Ein Zauberer an meiner Seite

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.

Henry Jaglom has often been accused, justifiably, of self indulgent movie making. "A Safe Place" is no exception, yet here it's an indulgence in experimenting with cinematic form itself. As always with Jaglom, it's a pretty mixed bag. There are scenes with some striking moments, but many which ramble on for much too long.

The question remains does this experiment work ? The answer has to be – no. But the attempt itself is not without interest. While much of the film will certainly test your patience, the rewards are there, though not as predominant as to make one want to champion this as a film that should be seen.

The film is centered round Tuesday Weld. Weld has always been something of an enigma. The movie persona of her earlier films established her firmly in the mind of the public as yet another pretty blonde. It took her a long time to shake this off. This need to find herself as an actress to be reckoned with must surely have drawn her to this project, written and directed by a newcomer. Her beauty and talent are in abundance here. This may have led to her next big role, made the following year; "Play It As It Lays". Sadly, despite a great performance, Weld never seemed to be able to prove her worth to the wider public or indeed the studios and moved towards a career in mainstream television movies, in which she still managed to shine.

"A Safe Place" boasts an intriguing cast. Alongside Weld is Orson Welles, a close friend of Jaglom's, obviously having much fun as a magician of sorts as well as a young and as always devilish, Jack Nicholson. Jaglom allows them much room for improvisation. He once related having written a scene for Nicholson and Weld; it somehow wasn't working. His feeling was that knowing them personally, they were both far more interesting people than the scene he had written for them showed. He simply let them improvise their dialog.

"A Safe Place" is the kind of film that sounds more interesting than is actually the case. I for one, despite being in favor of much of Jaglom's work and certainly that of Welles, Nicholson and Weld, am reticent in recommending it. For those with special interest in these people or the times, (New York, 1971), there will be points of interest but I must admit to being ultimately somewhat let down to what I sensed could have been far more than what I found.

Henry Jaglom is a director I've heard about before, but had never seen one of his films. He makes a film every couple of years, they play in like three cities in America, and no one seems to like them. A Safe Place was his first film, adapted from his own play, which he wrote in 1964. Tuesday Weld plays an insufferable hippie chick who doesn't want to grow up. Phil Proctor is a square who wants desperately to bone her, so he puts up with her nonsense (he knows that she's half crazy, but that's why he wants to be there). Eventually, a much more exciting Jack Nicholson shows up and steals her away. Orson Welles plays a magician who occasionally enchants Weld with his magic. Gwen Welles (whom you might remember from Altman's films California Split and Nashville), in her film debut, also appears and rambles on about her dreams of being sexually assaulted. The film is pretty, and that prettiness is very much augmented by Tuesday Weld's enchanting beauty. But, honestly, there's not much going on here. It's very repetitive (there are some nice, old songs on the soundtrack, but each of them plays all the way through like three times), and, well, boring.

One might be tempted to call Henry Jaglom's directing debut "A Safe Place", which he also wrote (based on material he originally presented on stage in New York), self-indulgent; however, the indulgence here really belongs to the editor, Pieter Bergema. This is a movie 'made' in its editing stages, and either Bergema had too much film to work with or not enough (this might explain the endless close-ups of crying or howling faces, several of them repeated). Tuesday Weld plays a commune-living hippie chick in New York City, on a tightrope between being a woman and wanting to remain a child, who begins a relationship with a drop-out from high society before she has resolved her feelings for former boyfriend Jack Nicholson, who apparently left her for another woman. Jaglom encourages his cast to wing it, and so we're left with lots of rambling, pseudo-introspective monologues about illusion and reality. It's wise not to try and dissect "A Safe Place"--that would be like analyzing a snowflake. There's just not enough real substance here--nor enough real acting--to spark a debate on the film. Orson Welles as a magician (or perhaps Weld's guardian angel) looks like a cross between Jackie Gleason and Oliver Hardy; he has fun doing magic tricks in Central Park, but is mostly used as a shoulder for Weld to lean on. Weld herself is a lovely presence (although this little-girl-lost number was just about played out), and cinematographer Dick Kratina gets some gorgeous shots of her all around the city, but the only genuine acting in the film comes from newcomer Gwen Welles as another hippie who is mesmerized by the non-meaning of her dreams. ** from ****

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.