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.
