The Safety of Objects

2003 "What do you hold on to when your world turns upside down?"
6.5| 2h1m| R| en| More Info
Released: 07 March 2003 Released
Producted By:
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

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.

Genre

Drama

Watch Online

The Safety of Objects (2003) is currently not available on any services.

Director

Rose Troche

Production Companies

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
The Safety of Objects Videos and Images
View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

The Safety of Objects Audience Reviews

TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film
BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment
Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.
Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.
rodolphefleury OK it's trying to be groundbreaking but the cinematography is dull as hell, it's over sentimental, there's too many characters, a plot that tries too hard to make sense, unbelievable characters although the actors try really hard ... The problem is you can't believe in the characters at all: the worse being the kid in love with a Barbie doll, it's trying to be meaningful, poetic and cute but it's just plain daft. The lawyer who's disappointed because he hasn't been rewarded, once again hard to swallow he wants to help the poor mother trying to care for her disable son and trying to win a car, none of that makes sense, and the film is trying to force you to believe it. Is that suppose to be Realistic suburbia? No way. This film is pointless and trying to pass as deep and dramatic. Sorry this film is just pure sentimentalism with tons of gimmicks, lots of idiotic subplots and a corny ending. A complete waste of time
villianlasegunda This film, which is supposed to be adapted from a collection of short stories written by A. M. Homes, is extremely painful to watch. The film follows four different neighborhood families with intertwining lives, while the book is simply stories about unrelated individuals and is, in fact, much more powerful. In the film each individual from the short stories becomes a member of a troubled family, making it so that the some of stories are barely touched on, while others are elaborated. Though the elaborate ones may be fairly easy to understand, the tales that are brushed over seem to have little relevance to the film and make the viewer feel confused and empty. The book may stand alone, but if you have not read it, you will not understand the film which is so muddled and filled with material that at two hours long is easily two hours too much. I continued watching until the end, hoping that there would some conclusion to make the intertwining families' lives have a significant meaning, and felt so exasperated that I finally stopped the film with five minutes left, feeling unable to watch a second longer.
Dolly76 There has been much talk of how the film represents (or apparently misrepresents) the American psyche but you don't have to be an American to empathise, or indeed sympathise, with these characters. Like it or not, all families are dysfunctional; we are all damaged in some way and that is the beauty of this film. I may not be a manic depressive, masturbate comatosed boys or have had a questionable relationship with my Barbies but life can be 'distasteful', 'brooding', 'pervy', 'joyless' and 'selfish' just as much as it can be wonderful, uplifting and compassionate. No, not every American suburban family are as impaired as these, nor as a Brit do I see a mirror of myself watching Eastenders or Coronation Street. It's just one point of view and I think Rose Troche has handled such social nuances sensitively and with care. I'm not saying the film is perfect. However, complaining because it makes disturbing or uncomfortable viewing smacks of it hitting a nerve.... If you're seeking a no-brainer, go and see the latest Seann William Scott flick. But if you want an alternative slice of American pie - and a more realistic and universal one at that - feast on this.
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.