The UK perspective

Rating: 5/10 (16 September 2002)

I had gone to great lengths to watch this movie without knowing anything about the plot other than what I had learnt from the numerous viewings of trailer before every film for the last month or so. I had managed to ban anyone who had seen it from telling me anything about the plot, just so that I could go into the film with my own expectations, and could then have the pleasure of trying to work out the inevitable plot twists that you expect to accompany a Shyamalan film. I had enjoyed his previous two efforts (although I am not a fan of Stuart Little) and was hoping - expecting - to be entertained and confused by the writer/producer/director/actor's movie.
The Signs opens by throwing clues and red herrings about so that your brain immediately starts to calculate likely outcomes and try to fathom which information to discard. Assumptions that we all know and understand the various theories behind crop circles and their hoaxes helps to maintain the narrative's speed in getting to Shyamalan's version of events. Based almost exclusively on a farm owned by Mel Gibson, where he lives with his brother, son and daughter, there is clearly meant to be a sense of claustrophobia within the film. Gibson only leaves the farm twice within the movie, once in his memories and once to visit the man who killed his wife (played by Shyamalan) in the car crash he continuously flashes back to. The enclosure is further strengthened when the family barricade themselves into the farm house.
Its not giving too much away to state that this is essentially an alien invasion movie. The Signs is presented like a microcosm of Independence Day, and would have perhaps been more suited to an episode of ID: The TV Series should they have ever made it. The clues given earlier in the movie that forshadow the ending are all too easy to spot and work out their importance. Even if you are the worlds worst sleuth there isn't an overwhelming realisation moment when you finally spot the connections between the opening and the end. For those of us who enjoy seeking out the connections, we are left disappointed as many of the earlier events are left unexplained whether they bore any relevance to the conclusion or not. This is particularly disappointing if you are a fan of Shyamalan's writing as, until now, the plants and woven links running through his movies were part of his massive appeal. Similar undertones and issues are dealt with, most of all being Shyamalan's constant investigation into the spiritual world and the conflict of religion with the unexplained. Unfortunately, like almost everything else in The Signs, the study falls short of either reaching a conclusion or creating enough conflict to justify its inclusion in the script. Here it is a particular shame as a three way fight between religion, the unexplained and precognition could have been the boost this movie so badly needed to take it from average (by an average directors standards) to at least something that bit special.
This film is ultimately unimpressive. The cast are underused, criminally in the case of Phoenix, the plot is underdeveloped and feels like one half of a story, and visually what could have potentially been a stunning mix of unexplained imagery and haunting glimpses turned into straight-to-video mistakes. The scariest thing about Alien was that you never fully saw the one thing that caused the fear, this is perhaps something that could have been considered when this movie was being made. On a more positive note, should you go to see this movie having no preconceptions about it being a movie by the man who made The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, then you are far more likely gain some pleasure from it. This is not a bad movie, but it must be questioned whether its release would have been quite so widespread and successful, or even attracted the cast it did, had it not been for the fascinatingly monikered author.