I have to disagree with you there on this point. Through looking deeper into this piece i have found there are areas within the play where Neilson’s promises are kept. The different levels of Character explored by Neilson are a great example to this.

Sam Cox’s many levels; The “Actor’s” role of a veteran seargent is what the audience are first introduced to, as if this were he’s normal “Self” however during the staged arguements over ‘Gant’s’ over-imagination we see another level, the “Self” shown through simple tendencies, hopefull and whimsical ideas and i understand this isn’t actually Sam Cox, but its teh idea that another level of “Character” has been unmasked through Neilson’s work.
This could be seen as a true ‘unmasking’ revelation. As humans we cover each hurt, each aspect of ourselves with a mask to hide it from the world. Nielson’s work tends to look at the different ways with which to explore the emotions we hold close and how to stage it in a way that can capture an audience.
I didn’t leave the theatre confused or even hopefull, i left feeling like i watched something worth thinking about, worth looking deeper into.

The only part of the play that left me a little put out was that of the bears. However i can even look into that as a way of exploring our hidden nature of playful curiosity, where we use our imaginations to shape the furture.