Signs (B- or 2.5/4 stars)
M. Night Shyamalan, the master of creating unease (he made The Sixth Sense), is back with his newest film, 'Signs'. The setting: Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Colleen Hess, wife of Reverend Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) has died in a freak traffic accident. Having lost most of his faith, the reverend recedes from the church & decides to work full-time on his farm. His younger brother, Merill (Joaquin Phoenix), a former minor league baseballer moves into the house to help his brother look after Graham's 2 young children, Morgan & Bo (Rory Culkin, Abigail Breslin) - he is asthmatic, she doesn't like water. Some 6 months after the family tragedy, humongous crop circles appear in Graham's cornfield. And everyone's thinking, 'What the Hell?'
The 1st theory on why they're there: trouble-making youths, of course. However, they come to find out that similar mysterious crop circles are popping up all over the world. Furthermore, local animals have been acting very strange. And not uncommon, both Morgan & Bo (as children) seem to have a better 'sense' of what's going on than their dad or uncle. The media is eating this crop circle drama up. From there, more & more evidence starts piling up which precludes that the crop circles are one of several 'signs' being sent from aliens. With no way to tell if these are 'good' aliens or 'bad' aliens, the Hess family takes heavy precautions to protect themselves. Why have they landed, are they good, & how will the recently faithless Graham react?
'Signs' is an odd film to critique. I feel like those who get it will deem it a masterpiece. And I feel like those who feel gypped by the ending (after having been immersed in a methodical, deliberate story throughout) will outright hate it. I fall somewhere in the middle. I like that 'Signs' is not your typical Hollywood flick. Shyamalan lends a degree of subtle, dark humor to the proceedings. Because of the slow, deliberate narrative, that humor was a necessity. I like that ... for a screenplay as uncluttered as this one is, there's an abundance of themes: faith, humanity, supernatural. And there are definitely moments (especially in the 1st hour) where I was creeped out, spooked, tense, & verging on scared. It's the kind of movie that slowly, silently creeps you out enough that you can't wait to exit the theater for hope of some sunshine. I liked how we don't know who the 'aliens' are or why they're here; if an encounter with them would go well or badly. Looking for faith & hope in a world of sadness, Graham believes that contact with the aliens may be positive. Others think the opposite. And I liked how, for most of the proceedings, you can't see the 'aliens' (a less is more approach). That method works 9 times out of 10. Leave it to our imagination.
But while I liked the 1st hour's deliberate-paced gloominess, it stalls so much in the 3rd 4th of the movie that you feel like it can't recover. The film keeps you watching. But the hushed anticipation & gloominess almost kills any enjoyment you may get from the film as it slogs to the end. The performances are a bit dour, as well. Everyone is sad, reserved; toned down to a fault. The performances aren't bad. But while the script is melodrama-free (a good thing), it gives little life to Graham or anyone else. And even though we can sympathize with the general strife & fears of Graham (& crew), it's hard to truly get behind them emotionally. And to this end, by the time the credits roll (& we are spoiled with a glimpse of the 'aliens' who are cohabitating on Graham's farm), the whole mystique of what had occurred for the previous 2 hours is all but lost; making the film feel underwhelming. Still, there is enough to 'Signs' that warrants praise for a director who is, at least, trying new things, or re-inventing other auteurs (Hitchcock, Lynch, etc.). 'Signs' is challenging, weird, intermittently gripping, but a sort of failure in the end.
The 1st theory on why they're there: trouble-making youths, of course. However, they come to find out that similar mysterious crop circles are popping up all over the world. Furthermore, local animals have been acting very strange. And not uncommon, both Morgan & Bo (as children) seem to have a better 'sense' of what's going on than their dad or uncle. The media is eating this crop circle drama up. From there, more & more evidence starts piling up which precludes that the crop circles are one of several 'signs' being sent from aliens. With no way to tell if these are 'good' aliens or 'bad' aliens, the Hess family takes heavy precautions to protect themselves. Why have they landed, are they good, & how will the recently faithless Graham react?
'Signs' is an odd film to critique. I feel like those who get it will deem it a masterpiece. And I feel like those who feel gypped by the ending (after having been immersed in a methodical, deliberate story throughout) will outright hate it. I fall somewhere in the middle. I like that 'Signs' is not your typical Hollywood flick. Shyamalan lends a degree of subtle, dark humor to the proceedings. Because of the slow, deliberate narrative, that humor was a necessity. I like that ... for a screenplay as uncluttered as this one is, there's an abundance of themes: faith, humanity, supernatural. And there are definitely moments (especially in the 1st hour) where I was creeped out, spooked, tense, & verging on scared. It's the kind of movie that slowly, silently creeps you out enough that you can't wait to exit the theater for hope of some sunshine. I liked how we don't know who the 'aliens' are or why they're here; if an encounter with them would go well or badly. Looking for faith & hope in a world of sadness, Graham believes that contact with the aliens may be positive. Others think the opposite. And I liked how, for most of the proceedings, you can't see the 'aliens' (a less is more approach). That method works 9 times out of 10. Leave it to our imagination.
But while I liked the 1st hour's deliberate-paced gloominess, it stalls so much in the 3rd 4th of the movie that you feel like it can't recover. The film keeps you watching. But the hushed anticipation & gloominess almost kills any enjoyment you may get from the film as it slogs to the end. The performances are a bit dour, as well. Everyone is sad, reserved; toned down to a fault. The performances aren't bad. But while the script is melodrama-free (a good thing), it gives little life to Graham or anyone else. And even though we can sympathize with the general strife & fears of Graham (& crew), it's hard to truly get behind them emotionally. And to this end, by the time the credits roll (& we are spoiled with a glimpse of the 'aliens' who are cohabitating on Graham's farm), the whole mystique of what had occurred for the previous 2 hours is all but lost; making the film feel underwhelming. Still, there is enough to 'Signs' that warrants praise for a director who is, at least, trying new things, or re-inventing other auteurs (Hitchcock, Lynch, etc.). 'Signs' is challenging, weird, intermittently gripping, but a sort of failure in the end.