Amazon.com

Patrick Swayze is a goofball criminal who suddenly finds himself strapped with his two kids. His teenage daughter escapes from an abusive orphanage, demanding her father rescue her younger brother. Dad, who may be a thief, is also a softie who decides to rescue his kids by kidnapping them from a school bus. The plot is lackluster and reveals few surprises as Swayze tries to follow his life of crime, only to be thwarted by his needy children. Child abuse, parental abandonment, and crime do not exactly make for slapstick, and this is too leaden to thrill as an adventure flick. Swayze, with his annoying laugh and manic mannerisms, is less convincing than the kids (Sabrina Lloyd and Brian Bonsall), who exude realistic desperation and pain. --Rochelle O'Gorman ... Read more

Reviews (7)

how good this movie
I seen this movie on saturday the 24 2002. This movie is soo good by the acting It's as pretty alot of action in this flick.
patrick swayne play a good role with his kids. But the kids were driving him insane. This movie deathly need to come on dvd it would be a better picture and better sound. The dvd makers need to create a version of this movie fast hopefully it should come out this year or next year that will be will good if it come out between that time. When it come's out I'll will be happy.

How good the movie
I seen this movie on saturday the 24 2002. This movie is soo good by the acting. There's pretty alot of action in this flick and pretty funny too. patrick swanye play a good role with his kids. They deathly need a dvd version of this movie I want it soo bad it would be a better picture. They should been create this movie on dvd too bad it's not on dvd yet. maybe this year or next year to be on dvd cause the dvd makers need to bring this out fast it's a real good movie maybe someday i have on dvd when it come out I be real sice.

Great movie
Fun, sweet and heartwarm movie. Real fun and touches on some important issues that need more attention

noooooo
Jack Charles (Patrick Swayze) is a small time crook with a glib answer for every question and two kids in foster care. When his daughter, Kelly (Sabrina Lloyd), escapes from juvenile hall and locates her father, Jack tries his hardest to get rid of her, but she persuades him to look for his son, Eddie (Brian Bonsall), who is being placed in the same unpleasant place she escaped from, where children are handcuffed and abused. Recognizing the conditions Eddie could be subjected to, Jack kidnaps him from the authorities at gun point, then goes on the run with both kids in tow.

If Father Hood is any indication, road pictures have become a worn-out genre. It's a mystery to me why films like this get made. Do we really need to spend ninety minutes following the misadventures of two children and an adult (who often displays less maturity than his offspring) as they run around the country trying to get to know one another? How many hundreds of movies and television shows have had the same plot?

There is little to relieve the tedium of this film, except an impressive performance by little-known actress Sabrina Lloyd. Hopefully, someone will give her a shot in something where she'll have an opportunity to catch someone's attention.

If I had cared about the characters, perhaps the plot implausibilities wouldn't have bothered me as much, but no one in this film manages to grab more than a token amount of sympathy -- especially not Jack, who is an annoying, arrogant jerk. Give Patrick Swayze credit (if you want to call it that) for playing this guy with the right amount of sleaze to get the audience to actively dislike him. Unfortunately, when he turns over a new leaf (as is inevitable), it's tough to accept.

The two kids have their moments. Actually, I should say that Lloyd's Kelly has her moments. Eddie, as played by Brian Bonsall, is pretty much a nonentity. The script tries aggravatingly hard to manipulate the audience into sympathizing with them. Movies of substance rarely resort to such blatant emotional trickery.

Father Hood comes complete with a social message that's as old as Dickens' Oliver Twist. Foster care in the United States has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years as more and more cases of abuse are revealed. While I would support a movie that grapples with the problem sensitively and intelligently, this is not that film. It takes a good-guy, bad-guy approach to the situation and presents it from a decidedly singleminded viewpoint designed to stir the viewer's emotions, not make him or her think about the seriousness of what's going on. In fact, the low quality of Father Hood may actually sabotage the message it's trying to get across.

Recently, an Italian film called Il Ladro di Bambini (Stolen Children) covered a lot of the same ground. That too was a road film featuring an older, somewhat callous guardian and the two children he was entrusted with. The similarities extend no further than plot structure and character background, because Il Ladro di Bambini is an excellent feature, and watching it only magnifies Father Hood's numerous faults.

There may not have been many like me, but I was actually impressed by Patrick Swayze's performance in City of Joy. I thought he took a big step towards advancing beyond his popcorn-and-soda reputation. But with the release of this ugliness, I may have to admit being mistaken. And "mistake" is a key word here, because that's exactly what this entire production is.

Funny Stuff
I've seen most of Patrick Swayze's movies and I really enjoy his characters. However, they're usually kind of serious and intense, with a rather "cool" quality. I never imagined him being manic and funny--the exact opposite of most of his more well-known characters. Well, to my surprise, he was terrific. The script has some gaping holes, but Swayze's portrayal of Jack Charles is a totally enjoyable experience. Anyone who is a Swayze fan will enjoy this movie (which even contains a tiny segment of him dancing in front of a mirror). ... Read more

Description

A vicious high school student is dead.A gang hit?An act of sudden rage? Or did a once-idealistic teacher finally snap?The issues and the tension hit home when Samuel L. Jackson stars in a gritty urban-school thriller that's "gripping, high-octane entertainment" (Newhouse News Service). ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Sometimes intelligent,sometimes silly
Sam Jackson plays a hard working New York teacher.At the very start of the movie we see him get brutally stabbed by the Wu Tang Clan's Method Man because he flunked him.After he recovers from his ordeal what happens?He gets transferred to another,even more violent school in Los Angeles.Lucky guy.He immediately makes an ill advised enemy of Hispanic ghetto thug Caesere(Clifton Clifton Gonzalez),whom he just wants to teach. .... The film was written by a teacher and makes some very good points.Teachers are here to help you so don't screw them up. But sometimes the script succumbs to Death Wish vigilante revenge type terrority and Jackson and Gonzalez' final showdown ...is just silly.Sam should've struck down on the punks with great vengeance and furious anger. By the way,DO NOT expect a happy ending.The ending in this movie is as bleak as the ending of Se7en.

its good
this is a great movie has some pretty cool gansters in it and sh*t(i had to use the asterisk and dont be a b*tch and say its gangstas not gangsters) but why did it take place in the valley??????? i mean theres no way that could be the worst school in america. not even the worst school west of L.A. they should have made it in city terrace or echo park or boyle heights but the valley???? i just dont get it. ive visited the valley and its disney land compared to city terrace or boyle heights or echo park. great movie though

An underappreciated masterpiece
Having attended an inner city high school, I will attest that while some of this was exaggerated, similar things do happen. I think the director took a lot of creative license and pushed things to a bit of an extreme with Garfield and Cesar's characters, but it only served to improve the quality of the film.

This is less "Dangerous Minds" or "The Substitute" than it is "Taxi Driver". Samuel L. Jackson does a superb job with his character Trevor Garfield, a man of deep moral convinctions and idealism who crumbles psychologically throughout the film. The way it is shot, along with the ominous soundtrack, creates an atmosphere of palpable doom and chaos. Garfield's speech to a fellow teacher who is beginning to realize the odd connection between the disappearance of troublesome students and his relation to them is really disturbing. The director should have worked more on the "teacher snapping" bit and had it a little less covert, but overall I would say this movie falls into cult classic, if not classic, range. The darkness is unforgettable, and the film does raise some relevant issues as to how people with values interact with those who have none. There is a certain flavor to this movie, somewhat inarticulate, that for me makes it worthy of the most lavish praise. This is no uplifting, Sidney Poitier film of redemption. It is simultaneously a vigilante film and a comment on conscious man and his place in the world. This is a must own, for Jackson's performance and the powerhouse ending.

not latin its HISPANIC
wow this movies was mind blowing. the ending reminded me of the 'godfather' movie. samuel jackson and clifton gonzalez give an amazing performance and i really like watching them intereactive with each other. this movie deserves five stars!!

and for those of you reffering latin people, its hispanic! not latin. lets get that strait, aight? peaze out yall.

smiley

A Pyrrhic Victory: Teaching America's Forgotten
"187" does not provide the viewer with a realistic insight into America's schools. Science teachers do not stalk students and then drop them with morphine injections, launched from a bow. But I did not pick up "187" expecting the classic teacher-makes-a-difference-in-children's-lives film. The very title moves one away from this depiction. Instead, "187" provides an interesting look into the job of educators when they are dealing firsthand with the violence that exists in many of America's communities.

One thing that I would have liked from this film is a slower transition from Samuel L. Jackson's former self to his newer self. The audience believes that they know his character and (quite suddenly) he has snapped and we are a bit unsure of the movement. This film is an intense experience-I found my nerves quite strained at the prospects of the chaos that exists in these communities. Above all, this film neither glorifies the student's actions nor the teacher's retaliation-a fact that prevents it from becoming a simple bloodbath movie. One leaves this film with a sense of loss on both sides and the utterly hopeless situation that we have created in our school systems. Jackson's character does, despite what some may say, have an impact on the students he teaches. But his victory is not without devastating losses; a Pyrrhic victory, as the movie (not so subtly) alludes.

Word to the wise: this is not an uplifting film. Do not rent it thinking you're in for a "To Sir, With Love" experience. Just read the title. But if you're in the mood to look at the darker side of life (think "Requiem for a Dream"), by all means. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Touching , Heartbreaking story
To understand this film you should understand whats its like to be from a family like this. Themovie played out like a home movie for me. The first reviewer from Mexico, is typical in his narrow mindedness about how "chicanos" live. How do you clearly represent a culture? This young boy was not "abused" by his father, he was ABUSED by his father. THis happenes a lot, in Mexico and America. The use of Cantinflas was not to link the characters to their Mexican roots,it was used by the mentally ill Mother as her escape from her painful existence. I don't know how the first reviewer lives or if he ever visited LA,and i don't mean the tourist locations, the real Barrios with real Chicanos, but, some lives are aggresive and crude. Everything in this movie has substance. It is not sexy though. You care so much about Carlito, that it is stomach churning watching him be voilated. Sure life is not this difficult for everyone, but this is what its like when you are f-up by your parents, and unless you stop the cycle yourself you end up being f-ed by everyone else too. This is fact, ive seen it with my own eyes. Why esle do Street childern exist? Besides all,that the music rocks in this film and makes it unique. All the musical interludes are so appropriate for each seen. Miguel Arteta is genuis.

The Typical Mexican Soap Opera -Movie Version
The story could have been good, the way it spilled to many other pointless stories is a waste of film and time.

The actors are very good, and seem to be caught in a story line that was made to be too complicated and over dramatized, just like a soap opera with endless plots that go no where.

The writer/director failed to clearly represent the "chicano" (mexican-american) culture, failed to show us Carlos transition from living in mexico (which is extremly conservative) with his grandparents to LA, to a hispanic community in a different country.

The focus is on the exploitation of the stereotypical "mexican", the poor uneducated unsophisticated mexican boy "abused" by his own family, by the american starand prejudice and everyone elses priorities, which unable him to reach his dreams.

This movie tried to shake the audience being aggressive, crude, cliche and with no substance, it is a very poor and unispiring image on the mexican- americans and the americans themselves.

The use of the comedian "cantinflas" to link the characters to their mexican roots is poorly done, and has no relevance to the film nor the characters and what they purue for themselves which is the "american dream".

Poor use of very good actors, whos american dream will not be reached through this movie.

Breaks the Latin Mold
Most reviewers have missed that Star Maps steps out from the Latino film routine of re-establishing the father as the rightful patriarch (Selena, La Familia, Rooster, ad nauseum). This is more than just another gay boy/prostitute movie; in narrative terms, it's a revolution.

Better than expected
I have read all the reviews about this, but decided to sit down and watch it anyway. I was completely caught up in this family and all of their problems. I thought a couple of the performances were a little stiff, but the screenplay kept me interested until the end, and the actors seemed to be earnest in their endeavor. Believe me, there are many other films out there that take the same gay-prostitute storyline and try to shock more than tell a story. This is good, and a great antidote to the current sugary "Latin Explosion."

Star Maps is filled with the promise of dreams
I saw Star Maps twice in the theaters, and still can't get it out of my mind. I keep checking to see when the sell-through VHS will be available (at an affordable price). The film's music is top-notch. This may be a so-called Indie film, but it's performances, especially from Douglas Spain as Carlos, the young man with a dream, are believable. This a gritty, realistic picture about people struggling to stay focused and to survive. Carlos wants to be an actor; he sells maps to the stars homes in Beverly Hills. He believes that all he needs is one chance at the acting brass ring. To earn more money he is forced to hustle, but he knows that what he deeply wants is to be an actor. A touching, poignant movie. There is nudity and adult situations, and even some comedy, but this is a strong film and well worth viewing. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Carol White (Julianne Moore) is a mousy housewife living the affluent life in the San Fernando Valley when, over the span of a few months, she begins to develop debilitating sensitivities to her environment. A permanent at the hair salon makes her nose bleed and her skin go bad, exhaust from a truck causes her to cough violently, she's allergic to the new couch, goes into seizures at the dry cleaner's. No one understands or credits her condition, least of all her husband or family physician. But the symptoms worsen, and Carol eventually discovers others who suffer from similar environmental illnesses. She checks into a desert spa that caters to those in her predicament, and the staff regales her with touchy-feely,infomercial-style affirmations. All of this could have been broad satire, butdirector Todd Haynes (Velvet Goldmine) opts for a filming style that captures the empty elegance of Carol's passive lifestyle and looks on with clinical dispassion, so that you can hear the oppressive quiet surrounding her. It's positively eerie, so you know you're not watching just a worthy cause picture or movie of the week. Haynes has more ambition than that, even going so far as to insert a slight buzzing sound in the soundtrack to accentuate the unease. Fluorescent lights? Power lines? Who knows? Maybe it's safe to call it the ominous rumblings beneath the surface of Carol's life, from antiseptic affluence to septic isolation in the spa environment. A model of sustained tone, boasting one of the most remarkable performances by Julianne Moore, from a whole career of remarkable performances. --Jim Gay ... Read more

Reviews (48)

Safe can be deadly
I think this is one of the best and most significant films of the 90s. It is a very introspective film, so if you require shootouts, steamy sex scenes and explosions to remain interested, this is definitely not the movie for you. Even fans of independent films may find their attention spans challenged by the deliberately slow paced and downbeat style of Safe. It is, however, well worth paying attention to. I've seen this movie three times now, and I notice more with each viewing. The opening frame, which puts brackets around the title [Safe] is a study in itself. Carol White (the name, like many details in this film, is quite significant), played by Julianne Moore, is an affluent suburban housewife who apparently becomes allergic to everything around her. Yet Safe, which might first seem like a made-for-television disease-of-the-week affair, has a far more subtle and thought-provoking theme than illness. From the start, we are oppressed by the white, sterile perfection of Carol's environment. The interiors of her house could have been designed by a feng shui consultant. The colors are all soft; everything is arranged in perfect symmetry. When a furniture store accidentally delivers a black rather than teal couch to the house, Carol panics (black=impurity). Carol at first attributes her illness to stress and her doctor concurs. Yet her life is anything but stressful; we see her float from the health club to the hair salon to lunch with a friend at a restaurant. Her symptoms worsen, and she learns about environmental illness; "Are you allergic to the 20th Century?" a flyer asks. As Carol becomes unable to cope with her life, she enters Wrenwood, a new age retreat center that promises to cleanse the body and spirit of impurities. Wrenwood preaches a self-righteous philosophy of asceticism, withdrawl from society and positive thinking. In Safe, director Todd Haynes has taken a profound look at some disconcerting aspects of modern society. What is perhaps best about the film is its nuanced performances. Carol, though ill and upset, is never completely out of control for long; she always returns to her "I'm fine" persona (which is part of her problem). The new age center and its staff, which could have been a parody of silliness or cultishness, is similarly subtle. If you listen to what they preach and the effects it has on patients (everyone is always on the verge of tears), you can see the flaws and distortions, but it's sophisticated and plausible enough that you can also see how people might fall for it. Safe suggests that the desire to escape all forms of impurity may be one of the most pathological things about our culture.

Anything but safe.
Safe - movie, 4 stars

Named by the Village Voice as the Best Film of the 1990s, this resounding social statement a-la-TV-movie-of-the-week is certainly anything but what its title suggests. Director Todd Haynes has the reputation of pushing limits and making audiences strangely uncomfortable, and this film is no exception.

San Fernando Valley, circa 1989. Carol White (Julianne Moore) is living her perfectly stereotypical upper-middle-class life when suddenly she becomes sick. When she has allergic reactions to all sorts of chemicals around her, her husband (Xander Berkeley) and doctor think it's all in her head. However, the hopelessly reserved Carol knows her "environmental illness" is legitimate, uprooting herself and moving into the chemically-sterile community of Wrenwood, New Mexico. There, she is treated for her mysterious illness by self-help guru Peter Dunning (Peter Friedman) and his bright-eyed cohorts; however, her health continues to decline.

The film's statement is quite difficult to detect upon first viewing. Certainly, the plot is extremely reminiscent of many TV-movies of the 80s and 90s, all showcasing a new disease of the week. However, it eventually becomes apparent that the film is not a commentary on environmental illness.

Performances in the film are all at best adequate, with the exception of Moore, who is undeniably brilliant. Her detatched, sad carriage and demeanor arguably echoes more loudly than the film's social statement. Of course, she depends heavily on her subtleties as usual, and when she's onscreen, it's difficult to pay attention to anything else. Her birthday scene, toward the end of the film, is particularly moving.

Haynes's direction is seemingly bland at times-- one may feel as if he's watching a horror movie on Valium. However, Haynes's complexities eventually show through and what we see is a brillantly sincere and deep commentary on a rather provocative question: Is anyone ever really safe?

Excellent Psychological Drama with Lingering Effect
Carol White (Julianne Moore), a homemaker, lives a life without doing the daily chores of a housewife as the family maid takes care of household tasks. In essence Carol has only one responsibility: her leisure time. She tries to fill her free time with aerobics, beauty salon visits, and new acquisitions for their safeguarded home. These activities do not provide an outlet for Carol's own identity as she is a mere trophy wife. Eventually Carol's body begins to rebel against herself through nausea, headaches, and nose bleeding. The family doctor examines Carol and he finds nothing wrong as her physical miseries worsen. Carol is sent to a psychiatrist, but her subdued persona does not cooperate. Carol's health continues to deteriorate as she discovers an organization that enlightens people about environmental illness. Environmental illness is an over hypersensitivity to pollution, pesticides, and all other toxins in the environment that exist in foods, perfumes and make-up among other things. This means that Carol must remove herself from civilization and the world in which she lives. Carol departs for a new age health sanctuary, Wrenwood, where she begins her recovery. Initially Carol improves physically, however, as she comes across a closely located highway her health begins to decline again.

Safe has a lingering effect as it slowly moves forward as Haynes purposely displays each scene in order to build a deep understanding of Carol's identity. It becomes an exploration of Julianne Moore's character as Haynes dissects Carol's psychology through meticulous direction of every scene. When the scenes are edited together it leaves the audience with a profound insight of Carol's illness. This insight offers a disturbing experience as Carol's decisions continue to affect her negatively both physically and socially. Julianne Moore's performance enhances the distortion of her character's mind as she performs brilliantly, which leaves the audience with a fascinating cinematic experience.

Where the Stepford Wives Began
Julianne Moore does another fabulous job as an LA housewife exposed to the hazards of suburbia. The film is dark and stale adding to the creepiness of its message.

Moore's housewife is lifeless, she exists in LA going from post office to dry cleaners to aerobics class. She sips milk while her Spanish housecleaner does all the actual work of keeping up a home. She does her "wifely duties" with the same boredom with which she lives. Her world is protected and safe but she somehow ends up ill (is it real toxic poisoning or just a cry for attention?) and it all gets chalked up to stress.....what stress could she be having? The creepiness lies in how easily she gets programmed by all the others in her life. With no direction of her own she exists as a mere robotic representation of what she is supposed to be. How many of those do you see in a day?

Moore soon becomes so strangely ill that she can't even perform her meaniless tasks. This eventially lands her in a cultish type retreat where she is supposed to get well. Without her own backbone she flounders around influenced by everything external and open to all sorts of advice except what works. So we learn two messages in one movie, first be your own person and second that our environment may in fact be causing more undiagnosed illness than we imagine. Find your own influences before the Jones' get you down and above all stay SAFE!

Eerie and brilliant
I should start this review by stating that I'm not a Julianne Moore fan. A few years back a movie came out, called "Nine Months," that permanently turned me off this actress. In that movie, she played a whiny, obnoxious lady in a relationship with Hugh Grant. The whole picture revolved around the hijinks that ensued when Moore's character got pregnant and Grant didn't want kids. "Nine Months" was the most syrupy, sappy piece of fluff I have ever seen in my life. Think a Hallmark movie of the week with the emotional content pumped up on steroids, and you'll have an excellent idea of what "Nine Months" looked like. Oh, just to make it even worse, Tom Arnold and Joan Cusack appeared as these two grotesque superparent friends. Yuck. Despite my misgivings about Moore, I decided to give "Safe" a chance after reading its summary. The movie's premise, about a suburban housewife developing an allergy to modern society, was just too promising to pass up. I'm glad I watched the picture. Director Todd Haynes has scored a big coup with this grim take on American society towards the end of the twentieth century. And what a surprise! Moore actually tugged at my heartstrings in a decidedly non-icky way.

"Safe" is the story of Carol White, an adrift California housewife in the 1980s. Her life should satisfy: she lives with a husband and child she loves, spends her days doing whatever she wants to do, and lives in a huge house with plenty of money to throw around. What more could any American woman ask for? Apparently, quite a lot. In between the trips to the fitness center, the frequent lunches with female friends, and the important dinners with hubby's business pals, Carol begins to erode mentally and physically. If there's a starting point for this slow descent into illness, it seems to come when White throws a fit over a furniture company delivering the wrong couch. She soon cannot sleep, develops a hacking cough, and always feels bad. Her husband does not help matters. At first, he is sympathetic to his wife's plight, insisting she see a doctor (who finds nothing wrong with her) and offering emotional support. His goodwill doesn't last long, however, as he soon complains that Carol isn't fulfilling her duties as a wife and partner. The additional stress at home only compounds White's vague health problems. A trip to a psychologist offers little in the way of help, nor does a stay in the hospital after Carol has a seizure outside a dry cleaning business. This lady has a big problem, one that hauling around a little oxygen tank will not clear up anytime soon.

During the stay in the hospital, Carol finds salvation. An advertisement for a health spa called Wrenwood, located somewhere in New Mexico, promises to help people with unspecified health problems. Convinced this place is the only answer, White implores her husband to take her there. Wrenwood turns out to be both more and less than Carol White had hoped for. The facility is populated with a bunch of people, like White, who cannot seem to function in modern society. Even worse, the chap who runs the place, Peter Dunning, is one of those new age types. Dunning claims contracting the AIDS virus led him to set up the clinic so he can help people suffering from strange maladies. His speeches to his "patients," made in a special room complete with podium, cheesy murals, and musical instruments, convey the sense that this guy's running a cult. He likes to play around with people's minds, too, during intense "therapy" sessions where he tries to convince the patients that they made themselves sick. That may well be true in some of these cases, but the way Dunning goes about trying to heal these people is grotesque. In the end, Carol White is worse off than she was when she arrived at Wrenwood.

"Safe" works due to Haynes's masterful direction and sense of atmosphere. On more than one occasion, his cinematic approach reminded me of Stanley Kubrick. Haynes has that same ability to light and shoot a scene that looks like a giant hand squeezed all the emotion and life out of it. This tendency is especially prevalent in the first half of the film as we watch Carol start her slow decline. There's a great scene where we see White standing in her opulent living room, but Haynes shoots it so it looks like a mausoleum devoid of any feeling or life. If you look closely enough, Carol White appears as just another piece of furniture in the room. Amazing, simply amazing, and probably a good hint at the film's central theme. Our heroine really is just another ornament in this house, and her husband treats her that way. I suspect Carol's illness is related to her awareness that her life is essentially empty of meaning. Perhaps the illness is an attempt to get attention from those around her, or her body's way of rejecting the sterile background of her daily life.

Whatever the case, "Safe" is a deeply unsettling film that raises more questions than answers. Julianne Moore turns in a fabulous performance as the deeply flawed Carol White, as does Xander Berkeley as her distant husband. Peter Friedman threatens to steal the show, however, as the smarmy Peter Dunning. A commentary track on the disc done by Moore and Haynes seems to shoot holes in any attempt to see the film as a serious commentary on modern life. Both actress and director laugh and giggle a lot during the commentary, obviously getting a kick out of poking fun at the new age themes in the film. Still, "Safe" is an observation on our sick society, and fans of cinema will definitely want to check this gem out posthaste. ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Side out, now there's a concept.
This is one of the worst films you are ever likely to see. The acting stinks, the action is awful, however, this is strangely compulsive viewing. You know exactly what is going to happen but for some reason you have to watch. This is a must for all useless movie fans. The other big problem is that somebody must have believed that beach volleyball was going to be huge, that never happened. Genius! once more C.Thomas Howell in a real stinker, keep up the good work.

Great movie until the end!
This would have been THE movie for beach volleyball, filmed in Manhattan Beach, has appearances from Sinjin Smith, Steve Timmons, Randy Stoklos, all the major pros of the time. Very fun to watch. Great movie except that the very last scene, without spoiling it for you, makes everyone who plays beach volleyball cringe because they end it with a very illegal hand set. This movie had so much potential but became the laughing stock of the beach crowd because of those 3 seconds of footage right before the credits roll. Too bad the film's editor didn't catch that, this would have been a much more popular movie.

An Absolutely Brilliant Piece of Filmmaking
Side Out is just an incredible film. From the moment Monroe Clark steps off the plane from Milwaukee and onto the hot sandy beach volleyball scene, the action just never stops. When Zack Barnes speaks you listen. Peter Horton's finest hour. C. Thomas Howell's career had nowhere to go but, downhill from here. How he got sunbbed by the Academny, I will never know. This is just a true classic and must have for any respectable movie collector.

Laughable, yet, enticing
OK, for so many different reasons I could easily pan this. The volleyball action by a certain duo, namely horton / howell, really stinks! The acting is out and out crap, Stoklos and Smiths final film for a reason.
HOWEVER, I love this movie, if for no other reason that you get to see some of the classic players; Timmons, Stoklos, Smith, Mootheart, and of course OB. It is a fun romp through a sillier time, when anyone without a sponsorship deal could dream. Just don't expect too much.

C. Thomas Howell - Pro Volleyball? Whatever!
This movie is a complete joke. Anyone who says differently has taken too many volleyballs to the head themselves. The only way they could have made it more unrealistic would have been to cast Gary Coleman as his pro beach partner. ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Sometimes intelligent,sometimes silly
Sam Jackson plays a hard working New York teacher.At the very start of the movie we see him get brutally stabbed by the Wu Tang Clan's Method Man because he flunked him.After he recovers from his ordeal what happens?He gets transferred to another,even more violent school in Los Angeles.Lucky guy.He immediately makes an ill advised enemy of Hispanic ghetto thug Caesere(Clifton Clifton Gonzalez),whom he just wants to teach. .... The film was written by a teacher and makes some very good points.Teachers are here to help you so don't screw them up. But sometimes the script succumbs to Death Wish vigilante revenge type terrority and Jackson and Gonzalez' final showdown ...is just silly.Sam should've struck down on the punks with great vengeance and furious anger. By the way,DO NOT expect a happy ending.The ending in this movie is as bleak as the ending of Se7en.

its good
this is a great movie has some pretty cool gansters in it and sh*t(i had to use the asterisk and dont be a b*tch and say its gangstas not gangsters) but why did it take place in the valley??????? i mean theres no way that could be the worst school in america. not even the worst school west of L.A. they should have made it in city terrace or echo park or boyle heights but the valley???? i just dont get it. ive visited the valley and its disney land compared to city terrace or boyle heights or echo park. great movie though

An underappreciated masterpiece
Having attended an inner city high school, I will attest that while some of this was exaggerated, similar things do happen. I think the director took a lot of creative license and pushed things to a bit of an extreme with Garfield and Cesar's characters, but it only served to improve the quality of the film.

This is less "Dangerous Minds" or "The Substitute" than it is "Taxi Driver". Samuel L. Jackson does a superb job with his character Trevor Garfield, a man of deep moral convinctions and idealism who crumbles psychologically throughout the film. The way it is shot, along with the ominous soundtrack, creates an atmosphere of palpable doom and chaos. Garfield's speech to a fellow teacher who is beginning to realize the odd connection between the disappearance of troublesome students and his relation to them is really disturbing. The director should have worked more on the "teacher snapping" bit and had it a little less covert, but overall I would say this movie falls into cult classic, if not classic, range. The darkness is unforgettable, and the film does raise some relevant issues as to how people with values interact with those who have none. There is a certain flavor to this movie, somewhat inarticulate, that for me makes it worthy of the most lavish praise. This is no uplifting, Sidney Poitier film of redemption. It is simultaneously a vigilante film and a comment on conscious man and his place in the world. This is a must own, for Jackson's performance and the powerhouse ending.

not latin its HISPANIC
wow this movies was mind blowing. the ending reminded me of the 'godfather' movie. samuel jackson and clifton gonzalez give an amazing performance and i really like watching them intereactive with each other. this movie deserves five stars!!

and for those of you reffering latin people, its hispanic! not latin. lets get that strait, aight? peaze out yall.

smiley

A Pyrrhic Victory: Teaching America's Forgotten
"187" does not provide the viewer with a realistic insight into America's schools. Science teachers do not stalk students and then drop them with morphine injections, launched from a bow. But I did not pick up "187" expecting the classic teacher-makes-a-difference-in-children's-lives film. The very title moves one away from this depiction. Instead, "187" provides an interesting look into the job of educators when they are dealing firsthand with the violence that exists in many of America's communities.

One thing that I would have liked from this film is a slower transition from Samuel L. Jackson's former self to his newer self. The audience believes that they know his character and (quite suddenly) he has snapped and we are a bit unsure of the movement. This film is an intense experience-I found my nerves quite strained at the prospects of the chaos that exists in these communities. Above all, this film neither glorifies the student's actions nor the teacher's retaliation-a fact that prevents it from becoming a simple bloodbath movie. One leaves this film with a sense of loss on both sides and the utterly hopeless situation that we have created in our school systems. Jackson's character does, despite what some may say, have an impact on the students he teaches. But his victory is not without devastating losses; a Pyrrhic victory, as the movie (not so subtly) alludes.

Word to the wise: this is not an uplifting film. Do not rent it thinking you're in for a "To Sir, With Love" experience. Just read the title. But if you're in the mood to look at the darker side of life (think "Requiem for a Dream"), by all means. ... Read more

Reviews (48)

Safe can be deadly
I think this is one of the best and most significant films of the 90s. It is a very introspective film, so if you require shootouts, steamy sex scenes and explosions to remain interested, this is definitely not the movie for you. Even fans of independent films may find their attention spans challenged by the deliberately slow paced and downbeat style of Safe. It is, however, well worth paying attention to. I've seen this movie three times now, and I notice more with each viewing. The opening frame, which puts brackets around the title [Safe] is a study in itself. Carol White (the name, like many details in this film, is quite significant), played by Julianne Moore, is an affluent suburban housewife who apparently becomes allergic to everything around her. Yet Safe, which might first seem like a made-for-television disease-of-the-week affair, has a far more subtle and thought-provoking theme than illness. From the start, we are oppressed by the white, sterile perfection of Carol's environment. The interiors of her house could have been designed by a feng shui consultant. The colors are all soft; everything is arranged in perfect symmetry. When a furniture store accidentally delivers a black rather than teal couch to the house, Carol panics (black=impurity). Carol at first attributes her illness to stress and her doctor concurs. Yet her life is anything but stressful; we see her float from the health club to the hair salon to lunch with a friend at a restaurant. Her symptoms worsen, and she learns about environmental illness; "Are you allergic to the 20th Century?" a flyer asks. As Carol becomes unable to cope with her life, she enters Wrenwood, a new age retreat center that promises to cleanse the body and spirit of impurities. Wrenwood preaches a self-righteous philosophy of asceticism, withdrawl from society and positive thinking. In Safe, director Todd Haynes has taken a profound look at some disconcerting aspects of modern society. What is perhaps best about the film is its nuanced performances. Carol, though ill and upset, is never completely out of control for long; she always returns to her "I'm fine" persona (which is part of her problem). The new age center and its staff, which could have been a parody of silliness or cultishness, is similarly subtle. If you listen to what they preach and the effects it has on patients (everyone is always on the verge of tears), you can see the flaws and distortions, but it's sophisticated and plausible enough that you can also see how people might fall for it. Safe suggests that the desire to escape all forms of impurity may be one of the most pathological things about our culture.

Anything but safe.
Safe - movie, 4 stars

Named by the Village Voice as the Best Film of the 1990s, this resounding social statement a-la-TV-movie-of-the-week is certainly anything but what its title suggests. Director Todd Haynes has the reputation of pushing limits and making audiences strangely uncomfortable, and this film is no exception.

San Fernando Valley, circa 1989. Carol White (Julianne Moore) is living her perfectly stereotypical upper-middle-class life when suddenly she becomes sick. When she has allergic reactions to all sorts of chemicals around her, her husband (Xander Berkeley) and doctor think it's all in her head. However, the hopelessly reserved Carol knows her "environmental illness" is legitimate, uprooting herself and moving into the chemically-sterile community of Wrenwood, New Mexico. There, she is treated for her mysterious illness by self-help guru Peter Dunning (Peter Friedman) and his bright-eyed cohorts; however, her health continues to decline.

The film's statement is quite difficult to detect upon first viewing. Certainly, the plot is extremely reminiscent of many TV-movies of the 80s and 90s, all showcasing a new disease of the week. However, it eventually becomes apparent that the film is not a commentary on environmental illness.

Performances in the film are all at best adequate, with the exception of Moore, who is undeniably brilliant. Her detatched, sad carriage and demeanor arguably echoes more loudly than the film's social statement. Of course, she depends heavily on her subtleties as usual, and when she's onscreen, it's difficult to pay attention to anything else. Her birthday scene, toward the end of the film, is particularly moving.

Haynes's direction is seemingly bland at times-- one may feel as if he's watching a horror movie on Valium. However, Haynes's complexities eventually show through and what we see is a brillantly sincere and deep commentary on a rather provocative question: Is anyone ever really safe?

Excellent Psychological Drama with Lingering Effect
Carol White (Julianne Moore), a homemaker, lives a life without doing the daily chores of a housewife as the family maid takes care of household tasks. In essence Carol has only one responsibility: her leisure time. She tries to fill her free time with aerobics, beauty salon visits, and new acquisitions for their safeguarded home. These activities do not provide an outlet for Carol's own identity as she is a mere trophy wife. Eventually Carol's body begins to rebel against herself through nausea, headaches, and nose bleeding. The family doctor examines Carol and he finds nothing wrong as her physical miseries worsen. Carol is sent to a psychiatrist, but her subdued persona does not cooperate. Carol's health continues to deteriorate as she discovers an organization that enlightens people about environmental illness. Environmental illness is an over hypersensitivity to pollution, pesticides, and all other toxins in the environment that exist in foods, perfumes and make-up among other things. This means that Carol must remove herself from civilization and the world in which she lives. Carol departs for a new age health sanctuary, Wrenwood, where she begins her recovery. Initially Carol improves physically, however, as she comes across a closely located highway her health begins to decline again.

Safe has a lingering effect as it slowly moves forward as Haynes purposely displays each scene in order to build a deep understanding of Carol's identity. It becomes an exploration of Julianne Moore's character as Haynes dissects Carol's psychology through meticulous direction of every scene. When the scenes are edited together it leaves the audience with a profound insight of Carol's illness. This insight offers a disturbing experience as Carol's decisions continue to affect her negatively both physically and socially. Julianne Moore's performance enhances the distortion of her character's mind as she performs brilliantly, which leaves the audience with a fascinating cinematic experience.

Where the Stepford Wives Began
Julianne Moore does another fabulous job as an LA housewife exposed to the hazards of suburbia. The film is dark and stale adding to the creepiness of its message.

Moore's housewife is lifeless, she exists in LA going from post office to dry cleaners to aerobics class. She sips milk while her Spanish housecleaner does all the actual work of keeping up a home. She does her "wifely duties" with the same boredom with which she lives. Her world is protected and safe but she somehow ends up ill (is it real toxic poisoning or just a cry for attention?) and it all gets chalked up to stress.....what stress could she be having? The creepiness lies in how easily she gets programmed by all the others in her life. With no direction of her own she exists as a mere robotic representation of what she is supposed to be. How many of those do you see in a day?

Moore soon becomes so strangely ill that she can't even perform her meaniless tasks. This eventially lands her in a cultish type retreat where she is supposed to get well. Without her own backbone she flounders around influenced by everything external and open to all sorts of advice except what works. So we learn two messages in one movie, first be your own person and second that our environment may in fact be causing more undiagnosed illness than we imagine. Find your own influences before the Jones' get you down and above all stay SAFE!

Eerie and brilliant
I should start this review by stating that I'm not a Julianne Moore fan. A few years back a movie came out, called "Nine Months," that permanently turned me off this actress. In that movie, she played a whiny, obnoxious lady in a relationship with Hugh Grant. The whole picture revolved around the hijinks that ensued when Moore's character got pregnant and Grant didn't want kids. "Nine Months" was the most syrupy, sappy piece of fluff I have ever seen in my life. Think a Hallmark movie of the week with the emotional content pumped up on steroids, and you'll have an excellent idea of what "Nine Months" looked like. Oh, just to make it even worse, Tom Arnold and Joan Cusack appeared as these two grotesque superparent friends. Yuck. Despite my misgivings about Moore, I decided to give "Safe" a chance after reading its summary. The movie's premise, about a suburban housewife developing an allergy to modern society, was just too promising to pass up. I'm glad I watched the picture. Director Todd Haynes has scored a big coup with this grim take on American society towards the end of the twentieth century. And what a surprise! Moore actually tugged at my heartstrings in a decidedly non-icky way.

"Safe" is the story of Carol White, an adrift California housewife in the 1980s. Her life should satisfy: she lives with a husband and child she loves, spends her days doing whatever she wants to do, and lives in a huge house with plenty of money to throw around. What more could any American woman ask for? Apparently, quite a lot. In between the trips to the fitness center, the frequent lunches with female friends, and the important dinners with hubby's business pals, Carol begins to erode mentally and physically. If there's a starting point for this slow descent into illness, it seems to come when White throws a fit over a furniture company delivering the wrong couch. She soon cannot sleep, develops a hacking cough, and always feels bad. Her husband does not help matters. At first, he is sympathetic to his wife's plight, insisting she see a doctor (who finds nothing wrong with her) and offering emotional support. His goodwill doesn't last long, however, as he soon complains that Carol isn't fulfilling her duties as a wife and partner. The additional stress at home only compounds White's vague health problems. A trip to a psychologist offers little in the way of help, nor does a stay in the hospital after Carol has a seizure outside a dry cleaning business. This lady has a big problem, one that hauling around a little oxygen tank will not clear up anytime soon.

During the stay in the hospital, Carol finds salvation. An advertisement for a health spa called Wrenwood, located somewhere in New Mexico, promises to help people with unspecified health problems. Convinced this place is the only answer, White implores her husband to take her there. Wrenwood turns out to be both more and less than Carol White had hoped for. The facility is populated with a bunch of people, like White, who cannot seem to function in modern society. Even worse, the chap who runs the place, Peter Dunning, is one of those new age types. Dunning claims contracting the AIDS virus led him to set up the clinic so he can help people suffering from strange maladies. His speeches to his "patients," made in a special room complete with podium, cheesy murals, and musical instruments, convey the sense that this guy's running a cult. He likes to play around with people's minds, too, during intense "therapy" sessions where he tries to convince the patients that they made themselves sick. That may well be true in some of these cases, but the way Dunning goes about trying to heal these people is grotesque. In the end, Carol White is worse off than she was when she arrived at Wrenwood.

"Safe" works due to Haynes's masterful direction and sense of atmosphere. On more than one occasion, his cinematic approach reminded me of Stanley Kubrick. Haynes has that same ability to light and shoot a scene that looks like a giant hand squeezed all the emotion and life out of it. This tendency is especially prevalent in the first half of the film as we watch Carol start her slow decline. There's a great scene where we see White standing in her opulent living room, but Haynes shoots it so it looks like a mausoleum devoid of any feeling or life. If you look closely enough, Carol White appears as just another piece of furniture in the room. Amazing, simply amazing, and probably a good hint at the film's central theme. Our heroine really is just another ornament in this house, and her husband treats her that way. I suspect Carol's illness is related to her awareness that her life is essentially empty of meaning. Perhaps the illness is an attempt to get attention from those around her, or her body's way of rejecting the sterile background of her daily life.

Whatever the case, "Safe" is a deeply unsettling film that raises more questions than answers. Julianne Moore turns in a fabulous performance as the deeply flawed Carol White, as does Xander Berkeley as her distant husband. Peter Friedman threatens to steal the show, however, as the smarmy Peter Dunning. A commentary track on the disc done by Moore and Haynes seems to shoot holes in any attempt to see the film as a serious commentary on modern life. Both actress and director laugh and giggle a lot during the commentary, obviously getting a kick out of poking fun at the new age themes in the film. Still, "Safe" is an observation on our sick society, and fans of cinema will definitely want to check this gem out posthaste. ... Read more