| (07.26) | Lady in the Water  |
| (05.21) | Da Vinci Code, The  |
| (05.06) | United 93  |
| (02.05) | King Kong  |
| (01.29) | Syriana |
| (01.24) | Walk the Line |
| (01.05) | Chronicles of Narnia, The: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe  |
| (01.02) | Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire |
| (12.30) | Jarhead |
| (12.27) | Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit |
| (12.05) | randy: Polar Express, The |
| (12.02) | Geoff: Polar Express, The |
| (07.27) | Jen: Lady in the Water |
| (07.27) | Justin: Lady in the Water |
| (07.12) | Sarah: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.25) | Chris: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.25) | Acceler8: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.21) | Mr Plow: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.11) | Sarah: United 93 |
| (05.11) | Bread: United 93 |
I have no doubt whatesoever that M. Night Shyamalan is the most technically gifted filmmaker of our time. Some may argue about his storywriting abilities, but I'm certain that no other contemporary director knows how to conjure up so much meaning and emotion from purely technical aspects of a scene such as composition, camera-movement, etc. One interesting comment I've read suggests that Shyamalan's films would be elevated to an even higher level if only he worked with a professional writer -- as Alfred Hitchcock usually did -- to compliment his incredible technical skills.
I understand this criticism, but don't totally agree with it. Signs is the third film in a series of truley amazing films from Shyamalan, and I feel that all of his stories are as tight and layered as his direction.
Shyamalan references Hitchcock's The Birds as a significant incluence on Signs, and anyone who's seen Hitchcock's film would be able to spot the similarities. Namely, both films revolve around rural families who barricade themselves inside their homes in a desperate attempt to keep the birds/aliens out (as a side note: as silly as the concept of Hitchcock's The Birds had seemed to me, I admit to being quite amazed at how good of a movie it is, after finally seeing it). Signs is so incredibly effective and suspenseful because of the restraint that Shyamalan shows in his direction; he understands that what we don't see can be infinitely more frightening than any sort of monster or alien that he could show onscreen (it's our imagination that is generally the most frightening thing of all).
I love how Signs so deftly moves between three quite different emotions. Obviously fear is the biggest factor in the film, and I think Signs ranks as perhaps one of the scariest films of all time (though I think 'suspenseful' is probably a more appriopriate word than 'scary'). But Signs is also a surprisingly funny film, and I think the humour works well to accentuate the 'scary' moments. Finally, there are some profoundly sad moments in the film, and credit should go to all of the actors who really bring this across. It's not sad in a depressing sense, but moreso in the sense that we can feel the sort of emotional turmoil that this family is going through, altogether combined with the loss of the wife/mother that is still heavily weighing upon them.
Okay... if there's one thing I don't particularly care for in this film it's the final scenes in which the religious aspect angle is unneccessarily overplayed, and the final change in Mel Gibson's character is made akwardly too-obvious.
Seriously though, there is no other director around right now whose next film I'm more eagerly awaiting than M. Night Shyamalan.
I agree with you Geoff, the first time I saw it at my friend's house. It was pretty "suspensful" with no lights on and nobody else in the house. There were a couple of times when I jumped. But the thing I did't like was when they flat out showed the alien (in the house scene, not the TV shot)! Granted, it was inevitable for the story, but it kind of ruined it. I thought it would have been more effective if we hadn't seen the entire alien, maybe more hands or just blurred versions. Personally, I think the best part (I won't try and spoil it too much for those who havn't seen it!) is when Gibson's character and his family are looking through the book and go to the one page with the house and fire and...well, you know what I'm talking about. I do, however, have one beef. And it might spoil things for those who havn't seen it, so look away now!! I said stop reading.......anyway, if the (you know) are damaged by (that certain liquid), why can they still grab people? Do our bodies not have it in ourselves? Does it not make up most of us?? That's my beef.
(more spoilers here... you've been warned)
I totally understand what you're saying Pete... I've also heard people complain that, you know, wouldn't there have been dew or condensation or something in the cornfields, and why would the aliens be stupid enough to come to a planet that's over 70% water... and what if it rained??
Well....
Here's my take on it. The whole movie has a very thick religious tone to it. If you think about the water that actually hurt that alien at the end, recall that it was only water that had been touched by the little girl, Bo. Bo is referred to as (and made to look like, IMO) an angel, and so the water could be seen as 'holy water' (which is why it hurts the aliens).
In fact, I might go so far as to say that the 'aliens' aren't even 'aliens', but are rather demons (considering the fact that they don't seem to have any kind of great technology, and they're not particularly strong... they could just be "lacky demon footsoldiers" or something).
Anyway, that's my take on it... and these sorts of extra "layers" of complexity is one of the reasons I like this movie so much.
Yah, I suppose that makes sense. But (getting REALLY picky here) if they were "lacky demon footsoldiers", why were they in ships?
Did you see any ships? ...
Didn't think so. :-)
Weren't there lights and stuff in the sky? Ok, so it could have been anything, maybe even "angels" to protect us in some kind of heavenly war. Who knows...anyway, lets just agree that this movie could have several meanings-the most obvious one involving religion.
Horribly boring movie for me. Maybe I just didn't get it, but after watching it twice, I can't help but shake my head at the great reviews it got. I get creeped out by scary movies fairly easily, but this one did nothing to me.
MHNZWB this is delisious!
xfather123
Look at this - don't is beautiful site? I believe so.
hdt6dsj
This is my first message. Please don't delete it. Thanks
jsh39shd2 link
j4j3h4kj5 link
Jonny was here Little Preteen Dancing qctz Preteen Model Xxx gpfgls Preteen Xxx Guestbook 471313 Preteen Swimsuit Pictures 259206 Small Nude Preteen :DDD Alissa Preteen Model >:-PP Banned Preteen Galleries %-DDD Preteens Models Videos :-(( Natasha Mouse Preteen wsxjs Preteen Twin Pics :]
What sort of work do you do? Hussyfan 10 Yo 80224 Hussyfan Images two Free Hussyfan Videos 588 Hussyfan R@Ygold 9729 Hussyfan Porn :-]] Hussyfan Liluplanet Pthc yeip Preteen Hussyfan Pictures >:-PP Hussyfan Pics Torrents uulb Pthc Hussyfan R@Ygold Liluplanet Babyshivid Childlover Kdquality Kingpass wzwh Hussyfan Site 8-[[[
I bow down humbly in the prseence of such greatness.
I bow down humbly in the prseence of such greatness.
Thanks for the hinotsg and the acceptance of my article.