runamokprods Often very funny, occasionally quite sad documentary on the life and hard times of "The Dog", John Wojtowicz, the real life man played by Al Pacino in "Dog Day Afternoon" – the hapless bank robber who held up a NYC bank to pay for his lover's sex change operation and (first) to get her released from a psychiatric hospital. Wojtowicz is affable and funny, completely un self-conscious about his rather insane life, his voracious, intense and sometimes confusing sexual and romantic appetites, his love of the spotlight. But there are also moments when we realize this likable eccentric does have a side that is closer to dangerously crazy and delusional than to simply 'off-beat' and that tension is one of the fascinating tears that run through the man and the film. It's also clear that John to a certain extent is also playing the role of 'John' for the cameras, which adds to the humor of the film (he has a very funny habit of saying things like 'action' and 'cut' to the documentary camera that is filming him), but also asks deeper questions about fleeting fame and how it can distort one's personality and perceptions of self and reality. Perhaps the most lovely thing about "The Dog" is how truly un-judgmental it seems. While it celebrates the humor in the absurdities of John's life story and his person (and those around him), it never feels like we're watching a freak show that sniggers at it's subjects from a distance. These may be odd people, but the film never seems to forget that they are people first and odd second, or that we're all odd in one way or another. I feel like the filmmakers genuinely liked John. It's a complex and rich portrait of a very unique man, sort of a hero, sort of a villain, sort of crazy, sort of scary, sort of wonderful.

meeza The documentary "The Dog" tails the tale of the late John Wojtowicz; the real life homosexual bank robber who the hit 70's film "Dog Day Afternoon" is based on. As presented in "Dog Day Afternoon", Wojtowicz' committed a bank robbery in early 70's in New York, along with two amateurs, to pay for his boyfriend's sex change operation. In the doc "The Dog", Wojtowicz is presented as an outlandish, outspoken New Yorkan who had no regrets about his crime; and also does not restraint himself on telling all the ins & outs of his homosexual lifestyle. Directors Allison Berg and Frank Keraudren had a bit of bark in the making of the documentary but not enough bite. Sure, they do interview plenty of players involved in that infamous bank robbery including Wojtowicz's ex-boyfriends, his ex- wife, and the amateur would-be robber who chickened out. But somehow, I felt "The Dog" tried to bite more than it could chew by stating too many mundane happenings. Nevertheless, you attica check it out if you are going through one of those dog days; just beware of some of "The Dog" drawbacks I warned you about. *** Average

paul2001sw-1 'Dog Day Afternoon', starring Al Pacino, is a great film about a bank robbery; but in fact, it's based on a true story and one arguably even more bizarre than the version told in the film. However, John Wojtowicz, the real life robber, was a man who spent the rest of his life attempting to milk his own history for money, which slightly diffuses the impact of this documentary, which is less an act of uncovering a story and more one of simply turning up and listening to an extended bout of self-promotion. There's still some interest in a tale that combines an odd combination of radical sexuality and bank robbery, while John's mother is a truly remarkable woman. What's also remarkable is how closely actor John Cazale resembled the dead robber Sal.

nick94965 The story of "Dog Day Afternoon" always intrigued me, since I never believed that the whole thing was true -- it didn't seem plausible that anyone like John, the "Dog" of the title, could really exist. After watching this documentary, I can say without a doubt that this person really existed, and not only that, but that he's even more entertaining in real life than Al Pacino was in the famous movie that was made about it. John is a multi-faceted, bizarre, crazy clown of a man with the most fascinating approach to gay rights ever. He is hilarious, headstrong, outspoken, a sheer nut case, and incredibly sympathetic, even heart breaking in his dedication to those he loves. His purpose in robbing the bank, to get his lover a sex-change operation, always seemed to be a plot device added to the film by the scriptwriter. Amazingly, it is all true, and even more truth is yet to come.One thing that really surprised me was the treatment of the relationship between John and his second "wife" -- Leon. John was actually married to a biological woman and had two children with her, and not only married Leon, he also married another man later in life. John was not only ahead of his time, way before gay marriage existed, he invented a new form of marriage, the likes of which would never be legal, at least in our lifetimes.In the movie "Dog Day Afternoon", John holds up the bank in order to get enough money for his lover Leon's sex change operation. I could never believe that the man played by Pacino could do such a thing, but watching John in this film, it is believable -- again, the truth here is stranger than fiction. Even John's mother actually appeared on the scene as in the movie, which also seems impossible until you meet John's real life mother. At first, John's relationship with his mother seems merely abnormal -- later, it seems like these two people deserve each other in being two sides of the same bizarre coin.Added to this is the fact that John never regrets his decision to go through with the robbery, regardless of having gone to jail and having spent a great deal of time in maximum security -- when interviewed after being captured, he still admitted that he was in love with Leon, and would have done it again if he had to do it all over again.What complicates this unbelievable sacrifice is a very candid interview when John is on a cable-access-type show, when John and Leon, (now having had the operation and transitioned into Liz), are both giving their individual perspectives, and Leon/Liz hints that there might have been another reason as to why John robbed the bank, to which John is not admitting. This opens up yet another can of worms that is never answered. It leaves a gaping hole in John's motivation for robbing the bank, and brings us back again to the essential question: how is it possible that truth can be so much stranger than fiction?