:
Mel Gibson,
Mel Gibson,
Joaquin Phoenix,
more...
:
M. Night Shyamalan,
M. Night Shyamalan
see all cast/crew...
: 
: Walt Disney Video
: Science Fiction , Aliens
: 106 min.
: English, French
see additional details...
|
|
Following the smash hit The Sixth Sense (1999) and the under-performing follow-up Unbreakable (2000), directing phenom M. Night Shyamalan returns to the summer box office landscape that served as the backdrop for his cinematic breakthrough. In Signs, another paranormal outing for the writer-director, Shyamalan explores the eerie implications of a 500-foot crop circle that mysteriously appears on the Bucks County, PA farm of reverend Graham Hess (Mel Gibson). As Hess and his family (Joaquin Phoenix, Rory Culkin, Abigail Breslin) try to take stock of what the sign means, and how its message incorporates into their faith, they start to get the feeling they are not alone in the fields behind their house. Shyamalan re-teams with producers Frank Marshall, Sam Mercer and Kathleen Kennedy, and produces the project in association with his Blinding Edge Pictures banner and Touchstone Pictures. ~ Derek Armstrong, All Movie Guide
|
| Here's another sign: DO NOT ENTER
by Chiend
February 10, 2006 - 6:14 PM PST
|
|
|
1 out of 3 members found this review helpful
|
| After his first two films (SIXTH SENSE and his disappointing follow-up UNBREAKABLE), it appears director Shyamalan has grown little talent-wise in film making style and technical knowledge. He first came up with an idea already worked to death (a man of the cloth loses loved one along with faith and later regains it) and attempted to make it more interesting by wrapping a sci-fi plot sprinkled with elements of horror around it for good measure. Well, most of us are suckers for such weepy, emotional dribble, but for the more discriminating among us, it doesn't work this time around. It looks as though Shyamalan came up with the idea after watching E.T. and used CLOSE ENCOUNTERS for inspiration while grafting it onto an INDEPENDENCE DAY plot (he should have watched FROM DUSK TILL DAWN instead). The results are annoying and pretentious. I realize the human race is screwing itself beyond reproach, but since when did children become more worldly and wise than adults? Hasn't that prepubescent Hollywood wimp Steven Spielberg driven this idea far enough into the ground already? Worse yet, the film has a hard time cutting to the chase. When the time arrives for the story to reveal its direction, it flies off on a tangent and buries its head in the sand. Its exasperating to find out the further along the plot develops, the less those symbols carved into Mel Gibson's cornfield have to do with the plot. And, as usual in Shyamalan's films, you can guess the plot resolution halfway into the movie. Finally, I have some special notes for director Shyamalan on film making: Either take more acting lessons or hang it up, please. Plus, it isn't necessary to deliberately use a shaky, hand-held camera to subjectively portray a person walking (even if you ARE in a cornfield) because it calls too much attention to what should be taken for granted. One more: panning the camera back and forth between two conversing subjects looks sloppy and makes you look like an amateur, which you are not. |
| Oh, no - this is CLASSIC science fiction of the Old School
by larbeck
August 21, 2003 - 9:54 PM PDT
|
|
|
3 out of 4 members found this review helpful
|
I must take exception to the previous review - I suspect this is a matter of my perspective as one of a certain age. But seeing "Signs" reminded so much of really Old School science fiction, like "The Day the Earth Stood Still" or maybe an "Twlight Zone" with the religious issues in on the sci-fi issues. Although, it was on a more personal scale than either "The Day the Earth Stood Still" or "Forbidden Planet". Even the cinematography hints at the starkness of the old black and whites (but it is not black and white). It was almost nostilgic that way. Don't rent it for action - it has that slower late's 50's pacing that drives the young folk crazy.
But I liked it! |
| more religion than scifi
by rarcher
August 21, 2003 - 9:52 AM PDT
|
|
|
3 out of 6 members found this review helpful
|
so this movie deals more with concepts of faith than scifi or outerspace
and that stuff sort of bored/annoyed me for its oversimplicity
anyway, it's a blockbuster, what do you expect?
what i did like about the film (and why i gave it more points than most people):
1. i had low expectations so it didn't disappoint
2. i like how, unlike most scifi, it doesn't rely on special effects, spaceships, explosions, etc
3. he gave the aliens a cool physical ability
relax
don't overthink
have fun |
|
|
GreenCine Member Rating
(Average 5.63)
351 Votes
add to list 
|
|
|
Your cart
Battie
snooper81
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®,
a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.