Error in Signs ( beyond plot, acting)

[Hamburger Pimp]

Alright, this has been bothering me for a while, and no one on here seems to have noticed it yet...  In Signs, (which I think is terrible, by the way) during the scene where Mel Gibson is telling the kids about their "birth stories," which is supposed to be a tense moment, I guess, a boom mike dips into the shot very briefly.  Then in the next shot of the same scene, the boom comes in again, and damn near HITS MEL IN THE HEAD!!!  I didn't notice this the first time I saw it, but on a repeat viewing (the humanity!!! why!!!)  I swear its there.  The second boom is on the screen for at least a few seconds - very noticeable in my opinion.  I haven't rented it to confirm this, but I swear it’s in there.  I can't bring myself to watch it again.  Has anyone else noticed this, or am I completely crazy???

Thanks,

The Hamburger Pimp

[Foywonder]

If you saw a boom mike in the shot at the theater it was the fault of the projectionist not having the film framed properly and not the filmmaker's fault.

[Scott]

They don't actually show any spacecraft in this movie. Maybe that was meant to be an alien spacecraft. ;) I liked SIGNS. One of the better films of 2002.

[Hamburger Pimp]

That seems like a reasonable explanation, for the first one at least, but the second time, it was really, really, close to Gibson.  I guess if they cut it very tight on the VHS/DVD you wouldn't see it, but the definatly had to take off the top of his head to do it!

[lonecorndog]

Scott,
I am so glad that SOMEBODY besides me on here liked Signs. I agree; I love M. Night (will not attempt to spell that last name)'s work and Signs was great.


"Supplies!"

[Evan3]

Signs???? A good movie????
You guys scare me.
The only good M. Night movie was Unbreakable, 6th Sense was merely decent.

[Brother Ragnarok]

I don't think I could sit through that steaming load again, even to look for such a great shot.  I remember there were a bunch of really obvious boom mike shots in The Others as well, which was another awful movie.
I liked Signs better the first time when it was really cool and called Day of the Triffids.

Brother R

[Neville]

This movie had many obvious holes, but despite this I found it rather enjoyable. Shymalan (correct spelling?)'s filmmaking made it so.

[nshumate]

Here are the two big, big things that bothered me about Signs:

1) What were the signs, anyway?  The only theory advanced is that they're landmarks.  You mean things like large bodies of water, huge urban centers, etc., are meaningless to whoever's driving the saucer, but put some concentric circles in an out-of-the-way cornfield, and suddenly they know, "Turn Right This Exit"?  (No, don't tell me; the men were driving, right?)

2) See if you can find the flaw in this invasion plan:

"We will invade a planet which is 2/3 covered with a substance which is deadly to us, where that same subtance falls from the sky regularly and condenses on leaves in the morning, where every inhabitant has easy access to it, and is in fact largely composed of it.  We will then walk around naked."

(And that's not even touching the whole "The aliens gave me back my faith in God" falderall.)

[The Burgomaster]

Nathan - If you think the invasion plan was ridiculous, try to imagine the part of the movie they DIDN'T show you. There was a scene where someone says that "a primitive method was discovered to defeat the aliens."

All I can imagine is a bunch of guys lined up with hoses spraying water on the aliens. Imagine if THAT scene was in the movie.

But, for the record, SIGNS entertained me, even if it did have plot holes big enough to drive a truck through.

*
*
*
*

[Chadzilla]

The Burgomaster wrote:
>
> Nathan - If you think the invasion plan was ridiculous, try
> to imagine the part of the movie they DIDN'T show you. There
> was a scene where someone says that "a primitive method was
> discovered to defeat the aliens."
>
>

This was a posting I read over at another site (scifilm.org) about the whole water thing...I thought it was pretty interesting.

Here's a thought that me and my friends have wondered about.

What if it's not water, plain water, but blessed holy water only.

The little girl is weird. They make reference to her being "an angel"

The dog only barks at her.

She touches her lips to the water and leaves the glass around.

Ready and waiting. Knowing that it will be needed.

The rumour could spread "something about water they don't like"
but it's obvious that ordinary water isn't a problem for them, or they
couldn't run around in a dew covered cornfield, now could they?

They mention on the radio about people in the Holy Land figuring out
some "age old" thing to get rid of them.

Holy water....thrown at demons.

[Funk, E.]

Tee-hee... Yeah, good ol' Signs. Now there's one for the logic circuits. As for the crop Circle thing. It could be argued that in additiont to being landmarks they might also say provide information like "gas, food, lodging, 4.5 million inhabitance, etc."

The Holy Water thing would make sense IF (and only if) Mel baby had BLESSED the water. Which he didn't. Besides... why in the (explicative deleted) would aliens be effected by water with a few words said in it's presence? The movie is dumb enough to accept a logic like that though...

[nshumate]

It's always a bad sign when the audience has to build a huge, Rube-Goldbergian logic scaffold to support the moviemakers' work.

[peter johnson]

Wahhh!
I still haven't seen "Signs", but I own the DVD of "The Others".  I'm sorry, but I really really like this film.  So what if it's a remake of "The Innocents"?  -- I like "The Innocents", too, by the way.
I don't recall seeing any boom shots in either the cinema/theatrical version or on the DVD.  Where should I be looking?  What scenes?  Actually, I think I'm quite good at spotting errors in films -- don't see any in "The Others", though I may just not be looking hard enough.
peter johnson

[Evan3]

Peter I will agree with u that the Others was a great movie, muych better than anything M. Night has come up with. Too bad alot of people think the Others is based on the 6th sense