The Safety of Objects

Rose Troche wrote the screenplay and directed "The Safety of Objects (2001)". I've got to hand it to her. She certainly did a fine job of linking social alienation and the commodification of human relations.

Rose poses these questions : Can one feel emotionally alone amongst people living in the heart of "upper middle class" suburbia? With real, sensuous subjects largely gone missing (i.e. human beings with genuine feelings of solidarity and love for each other) does one seek solace in the company of objects? The answer I give is, "Yes". My impression is that Ms. Troche thinks so too, but she has another take on the possibility of transcending this misery.

Granted, some of the objects, which/who are NOT subjects (well, only in our 'Barbie-est' of imaginations) are purchased. And some, (in a brief flash of subjectivity) have sold themselves into particularly alienating forms of wage-slavery. I say "particularly alienating" because these forms of wage-slavery appear to leave the human being in a state of having parts of their humanity hacked off. Granted, wage-slavery is a numbing experience for all of us. Such a cost we pay for selling ourselves in to it.

What's the choice though? Nothing or organizing to rid ourselves of the wages system. 99% of us choose the former and thereby suffer and continue to chafe under this system. But! What a playground it makes for artists like Troche. She romps around our collective misery and tell us what phonies we are and still, she gets paid for it! Wow! You go, Rose!

Enough with the hyperbole. The film is well acted, though the acting isn't perfect. So much the better in some ways. At least, one doesn't recognize say a, Bruce Willis or a Nicole Kidman AGAIN! More power to Bruce and Nicole, but for my money, I prefer an unknown who can do the part. And why not? There is good to fine acting in this film.

Do we ALL have to grovel and to worship the STARS? Hell no.

"The Safety of Objects" is NOT about how everyone discovers that they should have paid more attention to things which matter. No. What you've got here is a depiction of situations in our everyday lives which actually MIGHT occur. Okay, so you haven't heard of EXACTLY these situations developing. Hah! Dig this: the son of Gold goes from being a subject to an object. Talk about symbolism! Remember that. It'll be essential for understanding the story weave. Another thing to remember is Naturalism. Naturalism is the philosophical drive behind explaining how God is (I can't resist) essentially capricious with HIS power.

See this movie. Beware, there are pieces which you will see earlier on, which will only become apparent to you later, as the film rolls or digitizes through your viewing mechanism. No worries. With "Safety of Objects" you'll see something about your post-modern, industrialized, computer age selves. In other words, the film conveys a bit of, "the condition, your own condition is in."

Plastic people? Well, maybe so. If the shoe fits...

It's just what material objects do. They give us the security and tranquility to go on in life, when all other things appear to be crumbling. Rose Troche's "The Safety Of Objects" is one of the most interesting and poetic depictions of everyday life in a suburban "paradise" in the USA. Being from Mexico, is just another thing that allowed me appreciate it even more: I saw it like a foreigner, like a witness, without wanting to be part of the world Troche describes. But its message is so powerful, that I ended as part of this society that I already knew, but was afraid to accept. Based on the novel by A.M. Homes, "The Safety Of Objects" tells different stories, that reminded me of movies such as "Happiness" or "Grand Canyon", but in a really different tone.

We are presented early on to Esther Gold (a formidable, as usual, Glenn Close), a woman that has to deal with his sick son in a coma, and with her daughter who is unable to express what he feels about the situation of his beloved brother. We also are introduced to the Trains, a really nice couple that has come to a dead point in which the father, Jim (Dermot Mulroney in a really great performance) is dealing with a job crisis, and with the notion that maybe he doesn't have any goal in his life. His wife, Susan (Moira Kelly) tries to understand him but is unable to do so and starts to blame his husband for his usefulness around the house. Their kids seem like normal kids, but Jake, their son, has a strange obsession with a doll from his sister´s room. Also, we met the Jennings and the Christianson, two more families living near by, and with their own secrets. And there's this strange guy, portrayed by Timothy Olyphant, that seems out of place, until we realize what is his part in this story.

It may be difficult to explain the different stories that Rose Troche carry on without seeing the film, but one detail is certain: it almost seems that in the center of all things is Paul Gold (Joshua Jackson), the comatose son of Glenn Close's character. And as we are seeing this people living their lives, we are also committed to think about our lives. These characters have lots of problems to handle, their own insecurity and all their fears, their unfulfilled lives, their need of attention and support, but in their hearts, they only need safety: the safety to know that tomorrow everything is going to be fine, but only if they allow themselves to breath, and go on.

This film is just a beautiful essay of how everyone in this world tries to feel safe. Jessica Campbell, Joshua Jackson's character's sister, feels safe with the guitar of his brother in his arms. Dermot Mulroney's character starts to feel safe when he goes from goal to goal, trying to find something to feel fine with himself and his own life. It is only when they start to realize what they are doing, and start to accept the things that surround them, that they become aware of the vacuity of the safety that objects bring. And their problems then become real, and manageable.

"The Safety Of Objects" is an excellent motion picture, really. The work of Rose Troche as writer and director are really supreme, and the cast is really great too. Glenn Close shines as the always depressed and distant Esther, and Dermot Mulroney gives maybe the best performance of his life. Joshua Jackson's performance is credible, and Jessica Campbell is just great, along with Alex House, the kid with this "Barbie obsession". Maybe in other countries outside USA, "The Safety Of Objects" could be just another film about life in the 2000. But for Americans, and for seekers of good films around the world, this is a beautiful essay of the triviality of material objects, and the real assumption of our place in the world, our goals in life, and above all, the knowledge that the way to solve our problems is facing our fears and our responsibilities. Life is made of these powerful ideas, it would be a crime to let life pass us by without knowing that we are breathing... and that we have to walk ahead, farther along the way.

Although not as powerful as the (actually unrelated) short stories in the book, Rose Troche has adapted A.M Homes admirably to the big screen... which I was positive couldn't be done. The excellent performances of the entire cast are what hold some of the more thin connections together and although I was personally disappointed by some of the changes Troche made, I understand the necessity to a cohesive narrative. Had I not read the book, I think I would have enjoyed the movie more so I highly recommend viewers and readers who crave great stories about dysfunctional suburbia to check out any and all of my favorite female authors work... beginning with The Safety Of Objects and The End Of Alice.

Rose Troche certainly can't be accused to sticking to the same sort of film. This one is a complete contrast to `Bedrooms and Hallways', which was a pleasant gay romantic comedy and `Go Fish', which had a gay theme but was truly weird. The multiple storylines and cross-cutting are rather Altman-esq but the stories are tied together as in `What's Cooking'. In fact, it's a drama on the same template. We have four households (and one other guy) all tied together by the hands of fate.

Although there are some good lines, it's rather a dour film with a jaundiced view of American suburban society (though filmed mostly in Toronto). People are obsessed with their work or their children and seem to receive little happiness from either. In the case of Glenn Close's character Esther Gold she has an uphill battle since her once lively teenage musician son is now in a coma. She cares for him meticulously, constantly talking to him, convinced he will return to consciousness. The children are also dissatisfied with life, or have escaped into their own fantasies (one pre-pubescent lad is conducting an affair with a barbie doll), despite the affluence and parental attention. There is a resonance here with `American Beauty', but not the same lyrical camerawork.

Glenn Close, as the coma boy's mother who enters an endurance contest to appease her aggrieved daughter, is as good as she has ever been, with a kind of understated desperation that expresses perfectly her character's feelings. Patricia Clarkson is also a stand-out as Annette, a recently divorced woman, traded in by her air-head husband for a newer model, who battles on to look after her children, while trying to find some comfort for herself in the bar scene. Jessica Campbell as the daughter gives us a good picture of an angry teenage brat. The men, on the other hand, don't stand out, except perhaps Randy the pool guy (Timothy Olyphant), whose good looks take on a sinister aspect when he becomes involved with Sam, Annette's tomboyish daughter. Dermot Mulroney as Jim Train, a work–obsessed lawyer is curiously flat, though Moira Kelly curls her lips nicely as his aggrieved wife.

This could have been a gothic tale, but Troche keeps the story to a fairly mundane level, as befits the suburban landscape. I think American suburbia will hate it – far too drab, commonplace and close to the bone. `American Beauty' got away with it because it was so pretty, and Lester and his family really were a bit odd. There's nothing odd about these people – they are just as colourless and inadequate as the rest of us. I notice Roger Ebert thought them unlikeable. No, they're just ordinary.

I just watched this film for the first time today, and i can't believe, that I missed this the first time around. It was truly a well acted, and controversial motion picture, much in the tradition of CRASH. The four families whose lives are impacted by a series of events, tell the story. Glenn Close, and Dermott Mulrooney are basically the top names in this movie, but the rest of the cast carries it superbly. How this film did not receive rave notices for both it's direction and screenplay is something that i can not explain. This is a motion picture that will draw you in from the first scene. It is certainly one worth watching over and over again, and I will be looking to purchase my own copy.