| | |  | Action & Adventure | Home » » Signs (Vista Series) | | | | | | | Product Promotions: | | | | | Description: | | From M. Night Shyamalan, the writer/director of THE SIXTH SENSE and UNBREAKABLE, comes the story of the Hess family in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, who wake up one morning to find a 500-foot crop circle in their backyard. Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) and his family are told extraterrestrials are responsible for the sign in their field. They watch, with growing dread, the news of crop circles being found all over the world. SIGNS is the emotional story of one family on one farm as they encounter the terrifying last moments of life as the world is being invaded. "It's easy for a filmmaker to blow up the world -- but what Shyamalan does is much riskier. He tries to blow our minds. I was engaged by every inch of SIGNS." - Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper. | | | Product Details: | | | Actors:
| Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, Clifford David, Lanny Flaherty, Rory Culkin | | Format:
| Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, DVD, Widescreen, NTSC | | Language:
| English | | Number of Discs:
| 1 | | Studio:
| Touchstone Pictures | | Run Time:
| 106 minutes | | DVD Release Date:
| January 07, 2003 | | Average Customer Rating:
|  based on 1240 reviews |
| | | | Customer Reviews: | |
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
 Scientifically and theologically absurdSep 09, 2010
Warning: spoiler. Only read this review if you've already seen the movie.
I don't believe this is SCIENCE fiction. At best, it is fantasy. Water does the aliens in. That in itself is completely preposterous. Water is pervasive in the universe and it is inconceivable that creatures who live at "room temperature" (Earthly "rooms") would be destroyed by water. All creatures from wherever they are in the universe who could walk the Earth without "space suits" would depend on water for their very existence. So introducing that concept is just the "War of the Worlds" device used to get rid of the aliens and save the world. Because of that, the fact that this is an "alien invasion" movie is almost irrelevant. What's left is simply wrong-headed.
So at best the details of the aliens are irrelevant to what this movie has to say, which to me is simply blasphemous. What I don't like about it are the religious implications of the nature of God, as if God would cause great suffering in the past so that people could be redeemed in the future. If God is like this, then Gibson's loss of faith in God when his wife dies in a senseless accident is justified, and it's absurd that he regains his faith when later circumstances "prove" the necessity of his earlier loss. It's inconceivable to me that God manipulates events to teach people a lesson so they'll be better off later in life. What about the people who suffer and die in the "lesson"? I cannot believe that a God with unlimited perspective on things who understands every nuance of existence would ever act this way. Besides, there's absolutely no scientific evidence that God could "cause" accidents to occur. That is a concept of God that became incredible with the science of the 20th century.
It's better to realize that however God might be, he has no powers of efficient cause in the world. Science refutes that possibility. The only role available to him is as a psychological persuasive force in competition with all of the "demonic" forces in the world, and that it is precisely limited perspective that is demonic. The wider your perspective, the better is your chance of understanding what God wants you to do. But the premise of this movie is that God causes tragedy and death for the benefit of those who live on. This means of course that God is the cause of evil in the world. It would be irrational to worship such a God, anymore than it would be rational to love any Great Leader with unlimited power, like Hitler or Stalin. Sure, some people under the unimaginably cruel rule of the Great Leader persuaded themselves that they loved their Great Leader. But it is beneath human dignity to succumb to such temptations. So I don't admire the Gibson character in this movie.
 Awesome MovieAug 24, 2010
Finally saw this movie, and it was awesome. Not gonna go into a long review, but if you havn't seen this, you should.
 A Few Hiccups, BUT, Great Movie Overall!Jul 28, 2010
This movie easily stacks up with one of the better movies that give scares and does it very well even without the blood guts and gore of others. The movie presented alot of situations that can be very realistic in comparison to how people could react in situations of an alien attack. Some parts in the film can throw chills down your spine from a few surprise scares. In truth the movie isn't really scary by itself but the suspense from the audio really added to the surprises and scares which is what made it so successful, In other words it was done the right way from the suspense and audio. Some people may criticize the movie which is probably due to the dull lifestyle and somewhat dull story of the characters personal lives, which is true, but looking past that, one thing carefully evolves to the next keeping you guessing and wondering whats going to happen next which really kicks off after Mel Gibson see's an alien on a rooftop of the house next door looking directly at him through his daughters window which freaks him out and wondering "What the heck was that!?" Not knowing if that was human or something else. Basically as events unfold, the family encounters Symbols and shapes in the crops near their home, which throughout the story finally learn that the symbols are signs for an alien invasion. THIS part was done very well. Not just some story of "Oh, All of a sudden im Psychic and know whats going on!" Crap which is seen in just too many lame suspense movies. It slowly presents itself with more information gathered from the encounters of the aliens but mostly from the TV News giving updated information of whats happening around the world, which I found great and very realistic.
Aside from all that, if you can get over the minor minor hiccups and dull story of the characters in which you might notice with the film. The movie was rather good!
I read some reviews which gave negative feedback pointing to a scenario where the Aliens are afraid of water (Water hurts them). All saying crap like "WHAT IF IT RAINED!?"
In my opinion, Thats just outright stupid to judge a movie based on some rediculous scenario of WHAT IF's especially when the movie is fiction to begin with! Also pointing out THERE WAS NO RAIN in the first place! So why is that so important to even matter when its fiction!? NOW IF... It rained in the movie, then Yes! I could clearly see that being a big fumble which would truly ruin the logic of the movie. Now being realistic, lets point out that there is no such movie that is perfect in every situation possible without a nitpick Somewhere!
I personally felt this movie was intended to bring the suspense to life by clearly being as realistic as possible in the situations that were presented. I felt it was done very well!
In anycase, if you can look past some of the minor hiccups (that other reviews use to judge the whole movie) then i think you can really enjoy this movie! I highly recommend this movie to anyone that can enjoy some suspense and few little scares. Psychologically this movie can really suck you in and keep you hooked!
Enjoy!!
A True Classic, BravoJul 22, 2010
I've seen this film approximately twenty times. I am now purchasing a DVD copy since my VHS tape just bit the dust FAR TOO CLOSE to the end!! M. Night has created a classic film, acting is superb, story line credible, can't say enough about this film.
0 of 1 found the following review helpful:
 I saw the sign, and it opened up my eyes...Jul 15, 2010
Walking into `Signs', I had high expectations. I consider `The Sixth Sense' to be near perfection, and `Unbreakable', while flawed, was truly inspired in both conception and direction. I really anticipated another memorable night with Mr. Shyamalan. Instead, what I encountered was a huge disappointment. `Signs', while visually stunning at times, lacks nearly everything that made his previous efforts so remarkable.
There was almost no tension, and there was no real cohesion.
Aliens have been the topic of many horror films, with varying results. Some films truly capture the dread that comes with the unknown, while others fail to capitalize on that human curiosity. For me, `Signs' falls very short of its own promise by delivering a film that moves at a snails pace, setting up a conclusion that serves up mild amounts of paranoia. Shyamalan also seems to have turned his brain off for this film, for the conclusions he asks the audience to draw from this are simply improbable and kind of, well, stupid.
This is far better than `Lady in the Water', but that isn't say much since that film is beyond abysmal.
`Signs' revolves around a close-knit family who discover crop circles that begin to make a serious impact on their lives. You have Rev. Graham Hess, who is a widower and is suffering from a lack of faith (or at least a bout with it). His brother Merrill lives with him on his isolated farm and works hard to keep what's left of his family together. Together they raise Morgan and Bo, Graham's two children. As the crop circles begin to pop up all over the world, Graham and Merrill start to contemplate what this all means for them, and for everyone else.
Is there anything they can do to prevent what is bound to happen?
The climactic scene in the cellar is chilling to a degree, but it lacks the visceral punch that one got when watching Shyamalan's previous films. There was a layered and harrowing atmosphere created in both `The Sixth Sense' and `Unbreakable' that is not present in `Signs'. I know that some (maybe many) will disagree with me, but I just didn't find this film as gripping nor as suspenseful as so many claimed it to be. I found the way in which Shyamalan connected the dots within his own story to be rather sporadic and disjointed and the eventualities weighed down any of the tension with their ridiculous nature. I really admired Shyamalan in the beginning, for having an imagination he continually insisted on challenging in order to create something fresh and exciting, but he has continued to go so far out in left field that his ideas become tainted with preposterousness.
It's like he forgot how to make a movie.
The performances in `Signs' are all good. Not a sour grape in the bunch, to be honest. I am not almost convinced of Mel Gibson's talent, but he pulls out a very nuanced performance here (something that helps elevate the film in times of serious need). Phoenix is an actor who I at one time adored but have grown somewhat cold on. This is a minor effort for him, but it works. Abigail Breslin (whose character arc is infuriating) and Rory Culkin (possibly the most talented of the Culkin clan) put out good performances here, doing their best to combat the script handed to them.
As a director (at least in his earlier days) Shyamalan shines. Even here he manages to deliver sequences that are visually captivating, and that style alone leads to sharp edits and sharper chills. As a screenwriter he has diminished, and his ideas deter us from his directory flare.
This should have been so much better.
| | |
|
