Hitchcock Retrospective – The Birds Review

This is Batgirl and you're listening to the GeekCast

Radio Network. Hello and welcome to episode 214

of the Cinema Geeks. I am one of your Cinema

Geeks optimists solo and joining me today as

usual is the Comic Concierge. Hello Dan. Hello,

how are you? Good. I almost forgot what number

we started with. I'm like, I know it's 14 and

then I was like 114 to 214. I don't remember

where we're at. So 214, I think is the correct

number. So we are back here once again to talk

more Hitchcock. This would have been or was,

I guess, planned to be the last of our Hitchcock

episodes until we called an audible, which we

talked about a little bit in last episode's review

of Psycho that we're going to go a little bit.

We're gonna push the limits. We're gonna go into

whatever extra innings over time sudden death

I don't know what you want to call it, but we're

gonna do some more Hitchcock coverage in a few

future episodes We'll see how many we get through

but we want to we want to cover a few more There

was a few that weren't on the list of ten that

throughout this journey. We've decided we want

to cover Dan anything you want to say about that?

No, I just it was it's been a journey of course

to go on through all this I think it's been I

don't You know how much people enjoy listening

to it, but going through it in Washington has

been a lot of fun. Learning a lot and I don't

know. There's something about this era that is

just has me inclined to go back for more, so

I'm excited that we're keeping it going. Yeah,

I am too, so that we're going to cover a number

of different phones that we didn't have in the

original slate will talk a little bit about that

at the end, but there's a few. Jimmy Stewart

or Cary Grant or Grace Kelly films that we haven't

covered. There's a few that are just more notable

that get a lot of recognition when you think

about Hitchcock that weren't on our original

list. So we're going to try to hit a few of those

and see how far we can go with this filmography

before we tap out to the suspense. So we'll keep

you guys in suspense as far as how many episodes

we're actually going to do on. Alfred Hitchcock,

how's that? So for today, we're going to be jumping

into the 1963 American horror thriller film,

The Birds, starring Rod Taylor, Jessica Tandy,

Tippi Hedren, Suzanne Plachette, and a few others.

So Dan, I know we talked about it a little bit

at the end of the last episode, but what was

your experience going into The Birds? This was

the first time watch for me. I've never watched

it before as I mentioned I've never seen the

birds have seen birdemic of course, which is

a very different movie, although not that different

oddly enough But no, so this was the first time

watch for me, of course, I like you know it There's

so many scenes that are if you watch the Oscars

and stuff like that that like this is always

featured You hear about it, but I've never sat

sat down to watch it from beginning to end So

yeah, I was just kind of going in rather blind.

I've heard All the movies we've done so far.

I feel like I've heard the most mixed things

about the birds But I was interested to kind

of going in it and spirit seeing it for myself

to see where I fell Yeah, it was Yeah, it's definitely

a first time watch for me as well. I have seen

other films in its ilk I guess you could say

like you mentioned Some you could throw a bunch

of other ones that I'm sure will comment on throughout

the episode that came later as far as in this

Kind of like a sub horror genre, I guess you

could call it like the it's not I know they reference

it I watched some special features about this

and they talked about this being like Alfred

Hitchcock's monster movie Yeah, and I suppose

it fits in there But I guess I view it a slightly

different and they do talk about how this was

like a turning point Where it goes from like

the monster movies of old where it was more Frankenstein

Dracula I don't know maybe like King Kong or

things like that went into this new mixture of

a different way to look at the monster in a horror

film. So we'll probably get into that a little

bit. But yeah, I didn't have any experience with

this particular film. I was excited and a little

trepidatious I think at the same time. But I

was excited because I generally actually gravitate

or have like a guilty pleasure like enjoyment

from films where there is a like a soul I guess

you could say but instead it's like a man against

nature or man against some type of other living

being whether it be you know answer bees or spiders

or birds or whatever the case may be like for

some reason I typically enjoy those films so

I was somewhat excited to view this one but at

the same time a little trepidation because it

is from 1963 and I wasn't sure like how it would

hold up, what would the special effects be like,

what would the visuals be like and all of that.

And also something that we haven't necessarily

seen Hitchcock do in the rest of the films that

we've covered. So I was like not 100 % sure how

I would land on this, but I was excited about

the journey and taking a look at it either way.

So obviously this film is set in, mainly in a

place called Bodega Bay. starts in the different

location in San Francisco, like in a pet store,

but we go to Bodega Bay and it follows the travels

of Melanie Davis or excuse me, Melanie Daniels,

who meets a lawyer in the pet store named Mitch

Brenner. And then he basically tracks, she tracks

him down to where he's going to be and brings

him some lovebirds. And then it kind of goes

through her visiting of the city in, in her city,

this town, I guess an interaction with. and then

obviously we have some birds that come into play

and take the movie in all kinds of different

directions. Melanie Daniels is the one played

by Tippi Hedren, Mitch Brenner is played by Rod

Taylor, and then Jessica Tandy plays Rod Taylor's

mom. So on first viewing here of this first time

watch, Dan, how do you think Hitchcock did with

his quote on Cove Monster movie? Interesting

of all the films we've watched so far if like

this is the one I'm the most conflicted on because

I think there are some moments in this that are

just truly brilliant some actually like Really

captivating moments and scenes that are so some

of the like most complicated scenes that we've

seen him put together Throughout this retrospective,

you know, certainly special effects are gaining

a bit obviously there's some ways to go but really

some Like even, but even some of the quieter

moments that I'm like, oh, this is, this is really

brilliant. But at the same time, like, obviously

there's some things that don't hold up. I'm not

trying to hold that against the movie. Of course,

you know, this came out in 1963, but beyond that,

like I wonder, and I struggle with, is there

a substance there beyond those elements? Like,

is there, you know, is, is this trying to say

something? Is there something deeper beyond the

schlock? I think you're deeper beyond the terror

and the horror. And I feel like if a movie comes

out today and there isn't much beyond that, we

tend to criticize it. So should we not hold that

same regard for a movie of this era? And maybe

there is something. And I've been digging and

trying to see, you know, thinking back at it.

And I think there are certain elements to it,

perhaps. And it's not just because, like, you

know, the reasoning is behind the burge attacking

or lack thereof. but I don't know I struggle

like is anything here is there a there there

beyond that and I don't know and when I match

that with characters that I don't know I wasn't

super inclined with I didn't really enjoy being

in their presence for a multitude of different

reasons I found it I don't know I found those

this movie to drag a bit in those moments because

of my lack of engagement with them at times that

Yeah, like I said, I still think there are the

moments of brilliance here, and you can see why

it would be impactful to so many directors regarding

the scene construction and utilizing the sound

design in here can be terrifying at times. But

as a whole, I found myself lacking. I didn't

seem... To enjoy this or walk away with it as

fulfilled compared to some of the films even

that we've watched recently like a rear window

or North by Northwest it to me isn't in that

oak. It's probably honestly near the bottom.

I think even I think I might even got out more

of rope than this at times So, I don't know.

It's the one I struggle with the most like but

at the same time Like I said there are it's I

have very polarizing Feelings about this one

every time we're going to a new film. I'm like,

this is gonna be the one that Dan and I differ

the most on. And then I always let you go first

for some reason with your thoughts. And then

I'm like, oh, that's not I guess we're still

somewhat in sync here, which is odd because we

do tend to have different opinions and different

perspectives on a lot of different films. But

for Hitchcock, I feel like we've been somewhat

in lockstep with each other. I mean, to varying

degrees. I mean, there's some films that you

probably liked a little more than I did or vice

versa. But I also found this to be very polarizing.

Like, I think there's a lot of comparisons that

you can make. Between this and psycho i'm not

putting it in the same level of psycho or saying

like they're like the same, you know anything

remotely similar as far as maybe quality goes

but I am saying that it's hard for me because

on one hand this film does a lot of things like

psycho does as far as Laying the seeds or the

foundation for a genre or changing way that people

approach a subgenre or things of that nature

like I can see that it's impactful, right? Like

I watched one of the special features I was watching

this and Amanda actually fell asleep in this

one, which is the first One we've watched that

she's fallen asleep in I think which take that

for what it is but so I finished the movie and

I wasn't quite ready to go to sleep yet, so I

Started throwing on all the different special

features and there is a very interesting special

feature on the masterpiece DVD set that I have

that talks about this being Hitchcock's monster

movie and talks about the shift between like

how monster movies were treated before and how

they're treated now. And it does some really

clever like interlaying of scenes from this and

scenes from Jaws and scenes from like Tremors

and a number of different films. It probably

has like shots from six to eight different films.

I think even the mummy is in there maybe. And

like it's interesting because they literally

take some of the sequences from this film and

then immediately or side by side, play it with

the sequence from one of those films. And it's

crazy how similar they are. And it's not like

it's ripped off or anything like that. But you

can just tell that the influence was there. So

like you have a film that is clearly influential

and you give it points for that, whether it be.

influential or impactful for the genre or the

things that they were able to do from a special

effects standpoint and some of the technology

standpoint that they may be advanced through

the work of this film. And then you put that

against like a lot of the things you bring up

with, which is a story that for all intents and

purposes doesn't have much there. Like as far

as anything to think about, anything to chew

on, anything to like marinate with. I agree with

you. I don't think the characters in this film

are very, um, I don't know if likable is the

right word or just like engaging, like maybe

if they would have gone down the path of giving

Tibby Hedren and Suzanne Plachette a bunch more

time together, perhaps I could have enjoyed that.

I don't really enjoy Mitch Brenner's character

almost at all. Like I find him to be not very

charismatic, not very magnetizing. Like I at

no point in this film was I like give me more

Mitch Brenner scenes, which taken for what it

is. I know Jessica Tandy is like a very famous

actress. I don't know if her character in this

film really does much besides make me angry in

this, you know, as far as some of the ways that

she acts and interacts and reacts. So like it

doesn't have that. Like I almost feel like Hitchcock

at some point later in his career Abandoned some

of the things that I felt were really working

for him in the beginning which was Really developing

characters making characters interesting regardless

of if they were lead supporting Just cameo characters,

whatever the fact, you know, whatever the case

may be He was very good at like making you interested

in all the different aspects going on this in

his films and I don't know if it Because these

were a little bit more I don't know if you would

call this experiment or experimental or different

things like that but he seems to be doing a different

thing with psycho and a different thing with

the birds where he's becoming more interested

in the nature of the film versus and like pulling

off these different feats then developing the

characters in the story a little bit possibly

like I even read something where he basically

in the, I think this might've been trivia on

IMDB or somewhere where I was doing a little

bit of research. Cause obviously whenever you

do that for movies, it always talks about different

people that were considered for the cast and

different people they may have thought of. And

I know Hepburn's name got thrown out here for

Melanie Daniels. I know Cary Grant's name got

thrown out for Mitch Brenner. And I remember

Sean Connery's name got thrown out for Mitch

Brenner as well. And there was one line on there

that said it was a direct, I don't know if it

was a direct quote or reference to Hitchcock

that said he considered Cary Grant, but then

decided that he didn't want anybody that was

that commanding in the film because he wanted

the film to be basically sold as a combination

of Hitchcock's name and the birds. Like that

was what was important to him. like that his

name and just the idea that it's a bunch of crazy

birds. He wanted that to be the only thing that

was carrying it and nothing else to distract

from that. So I don't know. Like it just feels

like me to me. Like I'm not saying that Psycho

doesn't have a couple of good characters in it.

And obviously, Norman Bates is like legendary.

I get all that. So but I feel like I started

to see it there and I'm seeing it even more here

where it's just like the characters become secondary

and the films, in my opinion, suffer a little

bit from that. Then I agree with you at the same

time that this if you're viewing this just as

what it is, which is a schlocky I guess call

it monster movie or whatever you want to you

know horror film But then like you said, how

does it differentiate itself from any of the

dozens of films? We've seen like this that get

absolutely crapped on or at least not held to

a high regard that we've seen over the last 20

30 years I don't know What do you think as far

as do you feel like there's been a shift in how

he's treated his characters in the last couple

of films or no? Oh, I think with psycho I I have

a different opinion when it comes to the characters

in that because I do feel like even you know

beyond overbates You know the I can't think of

a name what the leading character that we start

with I I found her compelling agree I uh, I think

with this though. I I do have an issue with the

characters and I was feels like the movie is

actively trying to get you to disengage with

them like it almost feels like Hitchcock himself

the script just doesn't like like the characters

like be Hendricks character I Don't know. It's

just I struggled with understanding her motivations

regarding nearly any decision she makes from

the beginning like I don't like from her making

this decision to go up and travel to this guy's

house drop off these birds like it seemed but

I guess you know if you get some hints regarding

her past and how she seems to be a bit flaky,

isn't the right word, but certainly is one that

tends to leap before she looks. But I don't know.

The women in this, I think, almost universally

are portrayed horribly. Like every female character

is hysterical, incapable of finding any solutions

whatsoever. like even opening a door becomes

like the most difficult thing ever. I don't know,

it just, it seems odd in when you look back at

Psycho and not necessarily the characters being

lacking, but like even there, you know, again,

you're seeing a lot of women making wrong choices,

which is odd with, you know, which I think, you

know, other Hitchcock films had. Much stronger

female characters rear window notorious, you

know, so I don't know if that was just a direction

like where he was going I I don't know if you

want to talk about behind the scenes, but there

are so many behind the scenes horror stories

regarding this especially regarding um tippy

hendren and how she was treated by hitchcock

and and she was you know injured on set and things

like that and I don't know if that like made

its way into the film itself, but I do just at

times I feel like this movie is actively and

Making you dislike these characters, and I don't

know if that's the point because of course you're

seeing You know all nature basically come down

upon them But then at the same time if you are

just engaged with these characters, then does

their fate really matter to you? So that's that's

again. That's where I struggle with the movie

because I'll look at these scenes And they're

so well made like the the sequence where now

you have the kids choir in the background Um,

she's, you know, at the bench and then the birds

slowly start landing on the playground and it

just keeps growing and growing and growing. And

it just, the eeriness there, like it, this does

have some great moments of just complete silence

and there's so many moments like that. And it

does make birds into this threat. Like I, you

know, we thinking, Oh, movie about birds attacking,

like who's going to be hurt? You know, you can

deal with it. It does a good job of like building.

Levels up and birds were to turn on us like we

really don't stand a chance even if there were

some what's that were maybe After all these years

look a lot more Humorous humorous than originally

designed but again, it's just like I struggled

with then I don't know the kid like I finding

the characters not only disengaging but like

Actively rooting against them because like why

are you making? those decisions. And I know that's

a trope of horror where people are going to make

wrong decisions, but at least with that, you're,

you know, a good horror villain, you're a good

horror character you should want to root for,

or you should see them take charge or something

like that. And I feel like that just, we never

get that moment within this. It's just chaos.

And from afar, it's great. And from afar, it

can be really effective to look at. But then

on a story perspective, I just didn't see much

there. Yeah. And I think, too, as you're trying

to search for... And I don't think he intended

to have anything to say in this film. That doesn't

seem to be Hitchcock's thing, right? He's not

making a bunch of films that are commenting on

a lot of complex life and societal issues outside

of murder. And, you know, some of those. I think

we get that somewhat with Rear Window. Like,

I think that's the one movie, certainly. I think

there are there, but I think the further we've

gone along with this, the less and less that's

happening. Yeah, and I agree. I think Rear Window

does have a lot to say. That kind of slipped

my mind for a second. But there's some that are

literally just about. Like. can I pull this off

or what if this was the scenario type, type tales

where it's just going to put it out there and

let you be more about like in the moment where

it's like, how do you feel in the moment while

you're watching this? How does this affect you?

Like what, what emotions, what thoughts does

it provoke in you without necessarily like having

like these big allegorical, you know, things

or these big dialogue things that are like really

diving into it, at least in the later films that

we've seen. And I really think in this situation,

like all he was trying to do is just pull off

this film with birds attacking people and like,

can I do it from a logistical standpoint? And

I don't know if there was a ton of thought into

some of this, because even if you're thinking

about it, like, okay, we have this village and

maybe it's got a bunch of people that are making

bad life choices. And then you'd say like, this

is nature's version of. Leveling the table with,

with these really bad people, but Like you said,

there's a whole segment of this town that is

kids that are going to school and They're not

shown doing anything bad like they're not shown

Being involved in anything that so it's not that

because it doesn't work then with the kids and

like you have that whole sequence Which I agree

is probably my favorite sequence of the film

with the crows Growing on the playground behind

her as she sits Which is weird because it's like

Put beside one of the creepiest weirdest children

songs that I've ever heard in my life That just

seems to keep going and I read or in one of the

special features the I Don't know if it was the

writer of the film or the guy that did the screenplay

or somebody that was involved in the filming

of it that was Putting that sequence together

or putting that scene together and they there

was a need for a children's song to play in the

school while this scenes going on and I get he

literally says that he goes to his kids who he

had school -aged kids at the time and asked them

for a popular song of the day that kids would

sing at school and this is what they gave him

and That's mind -boggling in and of itself, but

apparently because they wanted to make the suspense

and the tension Build over so much time that

it was much longer than the song was So he had

to like take the song and then write all these

extra stanzas to it to make it keep going which

in order to do that he had to become a member

of the whatever the acronym is of people that

write music for Film or TV or however that works

in Hollywood So he had to like get a membership

or apply for whatever like it's almost like a

screenwriters thing but for Lyrics, I guess for

music that's that's played in film. I'm showing

a lot of ignorance here, but In in doing that

I guess he because he's then Considered a part

writer of that song like he gets royalties on

that song now Above and beyond like whatever

he would have got for the film, which is Kind

of interesting, but. But anyways, that that sequence

is fantastic. But then obviously that's followed

by the kids running through the streets and getting

attacked by these birds, which again was some

backstage, probably horror because they said

that these kids were like made to run on treadmills.

Like. In front of each other and side by side

of each other in order to pull this off and like

they kept speeding up the treadmill and kids

were like falling and. taking people out behind

them and like all this other jazz and they're

like I don't know if any of them got hurt but

it was like literally saying that they're going

so fast on these treadmills they're like the

first person would fall and take the two or three

people behind them out and like I guess I guess

anything for a shot back then but I don't think

that would fly today but yeah it just makes me

think like what what is there like they I guess

the best attempt at doing anything along that

line would be the diner sequence, when there's

a bunch of people discussing what's going on

in the town and what they should do and if it's

real or not. But then we also get, again, like

you said, some female characters that are just

portrayed terribly in that sequence as well.

And that's just a whole nother can of craziness

with the whole explosion with the gasoline. And

they didn't Pull any punches in this film. That's

for sure. When it comes to like, is this over

the top? No. Just go for it. Yeah. What do you

think of that sequence? You know what movie reminded

me a lot of or his story was like it got a lot

of felt very reminiscent of the mist and you

know how you know they're they're in the grocery

store and you see like all these people arguing

what's happening, what's really happening and

that. And this movie does have a lot of Stephen

King vibes. I could see this being something

that certainly influences him. Like if, you know,

from afar, I would think it's almost more of

a Stephen King story than a Hitchcock story.

I do think it's interesting in that scene that

it feels more judgmental of the concerned mom

than it does the guy who's willingly to drink

and drive. Who's like, I can't drive yet. I'm

not drunk enough. Which is like, this seems like

a weird choice of all the guys are going to go

with the dude who's like. But, you know, it was

a historical historical situation. I did like

that scene. And like you said, I think I felt

like that was the one place where it was potentially

getting to something. And then again, like not

much is really sad, like beyond just like coming

to terms with what is happening per se. So it

was like the opportunity was there with that

scene to do something with that or to set some

things in motion. But then they like decide not

to do that. Interesting yeah, I guess it's like

I like I don't need an explanation of what's

happening. That's fine. I don't need that but

You know, it's like, oh, maybe it's the end of

the world or something like that, which is fine

But I just I felt like oh, it's not why it's

happening it's in the sense of like the reasoning

for the birds attacking me it's like what is

being told here and You know, I can I against

people's like oh, it doesn't matter Just you

know, it's just meant to be movie full of thrills,

which again is fine But I think for those thrills

to be effective. I have to be invested in the

something Uh, and I didn't I didn't get that

here and partially because yeah, I am comparing

it to what came before And I guess it's similar

to the issue like I had with rope where you know,

I I you know, it was a movie built on tension

regarding us like something happening that I

don't really care if it happens or not because

of what you've given me regarding the story and

and not that I like want to see like this kid

get hurt or anything like that, but I I don't

know it just it felt very thin beyond just a

technical standpoint. Well, and in the end, you're

right. Like, do you care if this? I guess let's

specifically look at just the main four people

that are involved in this, I guess you could

call it almost like a family unit. Like, do you

care if they get away or not? Like, do you care

if the birds get them or if they're free? I know

it's human nature to hope that they survive,

I guess, but do you really care? Are you gonna

be torn up if you see that they go down? I don't

know if that's the case in this situation at

all. I wanna get into a little bit more of that,

but before that, just to kind of tie up some

loose ends or whatever on the effects and some

of the other things of that nature. Another thing

that this was instrumental in doing and whatever

was changing some of the ways that they film,

as far as people in front of fake backgrounds

or in front of screens. So obviously up to this

point, they had done things with a blue screen,

which they found was not going to work with these

birds because of the amount of movement and whatnot.

And if you've ever seen like an old film where

they use blue screen, you can see the blue fringe

or the blue tint around all the edges. So they

developed a yellow screen, which was. A different

process for doing that and the only studio in

the country that had the capability of doing

that was Disney So this leads to like something

crazy that I don't think we would ever see again

but there's a effects when it comes to the birds

themselves of Like I think one of them was just

one sequence if you just take one sequence I

can't remember if it was the one where they're

attacking the kids attacking the phone booth

or if it's the one they're coming out of the

chimney, but there's a sequence where there's

somebody from Disney involved because they needed

their studio for the yellow screen. There's somebody

from MGM involved. There's somebody from Universal

involved and there's somebody from Fox involved.

Like all doing different things that each studio

had like the ability to do to make this work.

And there was a couple other like lesser known

studios or companies that maybe don't exist anymore

and things of that nature. But I don't ever recall

seeing a film that had four of the major Companies

involved in filmmaking all like partnering together

to make that work from an effect standpoint.

That's kind of crazy Yeah, that is crazy. I don't

yeah That's rather impressive which makes you

wonder just like how the rights work with this

But I guess I figured out some way or what kind

of swing Hitchcock had in 1963 to just be like

yeah, I need your help Okay, it's Alfred Hitchcock.

I guess we'll do it. I did want to ask you about

the sound of the birds What was your take on

the choice of how they made the birds sound I?

Thought it was very effective like I know it

doesn't like necessarily always sound like birds

But I thought it did a good job of because which

to me makes sense because you want them to sound

Different because something is off and then when

that sound came like it it was eerie like it

did have that effect it was you know that something

was wrong and I thought of all the things that

worked well with this movie to me the sound the

sound design was one of the best I do think and

they said this in the special features that you

could definitely draw some connections with some

of the stuff they did with the sounds of the

birds and then How they do some of the stuff

with like some of the sounds in things like jaws

and and things of that nature I was a little

thrown off because it sounds nothing like birds

but it sounded like a kitten or not a kitten

like cats that were getting attacked and I can't

remember what Amanda said like it was a combination

of that and something else but I do think it

was like nerve -wracking right like it is something

that's not a fun sound to hear so from that standpoint

it does add to the atmosphere of what you're

watching that you can't really like and I thought

it was also clever that they're using a variety

of different types of birds this isn't just one

type of bird that's going bananas Like we have

crows and what, sparrows and there's a third

type of bird in there somewhere. Seagulls. Seagulls,

yes. So we have at least three different types

of birds that are going crazy at the same time,

which was interesting. As far as the end of this

film goes, and yes, spoiler alert for a movie

that is 60 years old or whatever this is. The

ending is obviously a sequence where we we see

them in a house They've barricaded themselves

into their house, right? They've they've boarded

up all the windows and doors and and things of

that nature to try to like survive the night

until the birds calm down because what we've

seen over the course of the film is that the

birds are kind of going in in Ups and downs right

like they're going crazy and then they're becoming

completely like Peaceful not peaceful but not

attacking. So they're going in cycles, it almost

seems like, as far as their crazed actions go.

And so they're trying to wait that out. They're

in the room. They're in the house trying to do

what they need to do. Obviously some stuff happens

where the Melanie gets attacked for doing what

could only be seen as one of the dumbest things

that you become used to seeing in horror films,

where it's like, hey, I tried to whisper to that

guy sleeping and he didn't wake up. So let me

go. do this on my own and I haven't seen anything

bad come from investigating these birds so far

in this film. So they survive the night and they

come out the next morning to obviously see a

pretty horrific scene, right? Like you see all

the birds just sitting. Like it's not that they've

gone away. It's not that they've flown away.

They're all right there. You open the door. They're

there. There's thousands of them and they're

just chilling except for the one that tries to

attack his hand, I guess. And which is an interesting

story because he definitely said that there was

one bird that was in the film that would always

find him and always bite him no matter what.

Like most of the most of the real birds they

used had like actual names because they were

somewhat trained and he would ask when he came

on set if this one bird was there or not because

he knew it would find him and bite him. But you

see all these birds that are basically subdued

at the moment, but you don't know what could

set them off. And they're trying to get Melanie

to safety because she's needing medical help

because of her choice to go into the attic alone,

which was a crazy scene in and of itself. And

so they're making the decision to kind of get

in a car and head out to try to get through the

town, out of the town to the most nearby hospital

or whatever the case may be, some type of medical

attention, right? We see a sequence where they're

very carefully and slowly loading everybody up

into this car, watching as the birds are watching

them and then trying to take off. And they basically

drive out of their driveway slash whatever you

want to call it. Cause it wasn't really a driveway

and the movie ends at that point. Like we see

the universal logo. What is your thoughts on

how they chose to. in this specific film. I didn't

mind that. I feel like the way this was going,

you had to have somewhat of an ambiguous ending

because if you tried to give an answer or you

tried to have some easy solution, I don't think

it would have worked. I think it would have felt

unearned or just too much of a stretch. I think

leaving it open, I think makes sense in a sense

because you don't know what's happening. So there's

a lot of different directions that they can go.

Maybe this is where they headed. And I thought,

although narratively, it doesn't give you a lot,

the feeling, the imagery of that moment, to me,

it's like perfect. Just edit there. There's not

much more you can say. As I mentioned, this was

a movie that, at that moment in time, it was

clear there wasn't much more beyond. That those

thrills and that element of it. So, you know,

I think Give more of a complete ending. I don't

know. I think I don't maybe it would have Dealt

with one my shoes, but I didn't have an issue

with anything about yourself. So that I didn't

necessarily I may catches you off guard at first

right like and I am NOT Somebody who opposes

ambiguous endings. I generally like an ambiguous

ending sometimes it catches you off guard and

it's like what the H, that's how they're gonna

end it. But most of the time I like an ambiguous

ending. If it's leaving you with something to

think about, if it's leaving you contemplating

what happens, what are the different possibilities

and things like that, like I usually don't mind

it. I don't necessarily mind it here. However,

in the special features, there was an alternate

ending that was completely written out as far

as the screenplay goes or like another draft

of it and with photos. like that sketches that

were drawn of like what the sequences would be.

And I will say I don't think I would have minded

if they would have went with this alternate ending,

which I don't think ties anything up. It doesn't

give you any answers. It's still to me and somewhat

ambiguous, but I think it may have been more

appealing to me. It doesn't change things a lot,

but basically they get in this car and they start

to drive. If you're familiar with the film, their

house is on the opposite side of a body of water

compared to the village or the town. So they

have to drive around this body of water, get

to the village, drive through the village to

get to wherever they're going. And so it takes

them on that journey and they get to driving

through this town and you get to see a variety

of different scenes or sequences where you see

a shot of some people that have not made it who

have gotten. the birds got the best of them and

you see other folks that are still alive waiting

it out and you know behind closed windows or

behind doors or trying to peek out to see if

it's safe or not and then you see other people

that weren't as fortunate to make it through

the night and things of that nature and then

you also get this instance where which is something

that Amanda and I had been waiting for the whole

film right because you see the type of car she's

in and you know What birds can do and you're

like waiting for this to happen and it never

happens in the whole film but it would have in

this alternate ending where they're driving because

this driving this car is like like like James

Bond car from what is it Goldfinger or something?

That's like a I Don't know if it's an Aston Martin,

but it's it's some type of car like that with

a Retractable roof right and at that point most

of those retractable roofs are obviously made

out of some sort of fabric And so they're driving

through there. And as they're getting close to

getting out of the town, one bird, birds have

been like starting to follow them. So instead

of just sitting around, they've started to like

follow them in the air. And at some point, one

of the birds or a couple of the birds kind of

dive bomb the car and start just barely tearing

that fabric on the car. So you can see like sunlight

come through and a hole. Then little by little

the birds start doing it more and more so you're

seeing this top of this car getting like a rip

To shreds as they're trying to make it through

town And then they're getting towards the edge

of town as they're you know about to drive away

from the town And then the movie would have ended

right there I don't know how much that really

changes things or not I wanted to see that just

for the birds attacking the the fabric top of

the car on a just a Delphish level but I thought

it was would be kind of cool to see them drive

through the town and see some remnants of what

happened even if it's not giving you any answers

as to why it's happening or If it's gonna continue

to happen or if it's done. I don't know. What

do you think about that alternate ending? I Mean,

I want to be against seeing it for sure. I've

heard I've heard other Another ending that was

I don't think ever shot or put together but that

it was going to show like the Golden Gate Bridge

just covered with birds, which I think I would

have probably liked that ending more because

it just shows you like, oh, OK, there is there

is no hope here because it's everywhere. So I

don't know if I needed that additional scene,

to be honest with you. I think I prefer it ending

the way it did because I think it. I don't know,

there's just it's the. heading on that quiet

like oh man they're just they're just like toying

with them it's just yeah it's just like what

you're not doing you know uh that makes it even

that more difficult so i think i think i prefer

it that way but i think it's also scary that

this actually did happen in real life like not

this exact thing but like that there has been

situations where birds have gone bananas and

like been attacking and dive bombing and doing

all kinds of crazy stuff. Like one of them was

said to have happened like right around the time

where Hitchcock decided to like go ahead with

this project and what and make a movie out of

it. But there's at least one or two sequences

or described events of this happening. I think

they were both maybe in California too. And one

of them was where the birds had gotten kind of

riddled with toxic algae from some type of sea

creatures or little animals or whatever that

they Sea life that they had ingested because

they said they tested the birds and they were

just like rife with this toxic algae or whatnot

and that they were just dive bombing people throwing

up like They're half eating food and stuff like

that because they were sick and just that would

be terrifying I just want to tell you right now

like I'm a I'm not afraid of a lot of things

that fly But if I saw birds acting like that,

I would be a little bit Distressed So, I mean

that would be yeah, go ahead. Yeah, I mean Even

because those sparrows and things like you thinking

they've been used a lot and most of the true

detectors like just the way they like you do.

Seamod and ravens are kind of freaky like you

do see a bunch of them and something about like

because they are so smart and you always wonder

like they're up to something you know they're

called a murder for a reason like there's. When

the group of you is called a murder. You need

to be aware. Edgar Allan Poe was on to something,

you know. So how about some some Hitchcockisms

that we saw here? I'll start. So obviously we

get this is based on a short story. A lot of

the stuff is based on other works, and this one

just happens to be based on a short story of

the same author that the film Rebecca is going

to be based off of. So obviously there's not

a lot that is similar in that short story compared

to what we see here in Hitchcock's film outside

of the fact that there are. birds attacking or

acting crazy in a town of people but I think

outside of that there's not a ton that's the

same as far as that goes and then we obviously

have another mom -son relationship for sure in

this film maybe to an extreme almost more than

we've seen in some of the other ones We do have

the Hitchcock blonde and the Hitchcock cameo

which again is half happens right out of the

gate So we don't have to be watching for it.

I guess Anything else that you picked up that

we've seen kind of dealt with before in some

of these other Hitchcock films We mentioned like

how would like there has been a lot of undertones

of homosexuality throughout it looks wrote wrote

for example and I The way like some of the remarks

Regarding I can't think of his name of his Yeah.

With Mitch, like, I don't know, like some of

the way, like the way Annie was talking, it made

me wonder if it was hinting towards that. Cause

like, you know, she made a mark regard, like

probably not any girl could get, you know, get

with, you know, be enough for him. And I didn't

know if that was because of his mom or if there

was something more there. So it did have me wondering

if that was again, like, you know, something

that he's dealt with a lot in these movies. to

some more obvious extent, and I felt like that

perhaps was something Lee was hinting at once

again here, but I don't know if that's just me

looking into something that's not there, but

it felt like it was heavily hinted at this time.

Yeah, I could see that for sure. Anything else

that you picked up on that I missed? No, I can't

think of anything else regarding some of the

issues we've discussed regarding. Hitchcock.

Yeah, I will say and just kind of some closing

remarks to this and I'm not faulting this film

because it's not what the film was going for

so I'm not trying to Basically be critical of

a film because it's not the film I wanted to

see versus what the film was and what they were

trying to do I talked in the beginning about

how like I gravitate and kind of have a guilty

pleasure towards these types of films whether

it be arachnophobia or different things like

I said, I've seen different episodes of TV shows

and movies that deal with killer ants and bees

and all that kind of jazz and I typically like

them but the reason I gravitate towards them

is because I like to see the the human aspect

of it try and it's the same with a lot of other

horror movies too because you see this in like

the predator or alien or things of that nature

where the human side of it has to observe and

figure things out in a way where they have to

try to not necessarily understand why the things

are doing what they're doing, but they have to

try to distinguish patterns. They have to try

to identify like methods of survival or like

how like even in Jurassic Park, you see it like,

right? You know, the one dinosaurs you can't

make sounds or the other ones you can't move

or different stuff like that. Like. I'm not saying

like all of these films have to have that, but

that's one of the things I really enjoy about

those films is trying to figure out how they

figure that out and try to figure it out alongside

them and then figure out how they're able to

kind of follow those rules that they kind of

discover to hopefully survive in that situation

or to put away the the impending doom that these

creatures are potentially causing. Like that's

what really drives me. To like having the guilty

pleasure for these types of films and I was a

little disappointed I didn't get that with this

film, but I understand that that's also not what

it was going for um, but it's hard to not watch

this and be in and trying to be like figuring

out what's happening because Outside of maybe

the birds are acting a certain way on high tide

and then not on low tide Like you can't really

reason too much of like their pattern of what

they're doing and when they're doing it Like

I know that they they keep hinting that the lovebirds

have some type of connection with this. That's

like why when you see. The fact that they're

going to take the lovebirds in the car with them,

I was like, oh, that's probably not a great choice

because half of me feels like they're only attacking

this town because the lovebirds are in the town.

I don't know why that what sense that makes,

but she brought him here and the bird started

attacking. I think there's got to be something

here. So like those types of things were stuff

that I was like really kind of like, I don't

know. Selfishly hoping for that would be here

and obviously it's not going for that So those

things are not here because it's definitely made

to be something that's not explainable outside

of nature versus humans, I guess but any other

final thoughts that you had of this one things

that you like that you haven't got a chance to

talk about or something else that you Didn't

necessarily work for you No, as you mentioned

like it's I'm not trying to take issue with the

film because it's not trying to be more than

this, you know, this thriller, but to me, I'm

just trying to hold it the same regard we would

in a movie that came out today in the sense of

if there wasn't any substance to a film beyond

that, we would, you know, necessarily take issue

with it. Plus, you know, I'm also looking at

it in the retrospective of Hitchcock's career

so far, and this is far better than the majority

of films I'll watch on a technical standpoint

for a lot of reasons, but I compare it to what

we've gone so far to me. It's just I don't I

feel like he's he's done far better here and

it just I Don't know. I just I Think if you're

going to watch his cock, I think there are a

lot of films that we've talked about so far I

would direct you towards before we go to the

birds Dan there's a television sequel that was

released in 1994 entitled the birds to lands

end any interest. Oh man I call is it like basic

cable or is it? No, it says television sequel.

It also says that the director removed his name

from the credits and it also says it also says

that tippy hadron Returned in a supporting role,

but not playing the same character Yeah Really?

That's interesting Why would you come back and

return role and not play the same character like

that makes no sense anyway? So yeah, so that's

the birds the 1963 if I get the year, right I

think that was what year we were in the only

other thing that last comment because I forgot

to say this earlier one of the first things that

Amanda and I said to each other because we in

this first set of ten films that we've covered

we were going in chronological order so we started

back in the what was a 1939 ish era somewhere

in there and we've gone all the way up to 1963

And even though that this film does a lot of

things from a special effects and from a that

standpoint it did strike me that the Most modern

film that we covered out of the first ten to

me also looked like the oldest Like yeah, maybe

that's just me, but it looked like the one that

should have been the 1939 one versus what we

got So I I know it was hard what they were doing

and I know It's a feat that they were even able

to pull off what they did and it looks better

than it should have but it does Kind of come

across weird that like the most modern one was

though to me the oldest looking one as well I

think it probably helps that it's it's trying

to do so much more like it's taking These bigger

chat like making birds look like they're attacking

people's yeah hard thing to do You know, it's

so I think that certainly is making it not hold

up as well compared to something that is a bit

more reserved Of like rear window. You're literally

just looking out a window or even something like

vertigo But I do give it credit though because

it was using mechanical birds real birds Hand

puppets and like I don't even know what else

and I I couldn't necessarily tell the difference

between all of them I mean, maybe I could if

I looked real closely and rewatched it but yeah,

there were there were times when it the the one

time when it was the final scene where you had

to see goals and he was like putting his hand

out to try to close the door. Like those were

clear. I get that. So also there was a number

of times. Sorry, I'll let you continue. I didn't

mean to cut you off, but there's also a number

of times where I guess I will give the actors

credit for working against a screen and and doing

this because there was two or three sequences

where they're literally acting like they're getting

attacked by birds with no birds to like give

them even a frame of reference. Yeah, I do think

too sometimes like when you had the sequences,

especially the first one where like the sparrows

come through the the Fireplace and they're all

over but like it's not really impacting the room

itself all that much like that to me is where

there's a bit of disconnect here and there because

it's like you have these birds in there all over

but it's not you don't see it really impacting

the environment all that much which i know is

like really difficult to do in 1963 but when

you did see that happen like that final that

sequence and we mentioned within the the phone

booth and the explosion like it was that more

impactful but that didn't happen it was like

it like you said it didn't it was like oh this

is this does not look great uh this is a little

bit like you know just lines written on drawn

on the on the on the screen but you know again

even with that like that was my least issue with

my problems with it like that I'm far more willing

to forgive beyond some of the other issues I

had for sure so like we said earlier we're gonna

continue on even though this has been the first

ten films we're gonna do a little bit more a

little extra Alfred Hitchcock content so we're

gonna start that by We won't be going in chronological

order anymore guys. We're just gonna be jumping

all over the place So we're gonna start that

by going from 1963 all the way back to 1940 or

the romantic psychological thriller starring

Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine from 1940

It's the film Rebecca that we're gonna be covering

next Dan like we've done every time Just give

people a quick rundown of if you have any experience

with the film Rebecca I've never watched any

of it. So I don't honestly even know what it's

about except for I Believe Rebecca is not even

a person there something like that. I don't know.

I don't know. I've never watched it I just heard

very great things about it and I'm glad we were

going back to watch it. Yeah based on the 1938

novel Entitled Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier who

was the first same person that the birds was

loosely based off of and this one received 11

nominations at the 13th Academy Awards. So I'd

be interested to see what we're getting ourselves

into. So stay tuned for more Hitchcock coverage

as we journey into 1940s Rebecca. Dan, if people

want to keep in touch with you or reach out to

you in social media, what's the best way to do

so? Just search Comic Con Sierra. You'll find

me on most social media platforms. Absolutely.

And you can search me at Optimus Solo. You can

search the show name at Cinema Geeks. Just search

us out on the lease on Facebook and Twitter slash

X and then you can keep in touch with all things

on the network by going to the geek cast radio

network and you can see a bunch of different

written content and podcasts of all different

kinds and natures for all the different geeks

out there we have a lot of different content

covered for sure whether it be video games cartoons

movies TV series and all of the comics and all

kinds of stuff so make sure you check that out

as well so that does it for this episode tune

in next time for another chance to listen to

more cinema geeks