Review of Signs (2002) by Seth S — 25 Jul 2014

Mr. Shyamalan, you've dropped my jaw again! Signs marks the third movie I have seen from the much maligned director. So far, I loved The Sixth Sense, but was left unmoved by Unbreakable - after which, I lowered my expectations for Signs. There was really no need, because this movie is the most well made, well acted, and emotionally satisfying Shyamalan movie I've seen to date!

Graham Hess is a former minister, a widower, and a father of two. He lives on a farm in Pennsylvania with his children and his brother Merrill. Things around the quiet farm begin to shake up when Graham finds crop-circles in his corn fields.

I will say this, Signs didn't hook me from the get go. In fact, it took a good hour before the movie really had my full attention. The build-up is necessary for the story, I'm not denying that. Yet it still failed to interest me. But it's the final forty minutes, the climax of the story, that really left me speechless.

And this time, it's not because of a twist. In the two movies before, the director relied pretty heavily on a surprise ending to sell the movie to the audience. It worked wonderfully once... But Signs doesn't surprise with a twist, it surprises with an emotionally effective story of redemption. It's all brought to an extremely satisfying conclusion in the final moments of the story. I loved it!

Because for the first time, a Shyamalan movie really had a message that jelled with me. The film is very faith-based. In fact, what shocked me most was the spiritual backbone holding the story together. Graham is a former minister for a reason. After the death of his wife, he questions if there really is a God. Does everything happen for a purpose? If so, then why would God allow his wife to die in a freak accident? There's an excellent scene between Graham and Merrill where they discuss the "two types of people," those who think there is a greater force making everything happen for a reason, and those who think everything is pure chance.

The drama works because Graham has a perfectly legitimate reason to doubt his faith. The movie explores that. And so while it's nice to have aliens and suspense (more on that in a second), I really like the movie because I really like the drama and character development.

But there's nothing wrong with liking this film for its suspense! Signs marks the most well-made movie I have seen from M. Night Shyamalan. The story focuses on one family during the alien attack. It's a very personal story. There's no army flying in to save the day. That makes the family's stand against the aliens that much more terrifying. No one is going to come to the rescue. The scene at the end, where the aliens invade the family's house, is dripping with suspense. I was on the edge of my seat, and I was left entirely satisfied with the conclusion. I guess it's kind of like what Unbreakable tried to do with the home invader scene, but it works so much better here.

The film looks wonderful! Shyamalan's direction is darn near perfect! He has a definitive style, a style that I really enjoy! Like his past movies, he does clever things with the camera, editing, and lighting to make the film entirely his own. Though his script, while offering a good story, also offers some cringe-worthy dialogue.

The cast is truly excellent! Mel Gibson gives a convincing performance as Graham. Like I mentioned above, there is a definite arc that the character must travel. Gibson sells the character in every scene. It's the most powerful acting performance in a Shyamalan movie I have seen so far.

The supporting cast also impresses. The role of Merrill Hess, Graham's younger brother, could have easily gone to an actor like Mark Wahlberg, and the result would have been just fine. But the movie goes the extra mile and places Joaquin Phoenix in the role. I was surprised to realize that this movie was released two years after Gladiator. But Phoenix takes the subdued supporting role and gives an admirable performance.

Graham's children, Morgan and Bo, are played by Rory Culkin and Abigail Breslin. Culkin gets the worst of it, he has to say lines that are well above his pay-grade as a child actor. Breslin, on the other hand, is pretty fantastic! Granted, the character's purpose is "cute kid" more than anything, but Breslin is natural and energetic in the part.

So there's a lot that I like about Signs. And I already mentioned something I don't like (the slow first hour), but the other main problem I had with the film is a certain plot-devise near the end. In short, the director borrows a weak plot-devise from Unbreakable and adapts it into this movie. Though I did prefer the rebranding, it's still kind of cheap.

In his third effort, James Newton Howard once again enhances M. Night Shyamalan's movie. Signs starts out with a fantastic opening credits piece of music. From there, Newton Howard's music fades into the background, but in a good way. I can't say I remember any of the music from Signs, but I know it helped tell the story.

I wasn't expecting a whole lot from this film, and the first hour didn't give me any reason to be overly excited about the movie on a whole, but the final act pushes Signs right up to The Sixth Sense level. It's not quite as consistently excellent, but Shyamalan's third major motion picture shows the director (not the writer) at the best he has been so far! The film has meaning, the film has weight, the film has thrills, the film has suspense, and overall, the film proves the abundant talents of one of the most negatively accosted filmmakers of our generation.

"There are a lot of things I can take, and some things I can't. But what I can't take is when my older brother, who's everything that I want to be, starts losing faith in things." 8.5/10.