Signs versus the true phenomenon

There is a geometrical pattern layed down in a corn field and few glimpses of other crop circles in television. That's all "Signs" has to do with the real crop circle phenomenon. It is a tale of an ordinary family meeting a hostile alien civilisation accompanied by a philosophical dilemma. The crop circles are there only for looks.

There is a geometrical pattern layed down in a corn field... That's all "Signs" has to do with the real crop circle phenomenon

Crop circle researchers (including myself part-time) and other crop circle buffs (generally known as "croppies") have been very concerned for the false information given by the movie. Shyamalan has, perhaps unwittingly, taken quite a responsibility presenting the crop circles to the masses. The movie-goers in general know close to nothing about this extraordinary phenomenon. Those who know something, believe the Circles disappeared in early 90's when Doug Bower and Dave Chorley made their notorious confession.

This story has proven to be a clever media trick, which unfortunately convinced the masses effectively. Apparently so effectively, that Shyamalan decided to adapt the misconception of the audiences, rather than present actual up-to-date information, of which he must have been aware (the movie team interviewed circle researchers and studied the available material in advance). In the film we are given the idea that crop circles turned out to be hoaxes in early 80's, and after that they've disappeared. Neither of these statements are true (just take a look at the crop circle database at http://www.cropcircleresearch.com).

A conspiracy?

In the trailers of "Signs" photographs of actual crop circles were shown. And it was even stated that "the answer to the mystery will be given Aug 2" (the USA premiere). All this causes suspicion in the minds of croppies; is this calculated disinformation? It is not necessarily so: "Signs" and its by-products are a commercial project, where people's curiosity towards the unknown is exploited in order to make lots of money. Despite this curiosity, it is known that the majority of people (though a decreasing majority) still wishes to have rational explanations for the mysteries. Hence the true crop circles are quickly quoted as hoaxes and the alien crop circles are introduced as something new, something apparently only invented for the film. So there is calculation, but it is mostly commercial. And in the capitalistic word, this is the norm most people have accepted.

The aliens make cricket- or grasshopper-like sounds, similar to those actually recorded and heard in some crop circles.

Anyway, those familiar with the true crop circle myths and anecdotes can in the film find hidden humouristic references to reality. In addition to Graham Hess' farm, there are numerous crop circles appearing in India; in reality there are rumours of many formations in India, hidden from publicity. In "Signs" the UFOs are centered over Mexico City, which has been a hotspot for real UFO sightings since the early 90's. The aliens make cricket- or grasshopper-like sounds, similar to those actually recorded and heard in some crop circles. Of course nobody mistook these sounds for humanoid creatures talking to each other among the wheat stalks...

And what about the media coverage? Experience has proven that phenomena such as the crop circles and UFOs are not displayed in the news as openly as in this film. Is this one more attempt to increase people's confidence in the media - if something is not in the news, it doesn't exist?

Martin Keitel, 2002