It is still relevant today 2024, or sadly, the topic has became less sensational for us now. I liked the ambience this film hold and Julianne Moore is excellent. Worth watching.

I give the movie points for originality and to Julianne Moore for an excellent performance. Just can't recommend it though, it's too slow for me.

Watched on the heels of a blog mention (never saw back in the day): Has good review numbers, but didn't really 'grab' me. The 'dull/sterile' world just seemed _too_ muted, to the point of dragging. Could be, seeing, "My World is Trying to Kill Me", circa '87 (channeled via '95), is a bit less impactful in a post C-19 world. Given, the broad trust level now, generally, is a ton lower than it was even then... Almost seems "quaint" in comparison. Moore's 'nutty' paranoid housewife now possibly reads, less like a rampant nut, and maybe just another unintended side effect, from a system we no longer understand.

Julianne Moore is phenomenal as a paranoid housewife. Director Todd Haynes' psychological horror drama Safe (1995) is a magnificent film. Haynes builds up paranoia and suspense with these eerie sounds, wide open spaces, constant noise, air pollution, coughing fits, and nervousness about modern medicine. It's been awhile since I've seen such a tense and uncomfortable film that's also so totally entertaining as Julianne Moore is slowly losing her mind. Haynes is a masterful director with such dark precision. Todd Haynes' writing is concerned with the apprehensions about the AIDS crisis in 1987, the new holistic medicines, germophobia, paranoia, clean modern living, housewives' monotonous lifestyles, and eerie disquiet of the suburbs. Safe makes you feel sick and unsafe at all times. Julianne Moore is absolutely captivating as the housewife estranged from reality named Carol White. Moore does really sullen and subtle expressions of discomfort, nervousness, and paranoia as she thinks she is unwell. Safe is kind of a condemnation of wellness culture and odd medical practices. You wonder if she is just depressed or unappreciated by her terrible husband, but Moore ensures you that her character is snapping to the pressures of social dangers and possible disease everywhere. Her panic attack and breathing spasm during the baby shower is so disturbing. How did Julianne Moore not get nominated for an Oscar for Safe? Xander Berkeley is perfectly cast as the jerk husband Greg White, who is obsessed with work relations and could care less about his adoring wife. Julie Burgess is so upbeat as the aerobics instructor. Martha Velez is great as the annoyed and helpful maid Fulvia. All of her strange housewife friends are excellent as the increasingly distressing people. Steven Gilborn is fun as the disbelieving Dr. Hubbard. Dean Norris got a quick cameo as the teal sofa mover. Casting director Jakki Fink brings talented actresses and actors into Haynes' nerve-wracking fold. Editor James Lyons has really smooth, dreamy cuts. Safe feels so modern in its hazy, professional editing. Cinematographer Alex Nepomniaschy does these isolating wide shots of Julianne, then abrupt close-up shots for when she's really losing her marbles. It all looks so uneasy and frightening. Safe is one of the best looking pictures of the entire 1990's. Production designers David J. Bomba and Clare Scarpulla do great work for Julianne's all white home that's spacious and modern to the point of being sterile. Art director Anthony R. Stabley gives each scene a cold and distant look. All the 80's neon things are really cool like the workout area and lighting at night. The purples, pinks, and blues everywhere look amazing. It's like the few plants and furniture from set decorator Mary E. Gullickson. Composer Ed Tomney's eerie film score is so freaky and haunting. He uses these dissonant synth lines and creepy ambient sounding parts underneath a gentle piano line. Safe has really really cool music. Sound designers Tim O'Shea, John Gare, Reilly Steele, David Novack, Neil Danziger, Mark Beck, Alan deGraaf, and Elliot Jacobson add in these strange ambient noises. Costume designer Nancy Steiner puts Jullianne Moore in these superb, vibrantly colored dresses, blouses, and skirts. Her 80's workout tights are so cute from that era. Makeup artists Deborah K. Larsen and David Syner give Julianne Moore the loveliest pale makeup that flatters her fair skin alongside her red lipstick, red eyeliner, and pink blush. Hairstyling Josef Pergi does Julianne's bright red haircut that's super cute on her. Her curly perm is fun. In short, Safe is 119 minutes of mental breakdown and rising paranoia.

Julianne Moore is remarkable, of course. Haynes was already doing impressive work as a writer and director. There's a very holistic feel to the whole movie. The dark, unsettling tone holds on to your throughout as the sense of unwellness is almost palpable. I feel like I need two showers and a cleanse. 3.2 stars

Important social commentary that explained an incident I went through a few years earlier. I wasn't alone.

Breathtakingly filmed and brilliantly acted, Safe is an astounding second feature from the mastermind Todd Haynes, who achieves the most out of a soberingly quiet Julianne Moore.

Todd Haynes is always a director who is willing to challenge his audience and 1995's Safe is no exception. Carol White (Julianne Moore) is a wife and the mother of a young son. Over time, she begins to experience symptoms that no doctor can accurately assess. Believing that she is a victim of an environmental illness, she retreats to a cult-like facility in the New Mexico desert to seek assistance. Is it satire? Probably. However, others would view it strictly as a cautionary tale while others would attribute a variety of different themes to the film. And that's its beauty – the fact that it is open to interpretation. Moore is fantastic as the slowly deteriorating protagonist, and Haynes directs the film with patience and assurance, every shot perfectly framed and blocked. Safe is a truly unique movie that needs to be seen.

A breakthrough film for both Julianne Moore and Todd Haynes, Safe is a film that many have called more relevant nowadays than it was back in 1995. It was also a film that some called the scariest of the year, and even among the best of the decade. Not sure exactly what those people were watching, because I completely disagree with both of those assessments. It's not a bad film at all, in fact I enjoyed many aspects of it. Its clever metaphors, its effective use of camerawork to demonstrate exclusion and ostracism, the understated performance from Moore, its numerous jabs at the wellness industry and pseudoscientific practises. The first half of the film is solid, but once our lead reaches the recovery facility, things start to fall apart. The ideas the film has are not enough to sustain the runtime, and the last chunk of it badly loses steam as we're subjected to a series of increasingly monotonous and repetitive conversations. It kills the goodwill and intrigue established in the first half, and as a result the film ends on a really limp note. I want to praise Safe for the statements it makes on health and the danger posed by cults and medical charlatans, but I just can't get over how much the films eventually lets itself down. It has its admirers, but I see it as a movie that's reach extended its grasp.

That was one the worst, drawn out, anticlimactic pieces of crap I've ever seen. That was a waste of life and money.

It's tough to find a film that feels so contemporary in its pacing and theme, but looks so incredibly '90s in its aesthetic. A societal drama that depicts the obsession with conformity on multiple levels, and expectations of individuals that are built around maintaining established standards, even when considered at increasingly specific 'in-groups', Safe feels unsettling and surreal in its slow, rhythmic character study of a character whose problems and recovery are not only made her whole responsibility, but largely her own belief as others actively challenge her condition or, most interestingly, co-opt potential recovery options for their own benefit, as in the case of Friedman's cult-like, soft-talking, and largely ineffectual holistic lifestyle champion. The lack of clear answers or resolution only adds to the power of the narrative, and leaves the film open to wide interpretations (including discussions on the suppression of sexual orientation or similar subtext). Haynes imparts this sense of unease in the shooting style to parallel the physical and emotional decline of Moore's Carol even as others either don't believe in her condition or are otherwise unable to noticeably improve her condition; the film gives you an itch under the skin as you watch, even down to the details of near-pointless domestic problems like the wrong couch color getting delivered, imparting the nagging sensation of a lack of control over one's own lifestyle and well-being. (4/5)

1001 movies to see before you die. What a downer. But the themes raised are relevant. I'm not a fan of Moore, despite her ability to act. It was on youtube.

You'd think "safe" was headed towards a message of environmental responsibility, but then it takes a turn at the end that seems to blame cult-like groups for preying on weak people. Moore is good...and young.

Well acted, disturbing and dull in equal measure. A step inside the mind of hypochondriacs conditioned to overthink and overstate their mental illnesses by slightly crazed new age thinkers. Feels like watching a scene from hell.

Scarier than any monster movie. Julianne Moore is understated yet unrelentingly creepy in her performance.

Girlfriend doesn't just need to get away from toxic environmental pollutants, but toxic mansplainers entirely (though really, they're one and the same thing).

very slow for my taste

The movie is about depression. It is difficult to make much of it. The drama is in no drama. Particularly, the irrational part in humans. I found it slightly boring though, but that's more on me. Interesting if you want to see a different take on depression.

A movie that is interesting to watch only to see the actors plying their craft. Otherwise, it's wasted time. The plot, such as it is, is full of itself and tries too hard for the viewer to think there's a deep meaning, when maybe there isn't. Do the people have chemical sensitivies, or do they have emotional/mental issues? Or both? Maybe the meaning is that Carol's sensitivies are the manifestation of Carol's lacking any real meaning in her life. Whatever the cause of the sensitivities, I found myself not caring much. I found myself thinking that if they had to work hard to provide for themselves, were truly busy living, they wouldn't have these sensitivities. I don't know. But I do know a good movie, and this isn't one of 'em. Still, it is interesting watching Julianne Moore act. That's always interesting.

This eerie character study is well crafted, but also overlong and frustrating...