Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Mabel Munoz Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Murphy Howard I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

calvinnme You get the feeling that what director Woodie Van Dyke REALLY wanted to do was reenact the great San Francisco earthquake scene of destruction on the 30th anniversary of its occurrence. Of course, MGM studio head Louis B. Meyer is not going to fork over money for that, so a story is constructed that merely contains the scene he really wanted to do as the climax of the film. The whole thing is a well acted but rather maudlin morality tale in the production code era tradition. You've got the personification of the Barbary Coast entrepreneur in Blackie the atheist saloon owner, perfectly cast with Clark Gable in the role. You have the voice of virtue in the person of priest Father Tim Mullin, again perfect casting with Spencer Tracy in the role, and you've got your virtuous songbird of a lady in Jeanette McDonald as Mary Blake, looking for work as a singer. Did anybody on the MGM lot in 1936 have a better voice than hers? Square jawed Jack Holt comes over from Columbia to play society scion Jack Burley, who in the end is no better, maybe worse, than Blackie. He claims he is respectable but when he and Blackie are fighting over the affections of Mary, there is no blow that is too low for him to land. In the middle of all of this conflict - scion versus rascal, man of God versus atheist, a woman who is torn between the man society tells her that she is supposed to love and the man she really does love comes the great quake. When you watch it think about the work that went into this given the technology that did not exist at that time and it becomes even more wondrous. Unfortunately, at least for me, the movie gets rather hokie at that point. I'll let you watch and get the details.In the final analysis, Jeanette McDonald is probably given more to do in this movie than she should have because Louis B. Mayer thought she was "hawt!". Meanwhile the production code was the best thing that ever happened to Spencer Tracy. No doubt he was a great actor, even greater when you realize that off camera he was a heavy drinker and bedding every MGM (and before that Fox) starlet he could get his hands on, and yet he plays a priest quite believably!. And Blackie suddenly believes in God because the person he loved is not dead in the rubble? What about all of the other dead people? Should, by the same logic, the people who loved them have become atheists? Not as long as head censor Joe Breen was on the job, and he would be for another 16 years.Highly recommended in spite of the hokie ending. It is just a shame that they couldn't have made it in 1933 when things were allowed to be a bit saucier and more realistic.

fflambeau What to make of this movie? It has 3 terrific stars in Spencer Tracy, Clark Gable, and the female interest and singer, Jeannette McDonald. I cannot say that McDonald's singing thrills me because she has a dated style and warbles but Tracy and Gable deliver. Especially Gable who is at his macho best.What undercuts this story is the religious message which is about the strongest outside of any movie outside of the "10 Commandments" where it is more understandable. The plot is written so you have good vs. bad, white vs. black, Tracy vs. Gable. Of course, the earthquake not only shakes the city, it shakes Gable's entire outlook and he gets on his knees and thanks God that his love, McDonald, survived. This is all a bit soppy in the 21st century. And Tracy, although a very good actor, almost is given a halo in this movie.Perhaps the star of the movie is the earthquake itself; considering this movie was made in 1936, the special effects were fantastic, even good by today's standard. Superb directing of the earthquake scene, Wikipedia says by D.W. Griffith in addition to the credited director Woody Van Dyke.Also notable are black performers, first in a contest scene (won of course by J. McDonald) and then some children as dancers in the earthquake scene. This was in 1936 so quite unusual.It is notable in a 3rd way: it is one of the movies credited with launching Spencer Tracy as a mega star. A good performance, but definitely not his best. Gable's performance here is far more powerful.So, like its theme of good and bad, this movie is a mix. It did not do well in the academy award hunt although nominated frequently (only 1 win) and I can see why: too much religion.

chaos-rampant At the time, this was probably seen as a blockbuster and moved many. It is too ordinary to recommend now. It has nice, clean drama. It has character conflict, sure. Gable stands in for ragged individualism and the American spirit of pulling yourself up from your bootstraps. Jeanette Macdonald stands in for unspoiled grace (what an amazing presence she was; exuding erotic magnetism in The Merry Widow, here she is dovelike and tender). Tracy's priest character acts as conscience.It is just so clean. Macdonald is not just the girl we see, she has to be a pastor's daughter and an orphan to emphasize her angelic purity, textbook stuff. The conflict up on the stage, since this is a musical, is that she's poor has to sing jazz tunes for Gable's music joint to get by, but her real talent is in opera, seen in this context as a higher form of expression. See?The one part that is interesting is that it all culminates with the San Francisco earthquake of 1906.The footage of destruction still impress on a visual level. There is scope here you wouldn't normally see in those days. But destruction like that—and Chicago's twenty years before—was a major force in shaping the face of modern America, doing away with the rubble of history, so the context matters.It ends with Macdonald singing among ruins and Gable in tears finally receiving god. (a scene that embarrassed this Hemingway man and his image)No dice. It is too Protestant to register for this viewer.But there is one notion that strikes some spark—a justifiably angry Gable has just hurt his former star in public for what seems like the last time, the rift between them for good, and this is answered the next moment by the ear-splitting roar of the earthquake and walls being ripped apart. Alas, in the film this is squandered in treacly lesson- learning.

james higgins San Francisco is a truly remarkable film. The special effects in the earthquake scene rival the special effects from any decade of film making. It is such an entertaining movie. Clark Gable is well cast in a role that's perfect for him. Spencer Tracy is fine as always, and was nominated for an Academy Award for his performance in this film. I am not a fan of Jeanette MacDonald, but this is one of her best roles. Jessie Ralph provides fine support. The plot is a familiar one to audiences today, but was quite fresh in 1936. Good music, excellent sound, costume design and score. Great production values. Very memorable and a great classic.