signs....what a pile of ****e!

patch · 22-03-2003 9:40pm #1

Having seen and heard quite a bit about how good SIGNS was, I decided i might as well rent it. It was muck! a wasted cast, and 'signs' that the director may well have his head up his arse. I enjoyed sixth sense, and really enjoyed unbreakable.... perhaps that was the writer/directors two best ideas used up! Unless of course I totally missed the point and it was actually an homage to silly sci-fi movies with ropey special effects.......

karma kabbage · 23-03-2003 3:20pm

are you mad? twas a great movie. Not on the same level as 'unbreakble' and 'sixth sense' but not on the same vein really. 'Signs' is about a more real approach to similar themes. How the one small-town family deals with an alien threat.

Plus on top of that, it was funny. C'mon '...why can't they find girlfriends...?' and '...it's what the nerds want...' Classic quotes indeed. i went to see it in the cinema with my friend and we were giggling about it for ages afterwards. And in the video shop where i work, it's been well recieved.

I'll admit mel gibson is a lil' cheesey, but Joaquin Phenix (guy from gladiator?) was well excellent

Two thumbs way up

Sloth · 23-03-2003 6:15pm

I loved it although I think it would have been better if

you never got to see the aliens

Jesus H Christ · 23-03-2003 6:26pm

i thought it was very enjoyable. The direction was fantastic a la 6 sense. the part where they are in the basement and the lights go out. Gibson is looking around the room with a torch but you are just looking at his face, that's a class scene. goog tension

patch · 23-03-2003 9:46pm

sorry, maybe i just didn't get it. On a more positive note, I just watched SESSION 9, on dvd. It's one of the best horrors I've seen in a long time. I'd say it pisses on the likes of blair witch and jeepers creepers......... then again, what do i know!

The_Bullman · 23-03-2003 9:56pm

finally someone who agrees with me.

I hated this movie. It just sucked. thats it. It isn't worth me talking about it more tbh

Tusky · 23-03-2003 10:36pm

i thought it was pretty good...had its moments and some were kinda funny

daveg · 24-03-2003 8:50am

Patrick I told you your taste was up your arse. Twas indeed a good film.

then again, what do i know

Exactly

anthonymcg · 24-03-2003 2:15pm

Originally posted by karma kabbage
Plus on top of that, it was funny. C'mon '...why can't they find girlfriends...?' and '...it's what the nerds want...' Classic quotes indeed.

Damn right. That was legend.

Saruman · 24-03-2003 2:26pm

I thought signs was very good.. would not say excellent but it was pretty damn good.. I loved 6th sense too.. however unbreakable?? I thought it was the most boring waste of my time movie i had seen since Dungeons and Dragons (not quite up to that scale of ****e!).

patch · 24-03-2003 7:39pm

unbreakable was well acted, well directed, and the story was intelligently put across. signs wasn't. maybe i was expecting some kind of twist- a clue to the twist for me was the fake ****ing alien! and what a stroke of genius to have it allergic to water.

michaelanthony · 24-03-2003 7:42pm

Signs is a bag of ****.

daveg · 25-03-2003 8:38am

and what a stroke of genius to have it allergic to water.

This coming from a man who loved *independance day where the aliens were killed by 1950's music

* I also loved independance day. This reply is mearly for flaming puposes.

dougal · 25-03-2003 9:11am

I never figured out that Signs was supposed to be a comedy!
Right it was still SHIITE!

hussey · 25-03-2003 9:21am

Originally posted by daveg
This coming from a man who loved *independance day where the aliens were killed by 1950's music

* I also loved independance day. This reply is mearly for flaming puposes.

I loved *cough* Independence day .. I thought it was V funny .. anything with jack in it is good

Saruman · 25-03-2003 9:29am

Originally posted by daveg
This coming from a man who loved *independance day where the aliens were killed by 1950's music

* I also loved independance day. This reply is mearly for flaming puposes.

Was that not Mars Attacks??

The_Bullman · 25-03-2003 9:34am

Originally posted by daveg

then again, what do i know

Exactly

Shouldn't that be

Anyway, what do I know?

gandalf · 25-03-2003 9:37am

Originally posted by daveg
This coming from a man who loved *independance day where the aliens were killed by 1950's music

* I also loved independance day. This reply is mearly for flaming puposes.

I think you'll find that was Mars Attacks which was a p!sstake :rolleyes:

Gandalf.

hussey · 25-03-2003 9:38am

Originally posted by Saruman
Was that not Mars Attacks??

yeah it was .. I presumed that what he meant (hence the * for flaming purpose)

ObeyGiant · 25-03-2003 10:30am

Originally posted by patch69
unbreakable was well acted, well directed, and the story was intelligently put across. signs wasn't. maybe i was expecting some kind of twist- a clue to the twist for me was the fake ****ing alien! and what a stroke of genius to have it allergic to water.

There wasn't much of a twist to Signs. The only 'twist' was the fact that pretty much everything in the movie happened for a reason (remember Gibson's monologue about there being 'no such thing as coincidence'?). Yes, this applies to the water thing, too.

As for the shitty CG alien - I am personally willing to forgive a bit of shoddy computer graphics, since I see the actual alien as being secondary to the point of the film. Sure, the film was centred around an alien invasion, but this was mostly just a plot device - the actual point of the film was about faith.

And yeah, I really, really enjoyed Signs.

patch · 25-03-2003 12:13pm

Finally.....Daveg unmasked as film-fact-free-****wit that he is! If your going to contradict me, at least get SOME of your facts correct.

*I know how to spell, I'm saying 'merely' for flaming purposes....

daveg · 25-03-2003 1:26pm

ahhh ****e....

I got the 2 mixed up.... ah well.....

Anyway I enjoyed sign's (he said sheepishly)

Chad ghostal · 25-03-2003 1:39pm

signs = dog turd..
all that cheesy religious crap
mel gibson went nuts there a while back after braveheart and hasnt done a good film since..

sixth sense was also carp.
unbreakable was damn good though ..

whosurpaddy · 25-03-2003 1:51pm

Originally posted by patch69
sorry, maybe i just didn't get it. On a more positive note, I just watched SESSION 9, on dvd. It's one of the best horrors I've seen in a long time. I'd say it pisses on the likes of blair witch and jeepers creepers......... then again, what do i know!

i just watched session 9 last week. thought it was shaping up to be very good.............there was loads of jumpy moments, bags of suspense.....................then it just ended ..............there was pretty much no plot resolution. it was like they ran out of budget & had to film the last 5 minutes in a day. first film ive ever seen with david caruso in it i was dissapointed in

Thorbar · 25-03-2003 1:59pm

The aliens are smart enough to make spaceships but they aren't smart enough to make waterproof suits?

patch · 25-03-2003 4:46pm

You should have seen the extras on SESSION 9, there was a sub-plot which expanded it a bit, all the deleted scenes were on it, with an alternate ending. which just impressed me all the more! I agree it was quite understated, but it reminded me of THE SHINING in the way it moved, which cant be a bad thing!

Samara · 25-03-2003 4:50pm

I thought signs was a storyline that had potential, but could have been way improved. A bit too dragged out and predictable for me.

Tom · 25-03-2003 5:08pm

I enjoyed the film to begin with. Then I got it into my head

that it was some sort of group hallucination that was brought on by something in the water but when it turned out to be aliens

, so I was a little let down and decided my plot line would have been much better.

daveirl · 25-03-2003 9:36pm

This post has been deleted.

patch · 26-03-2003 12:20pm

yeah, thats a very valid question......movies aren't real you see.
Therefore, if i see for example, what looks like a gentleman wearing a rubber suit, poorly lit-up so that i can't work out any detail, i'll say it looks 'fake'. The same can be said of seeing a poor cgi spiderman or indeed the scorpion king at the end of tne mummy returns. we're mostly all aware they don't really exist, it's when they detract from the viewing experience i question it.
ps. no I have not seen any aliens.

karma kabbage · 30-03-2003 1:14am

i don't think so much focus should be drawn to the special effects. yes it can be annoying but in the grand scale of things special effects cannot make an esscentially good movie bad. they contribute i'll grant you but fairly irrelevent.

i don't think the movie was intended to be funny and is actually classified as a thriller...but it had funny parts, unquestionably.

and i think there is a thread about session 9 on the horror board

i maintain, it was well acted and well written and thoroughly enjoyable. Reasons to dislike it, i'd put down to personal taste

Tyrrial · 30-03-2003 10:10pm

well, i thought the movie was really great and cool!
and some of the funniest things ever were said

karma kabbage · 30-03-2003 11:47pm

it's what the nerds want

evie · 04-04-2003 2:38pm

I thought it was a very good film. The atmosphere wasn't due to special effects or what the aliens looked like, it was due to the brilliant direction of the film! Personally, I didn't feel the need to show the aliens so soon, it could have been left to the very end!

echomadman · 08-04-2003 3:11pm

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

patch · 08-04-2003 4:42pm

Thats it all in a nutshell really- I rest my case!

Sev · 08-04-2003 4:49pm

Anyone with the patience, or capacity to suspend belief for 2 hours will find it a very entertaining movie. I did.

The other majority are bitter, pretentious, moany gits. Those who have to let everybody know how much they hated it, to feel better about themselves perhaps? Those who start this kind of thread.

Elmo · 08-04-2003 4:59pm

I don't think i would watch it again. Disappointing for me after Sixth Sence and Unbreakable.

I think Unbreakable was underrated and Signs very over rated.

What are the other movies by that director? M. Night Schal????

ObeyGiant · 08-04-2003 6:26pm

Originally posted by patch69
Thats it all in a nutshell really- I rest my case!

What case?
You've said you didn't get it. You've called the film "muck". That doesn't make a 'case'. I wish it did, because I'd rule at winning arguments. But it doesn't.

The only good thing to come from the URL that was posted was the Shostakovich reference - seriously, everyone should get that track.

patch · 09-04-2003 10:07am

I started off by pointing out that the film is ****e.
Of course thats just my opinion. I'm not forcing anyone to see my side,just having a bit of crack, passing time really. Which is what this forum is about i reckon. so, SEV, don't be such an insulting little boy- 'feel better about myself? pretentious? moany?'........that sounds like you buddy!

ps. obeygiant, look up the term 'figure of speech'

ObeyGiant · 09-04-2003 11:01am

But isn't part of the fun of this place the petty bickering? The childish namecalling? Where would we be if noone tried to actually make a case? That would be pretty dull:
"I liked signs"
"I didn't".
*fin*.

So, more petty bickering please!

(signs ruled)

patch · 09-04-2003 11:37am

He He:D , petty bickering it is then!
I say old chap, your dead right- the music WAS about the best thing in the movie. I didn't enjoy the movie. Neither did a lot of other people...........I could point out again where I feel the movie was lacking, but I'd just be moaning or even pretencious (!!)............................aahhhh, now I feel better about myself!

Sev · 10-04-2003 11:29pm

That was nothing personal patch96, sorry, it was just the best way to get my point accross. You see I've been through this all before, and it really bugs me why people can't just lay off that film.

When I saw Signs in the cinema, my friend beside me decided he would enter the cinema with the mindset that he was not going to like it before it ever began (because he read some bad review, most likely). He then proceeded to spend the entire movie sighing, and groaning in an effort to let everybody know how much he thought the movie was crap, and no doubt in order to stand up for and prove to me how right his view was in the beginning.

Afterwards there was much heated argument over peoples view on the movie, and I pretty much came up with that thesis I put forward already. You either really like it, or you're just out to tell everybody how much you hated it, in some kind of stance to be different, or oppose the system, its like a cry for attention.

And why is it that it's the ones who hated the movie are far more eager to let everybody know about what they thought about it, than those who really enjoyed it?

Mac daddy · 11-04-2003 7:26am

There have been better films, but it is alright for a tuesday night when there is nothing on tv, and nothing in the video shop so your stuck with this film, not that bad

patch · 11-04-2003 9:53am

No bother SEV, I'm new to the boards, in fact that was my first thread- I never saw a previous one on signs! I see your point though....... your just as likely to see positive comments from me on movies, it's just a matter of timing!

Houston Griffin · 12-04-2003 12:10pm

This is a movie no one seems to be neutral about. I liked it a lot, but many of my friends hated it. Most of those who hated it were staunch aetheists who didn't like the religious overtones of the movie. One was very religious and didn't like it due theological differences with M. Night Shyamalan's ideas about faith. One was caught up on the technical details of the alien invasion.

signs....what a pile of ****e!

Comments