Signs

Signs-360P

Signs-720P

Signs-480P

This is definitely one of the best movies that I have seen in years. The dialogue is smart, the camera work is perfect and the information and background setting are divulged to the audience at precisely the right pace and exactly the right moment. Mel Gibson turns in his best performance that I can remember and so does Pheonix, who is extremely funny and plays a very real and well defined character. The movie is coincidently the scariest movie that I can remember seeing in theatres, and the scary moments are guaranteed to haunt you for a few days afterwards at least, but the movie is so much better than that and its so much more than a movie about aliens. As everyone knows from reviews, "Signs" means more than just crop signs, but "signs" are never portrayed in a cheesy way, but in a realistic and honest sense, and capturing such a deep topic without going overboard or making a mockery of it seems very hard these days, so that makes the film all the more impressive. Basically, its just awesome, it really is. Go see it.

I saw this movie and even though I like Shyamalan, love Gibson and think Phoenix is great, the movie is plain stupid. Admittedly, it has quite a few moments that really scare the hell out of you (at least on the big screen). But the ending? Think about it! Aliens invade the earth and have to leave because they can't cope with water/rain? Where does that come from??? They've obviously been to earth a few times to "check the location", but they never encountered rain? They don't know that??? How stupid must they be - and yet surprisingly enough perfectly capable of building spacecrafts and interstellar travel. I think "Signs" is one of the most stupid films I've ever seen - unbelievable that such a film has been made. It's a shame!

I saw this film at a packed opening weekend showing in NYC. As the film progressed and the tension rose I thought to myself that this was actually a pretty good film. There were scares, some laughs and even some scenes that tugged at the old heart strings. It reminded me of Night of the Living Dead and the original War of the Worlds, both of which are long time favorites. Durring the final, climactic scene something so completely retarded occurred that I was ripped out of the contented haze the movie had lulled me into. I was shocked. I turned to my girlfriend and said "They get killed by water? Water kills them?" She said, loudly "This movie is F*CKING DUMB!" And I said "I don't believe it..." And that's it. Naked aliens who find water to be deadly come to the wettest place in this solar system. Then, believe it or not, they get killed with water. Other posters (nearly 1,000 or something) have pointed out how utterly insulting this is so I won't go any further into it. I would like to know why the people who rate this a 10 don't bother addressing this outlandish plot device that destroys the entire film for so many others. I would even accept an explanation like "I am an idiot and MAJOR plot-holes don't bother me at all". Has M. Night ever defended this ludicrous flick? No? That's probably because it's indefensible.

Leave it to M. Night Shyamalan to take our expectations for a movie, turn them upside down, and still deliver a work surpassing anything we'd dared hope for. With `The Sixth Sense' and `Unbreakable' the young director so immersed us in threatening, supernatural realities that we would follow him anywhere. When all roads led to remarkable twist endings, we loved him even more. It's with high expectations, then, that audiences greet his new sci-fi thriller `Signs.' And Shyamalan waltzes into the picture clearly aware of what's expected. He knows we're on to his trickery and will spot his clever little ending a mile away, and that knowledge assures that we won't. Shyamalan also uses the ongoing allure of UFOs and space aliens to sell a film that, ultimately, has little to do with either one. Despite the inescapable background noise, the movie is really about the emotional and spiritual journey of a rural widower named Graham Hess (Mel Gibson). Formerly a reverend, he gave up his church after the death of his wife. When we meet him, his days are spent tending a large farm with his brother, Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix), and children Morgan (Rory Culkin) and Bo (Abigail Breslin). It's a simple life that's turned upside down when strange crop circles show up in his field. At first, Graham is convinced it's a prank, but then they begin to appear around the world, and the possibility of alien life - perhaps even an invasion - looks realistic. As the film runs its paces, it riffs on a number of themes more important than the crop circles themselves, but Shyamalan is smart enough to know he has to hang his hat on something. With that in mind, he hides his real issues within a first-class, neoclassical thriller. That means the scares come not from splashy, grotesque special effects but tight editing and suspenseful storytelling. From the opening frames, Shyamalan creates an atmosphere so eerie and tense that one literally feels tired by the time the film ends. But it's a good tired, the type that comes after working on something worthwhile and being aptly rewarded for the effort. It's safe to say nobody else could have directed this movie. The unique perspective is purely that of Shyamalan, who wrote, produced and directed. At one turn the film feels campy, at the next desperately serious, but Shyamalan has somehow melded the diversities into a whole that plays like real life. Since that's what most people look for at the movies, the payoff is big. Shyamalan also demonstrates an expert ability to build tension, break it with comic relief, then rebuild it. It helps that he has veterans like Gibson and Phoenix delivering the lines, but one gets the feeling this movie would have been great even without the megastars. I'm glad they signed on, though, because their names assure a big-time audience, and this is the type of film that deserves one.

As a long-time science fiction fan and as a scientist, I was not prepared for the insult foisted upon this viewer by this miscarriage of the legacy of true science fiction. If one wishes to have a movie about faith and redemption, fine, but don't trash a whole genre in the process with unbelievable sloppiness. Three years after seeing the film, I still feel insulted. Spoilers: Why would an intelligent life form capable of traversing untold distances and for whom contact with water is fatal choose a planet for invasion whose surface is predominantly water? Why would that intelligent life form be incapable of sufficient intelligence and tools to free itself from an ordinary locked room? Why would those beings choose to prey on beings that are primarily composed of that substance they find fatal? The list goes on and on, but the bottom line is that some director with no feel and, obviously, no respect for the genre choose that genre for his vehicle? Oh, yeah, name stars and $$$. Next time I see the name M. Night Shyamalan, I'll forego the experience.

I don't think this film deserved the poor reviews that some gave it. I've only seen 3 of Night Shylaman's films (6th Sense, Unbreakable) and this one is the most sophisticated in my mind in terms of the director manipulating the viewers into seeing and believing what he wants you to believe. This is not Gibson's worst film by any means. If anything he gets to try to portray an understated, confused, and emotionally scarred character and I think he soft-sells it very well. Joaquin Phoenix also has a similar character to play and he too soft-sells it well. That was probably not an accident as their calm, sullen personalities contrast with the unbearable situation they find themselves in. If you haven't already, see it - and keep an open mind.

In a documentary that accompanies the film on DVD, M. Night Shyamalan admits that SIGNS was greatly influenced by such films as NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD and Hitchcock's THE BIRDS--an admission that will come as no surprise to any one who has seen SIGNS in the wake of those films. Although very different, all three have one thing in common: they ultimately focus on a small group of people fighting off an unnatural entity that attempts to invade their very ordinary homes. The story is an unusual mix of meditative religious and classic sci-fi elements blended together by Shyamalan's remarkable sense of visual style. Mel Gibson is a minister who has lost his faith in the wake of his wife's tragic accidental death and who now rejects the concept of unseen powers entirely--so he is nonplussed when his children discover a crop circle in his own cornfield. He remains skeptical even as television news coverage reports alien crafts hovering over major cities. But his denial is exploded when he and his family have a close encounter of the extremely nasty kind. The small cast is extremely, extremely good. I generally dislike Mel Gibson as an actor, but he has grown a bit since his macho-bravado BRAVEHEART days, and while he might seem an unlikely choice for the part of a failed minister he carries it extremely well. Joaquin Phoenix is perfectly cast as Gibson's younger brother, and the children--Rory Culkin and Abigail Breslin--are flawless. What isn't flawless is the story. The blend of religious and sci-fi motifs is an interesting idea, but director Shyamalan (who also wrote the script) doesn't quite manage to hold them in balance, and ultimately winds up beating you over the head with the film's religious elements while giving the sci-fi elements the short end of the stick. I did appreciate the fact that the film builds suspense more by what it does not show than what it does, and I have no qualm with that--it's a welcome choice after such special effects overkill as INDEPENDENCE DAY and the like--but several of his plot devices smack of stereotype, and the film's conclusion is such a deus ex machina that it is not to be believed. There is indeed a great deal to admire about the film, but when all is said and done it somehow lacks sincerity and falls just short of the mark. Entertaining nonetheless. Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer