<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: M. Night Shyamalan, &quot;Signs&quot; (2002).</title>
	<atom:link href="http://filmeyeballsbrain.com/2009/01/12/m-night-shyamalan-signs-2002/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://filmeyeballsbrain.com/2009/01/12/m-night-shyamalan-signs-2002/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:14:43 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: B. Vergara</title>
		<link>http://filmeyeballsbrain.com/2009/01/12/m-night-shyamalan-signs-2002/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>B. Vergara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:44:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filmeyeballsbrain.wordpress.com/?p=443#comment-60</guid>
		<description>I can barely remember the movie now, except for the fact that I was disappointed about the obviousness of the &quot;big reveal&quot; at the end. I&#039;m a sucker for alien / crop circle-type movies as well.

I did rather like &quot;The Sixth Sense&quot; and &quot;Unbreakable&quot; -- the latter more than the former, &quot;Unbreakable&quot; being a superb psychological exploration of the comic-book superhero&#039;s origin story (something always compressed to a few minutes in other movies) -- although those were only single viewings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can barely remember the movie now, except for the fact that I was disappointed about the obviousness of the &#8220;big reveal&#8221; at the end. I&#8217;m a sucker for alien / crop circle-type movies as well.</p>
<p>I did rather like &#8220;The Sixth Sense&#8221; and &#8220;Unbreakable&#8221; &#8212; the latter more than the former, &#8220;Unbreakable&#8221; being a superb psychological exploration of the comic-book superhero&#8217;s origin story (something always compressed to a few minutes in other movies) &#8212; although those were only single viewings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara Jane Reyes</title>
		<link>http://filmeyeballsbrain.com/2009/01/12/m-night-shyamalan-signs-2002/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Jane Reyes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:17:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filmeyeballsbrain.wordpress.com/?p=443#comment-59</guid>
		<description>Again, this is one of those films where we are beat over the head with the figurative. There&#039;s really no way to avoid it in Signs, as that&#039;s all the movie is about. The thing I am always asking myself is whether people really do need to have it spelled out for them; do &quot;everyday people,&quot; as M. Night has set up these folks to be, really ignore or not see the signs around them? As well, in the end, he himself is guilty of giving us a not so deep set of signs to read. This is also the problem with his later film, Lady in the Water. Goodness, what happened to M. Night? Didn&#039;t he used to be more complex than this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Again, this is one of those films where we are beat over the head with the figurative. There&#8217;s really no way to avoid it in Signs, as that&#8217;s all the movie is about. The thing I am always asking myself is whether people really do need to have it spelled out for them; do &#8220;everyday people,&#8221; as M. Night has set up these folks to be, really ignore or not see the signs around them? As well, in the end, he himself is guilty of giving us a not so deep set of signs to read. This is also the problem with his later film, Lady in the Water. Goodness, what happened to M. Night? Didn&#8217;t he used to be more complex than this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

