more in the film than he says on stage, he may even have said less, but we see him in close-up often so he becomes a much more vital presence. Despite Pacino's reputation as a shouter, he is in fact a highly nuanced actor. For every moment of Sonny yelling we have a moment where he is reacting actively but quietly, where his eyes do the talking. We get to know them both. And we have the environment of Brooklyn teeming realistically around us every time the camera leaves the bank. Lumet had NY in his bones. So did Pacino, and he and Cazale were at the top of their powers back then. The bank robbery spiraling out of control is certainly comedic, but not at the expense of suspense. The tension mounts in the movie; the police force surrounding Sonny and Sal is like the cavalry surrounding Butch and Sundance at the end of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. The stakes feel very high. With the exception of the scene with Leon, nothing seems to matter enough in the stage version to merit the story being told.

Maybe Giurgis wasn't the right playwright for this? Maybe Goold didn't have the right touch? More likely it just benefited form being told on camera, directed by and starring experts.