Death on the Nile

On a simply wild, wet and windy night audience members were not at all deterred from venturing out filling the Playhouse to capacity in eager anticipation of the latest offering from this talented company.
The tabs opened to suitably chosen show music, and once again we were not disappointed as the decorative set immediately transported us on board ship and the banks of the Nile. The
cane furniture was perfect for the action and together with the impressive sarcophagus stage left emphasised Egypt in the 1930’s.
As the passengers were gradually introduced as they came on board, their individual characters and idiosyncrasies obvious from the outset, certain coincidences and red herrings were thrown into the pot, in typical Christie style.
All were welcomed by an ingratiating Steward, giving a delightful performance, as he assured each and every one, they had the “nicest cabin on the boat”. Another fun character was the
Beadseller hounding each passenger as he attempted to sell his wares, forever being chased off by the Steward only to pop back again and again, commenting astutely that “foreigners
were very trying”!
Central to the plot were honeymoon couple Kay and Simon Mostyn. Kay was an heiress who had gained control of her fortune on her marriage. Had Simon married her for her money?
Did her erstwhile guardian and uncle Canon Pennnefather, who had coincidentally turned up on board, have a hidden agenda? Who was the enigmatic William Smith who was observing
everyone intently in the background? Why was Jacqueline de Severac, Simon’s jilted fiancée and once Kay’s closest friend, stalking their every move? DUN DUN DUN!
There were some lovely scenes and interchanges between the characters in the first half, but the plot thickened considerably in Act II.
To everyone surprise as he was sitting in the salon Paul was supposedly shot in the leg by Jacqueline who suddenly appeared DSL, then immediately dropped the gun and ran away. Soon after it was discovered that Kay had been shot dead in her cabin. Fortuitously, Dr Bressner was on hand to tend to things, an endearing performance with a charming accent that didn’t get in the way of the dialogue as can sometimes happen.
Clues and theories were tossed about as the various characters threw suspicion on each other.

All the cast played their roles sincerely and with conviction.
Central to the plot Simon gave a top-notch performance keeping everyone guessing until the end and was totally convincing at every turn. He was superbly supported by a very glamorous
Kay and his partner in crime Jacqueline. Who would have guessed that this congenial chap could have been do devious!
Mrs Ffoliot-Ffoulkes was very well played and had some lovely lines. The epitome of a snobbish matriarch, always underlining her social position, she looked down on the radical
William Smith, was perfectly bossy to her niece companion Christina, and made such fussover the disappearance of her scarf after the murder.
William gave a polished performance throughout and obviously had hidden depths, as it turned out he was actually Lord Dawlish, and took a shine to Christina who was sweetly played and looked lovely.
Louise the maid also managed to make her mark and throw extra doubts and suspicions into the equation.
The Beadseller did well again at the end as the ship’s Captain, but not so much fun!
The piece did miss the presence of Poirot in this one, but Canon Pennefather did well to fill his shoes and work out the denouement! There was an excellent scene when he quietly examined
the gun, the “blood” stained handkerchief and Mrs F’s velvet scarf, you could almost hear the penny drop when he worked it all out.
All the costumes were just right for the period, lighting and sound well thought out, and an extra nice touch on the set were the signs for STARBOARD and PORT CABINS.
This was an excellently performed, well cast and well directed production making for a very enjoyable and warmly received evening.

Any observation made by the reviewer can only be based on what they see at the performance in question.  The reviewer may have received information in advance of the
performance, and it is inevitable that their assessment will be affected by that knowledge. The N.O.D.A. Representative’s intention is to give an objective critique of the overall
production and in particular the performance viewed.  It should be remembered that any review of this nature can only be objective as far as the techniques used during the
performance observed.  Any criticisms expressed may not have been valid at other performances and are only made to encourage higher standards in Amateur Theatre.
It is hoped that the audience’s appreciation of your efforts will have given everyone a lift and encouraged you to greater achievements in the future and that the observations made by the
reviewer will prove helpful in improving future productions.

© NODA CIO. All rights reserved.