LOU'S VIEWS: 'The 39 Steps' is spoof positive of laughs in Hitchcock's work

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Lou Harry

There’s a blissfully funny sequence in the first act of the Indiana Repertory Theatre’s production of “The 39 Steps” (running through May 14). In it, our hero, Richard Hannay (Matthew Brumlow) is forced to share a train compartment with a pair of fellow travelers (Rob Johansen and Tom Aulino).

Also in the scene, if I recall correctly, are a pair of conductors (Rob Johansen and Tom Aulino), a newsboy (Rob Johansen), a police officer (Tom Aulino), and a nun (Rob Johansen).

The pleasure of the scene comes in part, of course, from the dexterous character switching of the two multi-tasking actors. Hats fly. Jackets are switched. And all of it is kept, miraculously, crystal clear. We know who is who even when that same who was a different who just milliseconds earlier.

The train sequence—which includes a climb through the window and a wind-swept chase across the train tops—is filled not only with the giddy how-will-they-pull-this-off tension, but also by the way playwright Patrick Barlow and director Peter Amster have hooked us into the familiar-but-fun spy plot (inspired by the Alfred Hitchcock film and the John Buchan novel). As silly as the antics are, we want to know what happens to the hapless Hannay, whose evening at the theater ended with a dead woman in his lap.

A&E A body is discovered—but the actress returns in multiple parts—in IRT’s “The 39 Steps.” (Photo Courtesy Indiana Repertory Theatre)

On the run from the police and toward an explanation of the title’s 39 steps, Hannay takes his seat on the train and high hilarity results.

In contrast, there’s a sequence in the second act where Hannay has now been joined on the run by his leading lady (Sarah Nealis, who also played the murder victim).

They are, of course, cuffed together and an obstacle is wheeled on from the wings that, for some unexplained reason, Hannay tries to awkwardly maneuver through. He never communicates with his partner about the strategy for getting past it and he never takes the steps necessary to extricate himself once he’s entangled. Every step seems to complicate things further until, inevitably, he’s got her hand emerging, puppet-like, through his legs.

A&E A “North by Northwest”-style chase is just one of the many Hitchcockian moments in “The 39 Steps” that movie buffs might recognize. (Photo Courtesy Indiana Repertory Theatre)

Yes, it gets laughs. But the sequence is so deliberately structured to get to this point that the joy is gone.

By this time, too, the plot has run its course and the production’s energy has dissipated considerably, which makes it even harder to pull the audience back to that blissful state. (It almost does, in a fun, but anti-climactic ending.)

Rather than inspired lunacy, this act two sequence has something that looks like inspired lunacy but feels once removed—kind of like the feel of later Marx Brothers films, when the organic anarchy of the boys lost its comedic truth.

The IRT’s “39 Steps” ping-pongs back and forth between those two comedic worlds: the funny and the funny-ish.

The play itself, which I’m kind of glad I didn’t see in its Broadway production, accentuates that bipolar quality.
The joy of seeing Hannay chased by a makeshift “North by Northwest”-style biplane has to share the stage with shouted-out-and-underlined mentions (not, alas, actual jokes) of other Hitchcock films. The lone woman in the cast is given next to nothing funny to do. And the whole thing stays around about 20 minutes longer than it should.

In a show so clearly sold as a comedic romp, I didn’t expect the beauty and charm of last year’s “Around the World in 80 Days.” But I did expect more consistent invention and laughs. Those gaps are what keeps this fun show from transcending.•


This column appears weekly. Send information on upcoming arts and entertainment events to lharry@ibj.com. Twitter: IBJArts and follow Lou Harry’s A&E blog at www.ibj.com/arts.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.