The Signal

"The Signal" is more horror film than sci-fi. It's about three people trapped in a threatening environment they do not understand. It is also about reality, and how our concept of it can easily be shaken by unexpected circumstances that are inconsistent with our past experiences and perceptions. In the early portion of the film there is a brief reference to Philip Dick, the master of reality tales, and to his book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep," which became the basis for the film "Blade Runner." Later references capture some of the mystique of "The Matrix" and also an often overlooked film from 1997, "The Cube."

Comments posted here about "The Signal" seem to be sharply divided: viewers seem to either hate it or love it. The displeasure is easy to understand. Those who expected a sci-fi story with a lot of techno-gadgets and special effects are likely to be disappointed. The same applies to those who are uncomfortable with the concept of victimization, a common basis for horror films and a key element in "The Signal." But those who like to read Philip Dick or who enjoyed "The Cube" will find much to admire in this film, a low budget effort with a smart script.

"The Signal" starts out a bit vague, but then the plot sets in. They manage to set everything up so that you can't be certain whether it's real or imagined. I read that the movie is partly based on Plato's Allegory of the Cave, in which people see a limited reality (also the basis of "The Matrix").

Laurence Fishburne's enigmatic professor is the best character in the movie, and Lin Shaye's* aging character. "The Signal" isn't any kind of great movie, but I thought that it was OK. Mystifying, more than anything. A similar movie is "The Quiet Earth" from New Zealand.

*She also played the sunburned neighbor in "There's Something About Mary" and the retiring flight attendant in "Snakes on a Plane".

The negative reviews are all so ridiculously nit-picky it's almost as if they were paid just to slam this film. It's a ride, not a thesis, just let it take you along all the twists and turns, don't bother trying to figure it out, and you'll have a good time. Isn't that entertainment?

Three MIT students are driving cross country to California. Nic (Brenton Thwaites) with his disability seems to be pushing his girlfriend Haley (Olivia Cooke) away. A hacker has been harassing Nic and Jonah (Beau Knapp). They track him to a desert house. Something happens and Nic wakes up in a facility treated by Damon (Laurence Fishburne) in an isolation suit. Haley is unconscious and Jonah is missing. Then he discovers his defective legs have been replaced by some sort of advanced prostheses.

Director William Eubank brings a nice look to a sci-fi premise with some promise. However the writing isn't up to scratch. The story has a couple of problems. Thwaites is not necessarily a big time star in waiting. They need to work on the couple's relationship. Parts of this movie feels overextended. It doesn't quite work.

"Visually arresting, methodically paced, and almost perfectly executed" says another review here. I agree and would add well-acted, produced, and directed. But it still doesn't quite make it as a movie, something with a real story that is effectively delivered and is more than the sum of its strung-together parts. Each scene is fine, but they just seem like a string of episodes rather than a coherent story. One has trouble getting the point and is left somewhat confused and unsatisfied, with the final twist more baffling than impactive. I would say that the words "inchoate" and even "incoherent" can't help but come to mind regarding the film.

Before you write me off as someone who only likes nice linear films where EVERYTHING is made perfectly clear and who can't handle anything unusual, abstract, metaphoric, or different in any way, compare "Signal" to "Dark City", the recent "Under the Skin", and even "THX 1138" (which BTW arguably has a lot of similarities to this one).

Meanwhile, for examples of films that have similar problems as "Signal", see "Citadel" (2012), "Critical Nexus" (2013), and even "Shuttle" (2008) or "Blair Witch Project". I would argue, tho', that most of these, whatever their flaws, are probably more effective at delivering a real story than "Signal". MEANWHILE, to see what a low-budget independent sci-fi movie CAN be, see "Moon" (2009).

Finally, I was just reading a review of "Signal" in which the reviewer mentions another director who started out with a middling low-budget sci-fi film and has gone on to bigger and better accomplishments; he sees similar potential in the director of "Signal". I fully agree. Again, I think "Signal" was impressive and well worth seeing, but doesn't quite make it to the level of a real and effective movie.