Fog Over Frisco

Have been through a lot of completest quests recently, most of them yet to be completed. One of those completest was to see all the films not yet seen of the films featuring and especially starring Bette Davis. Whether from early in her career when she was finding her footing, from the late-30s through to the 50s when she had found her style or from her twilight years. William Dieterle also did a fair share of films worthy of admiration and more.

Dieterle did do much better films in his career, epecially 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame' (one of the best versions), his Paul Muni collaborations and from memory 'Duel in the Sun'. 'Jewel Robbery' also is a gem worthy of more attention. Davis definitely did as well, too many to list being such a great actress who never phoned in regardless of what she was given and many of her films were good to brilliant, though she also did worse. The story also intrigued me but it could have been more.

Although it was great for some that it went at a fast pace and was short, there were times where those things were un-doings for 'Fog Over Frisco'. Did think that 'Fog Over Frisco' was too short, barely over an hour is not enough for a story that gets very complicated in the second half, and it did feel rushed towards the end when it literally felt like it sped up the action.

This resulted in from the middle act the story being too busy and at times very complicated, so coherence is affected. The dialogue does beggar belief far too much of the time, the worst of it vomit-inducingly inane, and Donald Woods is incredibly bland and simply does not have the presence for leading man material.

On the other point of view, Davis gives a fiercely committed performance and is a force to be reckoned with. Margaret Lindsay isn't quite as forceful, but she certainly does have much more presence than Woods and nobody doubts her commitment. The supporting cast are not exceptional but do well in rather cardboard roles, even Hugh Herbert (who for me is a take or leave sort of actor, sometimes amusing and at other times irritating depending on the material) and with Irving Pichel being the standout.

'Fog Over Frisco' looks good, especially the locations which have so much atmosphere. As does the photography which is eerie at its best. The film is hauntingly and not too melodramatically scored and Dieterle does competently with the direction. It starts off great with a very promising first twenty minutes that doesn't take too long to set up. The ending does excite

Concluding, not a great film but fun. 6/10

Mysterious crime, unconventional way of solving it, witty dialog, fast paced events, car chasing, unexpected resolution... are we watching just another detective action film starring Mel Gibson? No, it is 1934 film Fog over Frisco. It is amazing how little has this type of film evolved in last 70 years or so. The only "improvements" we see in modern versions of action films are slimy kissing and love-making scenes, two dozen explosions and rolling stock of a smaller country destroyed. Oh, yeah, done to include something for everyone and to extend the film time to standard one and a half hour.

Well Fog over Frisco is what a good action film should look like. It is absolutely enough to have a bit more than a hour to tell everything. Of course, Dieterle could easily make a film a bit longer and the plot more understandable, but this amazing pace is what makes this film even more special. You are moving in the spiral of events so fast that it is necessary to see it twice to get everything straight.

But this is not all. We see some really exceptional acting here. Bette Davis makes from one seemingly tiny role more than some leading character actors did in the whole acting career. She is absolutely convincing as Arlene, a spoiled and bored rich girl and you can never see Bette in another film to be so beautiful, glamorous, amusing and enchanting. No wonder that most men in film really seem to be in love with her. Margaret Lindsay, who plays a real head role of her step-sister Val, isn't match for Ms. Davis, however she did her part correctly. Other notable performances include Donald Woods playing Tony and Hugh Herbert playing Izzy, who are convincing as a witty reporter - funny photographer pair.

This film is one of the most underestimated films in the whole history of Hollywood and is a must-see for 1930s film period.

If you watch this only once it will strike you as a 7/10 because, unless you have the attention of a speed reader, much will escape you. After a second viewing and filling in all of the gaps, you'll likely see it as 8/10. This is a fast paced crime drama in which Bette Davis plays Arlene Bradford, the wicked stepdaughter of a wealthy man, and Margaret Lindsay plays the good daughter, Val. Everett Bradford is the father of Val, but he was once married to Arlene's mother who was apparently a wild one who ran out on him. Arlene is made in her mother's image - something her stepfather won't let her forget. Bette Davis gives a very lively performance here as a spoiled and easily bored socialite who, in spite of the family drama, has a good relationship with stepsister Val.

The whole movie centers on a complex securities smuggling racket that involves Arlene using her stepfather's business as a means of laundering the stolen securities - without his knowledge of course. When Arlene turns up dead, there are a multitude of suspects including the girl's own stepfather.

Bette Davis gives an energetic performance that presages the great roles to come, in spite of the fact that she is only in the first half of the film. Hugh Herbert plays the bumbling newspaper photographer who actually stumbles across a key clue. Warner contract player Robert Barrat plays the Bradford family butler, Thorne, who seems way too interested in Arlene's comings and goings.

I highly recommend this one, but only if you have the time to sit through it twice.

Bette Davis is an absolute delight and this is worth watching just to see her in her pre-code sultry best. There are some great costumes, nice sets and sequences but the plot and direction gets muddled midway after a great 20 minutes at the beginning. They try to cram too much into a short space and then move too quickly without making sense of what happens. There is also some corny screwball stuff which interferes with the flow of the film. This is what you would call a b picture with some good appearances by an interesting cast but it has an identity crisis going from serious danger in the air beginning with hot fox Davis and ends up as your average who done it vehicle.

I saw this at the Stanford Theatre in Palo Alto last week on a double bill with Of Human Bondage. At any rate, nothing really groundbreaking about this movie except that it was a fast paced, low budget bill-filler made before Bette Davis had broken through as a big star. The real treat here is the location shooting in San Francisco, showing the city before they built the bridges and a car chase that predates the one in Bullitt, except never exceeding 35 miles per hour. I also give the scriptwriters high marks for authentic use of forgotten place names ("Butchertown," "South of the Slot"). I'll admit my admiration is parochial, but you could do worse if it ever turns up on TCM or a streaming video service.

BTW: I can't recommend the Stanford highly enough. Beautifully restored movie palace featuring live intermission organ music on weekends and the cheapest date in town at only $7/ticket for a double bill. Google Stanford Theatre for the latest program.