A Corporate Tragedy Told with Wit, Bite, and an Uneasy Kind of Catharsis – front mezz junkies, Theater News

The Toronto Theatre Review: Crow’s Theatre’s Rogers v. Rogers

By Ross

Walking into Toronto’s Crow’s Theatre for Rogers v. Rogers, I was already annoyed, borderline hostile, if I’m being honest. The idea of spending ninety minutes revisiting the corporate dysfunction of a company I’ve spent years resenting did not exactly thrill me. Rogers Communications has been a forced companion in my current building and the pre-construction condo I’m still waiting to move into next year, and their customer service routinely leaves me pacing my apartment like a caged animal, furious and trapped. So sitting down to watch a play about the empire that has personally consumed so much of my patience felt like voluntarily reopening a wound that never really healed. I was bracing for a complicated, emotional impact.

And yet, by the end of the night, I found myself holding a strangely contradictory mix of emotions. I was frustrated, but also standing in a place of admiration, with even a wee sliver of catharsis somewhere deep inside me. The production doesn’t redeem Rogers as a company (nor does it try), but Michael Healey’s sharply calibrated script and Tom Rooney’s astonishing solo performance transform this well-known corporate fiasco into something unexpectedly compelling. The result leaves you irritated by the real-world implications and impressed by the artistry that exposes them, a paradox that somehow feels perfectly, unmistakably Canadian.

Rooney (ShawFest’s My Fair Lady) tackles the full roster of feuding family members, executives, lawyers, and peripheral players with the kind of focus and determination that has long made him one of Canada’s most magnetic performers. He’s hilarious, engaging, occasionally chaotic, and wildly committed. In an astonishing bit of theatrical artistry on display here, yet even in his thriving articulations, there are moments when the rapid shifts blur together more than they should. Characters bleed into one another, and the storytelling occasionally relies on us to wait for contextual clues before recalibrating back into whoever’s story we are existing in. I couldn’t help but think of David Greenspan’s virtuosic clarity in the Atlantic Theater’s I’m Assuming You Know David Greenspan, a one-person meta-masterclass in defining character through breath, voice, and stance alone. Rooney is ballsy and mesmerizing, but the razor-edge distinction sometimes isn’t as defined as Greenspan’s surgical clarity. And don’t get me started on Rooney’s strange guitar-playing interlude that stalls the momentum without offering any insight.

Where the play shines brightest is in its tone: a pointed, witty, sharply observed “Canadian Succession” that captures the absurdity and high-stakes theatre of the Rogers family’s public meltdown. Healey (The Master Plan) balances satire with sincerity, leaning into the corporate theatrics without losing sight of the emotional and political stakes. Director Chris Abraham (Crow’s Rosmersholm) makes superb use of a wide wall of screens behind that conference room desk, a cold, blinking constellation of capitalism that underscores the circus-like chaos of boardroom warfare that happens all around it. It’s smart, stylish work, courtesy of set designer Joshua Quinlan (Crow’s Octet), lighting designer Imogen Wilson (Soulpepper’s Old Times), and sound designer Thomas Ryder Payne (Soulpepper’s The Welkin). However, the projection design by Nathan Bruce (Crow’s Wights) is so strong that I found myself wishing the production had pushed it even further.

Underneath the comedy is a surprisingly affecting story about power, legacy, ego, and the high cost of corporate ambition. The parallels Healey draws between Edward Rogers’ internal coup and bureaucrat Matthew Boswell’s effort to block the Rogers–Shaw merger give the play a rich structural tension that keeps us leaning in. This isn’t just about dysfunctional family dynamics; it’s about governance, public trust, and the maddening reality of living in a country with some of the highest wireless and internet costs in the world. As an audience member who walked in already hating the company with a passion, the show struck a nerve. It also offered a strange kind of relief in seeing those frustrations articulated with such precision and humour.

Rogers v. Rogers, based on Alexandra Posadzki’s book, “Rogers v. Rogers: The Battle for Control of Canada’s Telecom Empire“, is a must-see battle, sharply written and skillfully performed. It is perfectly packed with just the right amount of smart commentary about Canadian power structures and the systems we’re trapped inside that I never disconnected (like that one day the play wonderfully references). I did leave the theatre frustrated, although not with the production, but with the reality that it mirrors back at us. The play wins its case with wit and theatrical flair while gently (or not so gently) reminding us that Rogers, as a company, remains a thorn in our collective Canadian side. The play is a powerful piece of satirical theatre, impressively crafted, and painfully truthful. And like the country it critiques, it leaves you wondering how, as Canadians, we’re supposed to navigate a landscape where the giants always seem to win. “Freedom” might very well be the answer.