The Birds

There is a kind of theory according to which a horror or thriller film would lose all its frightening effect if it did not have a musical support as a backdrop, and its greater or lesser intensity regulates the viewer's tension levels. And this is true, at least in most of these types of movies. But there is always an exception that proves the rule. In The Birds, an iconic film by director Alfred Hitchock (inspired by the eponymous short story by Daphne du Maurier), such musical intrusion was dispensed with, as the director wanted to give voice to these apparently harmless beings that terrorize the population of Bodega Bay (Bernard Herrmann appears in the credits only as sound consultant). The film, which dates from 1963, continues to promote an intense discussion about its meaning and the most varied hypotheses have been put forward, since the ending is left open, with the birds victoriously watching the removal of humans (of course Hitchcock knew that not giving an explanation would contribute to accentuating the mystery and interest that the film arouses, it is not his best film, but it is certainly one of the most enigmatic). Choosing the blonde on duty (one of my favorites) was also a winning bet. Tippi Hedren, the unlikely heroine, perfectly plays the role of the fragile young woman, who is able to stand up to the bloodthirsty bird though. Her image of scared eyes and disheveled hair covering herself with her hand is memorable. As far as I am concerned, the scene dominated by the couple of lovebirds always comes to mind, swinging along the curves, in the convertible on the way to Bodega Bay, inside a cage, without having the right to enjoy the landscape, as a trigger for the revolt of the birds.

What if..... imagine the unthinkable happened, and all of a sudden, The Birds attacked....

You have to hand it to Hitchcock, he knew how to scare people, by taking the ordinary, the everyday, and twisting it around, and making it scary, he did that pretty much to perfection here.

So the first half of the movie is slow, it's almost sedate, not a lot actually happens, however the second half is completely different, you can only imagine what audiences back in 1963 thought, as of 2022 it still terrifies.

It looks really good, the special effects for the time actually hold up very well.

Tippi Hedren is impressive as Melanie, it's a very sincere, strong performance.

The next time you put some bird food out for the jackdaws and magpies.....just wonder what if, what if the unthinkable did actually happen!

Great hooror from the real master of suspense, 9/10.

Melanie Daniels meets Mitch Brenner at a pet shop where he has come to buy some birds for his young sister. They have a conflict of words but he sparks her interest and she travels up to his small town to see him again. Daniels stays in the town for the weekend despite the tension between her and Brenner's mother. However this is not the only source of worry as the locals begin to notice that the birds are acting out of character and showing signs of aggression.

I came to this film because my mother mentioned she was scared of birds as a result of seeing this when she was young. So I went for it with highs hopes that were not disappointed on the whole. The basic plot is just that – basic. But it allows plenty of disturbing scenes of bird attack as well as a nice slow build. The effects have dated and it doesn't look as impressive now, but it still has an impact. More importantly the film has a rich side-plot about themes that carry over from Psycho about mother's and sons. Not quite as far out as that film, this still has plenty of meat for anyone looking to analyse it further.

Hedren is OK in the lead but I found her to be just giving the same performance as every `dangerous blonde' does in Hitchcock films. But she is the predator of the film and she does it pretty well. Taylor is a good stock B movie actor type but looking at him I couldn't help picturing Cary Grant doing the role and it took away from Taylor. Tandy looked old even then, but she does really well with a complex role of the mother. Pleshette is a little annoying but still ok

Most people see this as a horror film, but it is much more than that. The ending is quite low key but it worked well with the overall feeling of menace in the birds, but it's worth remembering that this is not the ending Hitchcock wanted. His first choice, the Golden Gate bridge covered in birds, couldn't be done due to a tight budget.

Overall this is a great bit of Hitchcock that works on several levels. The horror will have you sweating when walking through groups of pigeons in city centres and the subtext will keep you in the pub for several hours.

Hitchcock bragged that The Birds was pure fantasy, with no connection to real life (as we know it). I've seen this movie a few times and I still wonder what it "means," if it has a specific meaning. It might just be a horror film about preternatural killer birds, but I humbly suggest that it might, in a sense, be an allegory about the Nuclear Paranoia of the era. Not an exact allegory like "Pilgrim's Progress," but perhaps a parable, or a fable if you like, with the birds standing in for all those forces ready to kill innocent people for no good reason. "The Birds" is so richly suggestive that there's an Oedipal theme as well, and some hints that Mitch isn't a very admirable guy, and so on... very Kubrickian, but predating "2001" by 4 or 5 years. It's a film that can simply entertain, or frighten, or hold one's interest, without begging for interpretation. But it's fun to wonder what the writer and director were thinking, and how much the actors/actresses knew of the artistic intent of the filmmakers. It's interesting too that after "Psycho," with its classic musical score, Hitchcock made "The Birds" a 2-hour film with no music - except the squawks, clucks and cries of The Birds. Wonderful picture.

Despite spending most of his career within the realms of the thriller genre, Alfred Hitchcock hasn't restricted himself where variation is concerned. Most of his best work represents a different type of thriller, and The Birds is no different. It is often said that Psycho is Hitchcock's first foray into the horror side of the thriller, and it is indeed; but it's not the complete horror film that The Birds is. Often cited as an obvious influence for Night of the Living Dead, The Birds follows Melanie Daniels as she travels to the seaside town of Bodega Bay with a pair of lovebirds for Mitch Brenner, an eligible bachelor that she met in a pet shop in San Francisco. However, while there the birds of the coastal town begin to attack the residents and so begins a terrifying tale of man's feathered friends waging a war against humanity...

It could be said that the plot of The Birds is ridiculous, and it is. The idea of birds, a type of animal that isn't aggressive, attacking humans despite living with us for millions of years is preposterous and is never likely to happen. However; it is here where the film's horror potency lies. Birds live with us in harmony; we're so used to them that for the most part we don't even realise that they're there, and the idea of something that we don't notice suddenly becoming malicious is truly terrifying. Especially when that something is unstoppable, as the birds are portrayed as being in this film. The fact that the birds' motive is never really explained only serves in making it more terrifying, as it would appear that somewhere along the line they've just decided to attack. Of course, the film could be interpreted as having Melanie's arrival, or the presence of the lovebirds as the cause for it all; but we don't really know. This bounds the film in reality as if there was a reason given, it might be improbable; but there's no true reason given (although there are several theories), so it can't be improbable!

The first forty minutes of the film feature hardly any - if any - horror at all. Hitchcock spends this part of the movie developing the characters and installing their situation in the viewers' minds, so that when the horror does finally come along, it has a definite potency that it would not have had otherwise. In fact, at first the birds themselves come across as a co-star in their own movie as there are brief references towards them, but they never get their full dues. However, once the horror does start, it comes thick and fast. Hitchcock, the master craftsman as always, uses his famous montage effects and never really shows you anything; but because you're being bombarded with so many different shots, you'd never realise it. Many people have tried to copy this technique, but most have failed. Hitchcock, however, has it down to an art and this is maybe the film that shows off that talent the best. There are numerous moments of suspense as well, many of which are truly nail biting. We see the birds amassing and ready to strike - but they don't. And this is much more frightening than showing an attack from the off. Hitchcock knows this. The final thirty minutes of The Birds is perhaps the most thrilling of his entire oeuvre. First, Hitchcock gives us an intriguing situation where numerous inhabitants of the town give their views on the events, and also explains the birds' situation with humans, even giving the audience an angle of expertise from an ornithologist's point of view. He then follows it up with a truly breathtaking sequence of horror that hasn't been matched since for relentless shock value.

Hitchcock has made many great films, and this certainly stands up as one of them. Here, Hitchcock gives a lesson in film directing and creates a truly macabre piece of work in the process. I dread to think what the state of cinema would have been if Hitchcock had never picked up a camera, but luckily for us; he most certainly did.