Thanks for the memories!

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

...which is to say, a better script. "Safelight" is by no means a terrible film, but despite honest efforts from a talented ensemble headed up by Evan "American Horror Story" Peters and Juno "Killer Joe" Temple, the story fails to truly engage. The characters are a little too stock, their situations a little too bland and cliché to be memorable. Sadly, we've pretty much seen this all before. Impaired youth befriends broken flower, who inspires his special talent while inspiring herself to break her own bondage. The end. Ms. Temple makes the best of her mistaken choice of scripts, and it's always fun to see solid actors like Jason "Monkey Shines" Beghe and Christine "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains" Lahti get work on the big screen, but it's just not enough. I suppose "Safelight" is a reasonably competent calling card for auteur Tony Aloupis, but he still needs to step up his game. I followed this one up with another under-the-radar indie of a very similar nature, "Spring," which I would have to rate as at least marginally better than this one; neither one is essential viewing by any means, but if you can catch them for free, you'll do okay.

A slice of life indie-drama about a teenage boy (Evan Peters) with a slightly dysfunctional leg, they call him cripple in the movie but I think that's borderline slur so yeah I'll just put it like that instead, seems to work fine otherwise just walks a bit crookedly.Anyway he befriends a teenage girl who's a prostitute (Juno Temple) and yeah that's what the movie is about more or less.The plot summary here on IMDb make it sound more like a road-trip movie than it actually is, I mean there is a roadtrip but it's not substantial to the story so if you're expecting a typical get up to crazy things in new towns type of road movies you might be a bit disappointed.Writing could have been a little sharper but Temple and Peters are both as always good and make it worthwhile still.

There is no official indication that this is a movie set in some "retro" period, but I think it is. I'm not sure why. Perhaps to emphasize the physical and cultural isolation of the setting.The clothes and cars seem old and there are no computers.The two kids are outsiders for different reasons. But their status as outsiders brings them together. I don't think there was any narration until the last minute. That's always really awkward, although in this case the lines spoken by the narrator, who is obviously the male lead, are simple yet profound. He says that sometimes people come into your life who open up new perspectives or possibilities. Or something along those lines. That's really what the movie was about.It's dark, so if you are prone to being depressed by dark films, you may want to avoid it. Yet it's different than the dystopian cynicism of a lot of mainstream films, reality shows, and comedy. Because there is "light" in it. The Christine Lahti character never lets the kid down. She is always there for him.I did not understand the back story on the girl. They should have tried harder to make that clear. Did she get abused by a step dad? Of course the drives from the desert to the lighthouses made no geographical sense, but viewers outside California may not realize that. I suppose it's OK, because we sometimes allow for such things in order for a movie to get its' point across and entertain us. There are no lighthouses close by any deserts. You would have to travel a long, long way to find any on the coast. It wouldn't be a casual road trip either.There is no explanation for how the boy became a gimp. I guess they didn't want to focus on that, since the limp was just a metaphor for being an outside or a pariah.Although the conclusion was depressing and inevitable, they avoided showing gore by literally not filming it. There is no sex or hardcore violence in this picture. I really appreciated that.The music is not much to speak of. There were a couple unmemorable indie tunes, but original. I am so glad they didn't use some clichéd soundtrack.This is a slow moving character-driven piece that does not attempt to slam you over the head with a message. It's also a lot less cynical than the average modern indie.I have no idea who the girl is. She was OK and the boy did an adequate job. He was supposed to be an innocent kid and he portrayed that adequately. Lahti was good, although her character was not an original one. The kind-hearted country western divorcée has been done before.

This was a lovely and complicated story about 2 young people who live on the fringe of society only to find the center of it in each other. This is one of my favorite movies to date. It doesn't attempt to put lipstick on the pig in the room. She's a whore and he's a gimp but the 2 of them together is just beautiful. It doesn't have special effects, nudity, kick ass music or gory violence. This movie works because it's honest. Cinderella of the streets meets her prince in some poor run down town.The country music was decent and it's perfect for this movie. A picture about 2nd chances and humanity.