Señales

I'm honestly shocked this has a 6.8 on IMDb.

A bunch of people used to a 'twist'?

A bunch of people who think all alien movies must contain explosions?

A combination of both?

Great casting.

Great acting.

Great writing.

Lots of tension.

One of the most serious explorations of faith in cinema.

Just an all around really good movie.

Joaquin Phoenix steals the show.

I will say, it does have a very morose vibe - being the back drop is everyone being sad because the mom had died. I wonder if that is what turned people off. The subject of aliens plays second fiddle to it.

Yeah, if I had to put my finger on it, I'd bet that's it.

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.

M. Night Shyamalan has done it again, and this time, better. If 'Unbreakable' left skepticism about the young director, `Signs' will make you a believer again.

Mel Gibson and his family, one boy, one girl, and Gibson's younger brother (Joaquin Phoenix) take residence in the small town of Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Gibson's wife is not a member of this household (we find out why, later). Shot over and around a 'Walton's-style' house and surrounded by crops, we get the eerie feeling that we are to be entangled here for the next two hours. Immediately, the children notice gigantic perfect circular shapes or signs as we like to call them, appearing within the crops. Is this a hoax or War of the Worlds? And, that's all you need to know. The rest of film will dazzle you with style, suspense, and downright scariness.

The key ingredients to this recipe for storytelling is one half Close Encounters of the Third Kind, a dash of Stephen King, sprinkled with Orson Wells. Shyamalan also uses Hitchcock like close ups, wicked camera angles, and a blasting score. You are locked in as soon as the movie begins. You will tilt your head in wonder and confusion, as characters in the film do. There is a deep desire to figure this all out, while your stuck in the middle of nowhere, nowhere being Bucks County.

The picture gives us two ultimate dilemmas to wrestle with. Two basic questions we must ask ourselves. Are our daily occurrences and the paths we choose Coincidence? Or, are is it just plain Luck? Shyamalan weaves these posing questions into a subplot, with trickery until the end. From scene to scene, he leaves no fades to black. As one scene ends the other smartly begins. That's what keeps the audience watching as if we were tucked tightly into our beds and rapidly turning pages of a good book. Each page is significant. This movie isn't just about crops. That's what makes Shyamalan such a keen filmmaker. He has the talent and ability to fog up the film, and distract you with different propositions.

Shyamalan uses technique to peak his story, rather than dialogue. His masterful and favorite formula is the usage of flashbacks, which gives the audience a chance to catch up on what they might have missed. He emphasizes his points by re-occurring scenes and replaying them for the grand effect, the 11th hour, until he hits you with the finale. Whether you believe the outcome or not, you cannot deny his aptitude for storytelling.

This nervous and paranoid feature film with a heart-pounding ending is terrific. I was still thinking about it when I left the theater. You too, will enjoy the ride. But, when it's over, say your prayers, get into bed, pull the sheets over your head, breathe a sigh of relief, and close the book!

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

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.