Reviews

It aired on TCM last night and as I remembered that when it came out in 1967 I walked out of it, I wanted to see just how bad this thing was, or if I was that impatient. I rarely walk out on films.

As soon as the credits ended, I was reminded of one of the initial negative reactions I had to the film. We get a title song under the credits (left over from when the production title was "The Long Ride Home") and as soon as the director credit disappears, so does the song. As in someone picked the needle up off the phonograph record before it was done. That's only the first example of the kitchen blender editing that goes on in this film.

A group of Confederates are in a Northern fort, caged in a big pen and apparently treated decently by Major Glenn Ford. The leader of this group is played by George Hamilton and when his accent isn't atrocious, it's gone. The editing faults show up again when somehow a bunch of the rebels kill some guards, turn the fort's cannons around and begin firing on it. We just don't get to see how they managed to get out of the holding pen in which they were confined

They escape through some magical tunnel that leads to the river, but with no establishing shots, we have no idea of how far that tunnel goes. We never even get a shot in the tunnel. The rebs manage to catch up to and defeat a previously departed detail that includes Ford's betrothed Inger Stevens and they accomplish this by magically hiding in trees that manage to be right in the path of each Union soldier in the detail as they attempted to scatter when fired upon.

There's all sorts of exposition here to show us what a mean bastard Hamilton is - he's left most of his men behind when he should have waited for them at the river. There's so much exposition that we forget that top-billed Glenn Ford is even in the film since he disappears for about a half-hour. Ford's search party includes two comic relief types (one of whom is Dick Miller) who seem to have walked in from another movie or an episode of "F Troop." This is made more apparent as they are frequently seen in obvious studio shots that don't match the surrounding footage shot on location.

It was at this point that I recalled that this film was started by Roger Corman but it was usurped by the studio and given to Phil Karlson. Corman's involvement would explain Dick Miller, but the handling of his scenes might explain why Corman was dismissed. Apparently it was enough of a disaster for longtime producer Harry Joe Brown to quit the business.

Harrison Ford (billed with middle initial "J") gets reasonably prominent billing but he disappears once the film leaves the fort - we don't see if he's killed while the rebels escape. Paul Petersen is given very prominent billing above the title, but he doesn't show up with any dialogue until Glenn Ford comes back into the film in the last half-hour. That's just as well, Petersen is horrendous in his few scenes.

Even worse is Max Baer, Jr. as a whacked-out Confederate who loves killing and physically sparring with a buddy. This goes on my list of all-time worst performances and it indicates why Baer never got beyond Jethro Bodine on "The Beverly Hillbillies." Surprisingly effective is Todd Armstrong as Hamilton's sympathetic second-in-command yet this was his last feature film. As George Hamilton's moral conscience, he has the most well-written role in the film.

There is one strong plot twist here involving Inger Stevens that is quickly thrown away. En route, Baer comes across a Union dispatch carrier and kills him, taking from him the message that the war is over. The message couldn't have been that important to the carrier anyway as he's hanging out in a cantina with a bunch of whores. Hamilton swears Baer to silence (this way he "can kill more blue-bellies") as he wants to engage in a cat-and-mouse game with Ford.

This makes no sense as there would be no need for further pursuit but that would mean that the film would end just as abruptly as the title song. So just in case, Hamilton rapes and beats Stevens after telling her that the war is over. He leaves her there, but when Ford (the Glenn one, not Harrison) catches up to her, she fails to tell him that the war is over. She wants vengeance for having been spoiled. The film makes little more of that motive.

I could go on, but the film isn't really worth the verbiage I've given it thus far. Consider this a public service message and beware at all costs.

Father and son reconnect after 30 years, re-establishing the bond lost so long ago. Not exactly an exceptionally novel idea, but here it is given a new twist – the connection comes via a ham radio that links 1969 with 1999. Father Dennis Quaid exists in the past, but perhaps not for long as his number is supposedly up in a fire to occur. The son, in sudden rushes of ancient memories, warns his father of the event, and of the mention by another firefighter that his father made the mistake of turning the wrong way as he attempted to exit the blaze.

The film manages to utilize themes already explored in films such as `Peggy Sue Got Married' and `Back To the Future' and even `Field of Dreams' can be said to have provided some input. Even so, while not entirely original, `Frequency' manages to offer much that is fresh and entertaining, as well as cause a few lumps in the throat.

The inherent problem with time travel films – especially those that manage to alter events that occurred in the past, is that old `suspension of disbelief' requirement. If events aren't moving fast enough, the implausibility almost surely will dawn on the viewer.

The film almost gets away with it, only at the very end does it trip on its own contrivances, but this viewer was able to forgive it as the human element, the way the characters so endear themselves, made the transgression forgivable if not plausible.

Dennis Quaid, a native Texan, does a rather remarkable job of capturing the intonations of a lifelong Queens, New York resident. Being one myself, I think I'm qualified to make such an assessment. James Caviezel is less successful in that regard, but still he is ingratiating as the son grown to manhood who must come to grips with the forces unleashed by having tampered with time. Because dad was spared on the day of the fire, his wife – a nurse – didn't have to leave her job owing to the emergency, and thus was there to prevent a dosage error that would have proved fatal to a patient. The problem is however that this patient just happens to be a serial killer who is now still managing to provide victims even in 1999.

Did I mention that the killer stalks nurses? Unfortunately, now the one who managed to save his life is scheduled to become his next victim.

Alright, that's as much as you're going to get in terms of spoilers, as it would be unfair to spoil the rest of the story as father and son in their respective eras must keep the killer from increasing his count of victims. But, in doing so, both men become prey for the killer and both are subject to disbelief by the family friend who is investigating the crime in each era. Andre Brougher plays this character, now the son's supervisor on the 1999 police force. He's practically replaying his role from the TV series `Homicide: Life On the Street' but that's not necessarily a bad thing – Brougher is excellent in that role.

Sure there are some gaps in logic, and even in presentation, but they didn't dawn on me during the viewing, nor did they detract during a second viewing. As a bonus, the background of the New York Mets winning the 1969 World Series provided a most fascinating subplot that even manages to lend credibility to the claims made by Quaid to Brougher as he is trailing the killer in 1969.

Quaid once again gave me reason to wonder why he has never managed to make it onto the `A' list of performers. He's done consistently good work for over 20 years, but has trailed behind the likes of Harrison Ford and Michael Douglas – even though he's probably the better actor. James Caviezel's stock has risen somewhat since this film, and rightfully so. While only in the same scene together once, we can still believe that they are related. A standout performance is also given by Shawn Doyle as the killer – in both eras, and his make-up as the elder version is always convincing.

Credit must also be given to scripter Toby Emmerich despite the lapses in logic as his dialog always rings true and his characters really do seem to exist – which had to help immeasurably to what Quaid and Caviezel bring to their performances.

(MAJOR SPOILER BELOW)

Kazan talked, this film's fictional character David Merrill does not.

Sorry to give it away, but in no way should anyone interpret this as based on the infamous whistle blower at all. Kazan could have returned to Broadway where there was no concern over a blacklist, the film's protagonist does not have that option - although he considers it and does make an attempt.

The film does mix its few historical references - making it appear that Merrill is assigned to "High Noon" (which is referred to as a "B" film), but while that film's screenwriter Carl Foreman was under suspicion, he made it to the end of the film. Also quite interesting is the importance made on constant references to Darryl F.Zanuck - this is a Warner Brothers release. Had they checked, they might have noticed that it was Jack Warner who named Kazan and Arthur Miller as Broadway subversives (with no further elaboration offered or requested in the real hearings). I guess that Warners didn't want to denigrate their own history, but did manage to thumb its nose at Zanuck who left Warners back in the early thirties in order to head up what eventually became 20th Century Fox.

De Niro gives an excellent performance, his soul searching, his pain and his final triumph (at a price) do feel real. Annette Bening is less so, but she has much less of a role. Martin Scorsese, De Niro's frequent collaborator as his director, scores as a fellow director who leaves for England - most likely he is based on Joseph Losey. Their discussion on film-making has the ring of truth to it. Shortly after this, De Niro made HIS directorial debut, so the two got to reverse roles in real life as well.

Sam Wanamaker, an actor who actually suffered under the blacklist, plays an attorney named Graff who is recommended to Merrill and most likely he's based on Martin Gang who served a similar function during the HUAC hearings. He does an admirable job in what came close to a career finish for the actor/director. Chris Cooper and Patricia Wettig also rate in smaller roles as a show biz couple whose life is torn apart by the hearings, and which serves as the catalyst for Merrill's own introspection.

The subject still warrants a better, more accurate treatment, but at least this comes closer to truth than the bits covered in "The Majestic" or in "The Way We Were." There are some anachronisms, but the period detail of the production design is still admirable. The last quarter hour of the film packs a wallop as it fairly well duplicates the footage of the real events in depicting the misapplication of justice that came as close to being un-American as the subversive activities that the Committee was supposed to be investigating.