Signs - rated 12s

Blitzkrieger · 06-09-2002 4:55pm #1

I just can't see how a horror film could be rated 12s and still be scary (unless it's Bring it on). I've no intention of going to see it so I'll never know I suppose. Anybody know of a scary 'kids film'?

Dont be at yourself · 06-09-2002 5:26pm

The Grinch.

ObeyGiant · 06-09-2002 5:29pm

The Childcatcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is still the single scariest character ever.

Ever.

scipio_major · 07-09-2002 1:48am

From the trailer I saw (I think it was on before Minority Report) it didn't look like a horror movie. It looked like a typical Shyamalan (ok like Sixth Sense and unbreakable). With loads of strange phenomonen, that sort of thing, but with aliens behind the strange happenings. Is that a horror film?

Fade to credits
Scipio_major

Mr E · 07-09-2002 7:36am

Its NOT a horror film. Instead, Signs is supposed to be edge-of-the-seat "what happens next?" kind of suspense thriller. Its supposed to be very well acted and extremely creepy (mainly through the cinematography and amazing sound).

It looks very very good. To say you're not going because it is 12s is (ironically) a bit childish.

- Dave.

Blitzkrieger · 08-09-2002 12:19am

rdrr

Actually I'm not going to see it cos the ads bug me so much, and from the ads it certainly looks like a horror film. If you tell me there isn't even a monster at the other side of that door and the cat doesn't get eaten, it just makes it worse.

CuLT · 08-09-2002 2:38am

I saw it in the states a few weeks ago, its worth seeing.

Horror? no, but it is edge of seat kind of thing, but quite a few of those moments are broken by mel and joaquin into being funny.

(on a side note, the cat gets eaten and there is a monster, scares the bejeebus outta ya a couple of times)

Frank Grimes · 08-09-2002 9:12am

I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I don't know where you're getting this thing about it being a horror movie.
It's a great movie, I thought it was a very good/different take on the average alien movie.
Although if you base decisions on what movies to watch on the trailer and what certification it gets, you should probably give this a miss.

The_Bullman · 08-09-2002 10:19am

sorry to spoil this thread with a negative review but here goes..

total crap

fair enough it was acted ok. mel and joaquin where ok they had their moments, but all in all they seemed to be on autopilot.

it was stuipid

aliens can travel accross the galaxy to earth but yet they havn't figured out how to design a raincoat. Water kills them FFS

what was the point of that

i will admit to being a little facinated by the trailers until i realised that noone actually spoke for the whole ad. i can see why after seeing the movie.

what was the line- just keep swinging- something like that. Oh god just thinking about it makes me more annoyed.

but i guess that people like different things, i have heard of people liking it. i have never met them so i cannot vouch for their mental state

but the people that i saw it with all said crap and words to that effect

Frank Grimes · 08-09-2002 10:25am

I'd never seen the trailers, so I didn't know what to expect, each to their own etc.
That spoiler isn't working, or was that intentional

The_Bullman · 08-09-2002 10:28am

yeah sorry about that

just never did one before

i hope i didn't spoil the movie

nah, how could i its crap anyway

Blitzkrieger · 08-09-2002 11:20pm

It's got a monster that eats the cat but it's not a horror film? Simply beacause you don't see the cat being eaten? Is it perchance a fluffy monster?

ClevererThanYou · 10-09-2002 10:18am

Signs is a 15PG, not a 12s.

Illkillya · 10-09-2002 5:49pm

you're right blitzkrieger, when I went to see the film I hadn't realised it was 15s or 12s... when I saw that it was it occurred to me that the film would be ****e. That happened to be the case. And Just keep swinging was the worst line ever.

D-Generate · 10-09-2002 7:32pm

That film called something along the lines "The Nightmare Before Christmas" was very twisted and dark for a PG film. Don't let the animation and music put you off, it's very kind of errr weird

yellum · 13-09-2002 11:35pm

Rated 15 on my ticket. The film was so so boring. I mean good lord almighty. I notice too hes giving himself bigger and bigger roles in his films.

This was a very well acted but extremely boring film. Bad script that was too predictable.

spooky donkey · 14-09-2002 10:29pm

They dont make horror films really often these days, in fact its rare to see any film get an 18 cert.

Its all about bums on seats. And lots of kids goto the cinema these days!

Mr E · 15-09-2002 2:43pm

Went to see Frailty last week, and that was 18s (not really deserving of that rating, though). Fantastic film.

As for Signs, well I really enjoyed it! Its one of those movies that you have to watch on a big screen with a good sound system (I wouldn't be surprised if its sound editing started winning awards when awards season starts up). I didn't know much about the movie when I went in, so I was fascinated by how it progressed.

Acting was very good, script wasn't bad, camera work was excellent, and the tension was brilliantly built up in certain parts - that basement scene was brilliant.

I imagine most of the people who said it was crap watched it on a small screen, or even worse - downloaded it from the net and watched it on a computer monitor.

I say go and see it and judge for yourselves. 8/10.

- Dave.

GreenHell · 15-09-2002 6:02pm

Its an enjoyable film, umm some good edge of your seat bits.

Kalina · 16-09-2002 1:47pm

Originally posted by The_Bullman
sorry to spoil this thread with a negative review but here goes..

total crap

fair enough it was acted ok. mel and joaquin where ok they had their moments, but all in all they seemed to be on autopilot.

it was stuipid

aliens can travel accross the galaxy to earth but yet they havn't figured out how to design a raincoat. Water kills them FFS

what was the point of that

well, bacteria killed the martians in War of the Worlds and those aliens were a lot scarier than the ones in Signs. Maybe they hadn't invented antibiotics?

I really enjoyed the movie, it was eerie and spooky a lot of the way through. The ending was a bit weak but I was well and throughly freaked out, especially when the family were in the basement and the aliens were climbing into the house!

Acidflash · 16-09-2002 5:22pm

It wasn't the worst thing i've ever seen.The ending was terrible though.

It was rated as 15PG on my ticket also.

Dont be at yourself · 16-09-2002 5:42pm

Who would have thought that the little girl was really an alien though? Man, I didn't see that twist coming!

And what's your thoughts on the love triangle between Gibson's character, the polic officer and the alien king?

daveirl · 17-09-2002 12:57am

This post has been deleted.

kamobe · 17-09-2002 1:13am

Spoiler

I enjoyed it up untill they left the basement. It seemed as if the movie was building up to some super finale. Instead, the worst ending ever. Almost like someone said "that's it lads, finish up. Time for bed...."

Ugh.

swiss · 17-09-2002 10:15am

http://www.xmission.com/~maddox/signs.html

I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't really comment. But from what I've gathered, if you're just willing to watch a no-brainer with some action and suspense, go watch signs. If you would like something to exercise the grey matter or something that has (a rarity these days) a plot, don't.

That said, I might go see it later today

yellum · 17-09-2002 12:55pm

What Action ?

segadreamcast · 18-09-2002 6:43pm

Originally posted by yellum
What Action ?

Heh, I was thinking the same thing.

There was one moment that made me jump, and several that made me look at the movie and say "hmmm, good idea, but could've been executed far better."

Spoiler? Maybe - better blank it out anyway:

Why did they want to go to a planet with 70% water if they were allergic to the bloody stuff?

kamobe · 19-09-2002 12:32am

Originally posted by NoelRock

Why did they want to go to a planet with 70% water if they were allergic to the bloody stuff?

They didn't want the planet at all, they only wanted the people! Pay more attention next time

Loomer · 19-09-2002 11:45am

This movie was a good example of craft used as a substitute for substance. While well filmed I think Shaylaman took a bucket of LSD when he wrote the script as it the plot can only be described as a mish-mash of ideas from a deranged person. It is a crime to compare this film next to War of the Worlds even though the parallels are obvious, as the latter is a timeless classic, Signs is not even a wannabe. Don't waste your euros on this turkey, I've been more scared by a late night kebab and that cost less.

segadreamcast · 20-09-2002 8:07pm

Originally posted by kamobe

They didn't want the planet at all, they only wanted the people! Pay more attention next time

Who COULD pay attention - and humans are still composed of a hell of a lot of water too :P. Seriously though, this movie could have been done far better I'm sure... it never built up properly, you never really cared much for the characters - infact many of them apart from Gibson seemed rather two dimensional

KiKaZZ · 22-09-2002 8:49pm

Alright folks - education time.

When you go and see a Shylaman film you expect 3 things.

1. Suspense : Check

2: Excellent Acting : Check

3: Absorbing Story : Check

What you do not expect is some idiot down the back screaming out why the aliens wouldn't do this, that or the other.

The Bottom line is:

Signs does exactly what it says on the tin.

The_Bullman · 22-09-2002 9:10pm

Originally posted by TmB
Went to see Frailty last week, and that was 18s (not really deserving of that rating, though). Fantastic film.

As for Signs, well I really enjoyed it! Its one of those movies that you have to watch on a big screen with a good sound system (I wouldn't be surprised if its sound editing started winning awards when awards season starts up). I didn't know much about the movie when I went in, so I was fascinated by how it progressed.

Acting was very good, script wasn't bad, camera work was excellent, and the tension was brilliantly built up in certain parts - that basement scene was brilliant.

I imagine most of the people who said it was crap watched it on a small screen, or even worse - downloaded it from the net and watched it on a computer monitor.

I say go and see it and judge for yourselves. 8/10.

- Dave.

i agree with you that it could win awards for the sound editing, the camera work was good, good performances from the actors and there was an attempt to put some tension into it.

the only problem was the script which had a few holes in it, especiall the one that i mentioned before.

oh and i did see it in the cinema- i saw it when when i was in america. but anyway should it matter where you see a movie. i saw memento on the pc at home and still the movie shone through the low res. picture. a movie shouldn't need a 30 foot screen and a major kick ass sound system to get me on the edge of my seat. the plot should do that in itself.

Mr E · 23-09-2002 7:37am

Yeah, I agree that if Shyamalan had put a bit more thought into how to wrap it up, it could have been so much better.

I still enjoyed it immensely, though. Thats the whole point, isn't it ??

- Dave.

kirn · 27-09-2002 11:04am

actually i thought the end was good, that was the whole point!
the whole film worked towards it and everything had a reason the boy, the girl's water thing, his chat about whether he believes in miracles.

i thought it was better than most hollywood ****e actually.

segadreamcast · 27-09-2002 8:35pm

Originally posted by KiKaZZ
Alright folks - education time.

When you go and see a Shylaman film you expect 3 things.

1. Suspense : Check

2: Excellent Acting : Check

3: Absorbing Story : Check

What you do not expect is some idiot down the back screaming out why the aliens wouldn't do this, that or the other.

The Bottom line is:

Signs does exactly what it says on the tin.

I wouldn't exactly call the acting 'excellent', the Culkin kid seemed like he was reading something straight off a script when he started giving a speech without a single pause. Gibson was fantastic though - he certainly won me over.

The difference between this and shylaman's other movies? I saw the ending for this coming about 40 minutes before it happened - with the sixth sense I was baffled and on the edge of my seat until the very end.

Caesar_Bojangle · 27-09-2002 11:38pm

Erotic thriller.

I really didnt want to go see this movie especially after seeing does sh1te ads, i was dragged along by my girlfriend after a long debate between this and road to perawhatsitcalled, needless to say she won.

Its actually a lot better than it looks, it built itself up from the start only to fall flat on its arse at the end, it had great potential but the writer obviously got bored halfway through and wrote any old crap. Some sudden jumpy(not scary)moments with a predictable ending.

Worth a look, father

scipio_major · 29-09-2002 2:01am

Got to see it yesterday and I enjoyed it greatly.

Yes the sound/music is worth mentioning as excellent. Acting wise there are no problems. What impressed me most was how tight the script is. They are no surplus scenes here, everything had a bearing on the ending.

Stuff about the ending:

I don't know what you're complaining about. The point of it isn't that Aliens will be defeated simply but that there are no coincidences. to that end the ending works well. The fates have slowly been assembling all the right conditions to allow the family to survive. Once you look at it that way the ending is IMHO quite clever. But then again I had been expecting the War of the Worlds type ending so it was nice to find something else.

Fade to Credits
Scipio_major

Signs - rated 12s

Comments