The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

I didn't think BBS could have a stinker in the bunch. But this is the one bad apple for sure. It's so dislocated and uneventful, it truly hurts to see such great talents go to waste. Whatever it thought it was, it wasn't. Whatever it was trying to be, it couldn't. Whatever fulfilling moral it thought it possessed, it doesn't. It's useless magic that baffles the viewer into innocently believing for a mere moment, and then is ashamed for having bought into it. That sentiment can be said of so many flaky relationships with supposed 'magical beauty' that 90% of the viewers have already experienced, or will experience. This movie does absolutely nothing to justify or caution the naive lustful immaturity of the whole ordeal. If anything, it exploits Noah for being an overly attractive airhead that men put up with in order for sex. And as long as they do, she will eventually put out for them. I found this more distasteful of any Russ Myers or Roger Corman-esque 'Grindhouse Sexploitation' movie I've ever come across. And believe me, I like those movies A LOT! Like the fishing lines used in Welles childish tricks through out the film, and carrying the camera off on a balloon to simulate 'flight' - DO NOT BUY INTO THIS FOR ONE MOMENT! You'll be such an easy lay if you do.

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.

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.

Only in the post-"Easy Rider" early 1970s could a film like this be made by a major Hollywood studio. Totally devoid of anything resembling a plot, "A Safe Place" will probably seem incomprehensible to most. But if you already have an appreciation for the 1950s-1960s works of Fellini, Antonioni or Godard, come on in. You'll feel right at home in this "Safe Place."Henry Jaglom was the unsung hero amongst the circle of friends that brought us "Head," "Easy Rider," "Five Easy Pieces," and several other lesser-known classics of the era. Jaglom is more responsible for the success of "Easy Rider" than Dennis Hopper, as he took Hopper's three-hour cut--a mishmash of flashbacks, flash-forwards and art- damaged nonsense--and shaped it into the legendary film it is today. His close relationship with Hopper, Jack Nicholson, Bob Rafelson, Bert Schneider, and others gave him a chance to write and direct his own movie for Columbia Pictures.Jaglom in turn delivered this dream narrative starring Tuesday Weld as a young woman who copes by retreating into isolationism and fantasy. Orson Welles pops up here and there as a magician who represents a physical emodiment of her retreat from the world. Or does he only exist in her head?It's best not to ask questions like that. Free your mind, sit back, and take in the feeling and mood. Where Hopper failed with his cut of "Easy Rider" and "The Last Movie", Jaglom effortlessly succeeds with such lofty and artsy ambitions. "A Safe Place" coasts by like a gentle dream in an afternoon nap--full of beautiful, detached imagery, illogical but comforting."A Safe Place" is a beautiful relic of a brief time in American cinema. Even Jaglom-- always on the fringe of mainstream cinema--would never make anything like this again, as he later developed the documentary/verite style which has become his trademark.