'Signs' is really great

Submitted by The_Cyberbard t3_123hsi4 in movies

I get that the movie is a bit cringey with it's heavy Christian themes and the way the antagonists are designed. (I still laugh just thinking of Scary Movie 3 for this reason.)

But in terms of building tension and establishing a good atmosphere, this is hands down one of the best movies out there.

I really love stories that ask what's out there. Not religion or cryptozoology or anything like that, but about space and the universe specifically. "Are we alone?"

On top of that, I really like films that set a good atmospherere, and that place protagonists in scenes which feel really safe and inviting one minute, and lonely or insecure the next.

E.T. is a good example of these types of films, with Elliot being inside enjoying a pizza among family and friends one moment, and then finding himself outside in the cold and dark.

This feeling is further enforced by the shots of the entire town, lit up in warm street lighting and houses, and the contrast of Elliot's house being on the perimiter of the town right next to the mountain and forest.

Interstellar, The Happening, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Arrival, Contact, and War of the Worlds are also good in this regard. They establish tension, they ask the aforementioned questions, and they slowly build up a scenario of what it'd be really like if something like this were to happen.

So here's to hoping for a Signs UHD 4K edition soon, and more new films within this genre.

12

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

CartoonistBusiness t1_jdvveas wrote

Even the cinematography is underatted. Many exterior shots are composed so that the sky (the heavens) is overly dominant in the frame.

13

HoselRockit t1_jduw9hv wrote

While the ending isn’t so great, the set up amazing.

6

SomeDuderr t1_jdv4uhj wrote

It's basically like Contact - almost perfect premise and build-up, but it just deflates like a leaky balloon, with stupid religious nonsense mixed in

−1

HeartsPlayer721 t1_jdws3x0 wrote

You have to admit, it honestly feels like the only chance we'd have against invading aliens. The fact that they got here in the first place proves they already have advanced knowledge of science and technology. What could we possibly have going for us, except some weird premonition and the power of a deity on our side?

2

claudiorpr t1_jdunl7b wrote

It's awesome until the end which is ridiculous and so anti climatic

5

theprotector7 t1_jdutqfe wrote

Entirely allegorical and i thought it was fantastic.

Nobody is stupid enough to think this is literally an alien invasion film where they can be defeated by cups of water. The entire thing is symbols. ...or signs.

It has a great message of destiny and purpose. The aliens are like that gnawing doubt and disbelief that lodges itself in your soul.

8

Fargeol t1_jdwb7y2 wrote

I heard that the first version of the scenario had the alien become visible thanks to the water sticking to it, thus allowing Merrill to swing away. It was ditched since the CGI was too poor at that time to carry an "almost invisible" alien.

That would make more sense than the ending we got, obviously.

4

HeartsPlayer721 t1_jdwqyse wrote

I agree. That would have been such a better ending!

But I honestly don't mind it's ending. We need a bit of variety in movies. They can't all end in suspense of whether we survive or not.

2

The_Cyberbard OP t1_jdw1eq2 wrote

The issue is that many (most?) Sci-fi nerds, myself included, are irreligious and find it a bit strange when the two mix.

That isn't necessarily a problem on its own because a character can be religious and still be a great character (obviously).

But when the plot kind of pulls that sci-fi rug away from underneath your feet and goes "boom, Jesus" (voice of Peter Griffin from Family Guy), it feels a little awkward.

It would, imo, have been better if the movie ended on some lingering question about our place and meaning in the universe, like Morgan Freeman's epilogue in War of the Worlds.

−3

-FeistyRabbitSauce- t1_jdxooci wrote

Idk, I'm not religious in any way but I think as long as something is done well I don't mind. Adding religion to something can be fascinating, and I like how Signs pulled it off.

Take Stephen King. He often has religious elements in his works with his scifi. The Stand is probably the most obvious. But take The Dark Tower. It's a western, scifi, fantasy, meta, literary work of art wrapped in a bow of religious allegorical crazyness!

2

The_Cyberbard OP t1_jduotfc wrote

Yes, I agree. This is often the case with these types of films, sadly. The ending usually disappoints either simply because the mystery is gone, or because the resolution is executed poorly.

1

ZorroMeansFox t1_jdy3fc8 wrote

I'm the person who, over 18 years ago, originally came up with the alternate theory of the film arguing that the creatures in the narrative were actually demons instead of aliens.

I wrote this for The AV Club, but someone made a Reddit re-post of it which got thousands of hits --which is how Reddit first came to my attention, prompting me to sign-up here. Since I originally wrote this, it's been quoted and re-posted in publications around the world many hundreds of times --and I still stand by the analysis (if not my shabby writing):

HERE'S WHAT I ORIGINALLY WROTE:

Let’s skip the M. Night hatred for a moment. I, too, think he’s become something of a joke. But he has made a number of worthwhile movies, and this is one I initially couldn’t stand, thinking it was full of ridiculous plot-holes. And then…EUREKA!

When I first saw this film, I didn’t realize that it wasn’t about aliens at all. It’s about the return of demons.

Notice it’s all about a priest’s resurgence of belief, and a preordained moment of redemption-if-dared-and-attempted. There is no alien technology or weaponry or clothing of any kind, only a clawed, naked beast-creature and lights in the sky (which are just like Biblical images of Heavenly Lights).

Furthermore: The running joke throughout the movie is that people see these “invaders” in a way that’s related to their particular frame of mind: The cop sees them as prankster kids, the bookstore owners see them as “a hoax to sell commercials,” the Army Recruitment Officer sees them as invading military, the kids see them as UFOs…and the priest sees them as test of faith.

This understanding of the film removed my hatred of the “You’ve got to be kidding me, they were killed by WATER!” concept. In fact, the priest’s daughter had been referred to as “holy” (as revealed during Mel’s key monologue) –-recognized, he stated, by all who saw her at her birth as “an Angel.” And her quite particular relationship to water is shown to be very special and spiritual: In other words, she has placed vials of what are, essentially, HOLY WATER all around the house. (And the creature’s reaction when coming in contact with this blessed liquid is exactly like monsters/vampires being splashed by spiritual “acid.”)

This view of the movie also explains the creature’s actions: They act like superior tricksters, are not able to break in through closed doors, can be trapped behind simple wooden latches –all mythological elements of demons and vampire-like creatures of lore. It also (and this is most crucial "proof") explains the news over the radio at the end of the movie that an ancient method of killing the creatures has been found “in three small cities in the Middle East” –-which one would suspect are likely the religious “hubs” of the three main Abrahamic traditions, each discovering the “mystic methods” of protection-and-dispatch that I’ve noted earlier.

Note also: All the Christian iconography throughout the movie, the references to “Signs and Wonders” (the true meaning of the title), the crucifix shapes hinted-at everywhere (check out the overhead shot, looking down on the street driving into town) and the ultimate fact that the entire movie is built around a Priest rediscovering he is not abandoned to a random, Godless, scientifically-oriented Universe but, rather, is part of a predicted and dreamed-of plan.

Now, these creatures may for all intents and purposes be some sort of extraterrestrial or inter-dimensional “aliens.” But the point of the movie seems to be that they are, in the ACTUALITY OF THE FILM'S WORLD, the dark stuff from which all the character’s tales of devils and night-creatures were born.

4

pgpkreestuh t1_je8m15o wrote

> It also (and this is most crucial "proof") explains the news over the radio at the end of the movie that an ancient method of killing the creatures has been found “in three small cities in the Middle East” –-which one would suspect are likely the religious “hubs” of the three main Abrahamic traditions, each discovering the “mystic methods” of protection-and-dispatch that I’ve noted earlier.

Even outside the religious framework, the radio provides a key bit of context that makes the aliens actions a bit more understandable for the "but why would they settle on a planet full of water!" folks.

The radio guest says that he believes the aliens weren't looking to conquer the planet; but rather, that they were there to "harvest" humans. The guest goes on to describe how other families were dragged away to the alien's ships, presumably to be used as slaves on their homeworld. Pretty grim bit of dialogue that's easy to miss.

1

Masterbeif1 t1_jdytil4 wrote

Seems a lot of people hating the ending but I thought the movie was great one of my all time favorites. Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix were both awesome in it and I loved how on the surface it was aliens but there’s a metaphor under it for faith. Loved it

3

Solesky1 t1_jdvfo57 wrote

The ending makes more sense if you accept the theory that they're not actually aliens, but are instead some kind of demons, hence the "holy water" working on them

2

dixons-57 t1_jdvo77q wrote

The water wasn't holy unless you subscribe to the idea that priests bless every glass of water that they pour.

1

HeartsPlayer721 t1_jdwrh96 wrote

They only used glasses previously used by the daughter, right?

Maybe she's the next messiah.

4

The-Gnome t1_jdxetlw wrote

No but Mel Gibson was formerly a priest struggling with giving up. Meanwhile his daughter would drink a little of a glass and say “it’s contaminated.” Maybe he was blessing the water the entire time.

1

Masterbeif1 t1_jdyttml wrote

It wasn’t a priest it was Bo the daughter. It’s hinted at when Mel is telling her the story of how she was born. “You didn’t cry you were an angel” he meant angel metaphorically but unbeknownst to him she really was. Hence; the water was blessed.

1

AcaciaCelestina t1_jdvqw3i wrote

Which tbh even that falls apart unless priests are just like, blessing every body of water willy nilly.

0

ech0cide t1_jdx2dzu wrote

I really enjoyed Signs. If you've ever been near (or in) a cornfield at night, then the scene where he sees an alien leg out in the field is... incredibly creepy.

When you watch it a second (or in my case a 50th time) you start to notice other things about it. Like when he investigates the crop circles and the beam of his flashlight goes away when it hits the landed UFO, then the beam comes back as he moves it left to right.

So much good stuff in this movie and people hate on it so much because of the water ending.

2

MichaelRoco1 t1_jdw3fzz wrote

I’ve never heard the movie described as “a bit cringey with its Christian themes,” how so?

1

UpperFrontalButtocks t1_jdw5963 wrote

I think it's because the main character is an angsty ex priest who lost his faith and a big theme of the movie, seemingly confirmed at the end, is that everything happens for a reason. That's why his son's asthma, daughter's water habit, and wife's last words all come together to make sense and presumably lead him to renew his faith.

It just feels a little too convenient and lazy. I still really enjoy the movie, though. I just think the "angry atheist has faith restored" is a worn out trope at this point.

5

MichaelRoco1 t1_jdw6eny wrote

Your comment makes a lot more sense thank you. I think OP could have voiced the tale better, rather than calling it a cringey Christian theme, when really it’s an overused religious trope

1

ifinallyreallyreddit t1_jdxasth wrote

The difference between the comments in this thread and on a front page thread about Arrival praising it for not really being a sci-fi movie are striking.

1

Boozin37 t1_jdut74i wrote

Fucking Water!? To this day… just, what the fuck??

0

SomeDuderr t1_jdv1vnd wrote

Hey man, if we ever start visiting and invading planets, I'm sure there will be a few groups of humans who think that landing on planets with nitrogen or methane as the local atmosphere is a perfectly smart thing to do.

7

[deleted] t1_jdvdlg6 wrote

A species with intergalactic travel would probably be smart enough to scan for water. They also might wear spacesuits.

1

lavabears t1_jdvui1z wrote

Who’s to say this wasn’t their last resort?

4

The_Cyberbard OP t1_jdvy609 wrote

I mean, not necessarily. Humans are smart enough to travel to the moon and dumb enough to give ourselves cancer and pollute our own planet.

2

HeartsPlayer721 t1_jdwrpit wrote

How many planets have we found where water exists?

Maybe they'd never encountered it and had no idea it would have that effect.

1

[deleted] t1_jdwuzji wrote

We've found a quite a few that may have water. We would still probably wear a spacesuit when exploring them.

1

lavabears t1_jdvv2mf wrote

We already can’t breathe the air on the moon so there you go.

1

Holanz t1_jdzard1 wrote

Maybe they are prisoners sent to Earth

1

rellgrrr t1_jdw4xlb wrote

Not Demons. There is a better way to perceive the story.

The aliens are clearly not THE aliens. They are Naked, ffs. They are nothing more than biological Drones. Grunts engineered to a purpose. A slave army used for raids to capture other species.

What would be a Great way to keep a slave army in check? Make them water soluble.

If they act up, give them the hose.

I don't know what he intended, or if he thought about it this much. But I prefer this idea to demons.

0

PigeonsArePopular t1_jdwtbv4 wrote

Aliens that are killed by water attempt invasion of planet 2/3 water.

Dumb movie.

0

tekko001 t1_jdwut34 wrote

"A bit of moisture is there but otherwise a fine nice planet, with great desert areas like the sahara, just need some small modifications.

Is not like you can afford something else..."

1

D6Desperados t1_jdvggkk wrote

Thanks for starting your post with "the movie is a bit cringey with it's heavy Christian themes", that saved me some time.

−1