Safe Reviews

[Highly rated reviewer]

Peerless

Todd Haynes' cold, hard allegorical horror movie is a masterpiece. Ostensibly telling the story of an over-privileged Los Angeles housewife who slowly becomes allergic to living in the 20th century, this deceptive, slow-burning tale has been taken by many to be a metaphorical AIDS parable. Although it works, quite brilliantly, on that level, the suggestion that the focal illness is nothing more than psychosis, brought about by the complete lack of significance in the affluent, robotic, Stepford-esque set of scheduled routines that Carol (Julianne Moore) calls her life, is a far richer and more compelling interpretation. Regardless, subtext is not essential to the film's success, as it works quite wonderfully with or without it. Haynes' flourishes, particularly in the opening 40 minutes, are astonishing; the clinical, disengaged long-shot camerawork makes the whole film seem as if it is being viewed from a laboratory; the queasy, ever-present hum of air conditioning units and distant road traffic on the soundtrack during the interior sequences, vividly create a world rammed to the ceilings with potential disease; and the use of bland, almost lavatorial industrialized inner-city locations not only highlights everyone's complete separation from nature, but also visualises Carol's complete social and psychological isolation. The haunting, retro electronic score (which wouldn't sound out of place in an early Romero picture) is both aptly synthetic and quietly chilling, and Julianne Moore as the delicate, waspish Carol, gives absolutely nothing less than the performance of a lifetime. If all this sounds high-minded and conceited, its not; this is pure, resplendent cinema, and one of the defining films of its decade. It is, quite possibly, also the finest.

Moore is superb in a fascinating indie film

What a stunning film.

People who have seen Far From Heaven will know of the greatness Julianne Moore and director Todd Haynes can achieve together. Safe is their first collaboration and a fascinating one.

Moore is amazing and seems to go through physical transformation in the part. She captures the anxiety of the character, stuck in a hopeless situation, brilliantly.

The script is well constructed and multi-layered. Haynes explores a subject ever more relevant to today's society.

The commentary track on the DVD is very interesting. Moore, Haynes and producer Christine Vachon all discuss their areas of expertise with regards the film and reveal some startling facts - it was astonishingly low budget for such a beautifully made piece.

Check it out.

One of the most thought-provoking films ever

I absolutely loved this. The period (1987) is realised perfectly through music, the framing is exquisite and Moore acts so well it is impossible to believe you are not watching a documentary so deeply does she inhabit this poor woman.

No spoilers - but as you watch reflect on how this film could be a parable for the experience of being gay, our responsibility to ourselves and what it means to live successfully.

This quiet film will live with you for days afterwards. I'd definitely watch it twice.

Haunted?

"Safe" is haunted by a "Stepford Wives" feel. Carol White's husband is successful, his son nice, his dead wife died - how? Carol, however, sends up flares from the first moment. She is contained, perfect, quiet-spoken, entirely intent on fitting in and being approved of. Does this remind you of - a child? Perhaps even an abused child who has learned the "safe" way to survive and thrive?

The film is driven by an undercurrent that is never fully addressed. The environment has become inimical to Carol's being, but why? We are pushed to explore the question gnawing at us from beneath the quiet exploration of American San Fernando Valley success. Besides "The Stepford Wives," I think of Phyllis Chesler's Women and Madness (1972) and Donald Bain's The CIA's Control of Candy Jones (1976). Chesler's book is about the Freudian psychiatric bias against women, and "Candy" about the CIA's now-well-documented use of hypnosis, drugs, and trauma to create multiple personalities useful to "national security."

Perhaps it is enough to read Carol White's zombie-like existence that finally breaks down into an environmental illness as the vacuousness of the machinated 20th century lifestyle, but I sense something more ominous. Where did all her distance come from? Who exactly is her husband? What is their background?

Safe (if you don't hire this film !)

Un-believably poor film and I am gob-smacked as to why Julienne Moore agreed to take part (star in it is too generous).

Hire at your peril...

self-obsessed drivel!

Todd Haynes can be a brilliant director;but this,his first(?) movie is downright awful.It's NOT an allegory for Aids,it's NOT a take on 80's suburban L.A.,it's just not anything!A portrait of a boring,self-pitying,self-obsessed 'Stepford wife'.We had a good chat while this dribbled past in the background...like a dying fire!Thank the gods of film that Todd Haynes went on to make truly great cinema.But...give this a wide berth...you have been warned!!!

Dated

A good story about the toxic environment that we live in & the real affect that it can have on some people. However this film was very dated and showed the 80's as not being that great in regards to film making!

Horrific.

Bleak, mesmerising and terrifying, this sickening horror follows a timid housewife's frightening descent from her confused, empty life into a dreadful, hysterical illness. Julianne Moore is unutterably excellent, cringing from a world of shudderingly shallow people.

[Highly rated reviewer]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Maybe it was meant to be a campaigning film. After 1 hour nothing much happened so I had an early night.

Film quality was poor, as though they had used discount or out of date film.

Other than that, just slow and boring.

Bad decision. . . .

Now remind me again why I clicked the 'rent this title' button??!

I should have read the very accurate 'hate it' reviews here. I agree with pretty much eveything that was said about this film. It really was THE dullest film I have seen for a very long time. It is ugly, boring, has little plot, is mumbly and we both fell asleep after about 50 minutes and then switched it off when we woke up.

The 'love it' reviews are extremely pretentious which says it all really! Or perhaps we are all just thick and missed the point????

As a yardstick when choosing a film if the 'hate it' reviews outweigh the positive ones then I don't usually bother - how did I miss this??