So agree. I wanted to like it so much but really didn't.
I must first say, I'll take an ambitious failure like this over any upper middle-class-white-people-around-a-sofa play. But it is fails and falls short in almost every way.
The writing has some gorgeous language (it's unsurprising the playwright is also a poet) and a definite, fascinating voice. (I particularly enjoyed the anachronistic flashes of vocabulary among the poetry.) But a huge, huge weakness is in the storytelling and plot. Events and tension don't carry over into the next scene, resulting in an jerky, episodic feeling it doesn't seem to be intending.
To switch to the direction for a moment, I also agree the direction had promise but often felt underdeveloped and unfocused. The acting feels broad and unspecific at times and the hyper stylized parts don't seem to go anywhere. In particular, the segues between scenes seemed like they could add to something but ultimately seemed just there to fill empty time.
My largest criticism is how little time is devoted to the love story. We get to see so little of them falling in love. And it means we invest in each character separately, but not as a couple. (And don't get me start on plays about homosexual love where the only sex scenes are heterosexual. I'm not advocating for sex scenes, and I don't really like nudity onstage, but it always strikes me as odd when the only act shown is heterosexual. Can someone think of a play that's a heterosexual love story that only has gay sex portrayed onstage, while the central one is off?)
I so wanted to love it, but the execution let the ambition down.