Moonlight After Midnight – An Intellectual Puzzle
I found the performances strong. I did feel that Dockery dominated – he had more lines, more ‘important’ things to say, and most of the story revolved around him. Quesnelle was saved from a supporting role by the pure dynamics of the pair, the palpable power plays, and the enjoyable multitude of ways the characters turned the tables on each other. I would have liked Quesnelle’s character to have had more objectives, and a more equitable focus. And I didn’t feel the revealing ending justified her playing second fiddle.
On the topic of the ending… There is one. Which is important (for some people) regarding a puzzle. I am in two minds about it. [Don’t worry, no spoilers here.] On the one hand, a single fact means that there is a fixed point, a truth, and thus a resolution of all that has come before. Would we rather it not be there so we’re left guessing? Or does that solitary anchor prove the author wasn’t just waxing lyrical (not to mention providing peace for audiences who hate unresolved stories)?
The bottom line is that this mystery about relationships tickled my brain and captivated me from start to finish. The vivid performances by Dockery and Quesnell, and the chemistry between them, cannot be denied. This is an intellectual puzzle I enjoyed piecing together.
You can see it for yourself on Sept 7, 9, 12, or 14 at Waterfront Theatre, Granville Island.