Watching Alfred Hitchcock films – especially his classics – for this blog series is generally a pleasure, but with “The Birds” (1963) it becomes homework. The director’s first film after his run of “Vertigo,” “North by Northwest” and “Psycho” is considered to likewise be a classic. This nature/infestation horror blend is before its time, exploring inexplicable small-town infestation five years before “Night of the Living Dead” and nature-on-the-attack 12 years before “Jaws.”
I see its place in history, but I’m not sure why people like “The Birds.” I’m not in the camp that’s here to rip the special effects, as some modern anti-Birders do; I think it’s a bad movie for many other reasons. When Melanie (Tippi Hedren) is in the phone booth and the crows (a group of crows is called a murder, Marge, a murder) peck at the glass, it was likely thrilling in the theater. Hitchcock is enamored with rear projection and yellow screen compositing, but the special effects are good. Indeed, they are the film’s best quality.
The characters aren’t up to Hitch’s standards. Melanie starts off as a realistic person — part prankster, part serious. We can see why Rod Taylor’s square-jawed Mitch is interested in her after their meet-awkward at a bird store. Hedren and Taylor don’t have the crackling chemistry of most Hitch lead duos, but the first quarter of the film has smirky appeal due to their back-and-forth.
“The Birds” (1963)
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Evan Hunter (screenplay), Daphne Du Maurier (short story)
Stars: Rod Taylor, Tippi Hedren, Jessica Tandy
Suzanne Pleshette’s schoolteacher Annie – a new friend of Melanie’s and an ex of Mitch’s – has appeal, and it might’ve been nice if she had more screentime. Jessica Tandy’s Lydia – the mother of Mitch and his much younger sister Cathy (Veronica Cartwright, later of “Alien” and “The X-Files”) – talks with Melanie about her fear of loneliness in the wake of the first death in Bodega Bay, Calif. Lydia drifts into a nap, and “The Birds” drifts into daytime soap interactions.
Most Hitchcock films give us many points of interest to latch onto – like a great performance or a transporting score – and he usually draws suspense out of relatable situations. “The Birds” is missing these elements. Perhaps it’s too flat to have a shot at being suspenseful.
It doesn’t get off the ground
But also, Hitch doesn’t wield tools such as pacing and music and intriguing story hints like he usually does. Many scenes are slow, featuring lingering shots of Hedren that don’t pay off since she’s blander than Hitch’s typical leading blonde.
Also, birds aren’t scary. Even if the attacks looked flawless, the idea of mass bird attacks is implausible. Certainly, people could be pecked to death by birds, especially in a coordinated attack. But why are crows, gulls and swifts launching these attacks? The amateur bird expert in the diner says birds don’t launch coordinated attacks. They can’t. Their brainpans aren’t big enough.
“The Birds” doesn’t suggest a theoretical reason why birds might target humans en masse. While some viewers might admire the restraint of Evan Hunter’s screenplay, a little chatter along these lines might’ve spiced up the film to the level of a wackadoo scarefest. It could’ve been a cli-fi B-movie with a dash of pseudo-science.
With admittedly striking visuals (in a vacuum), particularly the land being covered with perched birds to the horizon in the final shot, “The Birds” says “There are more than 100 billion birds on the planet, so if they wanted to kill us, we’d be dead.” True. And yet – yawn. Humanity would be wiped out for lots of “if only this happened” reasons.
I’m happy for people who find “The Birds” suspenseful and scary, but for me it’s slight and silly and it never gets off the ground.
RFMC’s Alfred Hitchcock series reviews works by the Master of Suspense, plus remakes and source material. Click here to visit our Hitchcock Zone.