Rating: 
Summary: a very well done film
Review: most of the people i know who saw this film didnt like it. Most of them thought it was some sort of b-movie sci-fi that displayed an alien invasion in a really corny way. The thing they seem to not understand is that thats not the point. This movie is as much of a family drama as it is a science fiction film and is much more concerened with character than anything else. Sure, it is a homage to all those b-movies of the 50s but its still really good. When i saw it in theaters i was on the edge of my seat for most of the time, not just cuz of the scary scenes, which are scary not becase of the actual images but because of the atmosphere and the way they are structured, also becasue i really found my self caring about these characters, something you dont really find in most films these days. this was also maybe the only movie ive ever seen in the theater where the entire audience jumped in their seats at the same moment.Signs is directed by M Night Shyamylan one of the most talented directors around right now and throughout is very entertaining, shilling, and...yeah, ill admit, kinda touching.
Rating: 
Summary: Far From Perfect, But Offers Good Thrills and Humor Too
Review: When "Signs" is creepy and scary, it is really crepy and scary. But when it is ridiculous, it is hopelessly ridiculous, and even laughable. Many people, including me, saw the film with the first view in mind; others, though outnumbered, saw it with the latter, and have their good reasons. Whichever category you belong to, you just pick it.The actors are all good; Mel Gibson plays Graham Hess, who lost his wife in the tragic accident, is a sad, lonely and disillusioned father, growing corn in the quiet countryside. Joaquin Phoenix is no less effective as one of his family members, but it is the two newcomers Rory Culkin (younger brother of more famous Culkins) and Abigail Breslin (sister of Spencer, who played a kid with Bruce Willis in "The Kid") who really steal the show. The story goes around these four members, who encounter the "signs" created on the vast cornfield. One of the kids believes it has a meaning; the other claims she saw "it." And it won't take a long time for the two adults to be convinced. But of what? Of what? This part is the key of this very unique suspence film. so I cannot disclose it. The only thing I can say is that the director M. Night Shyamalan's atomospheric approaches to create a creepy feelings, which can be found in "The Sixth Sense" and "Unbreakable," still work, and though "Signs" is deeply flawed here and there, the film can scare us not a little. His hand-made style of filmmaking, clearly based on Hitchcock's thrillers, is done in a "less is more" fashion, which is now something rare these days. As James Hewton Howard's score suggests (listen to the opening number, which reminds you of one film starring Melanie Griffith's mother), the film is actually old-fashioned thriller. But it tries to achieve something more, and then it shows its shortcomings. The script attempts to be deep in philosophical meanings, but it totally fails. The last decision doens't require the logics the film shows in its flashbacks, but it is director himself to be blamed. Not that his directing skill is bad; rather, Shyamalan himself appears in the film, as he did in two previous films, but this time his role is much bigger one, including a dialogue with Mel Gibson. Hitch was wise not to take his signature cameos too seriously (in fact, he thought it as obligatory task) while Shyamalan goes much further, taking up the role which should have gone to a professional actor. The whole film build up tension tactfully, but it is the skills of the director that propel the whole story. Many would answer, if asked, that "it" would not happen in the way it is described when it should really happen. If you start to think that way ... and I confess I though a bit that way ... the film may look too ludicurous, and that is the reason for the complaints of some reviewers. That is quite understandable when you see one homevideo sequence -- what do you think if you watch THAT on TV? Do you take it seriously? So, let's forget those parts. Let's not think that so-called mystery circles are nothing but somebody's practical jokes. "Signs" goes smoothly as long as you keep fending off these doubts, and I think you can because of the film's well-measured pace and two cute kids. Yes, those two child actors are the best thing of the film, which in the most unexpected moment, gives humor to the film. With them and its eerie atomosphere, the film will be worth your time.
Rating:
Summary: One of the Best films ever made
Review: This Movie ROCKS! From the beginning to the end, its creepy. The unique part of the movie is that through out the movie there arent alot of background music and thats why its very much scary. From the aliens to the acting this movie does deserve the 5 stars. Ive seen it three times
Rating:
Summary: whoever jeff shannon !!!
Review: this movie was wonderful. the widowed minister who regains faith due to the gravity of the situations around him. this was an excellent follow up to shyamalan earlier films which are all exemplory. he is one one this countries top filmmakers and he pulled off the best movie of the year with this one. the only other films that can even come close are the lord of the rings and the Michael Moore film, Bowling for Columbine. so whoever this jeff shannon character is he doesnt have a clue what he is talking about, in the review at the top. so in conclusion if you havent seen SIGNS you need to buy it when it is released.
Rating: 
Summary: What was that?
Review: Signs is quite possibly the dumbest script ever to reach the silver screen. This movie was a scam and an embarrasment. Trust me, save your time and money.
Rating:
Summary: DON'T BOTHER WATCHING IT.
Review: Oh boy, what can I say?!?Maybe we've all grown great expectations when It comes to Mr.Shamalaya.Problem is, his imagination and creative genious is fading out.After the groundbreaking ''The sixth sense'' and the very different and unique ''Unbreakable'', It seems that not even Mel Gibson made this one shine.The plot goes from childish to poor, the acting is nonsense, so is the story.The approach was terribly executed, when you see how dumb and numb the aliens are, you won't belive we are talking about alien superior intelligence, plus, some unecessary violence towards the end..Does It help? Not even a bit, It only made the movie more silly.If you want to spend your hard-earned money on It, be my guess, but don't tell me I didn't warn you.
Rating:
Summary: Stop doing this!
Review: I just wanted to lodge a complaint where people could see it. I didn't see "Signs" (although I might as well have after reading these posts), but since I have to rate it, 4 stars, if only because they filmed it about 25 miles away from me. But seriously, this is about inconsiderate reviewers who drop entire plots in their reviews, be it "Signs", "The Sixth Sense", "Angel Heart", "Lone Star"... the list goes on and on. You're so interested in getting your idiot opinions posted that you don't even give a damn whether or not you just ruined the movie for someone. You could at least warn people that there may be spoilers in your reviews! Jerks.
Rating:
Summary: Don't waste your time
Review: I know alot of people liked this movie, but I thought it was horrible. It tried to be too many things and failed in every case. Also, it was insulting in its repetition of previous scenes. As though I could not remember an obviously important scene 45 minutes later. In the directors defense, I was stupid enough to shell out $7 to see his movie, so I guess he's justified. :)
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Movie!
Review: I saw this movie 3 times in the theater and it was great each time. The only problem I had with the movie was the ending. I felt that the vulnerability of the aliens to a particular element was extremely unrealistic. You would think that with all the creativity that went into the movie that they would have thought of something else for the ending. But I must still give this movie 5 stars. The cinematography alone makes this film a 5 star movie. You must see this.
Rating: 
Summary: Speilberg + Romero + Wells + Job = 2 stars
Review: 1 part ET, 1 part Night of The Living Dead, 1 part War of the WOrlds, 1 part book of Job adds up to not very much. The shots from ET are intrusive ( the corn field, throwing the ball to the alien in the corn, kitchen knives, the little Eliot clone, the little Drew Barrymore clone, and Mel as the dithering single parent), while Living Dead was simply far more effective at trapping people in a PA farmhouse while the world goes mad (which Romero did with no budget), while War of The Worlds was far more convincing in the Earth-toxic-to-aliens scenario. Shyamalan dabbles in several genres and efforts at homage, botching them all. Shyamalan was intrusive in his cameo, the aliens were dumb (in so many senses), and in rural PA nearly every home has a hunting rifle so the invasion would have sounded like D-Day. Plus Mel SLEEPS through the invasion. Finally, the religious angle is from the book of Hallmark. In the Old Testament, Job lost his family but kept his faith even while his neighbors told him that it must a punishment from God, until God shows up and tells them "Hey (bad stuff) happens, and I won't tell you why, but Job kept his faith so he will be restored." In Signs the scenario is totally opposite - Mel loses his wife and faith, but his neighbors support him spiritually, and not to worry because in his world (bad stuff) does not happen, and we always know God is pulling the strings for a purpose. Sorry folks, that isn't the Bible. God lets planes hit building, and he may have even let an asteroid kill the dinosaurs. People that considered this a spiritually important movie may want to check on the official beliefs of their church because they may inadvertently have been practicing the wrong religion.
|
