Box office During its Australian theatrical run,
Sleeping Beauty grossed
A$300,888. In the United States, the film earned
US$36,578 during its limited release in four theaters. Jonathan Romney of
The Independent gave the film a mixed review, noting that "Leigh's debut has style, strangeness and distinction – yet for all its icy brilliance,
Sleeping Beauty feels incomplete rather than truly enigmatic. But it's an intriguing piece, tantalising rather than a tease; it should keep you awake, at least." Moira Macdonald of
The Seattle Times praised it as an "elegantly creepy" film designed to "leave audiences uncomfortable." Tom Charity of
CNN similarly described the film as "brilliantly creepy" and praised its cinematography as "somber" and "surreal", concluding: "In the end, there’s enough here to make us see why Leigh felt compelled to turn her dream into a movie, even if this suggestive, frustratingly elusive effort is not an entirely pleasurable experience for the rest of us."
The New York Timess
A. O. Scott commented favorably on the film's dark humor, writing: "Though the tone is quiet and the pacing serenely unhurried,
Sleeping Beauty is at times almost screamingly funny, a pointed,
deadpan surrealist sex farce that
Luis Buñuel might have admired." Liam Lacey of
The Globe and Mail praised the film, writing: "While it might be easy to dismiss
Sleeping Beauty as an exercise in chilly titillation, that undervalues the precision of Leigh's technique, and her story-teller's slippery refusal to play to ideological expectations. At its simple core,
Sleeping Beauty is a perfectly pitched chamber piece about the menace of voluntary oblivion."
SBS Australias Fiona Williams felt the story failed to successfully translate to a feature film, noting that the "screenplay struggles to stay interesting, and wants for the evocative passages that are an author’s pathway to character and narrative development. We have little sense of Lucy beyond a series of repetitive actions that on the surface, paint her as an aloof party girl with cashflow problems. But surface is all we have." David Jenkins of
Time Out made a similar observation that "when Leigh lets her literary instincts take over, such as a flowery monologue by one of the old men, the film is at its weakest," but awarded the film four out of five stars and praised Browning's "rigorously passive performance [that] imbues her character with immense depth and mystery. She gives her body over to Leigh with the same reckless abandon that her character does in this singular film." Peter Debruge of
Variety gave the film an unfavorable review, describing it as "maddeningly elliptical, depriving auds of virtually any of the details they need to understand, much less relate to the character. It’s fair to call Browning brave for taking on this role, but she’s too wooden and inexpressive here to invite us into Lucy’s interior space." Writing for
The Age, Tom Ryan found the film's "distant" storytelling ineffective, writing: "Leigh, better known as a novelist, here creates a world devoid of tenderness or altruism of any kind. Her film is certainly intriguing, but it doesn't make for easy viewing and its misanthropy is deeply unsettling."
Accolades ==References==