Signs Review by Seth C (5 Stars)

Signs Review by Seth C (5 Stars) | MatchFlick

Steal of the Day

Startling Proofs DVD
~~$7.98~~
$4.99
The Steal of the Day is offered by MatchFlick's DVD partner, FamilyVideo.com.

[help]

[more]

MatchFlick Member Reviews


	4 reviews review this movie read all reviews

Movie Details

All Movie Info

Starring:
Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, Rory Culkin, Cherry Jones, Patricia Kalember, M. Night Shyamalan, Abigail Breslin

Directed By:
M. Night Shyamalan

Written By:
M. Night Shyamalan

Signs (2002)

email this review to a friend

Movie Review by Seth C

February 13th, 2006

From the genius mind of one of today's greatest new filmmakers, M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" is first-rate filmmaking. From the first scare to the last tear this is a film we can't take our eyes off of. The brilliance of Night's direction is that it's all about misdirection and what he doesn't allow us to see. For instance, there's a scene in which Joaquin Phoenix's Merrill is watching a news broadcast showing a birthday party and one uninvited guest. Although all we see is just mere seconds of what we're suppose to, throughout the whole two minute scene our eyes are fixated on whatever we are shown, trying our hardest to see something that isn't there. Or is it?

Night constructs his film with a 'more is less' philosophy. He doesn't show us what's outside the Hess family home, but he allows us to hear it. To feel it. And like the characters on screen, we become just as fearful and tense as they are. All we see are flashlights and living room walls, however, in our minds, there's a whole other vision.

"Signs" is yet another fine example of Night's directing career and possibly the first time Night's writing has ever truly shined. The dialogues Mel Gibson's Graham gives about God and his faith are so moving and truthful that we, the audience, can feel the pain and bitterness with each word he speaks. It's almost as if we can fully understand what Graham is feeling and what he's going through when in all honesty, thank God, none of us even have the slightest clue.

However, it's not just Night's writing that brings this character's humanist quality to life, but it is also the fact that it's beautifully acted by Mel Gibson, whose performance is, hands down, perfect. From the last supper scene to where he distracts his children during the chaos with stories of when they were born, Gibson delivers the best performance I've ever seen him play.

"Signs" is a movie about faith and family, disguised as a film about aliens. Sure there are aliens in this film, but I feel that if that's what you're coming out of this film with - If you're coming out of this film just thinking it's a Sci-Fi feature, than you're missing the entire point I would like to believe Night had for making it in the first place. This is a film about how one man loses his faith and how he goes about rediscovering it. I read somewhere that somebody said "The Exorcist" was a much better film about the same thing, however I feel that Night's story is much different and, on a personal level, it hit me much deeper.

On first take, the only complaint I had was that I felt the film's ending was somewhat hokey, however now that I've seen the film numerous times, I realized hokey or not, the ending completely works if we just allow it. And the emotion is still there.

M. Night Shyamalan and his films SHOULD BE the reasons we go to the movies in the first place. With films like this one and the extremely powerful and underrated "Unbreakable," I've come to the conclusion that what the future holds is M. Night Shyamalan films, and I can't wait. His films are always about something their not. The real purpose and story is always hidden in some stupid comic book, theater friendly tale. "Signs" isn't about aliens, it's about faith. "Unbreakable" isn't about a superhero, it's about a father through his son's eyes. And "The Sixth Sense" isn't about a boy who sees dead people, it's about...okay, maybe that one doesn't have a hidden message or purpose and is just about a boy who see dead people, it doesn't matter. M. Night Shyamalan is the future of Hollywood films and lets wrap our arms around him and smile at the Heavens for that.

(NOTE: This review was written in 2002, long before Night's next film "The Village," which knocked the boy down a few pegs. I still have faith in him and stand by everything written in this review, just please don't mention "The Village.)

email this review to a friend

Comment on this Review:

Sorry, you must be a member to add comments to reviews.

Join or Login.

	Ash Oct 25, 2006 4:00 AM also wrote a review of Signs
Great review. You show a strong of what makes this film great (unlike the other Seth who comments) and you don't get caught up in the trivial subjectiveness like so many other people (There is nothing wrong with the aliens looks. There is nothing wrong with water being a source of harm to the aliens.) Time and time again, people who didn't like the movie never seem to be able to criticize any true faults. They can only point out that it wasn't the film they wanted it to be. This was the same problem with The Village which I'm surprised to find you didn't like after such a review of Signs. The Village is perhaps even better than Signs, but way too many people expected and wanted a different film. Ah well... And by the way, I hope you'll watch Sixth Sense again because it's not really about a boy that sees dead people.

	Seth Jul 18, 2006 5:36 PM
Meh. I hated this movie. I will actually say the first half was really, really good. The way Night keeps us in the dark about the aliens is very well done. I haven't been a part of an incoming alien invasion, but if such a thing came, I think it would progress roughly like the beginning of this film. I loved the news reports, the way people in the house handled it, and the global perspective. And then they showed the alien. You are right, the birthday party scene is great. However, it goes horribly down hill, horribly fast after that. The movie becomes some silly B-movie, complete with lame looking aliens hell-bent on destruction for no apparent purpose. They shoot gas out of their hands and are blue. I though we got past this in the '70s. You were right the first time, the ending is hokey. And though I know you like it, I thought the faith sub-plot was kind of hokey, too. I had no problem with his lack of faith, it was how he regained it that bugged me. My problem is that Night is obviously smart and has the ability to make smart films. Apparently he just stopped the smart thing about halfway through this movie. Luckily, I never saw THE VILLAGE. And one last thing. What's the deal with him and water? You can't make two movies back to back where the main "weakness" of a strong character is water. It's attempt to have something simple be the answer for something complex is an over-simplified way of getting yourself out of a movie. So, don't get me started on LADY IN THE LAKE or whatever it is. Night needs to move past water.

	Seth C Jul 19, 2006 9:01 AM
First off, thanks for checking out the review. Now, your points are all well made and think maybe we're you're coming from is as a watcher who enjoyed Night's two previous films (am I right?). I on the otherhand thought "Sixth Sense" was terrible so "Signs" was kind of my re-introduction to Night, and I was so blown away that I think that helped my love for the film. You did nail it on the head with both the aliens comment and the water comment, but personally has there ever been a somewhat believable looking alien in film. And hey, water is just one Night's trademarks like dick and fart jokes to Kevin Smith ... we should be able to look past that. And for the love of God, don't see "The Village."

Subscribe to MatchFlick Movie Reviews through RSS