Signs (2002) Reviews

• underrated film

  J_Charles2005-07-28

  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.

  More

• I actually really rather like Signs...

  poolandrews2007-05-27

  Signs is set in Bucks County, Pennsylvania where Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) lives on a farm with his his two young children Bo (Abigail Breslin) & Morgan (Rory Culkin) plus his younger brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix), one morning they discover elaborate crop circles in their corn fields. At first they think it's a hoax but there are newsflashes all over the TV which say these crop circles have appeared all over the world, then things turn really sinister when UFO's start appearing in the sky by these crop circles & when footage of an alien is caught on a camcorder the Hess family have to consider the possibility of an alien invasion... Written, produced & directed by M. Night Shyamalan who also has a fairly big role in the film as Ray Reddy who ran over Mel Gibson's character's wife I actually really liked Signs. The script which takes itself pretty seriously could be described as somewhat slow at times but I thought the story was engaging & pretty intriguing which kept me hooked. I really liked all the character's here, OK maybe the kids are a touch annoying as they tend to be in films but I thought this was pretty well written with a decent balance between humour & seriousness. The alien invasion stuff is kept to a minimum & little is seen of the aliens themselves, this is a film where less is more & it retains a air of creepiness around the aliens. It's not big on action either & concentrates on the Hess family & almost totally ignores the outside world which is unusual for recent alien flicks which tend to be nothing more than showcase's for overblown CGI computer effects as in Independence Day (1996) & War of the Worlds (2005) so Signs is a nice change of pace, I mean there's nothing wrong with huge CGI special effects filled films but Signs was just a nice change. Director Shyamalan does a fine job but then he had a mega budget to help him, for those looking for another The Sixth Sense (1999) will probably be disappointed as Signs is a very different film & doesn't have such a great ending. I thought there were some creepy moments here & the restraint in the usage of CGI here helps create an ominous atmosphere & leaves something to the audiences imagination which is a novelty these days. What CGI is here is very good & the alien when eventually seen looks OK if a little unimaginative. With a whopping budget of $72,000,000 Signs obviously looks the business & has that big budget Hollywood look although that huge figure did surprise me a bit as there's not many special effects, there's only about five character's in the entire film & it takes place in the same location for the most part so 72 big ones does seem like quite a lot considering the end result. I thought the acting was pretty good throughout. Signs in my opinion is a great alien invasion flick that tells it's story in a different sort of way, I liked it a lot although I know for a fact there's a lot of hate out there for it. Personally I think it's well worth a watch.

  More

• Flawed but better than its reputation

  petra_ste2016-03-23

  There are few things more or less all moviegoers tend to agree about, one of them being that the career of writer/director M. Night Shyamalan, after an impressive start (The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable), has turned out to be a huge disappointment. Opinions may differ on the moment he completely lost it, although Lady in the Water is generally regarded as the point his hubris got the better of him. Like The Village, Signs belongs to a middle Shyamalan phase, where his visual talent still made up for his limits (preachiness, plot holes, the egotistic insistence of casting himself in pivotal roles). Signs follows an alien invasion from the point of view of a small rural family including a widowed father (Mel Gibson), his younger brother (Joaquin Phoenix) and two kids. The movie is filmed with style, intelligence and an unusual attention to silence and stillness in the build-up of atmosphere. The elephant in the room is, of course, a plot hole so conspicuous it has achieved memetic status, with the water-allergic invaders mastering interstellar travel but not raincoats and umbrellas. Why don't you just commit yourself to directing and leave screenplays to better writers and acting to actors, Night? Not everyone can be Orson Welles and pull triple duty. Special mention for the fine score by James Newton Howard, homaging the works of the great Bernard Herrman. 6,5/10

  More

• I think a lot of you don't get it

  MyDixieNormous2002-08-05

  **********POSSIBLE SPOILERS THROUGHOUT********** I've read some of the reviews here on the IMDB and one thing comes to mind: A lot of you have no idea what the movie is about, or just didn't pay attention to the dialogue. There's a lot of.... 1) Why did the aliens come to a planet that's 2/3 water when they are harmed by water. 2) Why did the alien look so cheap. 3) The characters don't act like people really would. Well allow me to try to explain it to all of you nay sayers. 1) There are a lot of explanations for this. One could be that they would have inhabited the other third of the planet. That's like what, 400 square feet. The world's a small place right? Another explanation could be that they weren't aware of the fact they could be harmed by water. Sure it seems silly but tell me, how does one know when they are allergic to a certain medicine or when one doesn't like a certain type of food. You aren't born with the knowledge that you aren't going to like steak before you even try it. 2) For those of you that don't understand the film I'm going to try my darndest to explain it to you. For those of you that did understand the movie but still had something bad to say about the look of the alien all I can say is that the Director is presuming not to know what aliens actually look like. Since none of us have actually seen them or know the extent of their existence he's not going to show us a tall lanky green alien with a huge head and big yellow eyes. That's also why all the scenes where we see the aliens the best is somewhat blurry. That was Spielberg's mistake with A.I. He used the same aliens from Close Encounters. Unless he has a few aliens living in his backyard I assure you he doesn't know what they look like if they do exist. 3) I find this totally untrue and I'm going to cite certain examples from the movie to show you that. The scene at dinner where Mel Gibson breaks down and then the children come over and hug him. I've heard it said that no child of that age would do what was done after having just been yelled at. He would most likely go running into the other room. I have a 10 year old niece that is actually one of the smartest people I know. Smarter than a lot of the adults I know as well and would have handled the situation the same way. Just because someone is a child doesn't mean that they always act like a baby and start whining and crying. And vice versa. Just because someone is an "adult" doesn't mean they always act like an adult. The best scene of this movie is another example of this. When Mel Gibson crouches down to his sons height and proceeds to tell him of the day he was born. How awesome of a scene is that? If it hadn't hit yet, that scene should have been pretty clear that this wasn't a movie about an alien invasion but rather something else. And that is most likely what a real father that thought he and his family was going to die would do. They wouldn't have run. The Director is not an idiot and he is not going to treat the movie going public like they are idiots. That is why at the beginning of the movie there wasn't a disclamier saying that this movie is not really about aliens and that's why there aren't going to be very many aliens throughout the movie. He left it up to you to figure out what the movie was about. Obviously a lot of you had trouble doing so. If you wanted to see an ID4 type movie then go rent it. That may be the kind of movie that racks up all the millions but I guarantee you that the Director would rather his movie tanks while making it his way then it makes millions by being a cheesy alien film.

  More

• What was the guy on who invented this ridiculous story??? ***Spoiler Alert***

  martin_lange2004-02-28

  *** Spoiler Alert **** Spoiler Alert *** Spoiler Alert *** OK, this movie has a good cinematography and one cannot argue about the good craftsmanship. However, who invented this ridiculous story??? Let me get this right: a) Aliens can travel millions of light years in their space crafts, but lack the technology of breaking into a wooden house. b) For that matter - a seven-foot-tall alien, who can run like an Olympic athlete, can be locked into a wooden kitchen pantry without being able to escape. c) Aliens (able to travel space) run around naked and cannot deal with water. Does this imply that a raincoat is a more sophisticated invention than a spaceship? d) Aliens come to `harvest human beings', but can be scared off by wooden clubs. Aehhh . the human body consists 90+% of water, which the aliens cannot handle . does this qualify for the `real dumb plot award'??? e) A referent looses his faith when his wife dies (which is fair), but regains it when he remembers her last words which tip him off that Aliens doesn't like being beaten with wooden clubs . are there more people who think this is crap??? Also: f) When confronted with an imminent Alien attack, board yourself into a lonely wooden house in the prairie - don't go into the next town, arm yourself and join the local militia / military organisation. g) Don't have the asthma medicine your son's life is depending on handy. h) After you boarded up your house, just hang around in the lounge. Don't fortify your cellar basement and shift all your water, food and medicine there. i) Lacking fire arms, don't arm yourself with knifes, axes or whatever you can find. Leave your vicious guard dogs (who detect aliens earlier than you and could scare them off) outside the house. .. And the top price goes to: j) Alien communication can best be observed on baby monitors!!! . sophisticated civil air control and military radar equipment cannot spot them. Well, they don't make movies like that one any more. Hopefully, no-one will never ever make a movie like that one again!!! My opinion - right down there with `Battlefield Earth' and `Giggli'. 1 out of 10.

  More