You’re Stupid For Thinking The Ending Of “Signs” Is Bad

I’ve stayed quiet since 2002, but I’m past that now. I’ve got to get this off of my chest after hearing and reading so much bullshit about how M. Night Shyamalan’s movie “Signs” has a bad ending. I’ve endured this stupidity for too long, I’m going to just do a final say on it.

First, I’m not exactly a Shyamalan apologist, although I do consider myself a huge fan. “The Sixth Sense” was a great movie, “Unbreakable” was even better, and “Signs” was his best. After that, was the total nonsense of “The Village” and “Lady in the Water.” Both of those are pretty indefensible pieces of shit, although I do enjoy watching them, merely for the so-strangely-bad they’re-compelling factor. I thought that “The Happening” was a very entertaining B movie, that wasn’t aiming any higher than being a B movie, and I have not seen “The Last Airbender.”

BEWARE SPOILERS FOR THE MOVIE “SIGNS” ARE BELOW

LAST CHANCE TO AVOID SPOILERS FOR A 10-YEAR-OLD MOVIE

Now, to my point: Yes, you’re an idiot for thinking the ending is bad. Basically, the part of the ending everyone hates is when the alien invader is killed by water. Everyone always brings up the point that 70% of the Earth is made up of water, and the Aliens come to earth anyways, and they’re able to interstellar travel and they’re not wearing spacesuits, and on and on…

Here’s some questions for you dipshits:

1. Where is the scene of the alien ship?
2. Where is the scene where we see the alien driving the ship, or hell, even in it?
3. Where is the scene where you see the alien, OR a ship or any kind come from space?
4. Do you see any water BESIDES the water in the cups injure an alien?

And here’s some answers:

1. There is no visible alien ship ever seen in the movie.
2. The aliens are never seen coming or going from any ship.
3. There is no such scene.
4. No.

The point I’m trying to make is that the people ranting and raving about how the ending makes sense are coming to conclusions based on made up things. They either did not watch the movie attentively or made shit up in their minds.

Everyone complaining about the movie believes it shows that intergalactic space-aliens came down to Earth and were destroyed by water. You can also easily complain that the movie shows a race of monsters who came from the Hollow Earth, and were killed by the fluoride in drinking water. You can make both of these complaints because there is barely any information given to us at all, and what information we do get can be seen in many different ways.

The biggest sticking point for me is the idea that “water” destroys the alien, when it doesn’t. The movie doesn’t definitely say at any point that water kills the aliens, it merely shows the alien dying from the cups of water around the house. These complainers would make fucking awful scientists.

Here’s just a list of some possibilities of what killed the alien at the end:
1. A liquid of any kind (Not just water)
2. Human saliva (Remember the girl drank out of every cup of water)
3. Fluoride (That is put into some public drinking water)
4. Any mineral found in that water
5. Any bacteria found in that water

If you see where I’m going with this, then you know it’s not out of the realm of possibility for the alien to be injured and die from the water in that house, but that same alien could be unharmed when drinking both bottled water and also when swimming in the ocean – because it’s not the fucking same.

Even if I were to entertain the idea that any kind of water destroys the aliens, that doesn’t make the aliens stupid or less of a threat. It just means they are serious about what they’ve come for. They might be just the foot soldiers sent out from the higher-ups in their own society to kidnap the humans, regardless of the loss in “alien manpower” in order to achieve this end. Maybe their society needs some sort of chemical in our bodies, or our brains, or our cells to harvest in order to save their civilization. They understand the dangers of the rain, the water covering 70% of Earth, and so on, but the loss of all of their foot soldiers means nothing when stacked up against the ability to save their own race from extinction.

No one can say because there are no answers given in the movie. Their motives are not spelled out and their reasons are not explained.

I’m not putting a lot of thought into this. I understood and loved the movie immediately in the theater, and only when all these people were complaining did I realize none of them got it.

I, personally, like the saliva theory being behind the death of the aliens because it makes the ending more enjoyable. Near the end, a news broadcast explains that some people “have found a primitive method to defeat them.” I can see the scene of the alien coming up on a group of people, one of whom steps up to it, spits on it, and watches it stagger back in pain. Then the rest of his buddies just start spitting and looging on the freaking thing until it’s just a burning heap.

Oh, and the plot hole nobody gives a shit about – why doesn’t the fucking alien break out of the pantry and kill Mel Gibson’s character right there when he’s fooling around with the knife? All that’s holding it back is a flimsy pantry door.

But nobody brings that up.

Because they’re stupid.

  • Jim

    Actually, the movie makes a pretty big deal of the fact that there are spaceships. There’s the whole thing about the floating lights in the sky, and then the bird that gets knocked out of the air by invisible spaceships. Also, we have the director dropping a very big hint about the water with his whole “I don’t think they like water” monologue.

    So in conclusion… Nope, it’s still a dumb movie.

    • I know all about the alien ships. But you need to remember how and where the movie tells you about the alien ships. First, the information is given to us from the news, and from a newscaster. Of course they never get anything wrong, right? If you’ve been fortunate/unfortunate enough to see Mars Attacks (just one example), that’s what I’m referring to when I mean alien ships. Unclear lights in the sky on a news show is very different than literally seeing the aliens piloting a ship. The way we get the alien ships information is incredibly subjective in Signs. Whereas in Mars Attacks or even Independence Day, it is very objective. The bird part is also very much in the style of “sensationalist news” in order to keep the story going and keep viewers when there is literally nothing to see (since they are invisible). How did they find a single bird in just a few hours, and then determine exactly how it was injured? Really.

  • Also, it’s implied there are spaceships when Mel Gibson character and Merill are blocking doors and windows, Mel Gibson goes to his room and looks out the window and he looks up in the sky and he is frightened, they never show what it is, but it’s implied he saw an spaceship, otherwise he wouldnt be looking at the sky.

    • busylikemikey

      they do show what it is. It’s an alien standing on the roof opposite the window. Dark scene – hard to make out if there is any glare on your screen.

  • Jonn F

    the bad ending has nothing to do with water forme there just isn’t enough to the ending, where did all the aliens go?? killing 1 didn’t make thousands of spaceships over 200 cities disapear

    • The lack of explanation doesn’t mean it’s a plot hole. You are absolutely correct. We don’t find out what happens to the other aliens. If you believe killing one alien made them all retreat, that’s a perfectly valid understanding of the movie. Although to be fair, there is a radio forecast talking about people finding a primitive method to defeat them, so it’s unlikely just to be Mel Gibson and his family. You are allowed to come up with your own explanations! I like that the movie leaves those questions dangling because to me they are not required to be answered for the story to make sense or have a satisfactory ending. It’s good to not have everything explained, since it allows you to come up with your own theories.

    • Dan Shumway

      Wow. Just wow. If there are a lot of you out there, John F, wanting to have these “complete” endings all the time, Hollywood must be aware of you! Of course!! (Smacking my head). Now I know why there are so many CRAPPY movies being made!!! (And no, I won’t give you the explanation.) Sigh.

  • Bartosz Skorupa

    Well if thinking that ending was bad makes me stupid then you are really retarded for thinking that your “article” have any kind of sense. Actually your wall of text is a prove that you didnt watch or

    at least understand “Signs”.

    Where are ships? There was about them in movie, hard to miss that part. Idk how you did.
    Water is not bad for them? Oh gee that means “I don’t think they like water” thing was a lie all along.

    (If you really didnt see any water injuring alien then Iam sorry mister, but you need to new eyes.)

    “Signs” is a bad , non-logical movie even without Shyamalan “master of twists”.
    Where there was even a good movie with a bit of sense from that guy?
    I dont know what you smoke to write something like that but it must be a very good stuff…..

    Not sure if terrible troll or even worse fanboy.

    • I’ll reply even though you clearly haven’t read my “article.” I go over in exactly detail everything you brought up, including your picture (in exact words…). I don’t really think my “article” is a wall of text. It’s not really that long and I’ve personally written much longer on this site. Possibly it looked like a wall of text because you didn’t read any of it? I’ll write a bit more concise here, especially since I could have made my point clearer. This will be shorter than my “article” but unfortunately might still qualify as a wall of text to you.

      A lot of the problems people have with this movie is because they see a lack of explanation as a plot hole. I feel that dumbing the movie down to cater to this mindset would have made it worse, since then it would have been almost all exposition. To someone who agrees with your picture, what would have improved the movie is if there was some explanation on the radio or TV at the end saying: “It appears the aliens, desperate for a replacement food source, left their war torn world with limited resources to the first place they could find, our planet! Even though our oceans and rain were like acid to their skin, they had no recourse but to land here for a last ditch effort to kidnap humans and escape. Upon dissection of a dead alien, we found that they required food that was very much like human kidneys and livers, which is why they decided to stop on our planet, regardless of how dangerous it was!”

      That about explains everything, right? That would have improved the movie for you, but not me. I don’t need or want all of that explained because I enjoy the mystery and being able to come to my own conclusions. Perhaps they were not the entire alien race, but more of a scouting party? Perhaps they were going against a “Prime Directive” of sorts and making themselves known to us, to fight back against the orders of a fascist regime? I like being able to decide which of those explanations I like best. Having some cursory explanation at the end of the film would have lessened it significantly.

      Sorry for the wall of text, but for anyone looking for a bit more detail on this point, here you go.

      • Dan Shumway

        Yes, there are so many possible explanations of why things turned out the way they did, but the essential elements, the beautiful plot development which allowed the ending to be so climactic and satisfying to those of us who got it, were all there. No need to slap it down in front of us and blatantly have some guys standing around at the end saying why. I don’t think I am being very clear here, but I just know that this was a magnificent plot, wonderful directing, great acting. Shyamalan can be amazing.

  • mark adams

    That’s entirely a matter of taste whether you like movies with loose ends and unanswered questions or not. Its not retarded to draw these conclusions, such as them having a ship. Its clearly hinted. Whats not hinted at is
    ” You can also easily complain that the movie shows a race of monsters who came from the Hollow Earth, and were killed by the fluoride in drinking water.” Its dumber to ignore clues given than it is to draw conclusions from those clues to help get a clear picture.
    So Why assume more than that which is strongly emphasized by the movie? Its retarded to ignore the blatant signals regarding important facts of the movie simply because its not directly stated. If you applied that intentional ignorance to every movie you wouldnt be able to understand any. Things are rarely ever plainly explained. Movies are better enjoyed when we have to figure it out with what was given to us.
    And from that comes very simple questions.
    Like these aliens can travel in space but can’t break wood? And yes if you can die from water or be hurt from it, and expect to accomplish anything without body protection on a planet with 70% water, then you’re pretty dumb yes. even if you “really needed to come for an important reason.” Then you’re just dumb and desperate.
    Usually movies will have some sensible answers or reasoning for these questions, but signs isnt one of them, yes it was enjoyable for what it was but any kind of thought or simple questioning makes you realize how silly it is. Enjoyable yes, but also a clusterfuck that is better off left without questions.

    • Dan Shumway

      It’s so obvious from how you express yourself that you couldn’t have the perception and sensitivity to find the genius, spirit, and masterfully expressed emotions found in this script, the acting, the directing and the, once again, AMAZINGLY FANTASTIC ENDING!!!! I really feel sorry for people like you. You miss so much with your hardened, cold soul

  • Jack

    I also was not bothered by the water thing in the least. Remember, these are beings from a different planet VEEERY far away, right? Who the fuck knows what living conditions are like on their planet. Maybe they’ve never even SEEN water before, or even KNOW it could kill them because they don’t know what the hell it is. Maybe life found a way to develop and evolve on their planet in a different way then it did on ours…it would make sense since their aliens…

  • Barancy Peloma

    The author is wrong.
    Signs was an awful movie.
    He can try to defend it but, he is wrong.
    Case closed.

  • Dan Shumway

    This was the most amazing and wonderful ending to a movie in a long, long time. The way everything came together, slowly and agonizingly presented throughout the movie: Merrill saying it just always “felt right” to swing the bat, so that he had unusually tremendous swinging power, then the wife’s last words, “tell Merrill to swing away”; the little girl – the water just didn’t “taste right” and thereby placing glasses of water everywhere at the moment needed and them discovering that by seeing the water hurt the alien (how much acid is on this earth that is damaging to we natives who live here?? I mean the acid in our stomach can kill, and it’s everywhere in nature, yet we can live here – so of COURSE aliens could easily live on this planet despite the water!); the asthma attack preventing the poison from fully entering the boy’s lungs; the priest having lost his hope and belief and then being given undeniable signs and inspiration from his wife and this circumstance to fully regain that faith etc. etc. etc. The music is just PERFECT and beautiful as the climax arrives and brought a full-on flow of tears from my eyes. I just have no understanding what kind of cynics couldn’t FEEL the beauty and majesty of this ending. This reminds me of the time while watching Ordinary People and Timothy Hutton’s character has his breakthrough; I was behind a couple of teenage girls who, because the character gets angry and uses the F word there, started laughing and giggling at that very moment – obviously completely oblivious to the magnificent, climactic moment in the movie. Just pathetic. I have found that I seldom have any interest in attending movies in theaters any more. MUCH more satisfying to watch movies alone or with the one or two people who I can trust to get it (as much as I love all my family and friends, I know who has the perception and proper spirit of appreciation to embrace genius and quality in movies when they see it – I highly recommend this – and wait to see it on DVD at home rather than impatiently going to a theater, but if you must, go to a matinee with very few there and sit apart). Well, I spouted off enough, but I was just listening to the soundtrack of Signs and searching what people thought of the ending (assuming I would find nothing but glowing opinions and reviews) and came across the negativity. Happy to find your comments!