Review from Nov 8:

So much to chew on here. I wish I’d been able to see it more than once, but my plane literally arrived a few hours before this final show so I’m just grateful that I got to see it at all. I didn't see the reading of this play a few years ago, so I’m only going off of what was shown tonight.

I really enjoyed what I saw as a lot of post-modern elements used to great effect. The almost mise-en-abyme structure where images and memories and ghosts are replicated and reiterated so many times in dream-like and destabilizing ways was very compelling and actually one of my favourite styles of narrative across mediums so this really worked for me.

I appreciate that you could really tell that the playwright was questioning the ethics of audience and the point at which empathy/sympathy can tip towards voyeurism/exploitation when making art. A lot of this came through in dialogue, and the entire concept of filmmaking and actors' performances being projected onto the wall behind them simultaneously (which was very smart), but also strikingly in two scenes: one where two characters have their first honest conversation only when the lights go out, and another where the characters retread a traumatic location offstage in the final scene. We are inside of these moments in that we have witnessed the complexity of these characters leading up to these moments, but we're also outside of them in what would be a climactic close-up shot were this a typical oscar bait-y film. I enjoy when art doesn't show us everything on purpose.

I also think that a lot of art feels the need to justify itself whether that's because of grant/funding models, the hollywoodification of art, a lack of faith in the audience, etc.). Sometimes we get stories that take a really clear stance on a complex issue, and work their way backwards from that, which can then feel inevitable and thus uninteresting. I think tough guy rode that line of courting complexity around so many questions (queerness in public life/perception, violence against queer communities, queer joy, ownership of trauma stories, voyeurism/witnessing, the ethics of activism or the "right" way to move through politically fraught events, etc.) without feeling like a smarmy know-it-all playing devil's advocate.

If I were to critique anything, there were some moments where I felt dialogue became a bit didactic, like the playwright was speaking to the audience through a character to really drive the point home. As an audience member, I don't really like this way of emphasizing a thesis, but then, I’m not a playwright, so I don't really know if there is/was a better way for this play in particular that felt like a puzzle box of various thoughts and questions still coming together cohesively at the end (a feat in itself!).

The writing was really the star of the show for me here, though I am biased since I know the playwright. However, aside from that, they really found a wonderful cast of actors who brought a distinct feel and to each character, which can be tricky in an ensemble. The lighting and sound was phenomenal, as many have already said. Less was more with the set; lots of negative space for ghosts to haunt. I look forward to seeing the awards recognition this play will receive in the future.