Rating: 
Summary: Carol White is a hero.
Review: There are a half dozen sceens in this film which showed a clear, objective cause and effect relationship between chemicals/fumes and Carol's allergic reactions. So where is the ambiguity as to whether her illness is real or imagined!I am not one who sees upper class suburban life as automatically shallow, empty and boring. If that was an intended message of the screenwriter/director, maybe the shallowness he shows us is his own, along with arrogance and envy. Two days after seeing this film I woke up crying about it because I realized belatedly that, although Carol was neither assertive nor intelligent enough in her persuit of cures, she is heroic. Although she was a victim of illness, insulting and undermining disaffirmations, isolation, and a severe deficiency of supports, in the end she was trying harder to get well. She wasn't giving up. The depressing and frightening thing about this film story is that so many people, who might have helped the kind and innocent Carol, undermined her. Have you noticed how little compassion that the Carol White figure illicits from most of the film commentators? How do think such film viewers would relate to a Carol White in real life? I think the answers to these questions are a large part of what this film is unambiguously saying.
Rating: 
Summary: just stupid
Review: I don't get these people saying this film was the greatest thing since slice bread. All this happening was inside that woman's head. She just didn't make me believe that household cleaning items would make one sick. Oh yeah, I do know if you breath it to much and drink it then a person would get sick. But only a fool would do that. Getting a perm will make one sick? And that part where she reaches the clinic had me laughing till tears came to my eyes. "stop! stop! your contaminating this whole area!". Talk about overreacting. All from the the exhaust of one car? Didn't the clinic in New Mexico seem like an occult group. And what was that with the singing and singing what? "giving yourself to love?". I really serious doubt that the enviroment will actually make one so sick that they can not walk out into the real world. NO, they have to relocate to a guru clinic in New Mexico. All this movie caters to is the enviromenatalist (tree huggers). This movie people is just a bunch of baloney. It is of no suprise to me that this junk is what is coming out of Hollywood. This movie was just to to stupid for words and way too touchy-feeling for me.
Rating:
Summary: my face hurts from slapping it
Review: I'm sorry, I just didn't get it. I know people like this movie, but I don't like it at all. It's by far the slowest movie I've ever seen. It was beautifully shot, and a slightly interesting plot, even a tad eerie, but just [was bad] right up until the end when absolutely nothing happened. Nothing happened the entire movie! She gets sick from everyday chemicals that are everywhere and seeks refuge from all this pollution in a New Mexico retreat run by a swindler/preist guru type. That's it. Call me spoiled expecting an ending too. Village Voice called it the "greatest movie of the decade" and the New York Times said it was "unnerving". It's not "darkly comic" either. All lies. The movie's one redeeming factor is that it is in fact, original.
Rating: 
Summary: Easily one of the best of the 90's
Review: Even people who like it seem to misunderstand it, though. This is the real brilliance of Haynes' creation - it can be read many different ways. If you watch it and say, 'yeah, yeah - I get it already,' as people frequently do, then you haven't gotten it at all. The second half is especially underappreciated - people often mistake it for a commercial for touchy-feely therapies rather than a scathing criticism. Haynes makes art modeled on the most banal forms imaginable - often TV movie of the week stuff. At his best he raises questions about our culture that are almost cosmically frightening. It's a pity that there aren't more films like this. Moore gives her very best performance here. And the craftsmanship is overall incredible. This is a moving and scary work of art - a new kind of horror film.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't expect much quality . . .
Review: If you are looking for a terrific visual and audio experience, you can pass on this DVD. The soundtrack is pure mono, and the picture is average. If you really want to purchase this movie, get the VHS version, although that's not much of a bargain at $18. Better yet, rent it. The only reason I bought this movie (DVD) is because Jessica Harper is in it. She had two very small scenes. There are some other supporting roles that are nicely done and appealing. Yes, Julianne Moore's performance is extremely good. She literally looks weak and sick throughout the film, but makes some nice fashion statements. I don't know if this film is for or against environmental whackos, and it will a while before I watch it again. Sometimes you roll the dice on DVD's and that's what I did here. I really prefer a presentation with great sound and picture -- that's what DVD's are about!
Rating:
Summary: Unsettling, creepy, BLEAK, perfect!
Review: I'll start by saying that Safe is hands down
the absolute BEST film I've ever seen. As has
been mentioned many times in these reviews, this
is THE best performance of Julianne Moore's career
(with Boogie Nights being a close second). This
is also the best film of Todd Haynes' career (does
ANYONE know where to find Superstar: The Karen
Carpenter Story or Dottie Gets Spanked????).
I've waited MANY MANY years for this DVD release,
as I can finally see the glorious framing in
widescreen, and get a bit of insight into the
thought processes behind the film. At first, I
was a bit disappointed by the commentary track,
but then realized that too much information on
MEANING, etc., would ruin the experience of
deciding for oneself if the illness was
environmental or psychosomatic (I tend towards
the latter).
I've seen this film close to 25 times now, and
still have yet to see a more unsettling film
(although Repulsion JUST sqeaks by on the
creepiness factor).
I had to smile at some of the
other comments posted here, namely about "subjecting"
friends to this film to gauge their reactions. And
as for the comment about the truly horrifying scene
in the baby shower....I COULD NOT AGREE MORE! I
thought I was the only one to be severly affected
by this extremely creepy scene. It ranks up there
with a particular scene in Happiness (if you've seen
it, you know which one), and the last shot in Repulsion
in its ability to send shivers up my spine EVERY time
I see it.
Suffice it to say, this is one of those films you
either completely fall in love with (as I and many
here have), or you find as boring and bland as watching
paint dry....Yup, gauging people's reactions to this
film is always fun. And one last adjective: UNRESOUNDINGLY BLEAK...
Rating:
Summary: In my top ten for the 90s
Review: Haynes' style in this film reminds me very much of Kubrick -- the static long shots, the deliberate, gradual pace, the startling and unexpected cut to black at the end. It gets under your skin and stays there. Moore, the best actress of her generation, has never been better (although you should see "Vanya on 42nd Street" for more of her range). I respect Haynes for respecting me enough to let me decide how to interpret what he shows me. Great movie. (By the way, someone earlier wrote, "Todd Haynes is an amazing director (and he's gay of course!)." I'm still trying to decipher that one. (Haynes is also Caucasian--does that also make him an amazing director?)
Rating: 
Summary: too subtle (!)
Review: Before I saw this movie, I didn't think I'd ever use the phrase "too subtle." And this movie is EXTREMELY subtle. Generally, that's a good thing--I love, especially in the beginning, how everything seems to be all right until you actually pay closer attention and realize that it's really not. However, in the latter half of the movie, the director seemed almost to be hiding from the plot, veering it in two different directions--on the one hand, Wrenwood is very cult-like, and the main character gets increasingly drawn in. On the other hand, she is getting increasingly isolated even within this isolated place. I expected the ending to be completely devastating in my depiction of her collapse and (self-)destruction. Instead, it cut off before she really got there. After discussing this with a friend for a while, we decided that in fact the end did imply that she would continue to get worse until the ending I expected would 'happen'. However, I have to say, the subtlety of the ending left me unsatisfied.
Rating:
Summary: Safe
Review: This is such a remarkable movie. Julianne Moore plays Carol White in one of her best roles ever. Though Julianne's character does not talk a lot throughout the movie, she proved that an actress can be very emotional and convincing while just sitting blankly in front of a mirror or on a couch. Her character is living the American dream until she starts to develope some symptons that appear to have no connection. That is until she learns about an illness that has to do with environmental fumes that cause certain people to become very ill. She got a bleedy nose from a perm, and started seizuring after walking into a building that was being fumigated for bugs. Her solution: Go to a remote center to live where it is safe and clean in the air. There, she learns more about this illness and more about herself. She almost undergoes a self-transformation. She becomes more aware of the slightest things. And the ending proves that not all endings are perfect and happy. Julianne Moore did a spectacular job on this role and I cannot think of anyone better to play it that her. This is really a very emotional movie and will (and has) make some people cry from pity. This should be part of all movie collections at your house. It's a truly moving movie.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: Todd Haynes, who earlier made a film about Karen Carpenter that used nothing but barbie dolls, sets this story in 1988 Los Angeles with a woman (Juliana Moore) who is "allergic to the 20th century." The film opens with Moore and her husband making love, but the brutality of the man's thrusts and the bored expression on her face reveals her alienation from her life. This is later reinforced throughout the first half of the film, when we see her with her friends and family. Finally, unable to combat her psychosomatic illness, she withdraws to a retreat in New Mexico run by a subtly tyrannical new-age leader. The results are disturbing and bewildering, and Moore gives the performance of a lifetime. Safe works as documentary, satire and allegory all at once.
| 
