Footsteps in the Fog

source: Footsteps in the Fog

I disagree with other reviewers who persistently label this a Victoria melodrama.This historically would be anytime between 1837 (Victoria's accession) until her death in January 1901.In fact judging by Bill Travers' second hand motor car seen in a couple of scenes, this is most definitely an Edwardian melodrama.Victoria's eldest son ruled briefly from 1901-1910 as his mother had ruled for 64 years which is still the record; (although I suspect it will be broken by our present monarch who is now in her 56th year. Now that historical point is out of the way, I awarded this film an above average 6/10 for acting, direction and other film credits including production values.Jean Simmons was miscast playing a lowly maid much as Audrey Hepburn did not in my opinion convince for the same reason as Eliza Doolittle.Jean as an actress was too refined and middle class and as another reviewer noted she could not affect a convincing working class cockney accent; (See "Eastenders" TV soap if you want authenticity).In 1955 when this film was made, drama schools were mainly run by a leftish middle class who trained often middle class actors for a mainly middle class audience and tended to drum out the regional vernacular accents of their charges during their training.How different now (post kitchen sink drama) when for example Sean Bean was told at R.A.D.A. to keep his broad Yorkshire vowels for a succession of working class roles.I did not feel Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons had much chemistry together, surprising considering they were married at the time. Bill Travers was rather wasted as the lovelorn barrister and the actress whom he wished to be affianced was rather a lacklustre character.However Finlay Currie relished his small part as the police inspector.Finlay was often cast in myriad different character roles in his long career and when Hollywood producers wanted someone who looked old and wise the casting request would often land in Finlay's agent's in tray.Another small character part was well played by William Hartnell (who played the first Dr.Who in 1963).He played an oily blackmailer whom the police should have thanked for putting them on the trail of the dastardly Stewart Granger. The film somewhat lacked tension, pacing and suspense although it was filmed adequately, hence my rating of 6/10.

She died last weekend aged 80, a great star whose career never seemed to find a summit, forestalled by middling films and imprecise casting. While this Edwardian Gothic gave her one of her more intriguing roles I've always felt she was too beautiful for it. If Lily the blackmailing housemaid had been less attractive the dangerous affair with her murderous employer would have felt a lot darker, seamier and her final pathos - the little skivvy whose dream-world collapses around her - more acute. When the Grangers are together they look perfectly suited - a married star-team of their day. Full marks to their performances, though. While one or two plot-twists are far too facile - the brother-in-law mistaking the barrister for Lowry just because he comes out of a room, for instance - Arthur Lubin's direction gets the points across clearly and efficiently though lacking the Hitchcock intensity and lingering touches which might have made this a minor classic. A solid Technicolor production there's nonetheless a certain aura of rush and tweaking here and there with odd continuity slips and scenes that suddenly trail away in mid-sentence. Some bad processing is evident when the rather wet second-leads go driving together in the new horseless-carriage, which at least provides some topically amusing light-relief. But it's a memorable little show overall, good to watch with a last glimpse of Granger that's quite clammy - and now to be cherished more than ever as another movie-icon slips away from us in the dark.

"Footsteps in the Fog" is a truly excellent Victorian drama starring husband and wife team Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons. Granger plays Stephen Lowry, a man who has murdered his wife and gotten away with it; Simmons plays his maid, Lily, who knows he did it. There are two different paths he can take to keep her quiet. He prefers one way; she prefers the other. Meanwhile, Lowry has fallen for a beautiful woman, Elizabeth Travers (the luminous Belinda Lee) of his own class, and, after a suitable period of mourning, wants to marry her. The fly in the ointment there is a solicitor, David MacDonald (Bill Travers) who is also in love with Elizabeth and very suspicious of Lowry's behavior. When Lowry is accused of a crime, Elizabeth asks David to take the case. This is a really neat film with a surprise ending. The acting is wonderful, as is the atmosphere, which captures not only the danger in certain scenes but the whole ambiance of Victorian London. Jean Simmons to my mind has always been underrated. She does an excellent job here as the quietly wily Lily. Granger is attractive and plays the fairly unflappable Lowry very well. Sadly, the gorgeous Lee would die a few years later, at the age of 26, in a car accident. Not only is she lovely in the role, but no expense was spared for her costumes, especially that blue gown. Filmed in color. Highly recommended. A real buried treasure.

When we first see Stephen Lowry (Stewart Granger)he seems to be a grieving widower as he stands beside his late wife's grave in Victorian London .The truth is another thing altogether and we soon learn that he has murdered his wife ,by poison ,and concealed the evidence .Unfortunately for him he was observed by the ambitious and put upon parlour maid Lily Watkins (Jean Simmons)who blackmails him into giving her the job of housekeeper and takes possession of the deceased's jewels .She is also in love with Lowry and he strings her along with promises of marriage while plotting to kill her and marry the dutiful Elizabeth (Belinda Lee)the daughter of his business partner Alfred Travis(Ronald Squire).much to the consternation of straight arrow lawyer David Mcdonald (Bill Travers)who is in love with Elizabeth and who harbours the gravest suspicion about Lowry. This is a well made movie ,with lavish interiors ,some striking Tecnicolor photography and a moody score .It is strikingly well acted especially by Granger who always appeared at ease in period roles .Simmons struggles a tad with the Cockney accent but still manages to convince as an opportunistic female with a pathetically unrequited love for Lowry .Strong support from Marjorie Rhodes as her nagging boss ,Peter Bull as a prosecuting attorney and William Hartnell as an oily blackmailer also boost proceedings .The whole thing is lushly and slickly made melodrama that stands out from the run of the mill studio product of its time

At first glance, FOOTSTEPS IN THE FOG looks to be a traditional Gothic mystery about a maid becoming involved with her sinister master, who may or may not have contributed to his wife's demise. Once you start watching it, though, you quickly realise that this film is anything but traditional. Instead it's a uniquely quirky black comedy, an exploration of some of the seedier aspects of the human condition; the '50s version of VERY BAD THINGS, if you will. Stewart Granger, who has the capacity to be wooden (see SODOM & GOMORRAH), is a good fit as Stephen Lowry, a shifty aristocrat who thinks nothing of poisoning his wife when he tires of her. Even better is Jean Simmons as his timid maid who decides to take on her master. The whole film hinges on this central relationship, and it's a real zinger. Excellent production values, plenty of tongue-in-cheek humour, and a finely-judged humorous supporting role for William Hartnell (HELL DRIVERS) all help to provide the interest, and by the end of it FOOTSTEPS IN THE FOG has become a thoroughly engrossing and atypical mystery story with plenty of twists you'll never see coming. A gem, in other words!

This film should have been better somehow. It has a lot going for it, in terms of the cast (with Stewart Granger and then wife Jean Simmons cast in roles which generate friction, not love). This is like the negative to their relationship in YOUNG BESS. In that story the plot of Admiral Thomas Seymour to grab control of England's throne through forcibly marrying Princess Elizabeth was twisted into a romantic tragedy (the first of many for the "Virgin Queen"). But the story held one's interest, and the script was well written (in particular giving that rising talent Deborah Kerr her first pathetic victim part as Katherine Parr Tudor Seymour). This is set in Victorian times, and is based on a story by W.W.Jacobs. Don't confuse him with his rival late Victorian/Edwardian/Georgian short story writer H.H. Munro. The latter, ever recalled by the nickname "Saki" is remembered for his impudent and brilliantly sardonic stories of life in the early 20th Century in Europe, like "Tobermory" and "Shredni Vasthar" and "The Interlopers". Jacobs was always W.W.Jacobs, and is principally recalled for one masterpiece of suggestive horror: "The Monkey's Paw". If one looks at his spot on the IMDb board, many films (mostly forgotten) were based on his short stories (mostly forgotten). One that did get made was based on "The Money Box", and was turned into Laurel & Hardy's comedy about two sets of twins, OUR RELATIONS. And there was this film. If it is not as good as a film with Granger and Simmons as YOUNG BESS, it is not as good a movie based on a tale by Jacobs as OUR RELATIONS. Briefly it is the story of two connivers who's goals run into each other. Granger is seen at the beginning returning from the cemetery, having buried his wife. Only when we are alone do we realize that far from mourning the loss he is very satisfied. Naturally this raises suspicions in our minds - and in the mind of an ambitious maid in the house played by Simmons. She finds proof that the wife did not die naturally, but was poisoned. She proceeds to force Granger to marry her. This was not in his scheme of things, and so he decides that Simmons must go. But in their scheming and counter-scheming others get hurt, and suspicions begin to recirculate concerning both of them. The story's resolution resembles an Eric Portman film of a few years before (not based on the Jacob story) called DEAR MURDERER. Oddly enough, that film was a better movie about an ill-mated pair of vipers. Whether the flaw here was that the script seemed to drift along, or the directing was not as crisp as it should be is hard to tell. For the sake of the cast, starting with it's two leads, I have given it a five. However, DEAR MURDERER would have gotten an eight.

This is a case of yer pays yer money yer takes yer choice. If you have a penchant for Victorian melodramas a la Gaslight then this should be right down your street. The source material is a story by W.W. Jacobs, best known for The Monkey's Paw, and it's the one about the chancer who marries for money and slowly poisons his wife. Alas, a servant in the household is on to him and blackmails him to elevate her position. She has to go too, of course, but suffering a touch of the Lord Lucans he kills the wrong girl, strengthening the position of housemaid Simmons. Meanwhile he lines up affluent Belinda Lee and hatches a plot to make it seem that Simmons has been poisoning him. Pure hokum not made more palatable by a wooden performance by Bill Travers that has to be seen to be believed. Ham Peter Bull phones in a turn as Crown Prosecutor and William Hartnell turns up as another blackmailer. Nothing, alas, can save it.

Jean Simmons and Stewart Granger are brilliant in this murder thriller. There are so many twists and turns that you'll never guess what is going to happen next. I wasn't particularly taken with the film the first time I saw it but after several more viewings it is now a firm favourite. Simmons in particular shines as the manipulative girl in love with Granger and this is probably their finest teaming together on screen. See if you can guess how it's all going to end - a clever ending to an enjoyable movie.

JEAN SIMMONS plays a housemaid who takes advantage of the fact that she knows the truth about STEWART GRANGER's wife--and the fact that he murdered her, then pretended to be the grieving husband. She uses this knowledge to blackmail him into making her head of the household staff--and the schemes continue, by both of them, with the cat-and-mouse game leading up to a satisfying ending. Both Simmons and Granger are at their best, completely in charge of their roles and well cast as the conniving leads. And yet, something is missing. Instead of building suspense, under Arthur Lubin's limp direction, the film wanders slowly toward the conclusion, a few surprises along the way and the main thrust of suspense being the question it poses: how is he going to get rid of Simmons when her hold over him becomes even stronger after a second murder committed by him on a foggy night, presuming the woman was Simmons. While the fascination lies in the handsome production values and the performances of the two leads, the film itself lacks the impact a melodrama of this sort should have by the time we reach the diabolical ending. A tighter script and stronger direction would have helped. BILL TRAVERS is completely wasted in a supporting role.