Signs, not all that impressed....

[camman]

Sorry to say to fans of this film. But what an over-hyped non climaxing movie. I got mine yesterday at a store I can usually find stuff early at. I was very excited to finally see this film after all I had heard about it. But what a dissapointing movie watching experience. Its is extremely slow, at one point I thought if it were to drag any more the disc would start turning backward. Secondly after the last two films by this director having such surprises and gimmicks, this film had none. You know pretty much what is going to happen from very early on. As far as the disc, the sound is recorded very low and subtle. You get the booming THX logo at the begining and then have to turn it up even more to hear the film. The picture is not all that great either for a THX and Vista release. It has a lot of grain and some areas that look a bit washed out. Now I didnt see this film in the theater, so it may have been intended to be presented this way. If so, good job. If not, then it is not impressive by THX standards. The extras were quite good however. A six part making of section, a multi-angle storyboard feature, but no commentary. And one question is, why no dts track? This may have made what is a lackluster soundtrack seem much better. Especially since all other Vista Series films I have feature a dts track. Maybe I was just expecting a bit more.

[Cap42086]

I thought the film was okay, but it wasn't what I was expecting. I loved all the horror sequences and alien appearances (especially at the Mexican birthday party), but they crammed all of this religious bullcrap down your throat. To quote the immortal Mr. Cranky, "Signs is like having a pretty package before you and then when you open it up, you get a box filled with puke." It wasn't too bad, but it still would have been much better if it stayed in one genre (!). And the "twist" ending really wasn't much either.

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

"Swing away, Merril." You're kidding, right?

As far as the quality of the DVD, the audio isn't too great, but there are one or two moments that are pretty good.

Originally posted by camman
Now I didnt see this film in the theater, so it may have been intended to be presented this way.

I did see the movie in the theater and I can assure you that it didn't look like that in the least bit (at least in the cinema I was in). I don't think the grain was intentional on the DVD. Some other things I noticed about it is that the black level was inconsistent and just down-right weak in some parts. There were one or two compression artifacts as well, but thankfully edge enhancement wasn't bad at all. However, aside from the iffy black level, color reproduction was accurate and well-done. This wasn't a bad transfer, just very poor for THX and Vista standards. Shame on them.

[Oscar Antonio M]

I think that Signs is an excellent film, up to the end.

The ending seemed totally clipped on.

[Hollow Man]

I saw it in the theater (in DLP to boot). I remember it looking nice.

This movie had me hooked until the end. Man, I was disappointed. I kept hoping Mr. Shama-lama-ding-dong would pull it out, but he didn't. So depressing.

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

In my opinion, he should've never shown the aliens if they were going to be that boring (Predator/Alien looking things). He also should've figured out a way to make us care more about them, rather than having them be these Independence Day type critters where we don't really have any concept, nor care, why they're here. Also, I'm supposed to believe that aliens who can travel light years didn't realize that if they have a problem with water, that it might be a bad idea to go to a planet that's mostly water? Yeah, yeah, maybe they didn't KNOW they had a problem with water; bah, it's still hokey.

I recommend Close Encounters of the Third Kind for this sort of thing done right.

-HM

[ceeece]

I haven't gotten the DVD yet, but I loved this film so much more than Unbreakable. That was one terrible ending! I can't buy Sixth Sense because the surprise twist ending is the only reason to watch it. And if you know the ending it isn't worth repeat viewings. This movie however IS worth repeat viewings.

I personally like the faith aspect of Signs and the ending. I wish it would have showed more of the aliens around the world and more crop signs but oh well.

[JimboQ]

http://maddox.xmission.com/signs.html

[chipmac]

I saw Signs in the theater and walked out in the end disappointed. After thinking it over and discussing with others I came to appreciate it more on a mental level since the entire movie has a much deeper meaning than what's shown on the surface. The problem I see is that it was marketed as a Sci-Fi flick and a scare fest when in fact it was a drama. IMO the Signs were not the crop circles but the things we see as coincidences are really signs of a higher power helping to guide our choices in life. If we turn a blind eye to these signs we'll miss out on many of life's meanings but if you keep looking for these signs you might be a more content and happy individual. So maybe the movie was not what many expected but I don't think it was bad for what it was.

As for the A/V quality in the theater I saw it in the sound was low, the picure grainy and with high contrast in some scenes so it sound like the disc is the same as I remember it.

[JasonKurtz]

Hmm, I really liked Signs and thought it was right up there with Unbreakable (though I too thought The Sixth Sense was boring and completely hammy, relying far too much on the "twist" at the end).

One thing I liked a lot about Signs (and ditto for Unbreakable) is that it takes a regular genre movie and does something completely different with it. Instead of the ID4 approach, where we have gigantic battles with monstrous alien hordes, we see what its like to live in a small town as a regular person during an alien invasion. The personal dramatic touch was what this movie was about, not the aliens. It was a story about family and faith, not the aliens (can I say that enough?)

On the same token, Unbreakable is the flip-side to Spider-Man and Superman, etc. Its what would happen if you were just a regular middle age guy who all of a sudden discovered that he had super powers. I really like how Shyamalan shows the flipside of typical stories.

The only other movie that has that sort of touch, to my memory, is Last Night by Canadian director Don McKellar. Its the flipside to movies like Armageddon and Deep Impact. Very compelling and character driven.

Just my two cents

[Istagi]

I liked Signs as well, unfortunately it fell victim to a very poor marketing campaigne. I think many people went in looking for a sci-fi, Independance Day or Close Encounters type of movie. If you were one of those yea I can see you being disapointed becasue the aliens were not the point of the film they were a prop to make a statement.

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

About Faith

and with that in mind it was very effective.

[Hollow Man]

Unfortunately, Istagi, I felt that Signs fell very flat with regards to that as well. I felt so beaten over the head with it that I didn't care once that conflict was resolved.

If one wants a far superior story than Signs that deals with that concept, read this book:

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

A Prayer For Owen Meany by John Irving

...but not the movie that it was made into:

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

Simon Birch

...which I have not seen because it's supposed to be terrible.

-HM

[Cap42086]

Originally posted by Hollow Man
If one wants a far superior story than Signs that deals with that concept, read this book:

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

...but not the movie that it was made into:

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

...which I have not seen because it's supposed to be terrible.

And yes, it was a terrible movie. Don't waste your time.

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

I go to church every Sunday, so if I want to hear about faith and God, I'll just go there.

But if I'm going to see a movie that one critic called, "The most fun you'll have being scared at the movies this summer," then damn it, I expect a well-done horror story, which is what it was up until the last fifteen minutes.

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

Am I the only one that wanted that Culkin kid to die? Can't the aliens do anything right?

[jonathan_little]

Just why is that damn THX logo so loud? The Warner Brothers Home Video intro music is a loud offender as well. I can't stand putting a DVD in just to be blasted into next week with those overly loud intros.

Dolby's dialog normalization feature is almost totally useless when you have these intros (or menus) that pump the sound way up to levels above that of the feature.

[drudo-182]

check out http://www.shyamalan.cjb.net

its phat with a capital PH.

-drew-

[PrometheusUFO]

I saw it at Blockbuster today, already for sale and rent. All the rental copies were out, and the sale copies were $21.99. But, I decided to wait until Tuesday for a lower price elsewhere.

[StinkPalm]

yeah i saw signs at the store around the corner from my house but all the DVDs were sold out and the VHS copies were $19.99!!!! so that means the DVD was probably about the same amount as the Blockbuster one

[elwood731]

I know this should go in the bargains area normally, but since people are talking price, Circuit City has it for $15.99 in the new ad.

[bgbohemian217]

I don't know how to do the black spoiler thing, but, Hollow Man, I read the book black out, and actually saw some of the similarites, but I wasn't too crazy for the book. Had it's moments, but, IMO, it beat me over the head with all the organized religion stuff, and all the time I wanted more of the story there was so much about all the Regan adminstration which was boring, plus I thought a few parts and sentences in there can only be described with "no". But I did like the ending, I found a lot of sympathy for the main character once I found out something about him. Any how, just thought that was neat that someone else had the same ideas I did. Oh, and I LOVED Signs. Can't wait for Tuesday.

[bgbohemian217]

I don't know how to do the spoiler things, but I did read the blacked out book, and, IMO, I thought the story behind Signs did a better job. I thought the book was slightly above average, but with all the junk about the Regan administaration and the being beat over the head with organized religion, and disliking both main characters, (I simply could not stand the "smaller" one until near the end when you find out just why he's that faith crazed) I didn't care that much for the story. I hate saying that things could've been better had some things been changed, but that's just how I feel about the book. Some of the build up to the end and various parts throughout the book just seemed kind of silly to me, but a decent read. I actually thought about the similarities once when I was thinking about the movie.
-Bryan

[feldon23]

{spoiler}This is a secret.{/spoiler}

but change the { and } to [ and ]

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

This is a secret.

[Nome King]

jonathan_little Just why is that damn THX logo so loud? The Warner Brothers Home Video intro music is a loud offender as well. I can't stand putting a DVD in just to be blasted into next week with those overly loud intros.

As far as loud logos go, what about that MGM/Lion intro. Much Much louder than it should be.

[Lo Pan]

(Though I don't consider it a spoiler of any kind, I'll retain the spoiler tags that were originally attached...)

Originally posted by Cap42086

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

That's an odd criticism. So any activity that can be replicated by us normal folk should not be fodder for film-storytelling? Or am I misunderstanding you? Is this more of a personal preference pertaining to religion, or is it a generalisation regarding what should and shouldn't be used in movies?

[elwood731]

Originally posted by Lo Pan
That's an odd criticism. So any activity that can be replicated by us normal folk should not be fodder for film-storytelling? Or am I misunderstanding you? Is this more of a personal preference pertaining to religion, or is it a generalisation regarding what should and shouldn't be used in movies?

Frankly, I find it to be one of the best films ever made about religion. For something that is such a big part of our social fabric, it is surprising how few films use it as a topic, and even less who do so intelligently. If you see the whole film as an allegory, it really works incredibly well.

Of course, I know some people don't want religion in their films, but like I said, I like it when done intelligently, such as this and The X-Files (series).

[Soggy Bagel's Revenge!]

Originally posted by JimboQ
http://maddox.xmission.com/signs.html

haha, I was just about to post this as well -- I think the article pretty well sums up the film: "That's exactly what "Signs" is like: the camera man zooming up on some guy's ass for two hours. "

In any case, I thought "Signs" was one of the most terribly nonsensical films of the year, which I'm normally ok with, just so long as the film is at least entertaining, which "Signs" certainly was not. Shayamlan spends all of this time at the beginning I suppose trying to build up suspense and allow the audience to empathize with the characters. The only problem, of course, is that at no time is there any suspense, and the characters' personalities are akin to four pieces of cardboard.

I think the only redeeming portion of the film was the scene in which the family is hiding from the monsters in the basement. A very well-done suspense sequence that made the cramming of the religious subtext down my throat at least a little more bearable.

In his article (see link), Maddox brings up a good point -- if water was deathly to the aliens, why were they able to walk around, despite all of the natural humidity in our atmosphere?

Arigato,
Brook

[Soggy Bagel's Revenge!]

Also, why in the hell are all you people who supposedly care about movies renting at Blockbuster? You do, of course, realize that by doing so, you're supporting film censorship, as Blockbuster won't rent NC-17 films.

Maybe a few years ago, "I live in a small town" might have been an acceptable excuse, but with things like Netflix, where you can just order the films to your home (and Netflix DOES support NC-17 films) there's really no excuse to be renting at Blockbuster anymore. STOP SUPPORTING FILM CENSORSHIP! Support directors and studios who are bold enough to put out an NC-17 film by not renting at a place that won't stock it!

Arigato,
Brook

[JasonKurtz]

Soggy,

Rants about Blockbuster have been done to death. There are many in the Soapbox if you're interested. We're trying to discuss the movie, not the vendor.

[Cap42086]

Originally posted by Lo Pan
(Though I don't consider it a spoiler of any kind, I'll retain the spoiler tags that were originally attached...)


That's an odd criticism. So any activity that can be replicated by us normal folk should not be fodder for film-storytelling? Or am I misunderstanding you? Is this more of a personal preference pertaining to religion, or is it a generalisation regarding what should and shouldn't be used in movies?

Maybe I overshot it a little because I completely pissed at the way the movie ended. But the point is, I wasn't expecting the religion to be used in this movie. And even the way it was used wasn't too great with me. Either way, it's just personal opinion, and take it for what you will.

But another big problem I had with the film is that they through every cliche in the book at you: the big dramatic speech in the middle; the loss of faith....

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

And what about all the other people who have faith that were killed by the aliens? Where was God then? Huh, Shyamalan? And if the aliens trying to kill everyone wasn't enough, one of them just happens to have asthma so he'll have an attack at the end of the film when the family conviniently forgets his medicine. This is exactly what happened in Panic Room.

You can pretty much set your watch by it.

But again, this is just my opinion and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone.

By the way, I have absolutely no clue why I put the spoiler tags up there. Must have been a mistake. Oh well.

Originally posted by Soggy Bagel's Revenge
Also, why in the hell are all you people who supposedly care about movies renting at Blockbuster? You do, of course, realize that by doing so, you're supporting film censorship, as Blockbuster won't rent NC-17 films.

Maybe a few years ago, "I live in a small town" might have been an acceptable excuse, but with things like Netflix, where you can just order the films to your home (and Netflix DOES support NC-17 films) there's really no excuse to be renting at Blockbuster anymore. STOP SUPPORTING FILM CENSORSHIP! Support directors and studios who are bold enough to put out an NC-17 film by not renting at a place that won't stock it!

Odd note, when I was in Blockbuster the other day (don't ask why), I noticed a copy of Showgirls on the shelf. It was the NC-17 version and all. Strange, huh?

[Icon769]

I don't think the movie was much about religion, as much as it was about faith. Also, my nearby blockbuster carries Y Tu Mama Tambien, and A girl Thing. On both covers it has listed Unrated. If they are cut, isn't it illegal to advertise the uncut version, or maybe they do indeed have the unrated/uncut version?

[Soggy Bagel's Revenge!]

Originally posted by Icon769
I don't think the movie was much about religion, as much as it was about faith. Also, my nearby blockbuster carries Y Tu Mama Tambien, and A girl Thing. On both covers it has listed Unrated. If they are cut, isn't it illegal to advertise the uncut version, or maybe they do indeed have the unrated/uncut version?

Hmmm, that's strange. Perhaps they've changed their policy (which would be absolutely WONDERFUL). Perhaps so? Anybody know any way to find out if their policy has, in fact, been changed?

Arigato,
Brook

[elwood731]

Originally posted by Cap42086

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

This is really more of a theology question, like why does God let bad things happen. Sometimes some good can come out of some bad. I think the point was on a more personal level, rather than global. Point being, Gibson's character regained his faith through the incident, but it didn't happen just for him. As for the Panic Room reference, well, since that film came out just about two months earlier, I can't see the point, as they really had no chance to copy. I do agree it is weird, but the old saying is true, there is nothing original left.

[sub780lime]

Originally posted by Cap42086

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

i think a better question is, why were all the aliens trying to kill everyone on earth (though we cannot confirm it was all the aliens) when they would have been Gods creation too, but we also have to remember that this is all M. Nights image of God in his movie, we know what kind of text he may be using as a reference

[Cap42086]

Originally posted by sub780lime
i think a better question is, why were all the aliens trying to kill everyone on earth (though we cannot confirm it was all the aliens) when they would have been Gods creation too, but we also have to remember that this is all M. Nights image of God in his movie, we know what kind of text he may be using as a reference

My theory on why they didn't explain why the aliens were killing everyone is because Shyamalan wanted to avoid another cliche, so he just skipped the part that they're wiping us out to stop the pain (The Abyss), they want to kill us all just be the predominant species (Independence Day), or they want to steel the galaxy and thus start a war between Earth and the Arquillians (Men in Black). So he just decided to let us use our imagination.

[Lo Pan]

Wait, wait, wait!!

I think the point of the film is being misinterpreted.

(All the following is my opinion, of course...)

Signs does not say that God exists. It says that there are two ways of looking at the world, that some see coincidence, and others see a plan. At the end of the film, Gibson finally admits**, "There are no coincidences." and he clearly believes this...but I don't feel that the film is stating that God absolutely exists...just that it's up to the individual.

...Of course, I could be completely wrong on this.



**And it bears noting that Gibson never gives up believing in God, no matter what he claims during the course of the film. When he says, "I hate you" to God, it's quite eveident that rather than not believing in God, he's simply been trying to ignore him.

[elwood731]

The following will contain some spoilers. But I will not black it out because by now I think it is obvious this is a spoiler thread.

I think there are several ways to look at the film. Is the film a Christian film about God? Yes, and no. It definitely enters that territory, but could be said to be just about faith and nothing more. I think one could argue that Night is dealing or has dealt with these issues in his own life and is drawing from them. So it is not necessarily Christian, or even religious, propaganda as much as it a film question the way things work, but with strong hints that these questions come out of religion.

As for why the aliens would kill us if they were created by God, I think people are misreading the film. The film is not about God looking down on Gibson's character and sending aliens to attack earth just for him. Instead it is saying that what his wife said played out to this point, to prepare him for what was coming, but was not the cause of the events that followed.

Of course, I look at the film in a much more symbolic way. I see the aliens as demons. They spend the movie on the outside, and we catch rare glimpses, but it is in his moment of weakest faith when they attack, and are able to get into the house, to break through his barriers. It is only when he accepts his faith again, accepts God back, that he is given the strength/wisdom to stand against them. And also the message that they are never truly gone, but sometimes cleverly hidden even when we think our vulnerable time is past. That is a purely Christian interpretation, and maybe not Night's intention at all. Oh well.

[tvboy]

I thought that it was a wonderful film.
If you are disappointed because it wasn't what you expected - then don't blame the film, blame the source of your misconceptions. Most likely it was the marketing campaign.

I just have one problem with the film....



SPOILER ALERT!!!!!


If the aliens have a problem with water, then why oh why would they invade a planet that is 70% water?!

Goofs!

[Dehrian]

For the 30% that wasn't water. Almost any planet with an atmosphere is going to consist of a great deal of water: they just have to deal with it.

Personally, I thought the movie was brilliant. It was an alien invasion film not about the aliens or action but about the affect of the invasion on a family. I love how Shyamalan takes an old idea and presents it from a new angle. I'm an atheist, but I still appreciated the religious message of the film, which was more about faith than any specific religion. I certainly didn't feel it was being crammed down my throat. As for the climax, I thought it was perfect.

I also like how no attempt is made to explain what the aliens want, or why they're here, or what defeats them eventually. Would we know in the same circumstances? No. We would guess, but we wouldn't know.

I really think this was one of the best movies of the year.

[Imagica]

I was thrilled to get the dvd...but after watching it, the thrill was gone. great first 45 minutes...but just not enough. and I love Mel and all, but he needs to stay out of this kind of film. Gibson and et's just dont mix.

[Damian]

Originally posted by Dehrian
For the 30% that wasn't water. Almost any planet with an atmosphere is going to consist of a great deal of water: they just have to deal with it.

Personally, I thought the movie was brilliant. It was an alien invasion film not about the aliens or action but about the affect of the invasion on a family. I love how Shyamalan takes an old idea and presents it from a new angle. I'm an atheist, but I still appreciated the religious message of the film, which was more about faith than any specific religion. I certainly didn't feel it was being crammed down my throat. As for the climax, I thought it was perfect.

I also like how no attempt is made to explain what the aliens want, or why they're here, or what defeats them eventually. Would we know in the same circumstances? No. We would guess, but we wouldn't know.

I really think this was one of the best movies of the year.

I agree with this post 100%. I started to watch the movie with no pre-conceptions about the style of the filming or with a comparison in mind against Sixth Sense or Unbreakable and what I got was very good.
For those of you who thought this movie was boring, did you actually WATCH Unbreakable? That movie is a COMPLETE bore. Still a good movie but barely ANY action takes place.
As for the audio in Signs, I actually thought it was great. I didn't adjust the volume after the THX demo and never once had a problem hearing any of the dialogue, and I thought there was a lot of rear channel activity which sooo added to the creepiness of the film.
I also had NO problem with the religious aspect of the movie. I don't feel it was crammed down my throut, it was a part of what the movie was about. A man who was a reverend and how and why he lost faith.
As for the ending, I actually glad it didn't turn out to be the big twist ending that M. Nights first two movies had. It provided a good scare and wrapped the movie up VERY well.
A great movie by a great film maker.

[Shawn Watson]

I thot it was shit! :flush:

Shawn

[darthbenbo]

i threw the movie in yesterday at work to get a feel for it before i broght it home to spend 2+ hours REALLY watching it. well, after about 20-30 minutes into the film i took it out because it just wasn't doing anything for me. i think that this film falls victim to one of Shyamalan's (sp?) HUGE downfalls as a director and writer: his characters are horribly 1-dimensional. to me, it feels like i'm watching stagehands carry around cardboard cut-outs of the cast rather than the actual characters themselves. 20 minutes into the film and i didn't care enough about the characters, or their plight, to continue watching the film.

i'm sure that i'll get around to watching the whole thing over the weekend, but so far Signs has just done what his other 2 films have done for me: convinced me not to give his work another chance.

[ceeece]

cramming of the religious subtext down my throat at least a little more bearable.

Funny, a movie has a little bit of a faith theme in it and all of a sudden it is crammed down our throats.

I really really loved this movie and the faith aspect was what really made it for me. The way Night presented the suspense was great. Those are the kind of movies I like. I adored "The Others" because it was more of a bump in the night kind of fear letting your imagination do the rest. And this is the same. Just show enough to scare the bejeebes out of us and give us a great soundtrack that makes us jump. Wonderful movie.