![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
coalescentThe short version: Better than The Sixth Sense, not as good as Unbreakable.
I tried my best to avoid spoilers for Signs, but by the time I got around to seeing it I knew: (a) aliens put in an appearance at the end, and (b) Mel Gibson finds his faith. I also knew opinions of the film were mixed, to say the least.
I thought it was flat-out great.
I thought the aliens looked fine. With the information I had when I went in, I was terrified that they were going to turn out to be misunderstood good guys, but that didn't happen. As for the method by which they are defeated, well - it ties beautifully into the film's central theme, and it is a lovely homage to The War Of The Worlds. And if still you want a fanwank to explain why aliens would invade a planet where three quarters of the surface is water, it would be trivial to argue that they are only demonstrably affected by fresh water...
The film's theme is for many, I suspect, where most of the problems arise. Gibson's character, having lost his faith after the arbitrary death of his wife in a car accident, regains it. There are too many coincidences involved in the saving of his son's life - the fact that his daughter leaves glasses of water all over the house, the son's asthma - for him to see it as chance. He has to see it as a sign; it's who he is.
And that's precisely why I think it works. It's who he is. It's not who everyone is - the film makes it quite clear that where some people see signs, others merely see chance. It's not who everyone should be - the indictment of people who see coincidences as being alone and afraid does, after all, come from Gibson's character, who might be expected to be a tad bitter on the subject. Signs is a personal story; it's about how one man copes with extraordinary circumstances.
And it is a fine, fine slice of SF.
I tried my best to avoid spoilers for Signs, but by the time I got around to seeing it I knew: (a) aliens put in an appearance at the end, and (b) Mel Gibson finds his faith. I also knew opinions of the film were mixed, to say the least.
I thought it was flat-out great.
I thought the aliens looked fine. With the information I had when I went in, I was terrified that they were going to turn out to be misunderstood good guys, but that didn't happen. As for the method by which they are defeated, well - it ties beautifully into the film's central theme, and it is a lovely homage to The War Of The Worlds. And if still you want a fanwank to explain why aliens would invade a planet where three quarters of the surface is water, it would be trivial to argue that they are only demonstrably affected by fresh water...
The film's theme is for many, I suspect, where most of the problems arise. Gibson's character, having lost his faith after the arbitrary death of his wife in a car accident, regains it. There are too many coincidences involved in the saving of his son's life - the fact that his daughter leaves glasses of water all over the house, the son's asthma - for him to see it as chance. He has to see it as a sign; it's who he is.
And that's precisely why I think it works. It's who he is. It's not who everyone is - the film makes it quite clear that where some people see signs, others merely see chance. It's not who everyone should be - the indictment of people who see coincidences as being alone and afraid does, after all, come from Gibson's character, who might be expected to be a tad bitter on the subject. Signs is a personal story; it's about how one man copes with extraordinary circumstances.
And it is a fine, fine slice of SF.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-09-19 05:21 pm (UTC)...yeah. Thanks for that Night.
I liked, nay loved, everything else. Which makes the fact that I find the moral message repugnant and hamfisted doubly annoying.