eery, relentless, melevolent, profoundly moving.

Rating: 9/10 (18 August 2002)

I was looking forward to seeing this one from the first (and last, remarkebly) time i saw the trailer, during a screening of LOTR. so little was revealed about a central idea that was so broad in interpretation that it grabbed me immediately. to add to its promotional strength, the name M. Night Shyamalan was tacked on to the title...
after months of subtle publicity and growing anticipation on behalf of anxious punters like myself, i finally got the chance to see it. 'Signs' is without a doubt a fantastic piece of cinema. Shyamalan has achieved to create a complex, multilayered and effective film using old-school methods and challenges his audience with a 'less-is-more' philosophy. we find ourselves searching the screen desperately with our eyes and our ears, trying to prepare ourselves for the inevitable. the most startling thing about this film is that despite all our mental preparation, the inevitable does arrive, and it still terrifies us. we know somethings in the cupboard. we hold our breath and clutch the seat while mel investigates. the silence is unbearable and we strain to hear signs of life on the other side of the door. and then...
the timing in this film is pure perfection. genuine, contextualized humour is interwoven beautifully with the tension, and the interplay between the characters is great. this isn't a jerky, angular film. it moves very organically as the tension builds up, undulates with small injections of humour and doubt, before reaching crescendoes that linger and spill into the next sequence.
the thematic elements within the story aren't entirely original. Alien invasion, the questioning of personal faith, small town anxiety and isolation have all been delt with in many forms, but the way in which Shyamalan gels them together and the influence and importance he allows them to hold in the final story gives them strength. each element doesn't simply present itself, leave an imprint and recede into the next one, they feed off each other and present different contexts for the others to play against. it deals with faith, and this is presented in a number of ways. one thing i noticed in particular was in the opening shot of an empty backyard and the surrounding cornfield through a window. the camera pans out and the yard becomes slightly distorted with the inconsistancy of the glass. in one of the final shots, after the faith of mels character is tried tested and ultimately prevails, a similar shot of the backyard through a broken window reveals a clear image of a family united.
i could go on but time and space limit me. the characters are great, and the performances reflect a rare maturity in all the cast members (for the first time in a long time, mel gibson was Father Hess, not mel gibson). sound design was fantastic, particularly the eery chittering of the ghostly visitors and their moonlit rooftop antics. lighting and camera work was suitably moody, ensuring once and for all my absence from and near any and all cornfields EVER. a fantastic score adds even more unearthly life to the relentless melevolence of shadows and shapes surrounding the house and breathes audible relief into moments of moving personal triumph.
as i said, i could continue ad bloody nauseum about this film, but i'll allow you to reflect on it yourself, or if you haven't seen it, catch it while it's still on the big screen. so before you go to bed tonight, tie up your dog in the barn, lock your doors and windows, board up the attic door, put a glass of water by your bed and if one were so inclined perhaps say a prayer. and if one weren't so inclined, see the movie and you soon will be.