User reviews

Bette Davis gets top billing even though she isn't in two thirds of the movie? Well, considering how boring the leads were, she deserved it. This films crams a lot into 68 minutes. Red herrings, wild car chases, a butler with a secret and of course Bette Davis as the one who sets it all off, it's all in the film. Davis as Arlene Bradford, seems always in command, that her fate is a little shocking but not unexpected and a little bit delicious. With her short blonde hair and the tight shiny dresses, she is quite a welcome sight. A short fun little film.

LOVE the butt-snapping game the reporters play at the city desk of the newspaper. That scene was a little risqué for its time, but the Hayes Code hadn't quite kicked in yet. It's a possible kidnapping of a rich, scheming socialite Arlene Bradford (Bette Davis). William Demarest is the reporter "Spike" who gets the call to check out the story. It's a Warner shortie, at 68 minutes, and just one of the four films Davis made with director William Dieterle in the 1930s. Margaret Lindsay and Donald Woods co-star. Alan Hale Sr. is Chief O'Malley, of course. No movie could be made in the 1930s or 1940s without Hale. Regular TCM viewers will also recognize Douglass Dumbrille as "Josh Maynard"; Dumbrille had made "A Day a the Races" and "The Big Store" with the Marx Brothers. Gordon Westcott plays Joe Bello, and in real life, Westcott died at 32 in a weird polo accident. The newspaper dudes and photographers are all over this story, so apparently being followed by the news hounds is nothing new... Arlene's dad is played by Arthur Byron, and he died only a couple years after making this. Some GREAT scenery of foggy San Francisco. The story moves pretty quickly, so pay attention! The sound and photography are a little shaky, but it does show on Turner Classic Movies now & then. A Fun, quick paced film, even if Bette Davis doesn't appear in much of the film! /ksf-2

Considering the reputations and historicity of Bette Davis and Michael Curtiz, why hasn't anyone issued this marvelously little fast-paced film on video? Davis is lightning-sharp as wicked Arlene, and Margaret Lindsay was an interesting early Warners player. I understand that Jack Warner, in the early days of the talkies, used this film to demonstrate what a director could accomplish with a tight budget and filmic expertise.

This film is so rapidly paced that some of the action flew by me too fast to fully understand, although some of the confusion was cleared up in the end. Director William Dieterle used fancy wipes rather than fade-outs and overlapping sound to speed the action along. I prefer a more leisurely pace to enable me to digest the material. Still, the ending was exciting with location shooting in San Francisco a big plus, and it's always enjoyable to watch Bette Davis, who had emerged as a big star by this time. Hugh Herbert provides very minimal comic relief as an inept photographer. I was reminded a bit by Hitchcock's film "Psycho (1960)," but you'll have to watch this film to see what I mean.

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.

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.

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

She ain't nursing no machine gun sister but she sure is as mean and soulless as Paul Muni in SCARFACE. This is a dark crime movie disguised as a woman's drama. It doesn't paint a particularly pleasant picture of mankind, it doesn't cheer you up but it's very expertly put together.

Just because something is well-made, acted very intelligently and beautifully photographed doesn't make it enjoyable. It's just personal taste but I found this a little too bleak. Now I love a good bit of bleak despair and unmitigated misery as much as the next man but to reach those Tennessee Williams levels, that misery has to be so over the top, so hyper emotional that your brain tells you that such desolation could never happen in your world. This isn't quite crazy enough here, it's just horrible enough to be real. Bette Davis is particularly believable as the sociopathic candle, luring her moths to her cold as ice flame.

What's different, almost modern about this for an early thirties film is that the supporting characters are all well thought out proper people. They have real personalities and story arcs. In this melange of moods and atmospheres we get to know who these are. The police aren't all ignorant imbeciles, the newspaper men aren't all arrogant vultures, the criminals aren't all one-dimensional heavies. Occasionally Lyle Talbot put in a fabulous performance but this was not one of those times. In this he tries to act - he tries to be a broken man, eaten away the pernicious darkness of his'relationship with Bette Davis. The way he shows his erosion to an empty husk, denuded of any spirt however comes across as so lifeless that you can't feel anything for him. Even so, this approach gives this picture extra depth and authenticity.

Hugh Herbert - who is running at level 11 on the irritating scale, isn't just the annoying, unfunny bumbling idiot he seems to be. His utter disregard for the horrific events going on around him and his sole focus on getting a picture and lack of empathy for anyone else is actually quite a biting bit of satire. Just a shame he's so annoying!

The weak link in this picture is Margaret Lindsay. Her character, the naive goody-goody nice sister just isn't strong enough to give us someone to root for. She's genuine enough but sometimes being ordinary doesn't grab you, you don't engage emotionally.

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.

I love the early Bette Davis films, where no one was quite sure what to do with her. Here she has a showy role, as Arlene Bradford, a high society girl who slums by being involved in a stolen bond racket, using her boyfriend Spencer (Lyle Talbot), who is appalled.

The problem comes when Arlene involves the good sister, Val (Margaret Lindsay), in her plans. Her father (Arthur Byron) becomes even more disgusted than he was before. But there's more trouble to come. One day, Arlene comes home in her car and minutes later leaves in a taxi. She leaves a note and an envelope for her sister and says she may send for it.

This is a fast-moving film sparked by Davis' performance, even though she doesn't have that big a part. I'll be honest and say I'm kind of missing the Hitchcock connection here. I realize the story has a similarity to Psycho, but I didn't really feel this film was done in a Hitchcock style.

Donald Woods plays an earnest newspaper man, and there's a good assembly of supporting players: Douglas Dumbrelle, Alan Hale, William Demarest and Hugh Herbert as Izzy the photographer. Herbert with that odd way of speaking is always funny.

Enjoyable.

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.

Bette Davis is the wild daughter of Arthur Byron, and her half-sister, Margaret Lindsay and she adore each other. When her picture appears on the paper's front page, daddy lays down the law. After she noodges fiancee Lyle Talbot into passing more stolen bonds -- the proceeds of which mysteriously vanish -- she disappears from the family's Nob Hill mansion, leaving the entire city running around like mad trying to find her.

There's a lot to enjoy in this Warners B during their high-speed dialogue period. Miss Lindsay sums up the solution speaking as fast as Glenda Farrell, Miss Davis gets one of her best entrances, Hugh Herbert gets a key role in which he's funny and not an absolute idiot, Alan Hale has a disappearing Irish accent, and the story has a tremendous number of red herrings packed into its 68 minutes. It's a bit unusual in having no clear point-of-view character; perhaps that's a foreshadowing of the cynical Universal soapers that William Diertele would direct at Universal in the 1950s. It's minor, very minor, but it was key to Miss Davis' career. Apparently she didn't fight her bosses to get out of this part because she wanted the loan-out for OF HUMAN BONDAGE and worked very well with Dieterle.

Spoiled San Francisco socialite Arlene Bradford (Bette Davis) returns to her partying ways and brings along her sweet half-sister Val. She steals security bonds from the family and cash out with investment broker fiancé Spencer Carlton. She's involved with crime boss Jake Bello. The theft is discovered as the family business tries to cover it up. Arlene disappears and Val is desperate to find her. Reporters find her body in the car that Val is driving.

This starts as an intriguing drama with Bette Davis. I expected this to be a girl behaving badly and getting over her head. In a way, that's what happens but I'm surprised that Bette Davis doesn't stay in the movie. It stops being her movie. It becomes a bit of a screwball thriller with the body in the trunk. This is a movie split in two. The first half is a character study with Arlene. The second half is more silly starting with the kicking contest in the newsroom. After that, even Arlene disappears for a while. It becomes a bit jumbled. I would have liked to follow Bette Davis for the whole movie. Failing that, the movie should follow Arlene all the way to the end.

Wow, I am amazed that this film is so overlooked, especially considering the reputations of its director (Dieterle) and its star, Miss Bette Dave. Fog Over Frisco is probably forgotten because it had the misfortune of being released the same year as Bette's Academy-rocking star-turn as waitress Mildred in Of Human Bondage. Nevertheless, she is true to form in this early role. I enjoyed this film's fast past and lack of fluff. If you liked "L.A. Confidential" you will enjoy Fog Over Frisco's complicated plot and ambiguous characters. The plot structure was strangely reminiscent of "Psycho" -- except that Psycho was made twenty-six years later! Seems Hitchcock was not the first to shock his audience unexpectedly...

Betty Davis shoots ..... she scores I was amazed she was wickedly delicious as Arlene Bradford.She played it full throttle also, the twist and turns that the plot took were amazing. Great vehicle to demonstrate her range and her capabilities.Ms.Davis at moments seemed sincere but you knew that there was something sinister brewing about her.As the film unfolded i was a little confused, but everything seemed to gel and it took great shape.I had to watch a second time and I enjoyed it even more.Turner Classic Movies introduced me to this fantastic film and I have recommended this film to other classic movie film fans . To no surprise the loved it*** 10* out of 10* .