A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

A terrific, unsettling film. A great performance by Julianne Moore. Great cinematography, of Los Angeles interiors and exteriors, highways and streets, restaurants and stores, and a health club - all amazing. A story that unfolds slowly and has loads of hints and pointers about what director Todd Haynes is trying to tell us, but in the end, the viewer is more or less left alone with Carol White in her dark bubble.I've read a lot of discussions and reviews about people wondering what exactly is going on here. My thoughts are all over the place as well, but I'm not getting into that, except for adding that it felt like one of those conspiracy / paranoia thrillers from the seventies, mostly those by Alan J. Pakula. This isn't really the same thing, maybe, but the vibe was at times very similar.What else can I say? I watched it twice within a short period of time, and that doesn't happen all too often these days. A must-watch for any film fan who likes to take a look outside the usual and familiar. A big 9 out of 10 for now, but that may change...

An affluent and unexceptional homemaker (Julianne Moore) in the suburbs develops multiple chemical sensitivity.Although much of the film is not noteworthy for its cinematography beyond the coloring (lots of green), there is one scene that features the most terrifying process of getting a perm... almost as terrifying as Haynes' obsession with AIDS."Safe" was voted the best film of the 1990s in the 1999 Village Voice Film Poll, though it does not seem to have gained the same reputation from general audiences. IMDb rates it a bit low, as does Rotten Tomatoes, and the awards overlooked the film. Jessica Harper appears as Joyce, and that makes the film worth seeing whether or not it has awards.At times the film seems like a subtle attack on Scientology, not unlike "The Master"... and yet, the film also seems sincere. Maybe there is something to be said about making life simple, avoiding chemicals, and other things... maybe.

One of the most important figures of modern independent American cinema, Todd Haynes is widely known mostly for his music-based projects ( ''Velvet Goldmine'', ''I'm not there'', ''Superstar : the Karen Carpenter story'' and the videoclip for Sonic Youth's ''Disappearer'' ). But it's 1995's ''Safe'' that, although not related to music ( except for the amazing soundtrack ), stands out as his greatest work by far - and that is because it proves once more something that seems paradox at first glance : that the most ''anti-American'' culture that we've known so far, is the American culture itself.Carol White ( Julianne Moore in the greatest moment of her multifarious career ) is a bourgeois housewife that leads a peaceful and safe ( motif that obviously repeats itself several times throughout the film ) life with her husband and her adopted son in their luxurious house. Her daily routine is limited to aerobic classes, choosing the right color for the new sofa and having healthy meals with the rest of the good housewives - her friends. While the story unfolds she goes through some crises that look like epileptic and she starts believing more and more that its due to the effects of the environmental disaster, like the infected air she breathes in the city, or the chemical products she consumes on daily basis - and that's enough with the synopsis cause I already gave away a lot.Judging from all the above, someone would imagine that this is just a film with eco-friendly messages and indeed, this is the impression that the viewer gets around halfway through the film. Sure, the emotional emptiness of her family routine and her materialistic way of life has been made clear so far, but until then her emotional crisis doesn't seem to connect to the environmental crisis in any convincing way. The viewer is trying to connect the pieces, completely unsuspected about what's coming up next - and be sure that it's going to shake and flutter you like few other movies do.The ideology that dominates the world right now, not only in the US of course but globally, has too many aspects and the environmental crisis is only a small part of its effects in the social life - also in the film, it's going to be proved that the ecological extension is just an excuse. What really matters here is the basis upon which this ideology is build, meaning everything that feeds it and promotes on a daily basis ''from below'' : the path of individualism and family alienation from society create the need for safety from everything that threats to shake the peaceful life of the proud ''civilian'' - and that's exactly what Carol is. A low-profile, exemplary, law-abiding citizen that minds her own business and that once in a while ''breaks'' the routine by drinking tea with lemon at her friends' or trying a perm for a change. However, she's completely helpless fulfilling her need for emotional contact and, in what seems a huge step for her from what we've known so far, she decides to change her way of life drastically. Convinced that the root of all her problems is the exhaust gas of the big city, she cages herself in an even more limited environment, a strictly closed society that promises peace and serenity to her. ''We are safe, and all is well in our world'' teaches the new ''alternative'' mentor and he warns her that she is the sole responsible for everything that spoils her peace - and that is because ''she doesn't love herself too much''. Carol is willing to believe anything to find a cure, but her new cage is as deadlock as the previous one, only this time human contact is restricted by rules. The shockingly ironic last scene still haunts me every time I walk alone in the dark.

This movie dramatizes the plight of the hypochondriac, a person who sincerely believes that he or she is physically ill although all empirical evidence indicates the exact opposite. A person has a cough, or a headache or some other somatic problem yet a physically examination reveals no problem. What is a person to think or do? Okay, then is it the environment that is making the person sick? That leads to more frustration as those in charge of the environment claim that everything is fine, that nobody else is getting sick, only that one person, so therefore the problem must be psychological. By this time the person is frantic, can no longer function and then really becomes mentally ill. This is the theme of this movie. How is one to cope in an increasingly polluted environment that literally makes you sick but nobody really believes that you are really sick?What is one to do when they sick, really sick, yet there is no empirical evidence to suggest the presence of a health problem? Is it all merely psychosomatic? That is, is just in one's head? That is is the them of this provocative movie. Our environment is filled with thousands of chemicals the exposure to which cannot be avoided. Yet what is one to do when exposure to these chemicals effects one's health? How can one effectively cope? As movie so effectively shows, there are few if any viable options. For instance, what are you to do when at the workplace you have an adverse reaction to the chemicals in a detergent used to mop the floors? Stop working? Go home? Quit the job? Complain? Stop breathing? And then there is the question of whether you may be overreacting or is a hypochondriac. This movie dramatizes the plight of those who become sick as a result of exposure to chemicals.