The movie opened on March 13, 1958, in several cities around the United States, including Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Box office It grossed $48,000 from four theaters in Los Angeles and $15,000 in San Francisco in its first week. It opened to good reviews but did not score a significant profit at the box office, grossing US$3,500,000. Against this,
Variety did describe the movie as "very profitable". And in October 1958 the same magazine reported the film as having earned $8,500,000 worldwide.
Critical Billboard commended the acting as "first-rate" and "robust", with particular praise for Woodward, and also praised Ritt's direction. Meanwhile,
The Reporter highlighted the film's similarities to the play
Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and described the cast as "an impressive one", but remarked that the actors and characters "never seem to get together". The review called Welles "great" and "gusty", but described Woodward's participation as a "poker bluff".
Time described Newman's performance as "mean and keen as a cackle-edge scythe". The publication also praised Woodward, stating her acting was delivered with "fire and grace not often seen in a movie queen", but decried Welles's acting as "scarcely an improvement" on his performance in his previous role, in
Moby Dick.
Variety called it "a simmering story of life in the Deep South, steamy with sex and laced with violence and bawdy humor... a kind of
Peyton Place with the action shifted from New England". It praised the scriptwriters for the successful merging of the three Faulkner stories that inspired the film. The review also praised Martin Ritt, the camerawork by
Joseph LaShelle, and the film's musical score.
Cosmopolitan called the movie a "gutsy melodrama". For
The New York Times, critic
Bosley Crowther noted Ravetch and Frank's "tight, word-cracking" script that featured fast-paced scenes with "slashing dialogue". The reviewer felt that the cast was "clicking nicely" until the story of the writers "plunged" from the dramatic scenes to "sheer story-telling make-believe", while Crowther concluded that it went from "superb" to a "senseless, flabby heap". The
Los Angeles Times opened its review qualifying the movie as "provocative, evocative". While critic Phillip K. Scheuer failed to see the plot's relation to
The Hamlet, he praised the work of writers Ravetch and Frank, as well as the "exacting direction" of Ritt. Scheuer perceived the southern accents of the cast and the use of redness on their make-up to be unauthentic, but he felt that the use of the Louisiana landscapes and the development of the characters gave the film a "comulative bite" and a "powerful persuader" that "you are there". The review described Welles' acting as "terrific" and as dominating of the plot, while it favored Newman, Woodward and the supporting cast. Closing the piece, Scheuer wrote that he could not "get the sense" of the ending, while it mentioned as "top credits" the contributions of North on the soundtrack and Lashelle's camerawork.
The Miami Herald pointed that the story did not resemble Faulkner's work excepting his use of "lusty accessories". The reviewer implied that most moviegoers would be not familiar with the work of Faulkner, while he remarked that the film would be "perfectly satisfactory". The piece closed by again criticizing the producers that felt that "Louisiana looked more than Mississippi than Mississippi does", and the newspaper took it as an example of the "liberties" taken with Faulkner's work.
The Memphis Press-Scimitar welcomed Welles' performance as "superb", while it also remarked the large difference between the original stories and the movie. Also in Memphis,
The Commercial Appeal defined
The Long, Hot Summer as a "sizzler", that showed a "superior" performance by Woodward, as well as a "stellar" cast. The piece determined that the "tempestuous, earthy" plotline would not be suitable for the "immature", rather for the "adult" that would find it to be a "dynamic drama" for the "swirling turbulence" of the Varner family and the "frank omnipresence of sex". The
Austin American-Statesman considered that Welles represented "one of the picture's more entertaining features" that made the film "gripping", along with the "able performances" and "crisp dialogue". For the
New York Daily News, Kate Cameron gave
The Long, Hot Summer four stars. She described the work of the writers in integrating Faulkner's three works as a "fascinating saga". Cameron called the cast "first rate", with a "smoothly and convincingly" direction by Ritt. The
Chicago Tribune wrote that the movie had a "first rate" cast, praised the photography and defined the result as "engrossing entertainment".
The Boston Globe defined the location as "authentic", while the reviewer felt that the plot "has bite" and its pace advanced as "a race horse". The newspaper hailed Woodward's interpretation of the character as "a polished perfection of understanding".
The Cincinnati Enquirer opened stating that doubts regarding Woodward's acting "are put at rest" with the release that it called "adult theater". ==Legacy==