One of the year’s loveliest shows—one of the eeriest and most spectacular—requires a little investment. Not so much of money, but of time. Punchdrunk, the hotshot British company that builds ornate, immersive environments for its shows, has created Sleep No More…in Boston. Despite the seven-hour round trip—part of it on a shockless, overnight Fung Wah bus—I can still honestly vouch for the experience. Admittedly, the second cast (most of the Brit players have headed home) can be less than convincing, but even with watered-down Punchdrunk, Sleep No More will expand your notions of what’s theatrically possible. If your budget stretches to a Zipcar-enabled bop up to Brookline between now and February 7, I encourage you not to read after the jump: Punchdrunk’s sharpest tool is surprise, and you wouldn’t want to blunt the edge. That warning issued, you can buy tickets here, or click through to read about what you’re missing.…
Punchdrunk’s impact has already been felt in New York, although the shows themselves haven’t yet made it over here. (Scuttlebutt had it that a Faust was on its way to us, but venue and insurance negotiations proved too sticky.)
The company’s predilection for “total” productions, ones that have baroque ticketing processes that lead to spooky, out-of-the-way locations, has made it one of London’s breakout successes, and American creative teams have taken note. This fall, New York’s Woodshed Collective got rave reviews for its The Confidence Man, a roaming production on board the Lilac Steamship. And while I thought the show was a dead loss from a dramaturgical angle, the textures of the Lilac told their own, attractive story.
In Sleep No More, tellingly, everything is mood and texture and sensation. Fragments of the Macbeth story and visiting villains from Hitchcock thrillers (Rebecca’s Mrs. Danvers persecutes Lady Macduff) do exist, but they are drifting particles in the solution. We, along with these narrative bits, are suspended in the Old Lincoln School, four stories of creepy corridors and abandoned classrooms. In 44 of those rooms, the astonishing designers (led by Punchdrunk animating spirit Felix Barrett) have installed meticulous decors, throbbing with menace. The audience—split up early on and wearing anonymous blank masks—must wander in search of scenes, peer into cupboards and answer ringing phones. In Lady Macbeth’s dressing closet, for instance, one can root through her drawers to turn up early drafts of her husband’s fateful letter. The attention to detail is, frankly, overwhelming.
Now that I’ve made the pitch (and everybody left reading isn’t planning on going up to Boston, right?), I can let fly with my reservations. The troubles with the second cast are serious ones: Choreographer Maxine Doyle likes high-impact modern dance moves, remarkable for their athleticism (a woman runs up a door) and quick acceleration into frenzy. This can be a bit of a stretch for dancers not entirely accustomed to it; I saw one witchy boogie devolve into uncontrolled stamping, and so I ended the night consciously avoiding rooms with ongoing scenes. According to my companions, I missed some astonishing routines, including a bloody pagan ritual, complete with goat head and fetus. My path, though, took me up into the lonelier reaches of the production, where I felt like a detective discovering evidence (blood eddying in a bathtub) of some recently committed crime. I enjoyed the quiet. And while moments of revelation were many, wandering alone through a foggy, abandoned Birnam Wood (really just Christmas trees in an auditorium) may well have been unforgettable. Certainly, I have been seeing it in dreams ever since.
Sir. I think you got most of the cast wrong. Hecate rarely dances as she is usually doing one on ones in the basement. Are you talking about the woman in the red dress because that is Hecate. I think this review is confusing.
Dear Reviewer, Your review has a few inaccuracies. 1- only 7 out of the 17 or so cast members came over from Britian for this production, not the full cast. The rest were New York or Boston based and were part of the original cast that opened this show.2- The quality of performance has not diminished with the new performers who took over from the small handful of British who left shortly after opening (I have now seen this 3 times and can attest to this).3- I spent one of these times down in the lowest level following Hecate and the witches and at no point does Hecate do anything resembling a “witchy boogie”, she primarily does one one encounters and interacts with the witches 4- the actress playing her is part of the original cast, not a replacement. I would suggest getting your facts straight before writing a review.
The actress who plays Hecate was in the original cast and she is not a “dancer” in this show. Many of the original cast are still in this production. Where did you get your facts?
Here, read a real review:
http://cbreiner.tumblr.com/post/247385504/sleep-no-more-as-you-wander-through-the-bards
This is a sorely misinformed review. ..and I’m curious- Did you actually see the British performers when they were in Boston performing? Or are you just surmising they were “better”. How can you make a judgement based on performances you did not see? I have seen multiple Punchdrunk shows (Faust, Mask of the Red Death, Tunnel 228 ) in London and by chance was in Boston to catch Sleep No More. The performers are exceptional all around. I saw no marked difference in quality and was blown away by this production.
This review is irresponsible and grossly off the mark. Shame on you.
Hello commenters! You may notice I made a few changes in the text of my review. 1) I’ve revised the number of rooms downwards…where did I get the idea that it was 85 rooms? I tried counting as I went through, but clearly the show is spectacular at disorienting its clientele. And 2) I wasn’t sure if the dancing witch I saw was Hecate (she was a featured witch dancer, so I may have inaccurately promoted a run-of-the-mill witch), so I have changed it to “a witch.” It’s very confusing to match the cast to the performers, as you can imagine! The witch I saw snatches off a wig — and she was by no means the only dancer I objected to. Finally, while I never saw the British cast, the shortcomings I saw in the lead actor-dancers were a certain overcompensating hamminess coupled with physical inexactness. With many members of the British cast gone, it seemed to me uncontroversial to attribute this to a slip ‘twixt American company and British choreographer. Of course, as with all experience, it is subjective. I was unimpressed by the dancing that I saw; others were delighted by it. Still, I’m thrilled that so many are coming out in such furious defense of the show. As I said, I feel this is one of the great shows of the season. My quibbles with the performance style aside, the A.R.T. has done us all an immense service in bringing Punchdrunk to our shores. They have extended to Feb 7, so go go go!
Hecate is not a run of the mill witch. She’s the Queen of the Underworld. I agree with the other posters.. at least do your research before writing a review or a re-write of your review.
You do not even know what you are talking about. How can you write a review about characters you cannot name? The witch you mistakenly called Hecate was actually my favorite part of the production. If you wanted to clarify who she was, you could have just mentioned that she is bald for half of the show and people would have known who you were talking about. But the fact that you thought she (just one of the three witches) was Hecate, the Queen of all the witches and underground world, has to mean that she left a very significant impression on you, no? You clearly did not give her enough of a chance because she really is a highlight of the show. I am shocked that you objected to her as a dancer. Sorry to get so defensive, but I walked away really admiring her. I am also 100% positive that I am not the only one who thinks this way about this actress. If she was in the group of people you had in mind when writing that “the second cast seems less convincing”, you are out of your mind. She was one of the most dedicated of anyone. In fact, a lot of my favorite performers in SNM turned out to be ones that had recently replaced the original cast. Also, not really sure what else you expected of the choreography. What did they leave for wanting? Not much.
I agree with everyone else. When you do research and understand what you are writing about, feel free to write a review.
i agree. this review was not very helpful.
So many weird, nit-picky, resentful comments on an effusively positive review. Clearly there is some kind of campaign from disgruntled local cast members. Grow up, kids.
In response to “Biff” and Helen Shaw:
The tactic of attempting to reduce legitimate criticism to that of childish “nit-picking” is quite inappropriate, and only succeeds in projecting your own misdeed onto others. It is pandering to emotionalism and not to a rational discussion. The main point that must not be missed is:
A professional theatre critic compared British and American performers, without having seen the British performers, and without acknowledging the fact that half of the cast members, that were performing the night she attended, were a part the original cast and creative team, with the newer cast members trained by the original company members.
It is revealed by her own review and follow up post, especially by the statements “watered-down Punchdrunk,” “…while I never saw the British cast, the shortcomings I saw in the lead actor-dancers were a certain overcompensating hamminess coupled with physical inexactness. With many members of the British cast gone, it seemed to me uncontroversial to attribute this to a slip ‘twixt American company and British choreographer,” and “…so I ended the night consciously avoiding rooms with ongoing scenes. According to my companions, I missed some astonishing routines…” that the critic’s preconceived misconceptions created an unnecessary barrier that inhibited her ability to effectively critique the performers that were actually in the space. She chose not to watch the performers, and missed opportunities to see other sequences that would have informed and altered her premature conclusions. She therefore did not adequately observe the current cast AND she did not see the original British cast members.
To then put this into print and continue to support it - using the much worn out “with all experience, it is subjective,” as well as the vague and dubious statement “the shortcomings I saw in the lead actor-dancers were a certain overcompensating hamminess coupled with physical inexactness”(Over compensating for what? Inexact to what?), rather than finally taking on the challenge of objective analysis (which requires the support of factual data) - is very irresponsible on the part of the critic, and especially for TimeOut.
One suggestion is to acknowledge the fundamental differences between the highly stylized form of performance in “Sleep No More” (a fusion of acting, contact improv, and dance) that matched the environment it was born in, and the more accepted cinematic realism that is commonly expected by a general audience member, which would have been out of place in this production. Judging by her observation that, “In Sleep No More, tellingly, everything is mood and texture and sensation,” this should not be a stretch.
That aside, the critic does make effect use of language (“meticulous decors, throbbing with menace” and “Fragments of the Macbeth story and visiting villains from Hitchcock thrillers…do exist, but they are drifting particles in the solution”) to describe her reactions to the piece, and in that way, she does some justice to the production that she experienced. Her overall conclusions were favorable to the piece calling it “One of the year’s loveliest shows—one of the eeriest and most spectacular.” This shows a general strength in description and her appreciative support for adventurous theatrical events.
If she could match this with an integrity rooted in honesty, and not with a need to buffer a professional mistake using a rationalized justification, she would prove to be an asset to TimeOut.