Frequency Review
by Homer Yen (homer_yen AT yahoo DOT com)May 1st, 2000
“Frequency” – Tune In
by Homer Yen
(c) 2000
If you’ve seen any of the “Back to the Future” or
“Star Trek” adventures, cutting through the fabric of
time is about as easy as walking through the front
door. All you have to do is speed up that DeLorean
sports car or fly through some spatial anomaly. In “Frequency,” you would need a ham radio and a flurry
of solar activity. The difficult thing, however, is
not to disturb anything once you’ve gone back to the
past. Innocently stepping on a flower can alter the
future in unforeseeable ways. Thus, time travel is
one of the most creative yet trickiest of plot
devices. Do it wrong and the result is a flimsy story
filled with incongruities. Do it right and the result
might be “Frequency,” an inventive story about a Dad,
his son, and second chances.
The film opens in the year 1969. The Dad (Dennis
Quaid) is the spirited, responsible, and fun-loving
kind that all kids want. He’s also a heroic
firefighter. But his risk-taking approach eventually
gets the better of him. Thirty years later, his son
(Jim Caviezel) has grown up to become a respected
homicide detective. Like all children who lost their
fathers at an early age, he wishes that he had the
chance to get to know him better.
It’s just about the anniversary of his Dad’s death.
He pulls out his father’s old ham radio, which has
been stored away for many years. Incredibly, the
antiquated device still works. John is further
astonished when he hears a voice from the other end.
The voice says words like “Little Chief” (John’s
nickname) and relates other information that
incredulously makes it seem as if the mysterious voice
is living in the past.
After much contemplation, John can only conclude that
the other voice is his Dad’s, talking from the year
1969. It is a heartwarming sequence as these two
connect, and we believe the love that they share. “We
must be talking off the mother of all sunspots,” his
Dad says in amazement. John can neither contain his excitement. And without thinking about the
consequences of his conversation, he tells his Dad to
be careful, for tomorrow marks the day that he will
die in a fire.
You can’t blame John for his actions. But his advice initiates a chain reaction that alters future events.
In the new future, a serial murder case has now
escalated to new heights. John has to try to repair
the damage that has been done. The two work together
in a frenetic attempt to catch the killer. Here’s one
great benefit of time travel as a crime tool. In
1969, when the killer leaves his fingerprint on an
object, wrap it up and hide it within the walls of the
house. Then in 1999, John can retrieve it and use
modern technology to find out who the killer is.
As with all time travel plots, you can always find
fault with how the story resolves itself. In this
case, there is a double showdown, one that occurs concurrently in the present and in the past. But
enjoying what transpires depends on whether you become
fed up with the idea of solar flares enabling time displacement (smartly, the two characters are as
dumbfounded as the audience) or whether you are hooked
on the idea of a son getting a second chance to know
his Dad and to set things right. Concentrate on the
latter, and you can’t go wrong.
The film is impressive because the emotional aspect of
the story is so appealing. Its mood is uncanny but
not haunting. Its payoff is uplifting but not
treacley. It doesn’t benefit from special effects or
any big name stars. “Frequency,” however, is an evenly
paced and well-constructed story that enthralls and
keeps you guessing as to which way the film will turn.
This is one of more enjoyable films of this season.
Grade: B+
S: 0 out of 3
L: 0 out of 3
V: 1 out of 3
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online and get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
