Rating: 
Summary: Another Good Flick
Review: Shyamalan is becoming well known for creating movies with great characters and creepy, twisty plots. Signs is no exception. The suspense begins almost immediately with Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) running outside when he hears his children screaming. He finds them in the cornfield, confused and frightened by the crop circles that have appeared overnight.
After that, things get really weird. While crop circles are popping up all over the globe, someone is stalking the Hess family. Is it the trouble-making neighbors or something more sinister?
The cast's performance was excellent. I empathized with each of them as they struggled through the pain of losing a loved one while they fought their unseen nemesis. However, the ending was too quick. I left the movie theater feeling somewhat disappointed. I had to sit there afterwards and think about all the clues that were strewn throughout the movie. It was then that I realized what the real struggle was all about.
Signs is worth the full theater price. As with all Shyamalan's movies, it will give you the heebie-jeebies.
Rating: 
Summary: Cheesier than a box of Velveeta, and less nutritious
Review: M. Night Shyamalan's new flick is a B-movie with A-movie pretensions. While there are several very real moments of suspense, the rest of the film falls very flat indeed. Shyamalan's jejune spiritual pontificating and mawkish sentimentality made me cringe far more than the aliens, which are too cheesy to be believed when finally revealed.
In the acting department, Mel Gibson is lackluster as usual, having all the subtlety of a neon sign. Joaquin Phoenix is refreshingly low-key and unmannered, and big props go out to Cherry Jones (whom I'd never heard of) for her small but astonishingly realized role as the town Sheriff. I don't blame the child actors for their off-key performances--their roles are so poorly-written that no one could have pulled them off.
Finally, it must be said that M. Night Shyamalan's vanity roles in his films are becoming alarmingly self-indulgent. Hitchcock knew what a cameo was, and entertained his audience by making a game of finding him in his films. If a cameo is good enough for the master, it should be more than sufficient for Shyamalan.
Rating: 
Summary: Ok, but a bit boring
Review: I was extremely excited to see this film, as it seemed a good bet. I was however, somewhat disappointed. The premise of the film was sound, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Instead of focusing on what seems to be the point of the film, alien invasion, it comes across as a 21st century version of the biblical story of the prodigal son. Rather than the prechiness, I would have much more preferred knowing more about the aliens. Hopefully, when the DVD comes out, there will be some alternate endings, or deleted scenes included that will better explain what seemed to be the underdeveloped plot.
Rating: 
Summary: SIGNS & Wonders...
Review: Shyamalan has made another well-polished flick. It's cross-genre with elements of horror; sci-fi; and occult.Thematically it dramatizes inner battles for FAITH against the soul's demons of doubt;while battling ET/Demons from Outer Space in another War of the Worlds. Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix are excellent; as are the two weird children.The fact "FATHER" Gibson plays a lapsed Episcopalion Priest...who redons clerical garb before a Cross-relief door as film fades following the solid, "swing away", Good-Wood climax...may say more about THE SIGN Director Shyamalan really wants viewers to ponder.This combination of X-Files; TWILIGHT ZONE;Close Encounters of the Third Kind; within the claustrophobic ambience of "boogey man" hysteria is the latest
Invasion of the Body Snatchers sci-fi fear fest.It combines old George Pal with new Steven Spielberg to yield a WONDERfilled New Age nightmare...and minor science-fiction classic(?)...for entire families to "hide-under-the bed-from" and enjoy...
Rating:
Summary: Signs is brilliant
Review: M. Knight Shyamalan is a modern movie craftsman. He weaves simple yet elegant threads to create a rich thick environment. "Signs" is another hit.First off the audience in the theater was very engaged. Even when I thought things were getting a bit slow the movie would surprise you and keep you engaged. There were many times everyone in the theater burst into laughing tears, screaming horror, or simple contentment. There was also a lot of whispering and commotion when M. Knight made his appearance. M. Knight played his largest roll yet in signs and he did a great job. Mel Gibson was great, but we would expect anything less than great now would we. Joaquin Phoenix, Rory Culkin, Patricia Kalember all managed to capture our hearts. I thought that Joaquin offered up one of his best performances yet. Rory Culkin gets a big roll and does not fail to deliver, but it was Patricia who stole the show on many accounts. Then M. Knight, with his biggest acting roll yet astounded me with his acting abilities. He certainly doesn't give himself enough credit because he was very good. In "Signs" M. Knight opts for several visual effects, but he executes skillful restraint in doing so. M. Knight the master of not using visual effects keeps in touch by only using visual effects when absolutely necessary. Many visual effects (as in digital) are not digital at all. Rather they are effects done in traditional means. I really respect this as I think many directors have sold their soul to digital effects. All I can say is that despite some slow or awkward spots, especially at the beginning, the show is a real winner. I left the theater feeling great and even greater when I saw the huge line of people waiting for the next show. I'm definitely going to add this DVD to my M. Knight collection when it comes out. What magic will be in store for us next? Only M. Knight knows!
Rating:
Summary: A top-notch thriller
Review: Just came back for seeing M. Night Shyamalan's 'Signs' and I have to say that I enjoyed it very much. The film features some really thrilling moments and will have the audience on the edge of their seats. The cinematography is stunning and adds so much to the creepy atmosphere. M.Night is one of my favorite new directors, and he did not disappoint me with this highly orginal take on the 'War Of The Worlds' theme. And as much as the movie is about aliens and crop circles, there is also an underlying theme that deals with a man's search to regain his faith in God and to find the answer as to why sometimes bad things happen to the people we love. The movie begins with a series of geometric crop circles appearing mysteriously on the farm of Graham Hess(Mel Gibson), a former priest who lost his faith after his wife was accidently killed by a truck. At first he thinks it is a hoax perpetrated by some local hooligans, but when he watches the news and finds that these crop circles are appearing in all parts of the world, he begins to realize that something more ominous could be happening. The animals in the area begin to act strangely, and Graham's own dogs act violently, as if they were barking at something that wasn't there. As the tension mounts, more reports on the television about crop circles, and then some strange lights that are seen hovering in the sky over Mexico. People begin to predict the end of the world. Graham tries to protect his family as the reports become even more terrifying. This all leads to a very scary finale. Although the movie is filled with tension and suspense, there are also some great moments of comic relief, and they are interspersed nicely throughout the film. Very good performances by Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix(Merill Hess, Graham's brother), but they are upstaged by the two kids, Rory Culkin and Abigail Breslin. Where does M. Night keep coming up with these great child actors from? One minor problem I had with the film is a little too much reliance on sentimentality--in my opinion it could of done without so much of it and still been effective. Also, in fairness I should say that I've already talked to someone who didn't like 'Signs' as much as I did, and I've read some of the bad reviews it has received, so my advice would be to see it for yourself, especially if you liked 'Unbreakable' and 'The Sixth Sense'; if it is anything, it is certainly entertaining. I am already highly anticipating M. Night's next effort.
Rating:
Summary: The cons outweigh the pros in this one, folks
Review: Having just seen the new movie "Signs," to my surprise it seemed more like a comedy than a thriller. The plot is very simple. Basically, aliens are making signs on the earth and using them as navigational tools to get around and harvest everybody. Yep, that's it. I expected this movie to be a complex, mysterious thriller with a surprising ending like "The Sixth Sense," but instead I got a regular movie aobut aliens taking over the world. Think "Independence Day," but much less aliens and much less action. The overall intensity of the movie is usually not very great; almost every time there is about to be something scary something humurous happens. And that ruins the movie. How can a movie really be emotional or scary if something funny happens every time? I felt like I was watching a spoof of alien movies more than a real alien movie. And speaking of aliens, the people who made the aliens in this film didn't make them look very creative. They look like, well, the stereotypical kind of alien: Tall, green, big eyes. I expected them to look like the ones in "Aliens" or "Predator," but I ended up being somewhat disappointed. But a good thing about this movie (besides if you like watching comedy when you go to a horror movie) is the acting. Mel Gibson and Joaquin Pheonix are great, and M. Night Shyamalan himself makes a cameo! Another thing I enjoyed about the movie is the character development. Mel Gibson's character and others are not developed through a boring, expositional way but a very intersting way. Throughout the film, you gain clues about who they really are, what they really feel, etc. (It took me a third of the movie to figure out the Mel Gibson's character was a priest!) Now about the ending: Instead of the usual M. Night Shyamalan ending, (which is usually full of surprising details, twisty turns, and shocking truths,) we get a really average one. Basically, there is a fight with one of the aliens that lasts about 1 minute. Yes, that's it. So you can imagine that when I walked out of this movie, I was a little bit disappointed. I felt like I'd seen a movie with a bad ending that was part comedy, part thriller, and part B-movie all wrapped up into one. Don't get me wrong; "Signs" does have some scary moments, but the cons outweigh the pros so much that this film (which had a phenomonal amount of potential) turns itself into an average horror flick which is easily forgotten. Overall, it's a good popcorn movie to watch if you have 2 hours with abosolutely nothing to do. 2002; 107 minutes; Rated PG-13 for brief strong language, some frightening moments, and some scenes with overall intensity.
Rating:
Summary: better than both previous movies
Review: M.Night Shyamalan is brilliant...i loved both the sixth sense and unbreakable, but this was so much better than both of those movies. the acting was great and the music was even greater...do yourslef a favor and see this movie. it was truly a creepy smart thriller.
Rating:
Summary: It could of been his best yet....
Review: I just got back from the packed theater completely dissapointed. Up until the last 15-20 minutes, this was by far Shyamalan's scariest and best film yet. But what followed was complete rubbish. Without ruining or spoiling it for fans who haven't seen it yet, it appears Night tried to tack a Hollywood ending onto his film. I listened to a couple of radio interviews with him, and he explained that a couple of critics had already complained about the ending. I hate to agree with them, but they might be right. I realize that Night's trademark twist at the end of his movies would have to be included in SIGNS, and the twist (not as shocking as SIXTH SENSE or UNBREAKABLE but far more complex in a psychological sense) depended on the movie ending as it did, but I think it would have been much more mysterious (and a hell of a lot scarier if they hadn't showed the alien) if SIGNS had ended differently. Still, I would definately go see the movie, since all the performances were perfect for the part, and the rest of the movie more than makes up for the lacking ending. Shyamalan isn't the next Spielberg, he's in a category by himself, and it looks like he can only improve from film to film.
Rating:
Summary: Signs; the best movie at theatres this year.
Review: Rarely do I see a movie that causes me to remain tense 20 minutes after I leave the theatre(but in a good way, like a wild ride). The movie is gripping! Take the time to see this one!
|
