What a beautiful movie!

Strictly average movie

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

The Safety of Objects is based upon a series of short stories written by A. M. Homes about four suburban families that find themselves interconnected in a series of events.It stars Glenn Close and an ensemble cast that includes Dermot Mulroney,Patricia Clarkson,Joshua Jackson,Moira Kelly,Mary Kay Place and Kristen Stewart.Rose Troche wrote the screenplay about discontents and suburban life and directed the film.It starts when we find Esther Gold nursing his son Paul,once an up-and- coming singer/songwriter.She takes care of him alone without her husband,Howard and her daughter,Julie.Also,we find an alcoholic lawyer Jim Train,who ironically finds himself closer to his young children than his stay-at-home spouse,Susan.Their son Jake finds himself sexually fascinated with her sister's one-foot female doll.Added to that,we get to see Paul's former girlfriend,Annette trying to bring back her life and her family together after suffering from a divorce.All these characters find themselves interconnected in a series of events as they try to deal with unhappiness in life particularly within life-less objects.Incidentally,they all live together within a suburban area. This movie could have been effective and heartwarming as a character- driven film.Also,there were a lot of great performances in it.There is no question that it was a well-acted film.What makes this film somewhat disappointing is the fact that it is overpopulated with characters that the viewer will feel that the movie is somewhat monotonous and each characters are given enough emotional depth to deal with their unhappiness and issues in life due to the time limit being a two-hour film.If only Trouche could have given us with less characters - maybe around 7 or 8 - instead of 15,we could have had a better film.

I don't know what it was about this movie, but it was very powerful and moving for me. The cinematography execution was just excellent. I wasn't tainted by having read the book, and it's really unusual that a movie makes me want to go read the book it was based on. This movie really just makes you want to surrender to the good in humanity. I highly recommend it. The character relationships in it are more dynamic than you would see in a cable series, and although it's very dramatic; doesn't really feel over-done or sappy to me. like Garden State and many other independent films , this is on the top of the list for movies about dysfunctional lives and the strength we find in difficult moments.

I watched this movie in pain. I kept waiting for something good to come out of it. When things wouldn't normally fit together, the writers arranged whatever was necessary to make it "work", anyway. That takes me out of the usual mode of getting into a story (suspension of disbelief), and makes me say, "Oh, I'm just watching a story. This isn't real." That kind of writing ruins a movie for me. If it wasn't for the acting, this wouldn't be worth filming. Glenn Close gets the best line. Even though I don't agree with the point she makes, she delivers the line with her usual excellence.I like seeing movies that have a good solid story line. This movie doesn't have one. The stories are disjointed, set-up and pretentious. The acting is excellent. It's just too bad that such great performances were wasted on a movie like this. If you have a choice, pick something else to watch. You'll feel better for it.

Minimally savvy students of film know to not be dogmatic about the rules with which you evaluate a new film, since a new film may break the old rules and break them well, causing you to expand your notion of what's possible in a good film. To say that I tried to stretch my appreciation for what's possible when evaluating The Safety of Objects is to entirely miss the point. In other words, this movie was not attempting to break new ground. No re-thinking of ones aesthetic assumptions is necessary. In fact, they're reaffirmed--great films inspire a sense of the possible; bad films inspire the sense of what should not be possible.It's a movie of cloying Hallmark Card life lessons, built upon a script so weak I'm honestly astonished it got within a studio light beam's distance of production. Loose story ends abound. The film is desperately cluttered with too many characters and mini-plots in a failed attempt to remain true to the book. The characters' stories fail to elicit either viewer sympathy or comprehension, and shortly into it I found my patience severely tried. Some strong acting performances are not able to salvage this embarrassing work.The writer/director did a likable job with "Go Fish." Let's hope this is a bump in the road.