The Safety of Objects
The Safety of Objects
R | 07 March 2003 (USA)
The Safety of Objects Trailers

In a suburban landscape, the lives of several families interlace with loss, despair and personal crisis. Esther Gold has lost focus on all but caring for her comatose son, Paul, and neglects her daughter and husband. Lawyer Jim Train is devoted to his career, not his family. Helen Christianson wants to find a new spark in life, while Annette Jennings tries to rebuild hers.

Reviews
Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.
FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
Abegail Noëlle While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.
Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...
adonis98-743-186503 A series of overlapping stories about four suburban families dealing with different maladies. Esther Gold's life is consumed by caring for her comatose son; Jim Train is sent into a tailspin when he's passed over for a promotion; Annette Jennings' family is struggling in the wake of her divorce; Helen Christianson is determined to shake up her mundane life. The Safety of Objects (2001) is a tough drama not because it's going to make you cry or anything but because it's tough in order to actually enjoy it there are stuff in this film that i didn't found dramatic enough or clever enough to actually make sense to me. For example Jim Train's son is addicted with a Barbie doll like a lot and Jim himself wants Esther his neighbor to win a car for no reason. Randy keeps calling Sam (played by Kristen Stewart in her then film debut) Johnny and i get it he lost a loved one but i think 50% of the audience could tell back then that Kristen was a girl and not a boy just saying. Now on the good side of things the performances are quite well and feel pretty real, the whole scenario with Julie and why she acts so weird was a good twist for the ending and the overall movie it's quite interesting as a whole it's just that i expected more drama than just some small dozes of it. (7/10)
Desertman84 The Safety of Objects is based upon a series of short stories written by A. M. Homes about four suburban families that find themselves interconnected in a series of events.It stars Glenn Close and an ensemble cast that includes Dermot Mulroney,Patricia Clarkson,Joshua Jackson,Moira Kelly,Mary Kay Place and Kristen Stewart.Rose Troche wrote the screenplay about discontents and suburban life and directed the film.It starts when we find Esther Gold nursing his son Paul,once an up-and- coming singer/songwriter.She takes care of him alone without her husband,Howard and her daughter,Julie.Also,we find an alcoholic lawyer Jim Train,who ironically finds himself closer to his young children than his stay-at-home spouse,Susan.Their son Jake finds himself sexually fascinated with her sister's one-foot female doll.Added to that,we get to see Paul's former girlfriend,Annette trying to bring back her life and her family together after suffering from a divorce.All these characters find themselves interconnected in a series of events as they try to deal with unhappiness in life particularly within life-less objects.Incidentally,they all live together within a suburban area. This movie could have been effective and heartwarming as a character- driven film.Also,there were a lot of great performances in it.There is no question that it was a well-acted film.What makes this film somewhat disappointing is the fact that it is overpopulated with characters that the viewer will feel that the movie is somewhat monotonous and each characters are given enough emotional depth to deal with their unhappiness and issues in life due to the time limit being a two-hour film.If only Trouche could have given us with less characters - maybe around 7 or 8 - instead of 15,we could have had a better film.
pntacle I don't know what it was about this movie, but it was very powerful and moving for me. The cinematography execution was just excellent. I wasn't tainted by having read the book, and it's really unusual that a movie makes me want to go read the book it was based on. This movie really just makes you want to surrender to the good in humanity. I highly recommend it. The character relationships in it are more dynamic than you would see in a cable series, and although it's very dramatic; doesn't really feel over-done or sappy to me. like Garden State and many other independent films , this is on the top of the list for movies about dysfunctional lives and the strength we find in difficult moments.
Mike Wigley Having watched the film, and then read the comments here, I wonder if I was watching the film described. Admitted I am not American, don't live in America, and have never before heard of A.M. Homes or Rose Troche, but this film was to me a total waste of time. I guess I am a cinematic dinosaur, but any film that makes me say to myself 'What is going on now', or 'What is the point of doing that', or 'I just don't understand this' is a film I have no desire to see. Glenn Close is a good actress, and no doubt the performance she gave was the one required by the director, but personally I think she did this film because she needed the money. I have no complaints about the acting in general, it is merely the arrogance of film makers who foist their meaningless efforts on an unsuspecting public which annoys me. I do enjoy films that make me think, provided they make me think about the content of the film, and don't make me think I have just wasted two hours of my life.To sum up, think seriously before watching this film, if you are a member of a dysfunctional American family, with severe emotional problems, you might find something to empathise with, otherwise avoid.