Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign

Rating: 6/10 (7 August 2002)

Mel Gibson stars as a former pastor who has lost his faith in the
latest effort by M. Night Shyamalan. "Signs" is a return to form for
the writer/director of "The Sixth Sense " who stumbled a bit with his
last outing, "Unbreakable". While this is no "Sixth Sense " it is
good, compelling storytelling.
When mysterious unexplained crop circles appear overnight in his
Pennsylvania cornfield, Gibson and the local authorities figure its
the work of local pranksters. But soon the patterns appear in fields
all over the world. It becomes obvious something global is about
to happen.
Convinced by his wife's accidental death several months ago that
there is no God watching over people, Gibson decides he and his
family can only depend on themselves, whatever happens. So
joined by his brother, a failed minor league ballplayer (Joaquin
Phoneix) Gibson's son (Rory Culkin) (yes, ANOTHER Culkin) and
his irrestibly cute daughter (Abigal Breslin) the family prepares for
whatever might happen.
A lot happens, but I won't ruin it for you. You should go see for
yourself.
A suspense thriller, "Signs" is never gory or gross and bloody.
Instead, director Shyamalan masterfully builds up the tension in
Â Hitchcockian fashion. There's no nudity, but there's nobody in this
film you want to see naked anyway. Shyamalan must learn that in
addition to making films suspenseful, Hitchcock never forgot to
throw in a Grace Kelly or a Kim Novak or Janet Leigh. I must tell
him this next time I see him at the club.
Another weakness is Shyamalan's Tarantino-like decision to cast
himself in a key role. It's not that he's bad in it, he's not; but his
presence in the picture and the way he is introduced totally
distracts from the film's central story. M. (a Fritz Lang homage?)
would be better off limiting his acting to a brief Hitchcock like
cameo and hiring real actors to act.
Some people have complained a bit about the film's ending not
living up to the rest of the picture, and I can see their point.
However, I enjoyed the storytelling enough to give that a pass.
Besides I rather like campy 1950's sci-fi films, so I had no problem
with the ending.
What I had a problem with is Rory Culkin. Are these kids being
cloned now or what? There seems to be a never ending supply of
these Culkin kids. When one grows up and is no longer cute, two
more spring up to take its place. This is perhaps the real invasion
we have to worry about: the attack of the Culkins. Now that big
brother MacCaulay "Home Alone" (with his 22 brothers and
sisters--Christian, Kieran, Quinn, Shane, Rory, etc. etc.) Culkin is
21, I expect he'll be pumping out more replacement Culkin kids
before too long. And then his brothers and sisters will be old
enough to have kids, and then his kids will have kids and before
you know it, we'll be running in the streets screaming like that guy
in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers".
"Help! Wait! Stop. Stop and listen to me!...These Culkins who're
coming after me are not human. Look, you fools. You're in danger.
Can't you see? They're after you. They're after all of us. Our wives,
our children, everyone. They're here already!"
Now that's scary.
http://go.to/senor_sock