Box Office & Beyond.  Get The Numbers Here.
Lee's Movie Info > 'Signs' Secrets & Meanings    Updated: 08/14/02  

  Box Office  

  Predictions  

  Reviews  

  Articles  

  MovieTalk  

'Signs' Secrets & Meanings

Signs

by Lee Tistaert

Lee Tistaert writes: **(SIXTH SENSE & UNBREAKABLE SPOILERS)**
This is probably the biggest slap in the face I've gotten yet from Signs. It seems as though Shyamalan took the same classic dialogue formula from 6th Sense and used it again with Signs. In The Sixth Sense, one of the most memorable lines is "I see dead people", which off the bat appeared to be very simple and basic when there was whole 'nother world of meaning behind it. In Signs, Shyamalan chooses for the audience to remember "There's a monster outside my room, can I have a glass of water?" In 6th Sense, Cole says that not only because he surely does see dead people, but in that very scene, he's looking at one.

In Signs, Bo's character at the end is described as an angel like, with her birth out of the norm. She also has an ability to somehow see the events to come with her supposed "dream" line in the beginning as well as brief mentions along the way (which backs up the idea that she could be an angel).  When she asks for a glass of water that one night following the site of the monster, she may very well be asking for it so she can use it in defense. Bo may know that water is the aliens' weakness all along. Why does she leave half empty glasses of water around the house? It looks to be a subtle hint that she understands what's to come at the climax. Once again, M. Night Shyamalan looks to have hammed in a very simple dialogue etched into our memory that has a bit more meaning than the eye can see.

Also, anyone catch the strikingly familiarity in that Bruce Willis' character in Unbreakable had water as his weakness too? And if you think about it, all three films (The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable and Signs) have the same theme of someone discovering their purpose in life. Which if you think about it, can be applied to Shyamalan's own life as well, as his career was far from gold in the early days before writing 6th Sense.

Adding to that, there's been some speculation about Bo not being human. But possibly, an alien herself. If you look at the facts, she doesn't like water but it doesn't appear as though she is hurt when she sips (a question to ponder). However, the sheriff states that the animals in the county have been acting funny and almost as if they smell a predator around. In the beginning segment, their family dog is scared but when Morgan and Bo are trying to have it drink some water out of its bowl, the dog attempts to attack Bo...as if she's a predator?

On the matter, 'deja_account' wrote...
"Also, building up on your theory that Mel's wife was an alien - could it be that the daughter (Bo) in fact was one? Witness her discomfort with water, or her out of ordinary birth -- could it be that this was the original twist that was discarded in a script rewrite?"

This seems to be a very intriguing concept to pose, as going into my April screening of Signs, my basic prediction was that Bo, or one of the family members, was in fact an alien and that the alien invasion was to bring back the one member that was "one of them". This theory came to play when I started thinking about 6th Sense and Unbreakable similarities in their twists months back. The Sixth Sense was told in the fashion where you thought the point of the movie would sit within our main character, Cole, when the trick was played on the character beside him, Malcolm. In Unbreakable, many of us expected a reason behind Willis not being hurt consistently when the twist was on Samuel L. Jackson, the character sitting beside our main character. So if you had taken that into consideration, you could have placed a theory that the switch wouldn't be played on Mel Gibson, but maybe a family member.

After viewing the full trailer following the preview screening of Signs, I realized that there's a moment where the sheriff in a voice-over explains that the animals are acting as if predators are around just when the dog is jumping up at Graham (as if he himself is a predator). It's as if 'deja_account' is correct and that maybe Shyamalan had originally written Bo as a full blown extra terrestrial not where she belongs. But instead of shoving the answer clear into our face, decided to change it around and hint at the matter to lead moviegoers into post-discussions. Which like Memento, is more effective than saying "here's the answer", as we talk and talk about it, trying to figure out the logics involved and if all the pieces match up. This is where the fun begins, as the filmgoers who love to discuss the meanings behind such films go nuts.

Also on the matter, the point that makes Signs different and more remarkable from the other two of Shyamalan's major releases is that this is much more open to interpretation and we have no straightforward twist brought to our attention. But more so, possibly hidden interpretations that can be found after investigating facts. Night could have followed through with another twist but doesn't walk the cliché route where he could be viewed to be predictable in the storytelling for those who picked up on his previous twist patterns.

I may very well be too "into" the details behind Signs, but I figure, might as well bring the ideas to the table for whatever they're worth, if anything at all. Adding to that, anyone pick up on Morgan himself being a little clairvoyant with something along the lines of "it's going to go into history books" line right before the newscaster says this? I talked with someone who claimed it was purely a joke, but you have to recognize that both children had moments of these psychic abilities. Along with that, Morgan and Bo are seen wearing (alien) tinfoil hats claiming "so the aliens can't read our minds". Is it probable that both children are in fact extra terrestrials of some sort and are serious when they don't want the aliens to know what they are thinking? Consider why the alien at the end grabs Morgan; because he is a good extra terrestrial and it's Judgment Day?

Merrill is also seen wearing a tinfoil hat for humor purposes, and whether or not he is "one of them" is a question to behold but nothing offhand appears to line up with the logics of that. And adding to that thought, it almost appeared as though Shyamalan may have inserted these subtle hints/clues behind laughter deliveries to hide the "donning" from filmgoers until the later discussions; almost like a shield. JPK mentioned to me that the script appeared a little staged, possibly cueing into the possibility.

Anyone notice the brief details in the introduction to Signs? It appears as though Graham awakes from a bad dream in the opening shot. This is just moments prior to when Bo asks him if he was in her dream too. Is there a connection (more of a rhetorical query, as I don't have an answer yet)?

As it is just coming to mind, it seems as both Unbreakable and Signs have the interesting similarity where both villains are seen in some sort of reflection in the first official spotlight. Elijah all grown up is seen through the art frame's reflection while the alien at the end of Signs is spotted through the television reflection.

On a side note, Shyamalan's character notes in his car that he doesn't think aliens like water. How would he know this exactly? Is it purely because the crops are far from the substance?


russel.webster writes:
First of all, my theory is based on the radio report after the night in the basement. I believe what the reporter says is that they took his son. If this is so, I believe the movie is a new telling of the Passover story with the angels of death coming for all the first born of the disbelievers.
 
Or the Passover story in the Bible is a written record of when the aliens last came to harvest humans.
 
I do not believe his wife is an alien; if anything she is a good angel as opposed to a bad angel.
 
I base the first theory on the fact that the aliens stopped attacking the basement when Gibson began speaking to God. That was when he accepted His existence and became a believer again. The scene at the end with the stand-off with the alien just helps to confirm to him God's existence and gave him a reason why his wife died.

Lee Tistaert writes:
These thoughts keep coming up, and the latest one from me is: anyone notice the distinct similarity between the Bates residence in Psycho to the Hess family home in Signs? And given Night's overly evident homage to Hitchcock throughout the feature, was Psycho an influence to construct the house? And even adding to that point, Psycho had an underground layer where the Bates house had a secret in store. If Bo was originally or even in the official version is an extra terrestrial herself, could this have been the Hess' house secret? Also take into consideration that the Bates motel was for the most part out of civilization when Graham's location is in similar circumstances (his house was more so not within easy reach of other homes, of what was evident).

plps writes:
Before the movie's release, Mel Gibson was quoted as saying that Shyamalan "dropped only four minutes from the rough cut [of Signs]." Now, this doesn't seem like much time but we learned from Shyamalan's last two movies that sometimes only one or two minutes (at the end of the films in that case) can make a world of difference. The four minutes that were cut were probably similar to the cut scenes form "Unbreakable" in that they only added character development and were cut because they slowed the movie down. 

We know this: the line of Merrill saying "what could make a geometric shape the size of a football field" was used in the commercials but not in the movie (I don't think). So what could happen in those few minutes that were cut? Is it enough time to include a subplot or major plot twist? Probably not, because Mel Gibson didn't mention anything more about the cut material, but you never know...


trevorvos writes:
Just reading this page of speculation and ideas has made me want to see the film again. The ideas surrounding dreams, angels, the apocalypse, and Bo are very intriguing. I thought for a moment that Bo was Jesus, the 2nd coming. "The little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes." I know this is a song, not the bible, but still...

This being the apocalypse is the most interesting idea of all. There is a series of books called Left Behind in which at the apocalypse some are taken and some are left behind. I suppose this isn't just from the books but is a theory that many believe. Whether or not Signs is confirming that theory, I'm not sure. I was very surprised at the rather blatant message of Signs. Those who believe are the good guys, those who don't are the bad guys. It seemed to be a very Christian message and I wonder how an atheist might view this movie.

As far as what the movie actually tells us, minus speculation, I think that Bo has dreams, sees visions, knows some things, but doesn't know why she knows them. She is still a child. She isn't God...yet?


rgl2112 writes:
After seeing the movie for the second time tonight, I could not help but notice the many instances of Bo's premonitions, or feelings. To her, the whole thing seemed like a big deja vu.  Okay, perhaps she dreamed some of the events, such as Morgan's asthma attack  "I dreamed this" etc. From the beginning we seem to be in her mind. Her first line is, "Are you in my dream too?" as she says to Graham in the field. Some other examples: Houdini bares his teeth at her and Morgan saves her. The monster is outside her room as she talks about her mother. She has a feeling that Morgan is going to die. To her, contaminated water = acid to the aliens...There are so many now that I really think about how many times her psyche is revealed through a one liner.

Maybe she dreamed the whole movie and we are viewing the subconscious thoughts of a five year old. Perhaps this is her way of dealing with the loss of her mother. Who knows, but a great story, as I am still getting chills after Friday night and tonight...I don't want to walk outside and thank God I don't live near a cornfield.

Lee Tistaert's response:
Isn't Bo's line, "were you in my dream too?" or something like that? As in, in the past tense? I may be wrong, but I could've sworn she said as in the past. I do remember Graham briefly mentioning "this isn't a dream" but he doesn't fully complete the sentence (hence, a possible avoidance to fully confront the audience). Going back to 'rgl2112', are we living in a dream?

Signs Secrets Continued >>

Email: