1/4 part Hitchcock, 2 parts SNL, 3 parts disappointment

Rating: 5/10 (4 August 2002)

I don't regret going to see this movie and was entertained by it, but it should have been an awful lot more. It's been promoted for more than a year now in previews, and the recent cover of Newsweek displayed M. Night Shymalan. The headline: The Next Spielberg. The truth: yeah, right.
The opening credits felt like a Hitchcock movie to me: plain black and white credits, the suspenseful (though already familiar) theme song playing. That was where the similarity ended. The first half of the movie had suspenseful moments, but every single one of these was diluted by comedy to the point of becoming meaningless. The most egregious example came early, when Gibson and Phoenix invesigated a possible intruder outside the house. The scene began with a moment that I will confess made me jump. It proceeded to become one huge joke playing off of Gibson's docile nature (more on that later). The audience should have been on the edge of its seats; instead it was laughing. The viewer remembers the scene, but only as a cerebral memory, not as a gut feeling. The mood is completely killed. Shymalan doesn't even try to recover the mood: the next scene features a recounting of the events meant to evoke more laughter. I understand that people thought "Unbreakable" too slow and somber, but this was not the answer. Imagine Will Ferrel narrating "The Others" and you'll get the idea.
Without the accompanying mood, the suspense was lost. The last third of the movie was designed to make me jump a few times, but it was ridiculously predictable and failed. There was also supposed to be a great deal of conflict over Mel Gibson's faith, but this was also ineffective. The conclusion seemed contrived, but I won't complain about that because its artificial nature was part of the point. Nevertheless, it was far from a great ending.
***SKIP NEXT PARAGRAPH TO AVOID SPOILERS***
The characters were extremely disappointing. Early in the movie, Shymalan makes a big point of Gibson's inability to be angry. Later, he flips out on his children during the dinner scene. I understand that he's under stress, but what he does amounts to psychological abuse. But since Shymalan's so concerned with family relationships, his son of course walks over and gives his dad a hug so they can cry together. Given that his son is at oldest ten, this is beyond precocity. Considering the treatment his dad gave him, the kid would have been much more likely to throw a plate at him, and it would have been deserved. As for Joaquin Phoenix, his part was more of a clown than a real character. After his brilliant performances in "Gladiator" and "Quills" (side note, despite Phoenix, stay away from the latter), his talent is sadly wasted in "Signs." The little girl was also disappointing. In the basement she talks about "this was in my dream." There has been next to no setup to this, and there is no followup either. She just sort of hangs in the wind. Lastly, the alien was disappointing. The only suspense that the movie actually has comes from NOT knowing what they look like. As soon as we get a good look at one, the entire effect is blown. In the Newsweek article, Shymalan cites "Psycho" as one of his favorite films. Perhaps he should consider what damage would have been done to the shower scene if we saw the knife actually strike.
The movie shows humor, displays conflict in the former priest, and is occasionally suspenseful, but only the first of these is done well. Instead of weaving all of these elements in one masterpiece, Shymalan made "Signs" into three different movies, and I was never quite sure which one I was supposed to be watching. Wait for video on this one. Without expectations: 5/10 With expectations: 2/10