i saw Far From Heaven and Safe in the past week. i'd seen Velvet Goldmine a few years earlier but i barely remember it. FFH and Safe are, quite simply, masterpieces. so i'm reviving this thread.
Safe is absolutely chilling. i read through some of the reviews/critiques of the film, it's amazing how misunderstood this movie was.. particularly the part that takes place at Wrenwood, which was misunderstood even by some of the film's supporters. for example, i've come across reviews praising what they viewed as haynes' depiction of Wrenwood being "viable and sensible" in helping Carol find happiness. i have no idea what movie they were watching.

everything about the Wrenwood scenes, from carol's initial discomfort when she arrives there to Peter's attempts to convince the victims that they themselves were to blame for their illness, and that deeply moving final shot of Juli Moore's face as she says "i love you.. i really love you.." to her reflection -- it was pretty clear to me that what carol had encountered at wrenwood not only mirrored the vacuity and conformity of her former life but was, in some ways, worse.
i think part of why some critics misunderstood this is because haynes, in both Safe and FFH, subverts convention at every turn, but he does it so cleverly that you almost don't even notice it's happening. he "sets up" the film (safe) as a typical disease movie, yet he constantly (and sometimes, subliminally) reminds you that this is about something else entirely, achieving a rare, awesome synthesis between his subject and style. same goes for FFH, but perhaps with a slightly different set of motivations.
it's funny, the Haynes movie i wanted to watch the most, based on things i'd read, was Poison, now it's the only one i still haven't seen. it's in the queue though, along with VG which i obviously need to revisit.
ps. safe is only 5 bucks on deepdiscountdvd but it's TWENTY SEVEN dollars on amazon! 