 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
As an Admirer of M.Night's Sixth Sense I have to say that Signs is a big disappoinment and hopefully NOT a sign of a talented director taking a nose dive into one trick ponyville.
First off, I made sure not to read any reviews of the film since it's always better to go into a film with the least amount of info and hype
which can greatly affect your gut reaction to a film.
That said, here's what I saw last night..
Signs is basically a re-make of Hitchcock's The Birds.A supernatural event of global proportions occurs as seen and expierenced by a small group of people in a remote town.The event serves as a catalyst to force this small group of people to resolve whatever conflicts they may have with personal past life events.If you recall Hitchcock's The Birds the film starts off with the Tippi Hedrin character playing a narcisstic ,emotionally cold woman of wealth who starts a flirtation with the Rod Taylor character.The emotional lives of the 3 main characters(Jesssica Tandy as Rod's Mother)all have either expierenced a severe loss,or have a deep fear or loss of faith in the ability to love. Jessica's husband(Rod's father) has died leaving Jessica in a very emotionally remote and fragile state.Tippi grew up in a wealthy family ,devoting herself to wild parties with the European jet set.Tippi never had a loving Mother and Jessica is highly critical of her because of her privilaged life of non-comittment.That's the character 'conflicts in a nutshell.In Signs, Mel is an ex-priest who has lost his faith in God because of the loss of his wife in a tragic car accident 6 months prior.He aboandon's his priestly role and finds himself feeling bitter,resentful and a bit emotionally distracted by this horrific event.His brother Jaoquin decides to live with him during this period of transistion.Jaoquin is shown to be a man with a failed past,having been a famous minor league baseball player,who could have been in the majors(he now works in a gas station) if he hadn't held the record for most strike outs at bat.By the end of The Birds, Tippi is able to become emotionally involved with Rod and also finds her "Mother" in Jessica. Jessica has, by the film's end, regained her nuturing love which is expressed in her caring for Tippi(she goes into shock after an attack by the birds ) In contrast I think M.Night was trying to reach the same level of character arc but with a much less complex characters,and a major directorial miscalculation.(see later)In Signs,after the aliens have departed we find Mel returning to role as priest having regained his faith because of attack of the aliens.Joaquim is able to finally strike out with sucess(at the aliens)to help save the family from death...and that's about it for character arcs.The little girl saving glasses of water(which we find out later kill the aliens)and the little boy's asmathaic condition serve only as clever plot points that tie into a neat little ending.
Other note worthy similiarities:The characters in both films board themselves in their home hoping to wait it out against the intruders.
Mel and Jessica both take a ride to friends house midway thru the film to check on them.In Signs Mel discovers an alien,in The Birds Jessica discovers a ravished corpse.
I think the 3 major miscalculations of the director were...
1.Starting the film as an suspense film (Mel wakes up hearing cries)and then taking a u-turn into character development which made the middle of the film much too slow,unintentionally funny at times and taking the energy out of the film which was so nicely developed from the start.In contrast Hitchcock developed the character situations first ,then gradually let the birds intrude upon the characters towards a very climatic ending.
2.Failed opportunity when Mel discovers the alien at his friends house.The sequence should have and could have been much more of a scary ,dramatic set piece,but instead it's a one shock throwaway ...a big letdown.
3.the film should have had at least 3 good scary set pieces to sustain the middle of the film ,nothing would have suffered or would have compromised the ending by taking this approach but would have made it a much better film.
See Signs and The Birds and judge for yourself...
Follow Ups:
Game over.Take a bead on that inverted teardrop shaped head and blast it back to Alpha Centari. Get the kid's Super Soaker Deluxe (tm.) and acid wash the whole lot of them, like a good pair of Levis (tm.)
Where was that American ingenuity? The 'middle eastern cities' had to figure it out and save our sorry asses. Where the hell was Al Haig? The NRA? The spring water manufacturers with their squirt bottle sports packs?What if the kid didn't have asthma, maybe he could have run away or actually helped his uncle, who did all of the freakin' work, BTW. Plus he forgot about his dog and basically offered her up for a nice appetizer. Nice guy. He should have been gassed at the end.
Chris
You'll find this much more interesting, and less laced with fear ... Click on the link at the bottom of this message for a new documentary about to be given a cinema release.A batch from this year's 'crop', England.
Can you see Stonehenge?
jusbe
Share and save the World.
Wonderful ! I rereresaw the Rope...Not as bad as some says, in fact a good film, a pleasure that the old master indulged himself...
yeah, Birds is pretty close, also War of Worlds and Mars Attacks. Certainly the idea of yodelling killing off aliens is ten times more clever than the idea of water imo.
Seems you guys missed the point of the movie or at least a major layer of what is a very layered movie, something that neither "The Birds" or "War of the Worlds" were. Not that I am knocking those movies but the comparison is way off. You do know what the title "signs" is refering to don't you?
I haven't seen, and probably won't see, this movie. But I'm curious about your question as to the meaning of the title. I thought it was a rather cryptic reference to any number of things: signs of alien life, signs of the zodiac, direction signs for navigation, etc. Am I missing something? What does it mean?Ted
Yes. You are missing a terrific movie. Signs is a reference to the theme of the movie which has nothing to do with aliens. To tell you more is to give away to much.
"Signs" as an "objective correlative of an internal state".In this case the "objective correlative" being the invasion and presence of the aliens. The aliens are a force to be reckoned with ,which in turn causes the characters to react and resolve an internal conflict.The signs are numerous throught out the film .The most obvious being the crop circles.Also you can interpet the little girls reaction to water as a "psychic sign "or the boys asmathic condition as another "sign" or the brothers inability to hit the ball when he was in the minors as a "sign".But IMO these "signs' are merely plot devices not really what the film is "about".Not to mention the "sign" of the cross which, while not explicitly visualized is of course ,part and parcel of the life of a priest,who as we know is struggling in his life and giving the film the benefit of the doubt, waiting for a "sign" from God .Or at least does interpet the consequences of the invasion as a "sign",and regains his faith.
damn it..
Sorry if we spoiled things for you but I think if one decides to read a thread that debates the merits of a movie one can expect that some or all of the content of that movie will come up.
LOL.Good one A.S..
Chris
Sounds like a good movie!
Actually those signs, the signs given to Mel Gibson by his dying wife and are scattered throughout this movie and represent our own human flaws and frailty are very much what the movie is all about. It couldn't have been spelled out any more clearly since Mel Gibson pretty much says it. It's about belief. It's about the belief or lack there of in why things happen. Is it all a bunch of coincidences or is there an order and meaning to everything. Mel Gibson because of what seems to be meaningless tragic events looses his faith and chooses not to believe there is meaning or purpose to the events that happen in this world. All those events come together to save the life of his child. He finds his faith and once again chooses to believe there are no coincidences. That belief is the theme of this movie. That the film maker can tell a story of alien invasion on top of this, no intetwinded with all this is what I am talking about when I say this is a multilayered movie. I like that. I like a filmamker who puts careful thought into every element of his films. I like a film maker who can offer up so much rich and organic stuff in his movies and then make me look at those elements again and find another meaning in them.
I THINK WE SAID THE SAME THING ONLY DIFFERENTLY
I think both of you are attributing a depth and thoughtfulness of content that this film simply lacks. It's one thing to plumb the depths. It's quite another to read meaning into something that simply isn't there.
Mel lost his faith and redisovered it courtesty of a few green aliens. And the director telegraphed the process with multiple "signs" scattered throughout the movie. Woopie! Deep.joe
In this case you are simply wrong. It is there. Some folks may not enjoy it but it is there.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
