Review of Signs

Signs (2002)
10/10
This means something.
6 August 2002
Most of the people that comment on this movie are going to relate the fact that they were disappointed. And that's okay- your opinion of a movie should always include your pre-showing as well as post-showing emotions. But to those people I just have to say, "You just don't get it." Everyone is going into this movie thinking it is some kind of chilling horror, or blood-and-gore slasher flick. Shyamalan doesn't do those tired genres, thankfully. Instead, he gives us a warm, funny, emotionally-charged, and yes, suspenseful thriller which manages to compact an entire list of genres into one whole film.

I have seen the movie twice already- the first time for myself, and the second time just for crowd reactions. I wasn't bored through either showing. This is in part to some great acting by Phoenix, and some PHENOMENAL acting by the two child leads! Gibson isn't too bad either, but I have to admit, his part could have been played by anyone (sorry Mel :)

I think for the first time Shyamalan really brings us a film that doesn't rely on smoke and mirrors to please the audience. For all those naysayers out there, I would suggest that you view the film again, either now, or when it is available for home use. Look- and listen closer. You might just be able to make out the 'Signs.'
114 out of 169 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed