Talk:Signs (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???
This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Most of you 'dumb' people fail to understand the main story

The aliens in movie are not here to invade or to enslave humans. They are here for peace. During the final battle scene you can clearly see that alien does not even know how to fight. And its not god that rescues the child, its the alien that saves the boy by spraying that gas(its like the gas of an inhaler). The poor aliens do not even know the concept of war. They just could'nt tell the humans that they were here for peace and not war. Humans without knowing their intentions, attack and kill them. The movie had a sad ending and it showed how ruthless and barbaric humanity is, who always go for voilence whereas aliens do not even know of fighting and stuff. That was the massage of the story.

If you payed attention to the movie you would know they are there to attack the gas the alien sprays is poison as mentioned before a lot of people died from it. It doesn't affect the child because his lungs were closed due to severe asthma therefore he did not breathe it in. Get your facts straight next time before having a wild guess. Ps that is not what the story is about it is about human emotions andthe theory that there are no coincidences.-MACHETE

[edit] Structure

NPOV: The last part of this section is extremely biased, and reads like opinion, particularly: "The last five minutes are exuberantly thrilling".

[edit] Criticisms

I deleted a large chunk of the "Criticisms" section, because it looked like a debate, not actual criticisms, and was mostly filled with defences against the criticism(s). "People criticize this," "Others counter with this," "Which is countered with this," is fine to do, just not in the article. Capitan Obvio 08:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I added a brief paragraph describing another theory in the criticisms section which I've heard. I feel that it may be too strongly biased against those who hold the theory, but I'm coming up blank on other ways to word it. I actually think it's a fairly nice idea, even if there is no supporting evidence from the film. (I also realize now that I wasn't signed in at the time of editing. Oops.) Anjldust 06:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

This section fails to mention what is hinted at in the movie, the aliens weren't there for the planet, only the people to be used as slaves or whatever so their weakness to water isn't really a factor, just an obstacle. NeoRicen 08:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a source for this theory?  -- Run!  08:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
After the night locked in the basement, they awake and have a radio working. Merrill explains that the radio said they "weren't there for the planet" but just to "harvest". This could mean harvesting supplies, harvesting humans for food, or taking slaves. Since the aliens seemed to be portrayed as a direct threat to humans and "a lot of people died" one would think the harvesting supplies option unlikely. Harvesting humans for food seems unlikely due to the extremely different psysiology of the aliens, which would probably not be able to digest human tissue. Slave labor seems the most likely to me. This would be yet another reason that technology wouldn't be used (they don't want to kill ALL of them at least, and they don't want to have it fall into human hands so humans don't get any tech for their next visit in who-knows-how-long). Bizarre cultural or psychological reasons are also good (and a great part of the mystique of the aliens is not being able to figure out why they do what they do IMO).

--Daniel 00:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hidden messages

I removed the "hidden message" section as I watched the movie yesterday to find it. The "holes" "punctured in the house" were actually from the roof of a swing set. I would guess that the character used this roof as one of the boards to seal up the house, not that the aliens were "spying" on them early on in the film. I think it was just one person's opinion, and this person even said: "This has never been mentioned or explained." which is another way of saying that he/she has no reference to back this theory up.

Makes sense to me. --Delf 22:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signs 2

I'm not sure that Signs 2 is going to be a real movie. I found nothing about it on IMDB or anywhere on the internet other that Wikipedia. --LCpl 16:55, 2 June 2006 (EST)

[edit] Trivia: The Kids Births

I seem to recall reading or hearing somewhere that the stories Graham tells Morgan and Bo about their births were about the births of Night's own children. Fact or fiction? Morhange 06:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Obscure reason why water kills the aliens...

Okay, this is original reserch, not documented, but I think there is a very good reason why water wasn't dangerous to the aliens at first, then became deadly. The movie was about regaining faith... in god or life or whatever. The family was tainted by the mother's death. The aliens left the planet shortly after everybody on Earth began to pray to their gods. In the Catholic Church, water is used to hold the blessings of God (Holy Water).

I say (and maybe I am wrong) God saw fit to bless all the water on the planet when he saw every person turn to him, making the water burn evil. Faith saved everybody except the father, until the last alien rekindled his faith, making the water in his house deadly, too. 68.48.174.136 04:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember the water ever being non-harmful to the aliens...the only time an alien touched water, he died. I think it's just because their bodies aren't chemically made to withstand water. ~ Butros (Talk) 07:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't understand how water can be deadly, it has a neutral pH. I guess the aliens must not be carbon based lifeforms, I don't think M. Night Shamalan thought much about that though lol
first, water was always harmful to them. remember when M.Night's character said that he was heading down to the lake cause the creatures don't seem to like water? second, how does their not being carbon biased mean that M.Night didn't think about it much? and third, WHY CAN"T I FIND A COMPLAINT ABOUT HOLLYWOOD CREATING SUCH A BLAINTENTLY PRO-JESUS FILM?!?!?!?!?! o, and fourth, if they wanted us for slaves they wouldn't have killed everyone that the took.J.L.Main 02:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • You would think the water vapor in the atmosphere would be enough to kill them. I blame Mel Gibson overall.

While debating this with some friends, I really couldn't accept any of their explanations as plausible. There's water in the air, water in the ground. 75% of our planet is made of water. It's ALL WATER. You'd think, even if they were away from lakes and such, that there would be soft ground with moisture...and, again, the air. There's always moisture in the air. I questioned the contradiction presented by an interstellar traveling alien race who tries, stupidly, to take a planet that is comprised mostly of a substance that is fatal to them. One of my friends said they might have a slight immunity, through exposure on other planets or even sampling from Earth, that would protect them from the little water in the air but not a concentrated source. I don't think so. Theoretically, they were only there for a short time before attacking...and while an immunity might explain why the humidity didn't hurt them, it doesn't explain the lack of logic in their selection of a planet to take. The fact that they tried to avoid the water while planning the attack removes the possibility that they didn't know...and seeing as they "observed" us, they would know that we have access to water in most of our homes. It just doesn't check. I like the movie, not for the pro-religious qualities, but from a pure directing standpoint. There are some good scenes, good acting, and really a good idea. Were I religious, I would appreciate the meaning of all the inconveniences and wrongs in their life, and the eventual rediscovery of God. But I'm not. And the alien contradiction gets to me. Stupid. 68.114.69.217 21:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Having taking chemistry I can think of a few substances that react with water. You must also remember that water is a polar molecule, which can strongly interact with other polar molecules. In your body, all your cells are separated from the outside environment by a layer of non-polar molecules. It's easy to imagine life forms that don't have this kind of protection (but do have protection from other things unknown to us). Or, you could just think it's a movie, suspend belief and simply think it make sense inside its own universe (which most science fiction must do at some degree). 130.39.63.231 13:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I was honestly surprised to find that this article lacks a criticism section. I thought it was a decent film with many aspects that I enjoyed but found that the aliens' weakness to water was by far the worst oversight of the film. From this talk page at least it seems I'm not alone. I mean with humidity, mud, fine.. lets give 'em the benefit of the doubt... but what if it RAINED!? Surely theres a source out there that we could use? TCB007 13:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Everything around you can be exposed to liquid water without taking harm? Oh come on people think! Build a sand castle, it may exist for quite a while until it dissolves when exposed to liquid water. Water vapor and humidity are not the same as liquid water! You can breath in rather humid air without harm yet you will drown after some time under water, thus water can kill even human beings. You actually need water to make things out of clay or mud and yet they will dissolve when made really wet. There are a lot of other things that may be stable if not exposed to liquid water such as sugar lumps or crystals or things with an high content of salt. Other things react rather violently with liquid water such as soda or natrium, Never had one of them pills that you can keep for ages and yet they start dissolving with bubbles if you pour water on them? As a mater of fact I do remember some clothes that started falling apart when the got wet enough. Toilet paper is designed such that it easily dissolves when wet in contrast to paper handkerchiefs or paper tissues used in the kitchen. As for going to places that are harmful, don't humans do that all the time to get something valuable? Think of mining for gems or other minerals in harsh environments. People have dived for ages to collect things underwater like mollusks or sponges, knowing all the time that after some minutes they will drown if they don't return to the surface. Humans have exposed themselves to UV-light from the sun or radiation without dropping dead at once, though if exposed long enough they might have died from cancer some time after the incident. Some did this in Chernobyl knowing they will die (not all were fully aware of the real consequences though). A lot is made of the corn circles in the film as signs used by the aliens. Where do we find these? Corn and other cereals usually grow in places that have a rather dry season of some extant, especially towards harvest time. Well if I was a water shy alien I think looking for places with corn fields is a better option for finding lots of humans in a rather dry environment than scanning some scarcely populated desert or venturing to some rainy harbor town. I wont say everything is fully logical in the film but it really isn't that stupid. --T.woelk 12:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] why this is the worst movie ever

why would aliens invade aplanet that is 2/3 water? why didn't the water in the atmosphere kill them instantly? --128.205.161.150 06:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Toxicity doesn't have to be all or nothing. Many lifeforms on earth are perfectly capable of tolerating moderate amounts of toxic or acidic substances, without instantly dying (Ever go swimming in a pool that uses chlorine? Did it kill you?). The same reasoning can be applied to alien life, and explain why these guys don't seem to be drastically affected by humidity. Of course, maybe they simply use some sort of alien "sunscreen" that can handle normals amounts of humidity, but not contact with liquid water.

As for why they would invade a planet that's so dangerous to them, maybe they just can't afford to be picky. Planets with useful lifeforms/slaves are probably thousands of light-years apart, and these guys don't seem to have faster than light travel.

(the preceding comments should not be taken as evidence that the poster actually liked the movie) Prgrmr@wrk 05:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


It's kinda dumb tough. They have the legstrength to jump on rooftops but they don't seem to be able to kick down a door?

Wiki isn't a forum. This discussion isn't appropriate. 64.236.121.129 (talk) 21:33, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Structure" and speculative statements

The whole section "Structure" is a non standard Wikipedia:WikiProject Films section. It is redundent (just repeats stuff in the plot summery) and it is full of interpretation of the original film. I have removed most of the major original or non-cited statements. The whole section seems to be tipping towards the "Original Research Event Horizon" (something like the "Spam Event Horizon", if there is such a thing} Removed that last paragraph, the first sentence makes an unsupported statement, and the rest is speculation as to what conditions the aliens would react to. I notice from the talk above that this "waterphobic aliens" used to be a big part in this article under "Criticism". The author should consider re-adding a section like that if he/she wants to add a critical statement ("Criticism" is a valid heading under Wikipedia:WikiProject Films). 69.72.2.72 00:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Too bad. I came to read this article to see what other people interpreted of the movie. At least I still have the talk page. 130.39.63.231 13:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

You also have the History[1]. External links at the bottom of the article will lead you to what the critics thought. If you are looking for what other fans thought then you are reading the wrong website, this is an encyclopedia, not a fan site. 69.72.2.72 19:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


I have removed the section "Structure" to talk below. This is an interpretation of the movie, whose is it? The section has no Attribution which makes it Original Thought. As I noted above it is also a redundant plot description. 69.72.2.71 (talk) 03:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


==Structure==
The story is presented chronologically except for the scenes detailing the death of Graham's wife. There are several of these flashbacks, sometimes repeating the same footage, but progressively revealing more details. The film's dramatic structure resembles others of its genre (especially Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds) but with some surprises, notably its exploration of the deeper psychological and religious aspects of human-felt terror. One of the first images we see is a cross-shaped "clean spot" on the wall of Graham's bedroom. We infer that the cross was removed when the death of Graham's wife precipitated his crisis of faith, yet its image remains. People can't stop calling him "Father", though he asks them not to, and a girl in town insists he hear her confession. Most poignantly, throughout the building terror, Graham's family looks to him for pastoral reassurance, which he can't (or won't) provide.
The suspense builds slowly at first, though not without foreboding (early on, Houdini, one of the Hess' family dogs, is skewered with a barbecue fork). Graham insists the family go about its business normally, but the children quickly size up the impending alien invasion, finally confirmed by worldwide television coverage. A pivotal dramatic moment is the late-night whispered exchange between Graham and Merrill, in which each stakes out his philosophical position on the impending tragedy.
The twist at the end of Signs is a little different from Shyamalan's other films, like The Sixth Sense. In those films, some important fact is withheld from the audience until the end; in Signs, it is the meaning of the facts that is revealed. As the family battles the now-visible enemy, the disconnected details of the story (Morgan's asthma, Bo's placing of multiple cups of water around the house, Colleen's apparently nonsensical last words) all come to rapid-fire convergence with Graham's understanding of the "signs".
Thus the title itself is a double entendre referring to the crop signs made by the aliens, and the revelations Graham had.

[edit] Spoiler Warning

Hey I noticed that the spoiler warning here is in the plot. After looking at Wikipedia: Spoiler_warning and Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#plot I'm going to remove it from that section. If you have any objections reply below or let me know on my talk page. Thanks! Jussen 22:34, 19 May 2007 (UTC)