dungeonstudio I didn't think BBS could have a stinker in the bunch. But this is the one bad apple for sure. It's so dislocated and uneventful, it truly hurts to see such great talents go to waste. Whatever it thought it was, it wasn't. Whatever it was trying to be, it couldn't. Whatever fulfilling moral it thought it possessed, it doesn't. It's useless magic that baffles the viewer into innocently believing for a mere moment, and then is ashamed for having bought into it. That sentiment can be said of so many flaky relationships with supposed 'magical beauty' that 90% of the viewers have already experienced, or will experience. This movie does absolutely nothing to justify or caution the naive lustful immaturity of the whole ordeal. If anything, it exploits Noah for being an overly attractive airhead that men put up with in order for sex. And as long as they do, she will eventually put out for them. I found this more distasteful of any Russ Myers or Roger Corman-esque 'Grindhouse Sexploitation' movie I've ever come across. And believe me, I like those movies A LOT! Like the fishing lines used in Welles childish tricks through out the film, and carrying the camera off on a balloon to simulate 'flight' - DO NOT BUY INTO THIS FOR ONE MOMENT! You'll be such an easy lay if you do.

whitesheik So, let me get this straight - if I have a taste for Fellini, Antonioni and Godard I'll feel right at home with A Safe Place? Um, no. I love Fellini, right up through 8 1/2. I've enjoyed much of Antonioni. Godard - a mixed bag for me, but I like Breathless and Alphaville fine, and Band Of Outsiders, too. Mr. Jaglom is not in their company, at least for me, and A Safe Place is a pretentious mess from start to finish. No one loves Tuesday Weld more than I, and she's fine. Jack Nicholson, who came in for a day and improvised everything is embarrassing. Gwen Welles gives new meaning to self-indulgent, but then again she has the most self-indulgent filmmaker imaginable "directing" her. I have never met a Henry Jaglom film I liked - ever. And his "thing" that if you don't respond to his films then you don't understand women is, well, fatuous. I'm glad he considers himself such an enlightened and sensitive man, but I'm not buying nor are many of my women friends. It is the type of cinema that makes me want to throw up and not because I don't like experimental or interesting films, because I have and I do. As I sat there with drool running out of my mouth because I'd just invested what I thought was almost ninety minutes of my time, I paused the film to find out I was only at the forty-minute mark.However, one has to commend any filmmaker who keeps on doing it - he does it with his own funds (good to be wealthy) and as long as he keeps having girlfriends he'll keep making films because his entire oeuvre is based on his love life.

laffinsal This experimental piece of work, from Henry Jaglom, is actually something of a gem, if not for it's unique direction, for the typically stunning performance from Tuesday Weld. Weld is wonderful in her characterization of a simple, juvenile young woman, caught in the limbo between innocence and adulthood. This film is from the period which I consider Weld's peak. She is beautiful, charming and completely earnest in her delivery.Others in the cast are interesting at best. Orson Welles is good as the father figure in Weld's life. Philip Proctor is not much acting wise, but at least he has a pleasant voice. That seems to have helped his career in the years following this film. Jack Nicholson is his typical cocky, slimy character in this one. I didn't feel his acting was anything new here, but his presence makes for an interesting triangle relationship.The editing is choppy, utilizing audio and image clips flashing by, altered, and repeated again. It would seem to get old after a while, and it does to some degree, but it's effective nonetheless. There are some good vignettes here and there throughout the film, namely a scene where Weld describes to Proctor the importance of telephone exchanges. Not every actress could pull this off well, but Weld does so with empathy and charm...brilliant! The Ouija board scene also stands out, as do the ones of Weld and Welles in Central Park Zoo.A fascinating and surprisingly engaging film. If for no other reason, it's worth watching for Weld's performance.

pedrito I don't know why I hadn't seen this movie before. I find the script an almost perfect one, closer to poetry than to the novel and a cinema language that owes a lot to Jean Luc Godard but nevertheless contributes to a post-modern comprehension of cinema as an art form in constant evolution. A 'must see' for any serious student of the evolution of cinema.The film's cinematography, with a clear cut preference for close ups, is a contribution to the general epos of the story. A real masterpiece, which I am sure will gain in public aclaim as time passes. A 10 by any standard. Pedro Saad