why were the birds attacking people
why were the birds attacking people?
shareThere was never any explanation for that.
share
MovieChat Forums > The Birds (1963) Discussion > why were the birds attacking people
There was no reason. The point of the movie was to show how people tend to take
any event, no matter how random or meaningless, and look for someone or something
to blame--in this case, a beautiful stranger who appeared in town.
I'm not crying, you fool, I'm laughing!
Hewwo.
Well said tmaj48
Also, sometimes, many people feel that it is eerier and more horrifying if the reason for attacks, such as in The Birds and Night of the Living Dead, are left up to the viewer and not explained.
Also, sometimes, many people feel that it is eerier and more horrifying if the reason for attacks, such as in The Birds and Night of the Living Dead, are left up to the viewer and not explained.I agree with this. It's also why I like atmospheric horror films that leave a lot up to your imagination and prefer those over the more in-your-face stuff. Our imaginations scare us a lot more than anything we see with our eyes.
The people, and the people alone, are the motive force in the making of history.
-Mao Zedong share
The birds were a manifestation of Mitch's mum's fear of losing her son to another woman. She didn't want to let him go.
Annie warns Melanie that Lydia won't like it - or something to that effect, I haven't seen the film in a while. The bird attacks get worse the longer Melanie is in the town, and the closer she appears to get to Mitch. Lydia tries to accept it out of deference to her son, but she cannot control her inner anxieties. I like the way she has the appearance of a bird herself, the way she wears her cardigan over her shoulders so that the arms look like a pair of wings. (The lovebirds appear unaffected because they are a pair of caged birds.)
It all reaches a crescendo in the attic scene - and it seems that is the pinnacle of Lydia's black bile of anxiety. Once Mitch has saved Melanie from that situation, Lydia would appear to have calmed down and accepted the relationship between Mitch and Melanie - hence the calmness of the birds in the final scene.
Watch it again with this interpretation and it becomes not just a great film but a bloody great film.
Then why was Melanie hit by the gull before Lydia had met her? Incidentally, have you ever noticed in the last view of the Brenner's home across the bay, as the postal clerk is pointing it out to Melanie, Lydia's blue pick-up pulls into the frame from the right?
shareLydia doesn't know she is influencing the birds - it is a general manifestation of her unease. That's why it emanates out and causes minor bird attacks elsewhere, but it is centered on Bodega Bay. That is why she is as shocked and sickened as anyone else by the bird attack on her neighbour.
Lydia doesn't need to meet a potential suitor, the fear is there constantly. Mitch only needs to take a romantic interest in someone and the anxiety is stirred up.
Are you saying this in a 'this is the symbolic interpretation of the film' sort of way, or in a literal 'this is the narrative reason the birds attacked'?
Apathy on the rise, no one cares
I'm watching this movie right now on TCM and I can imagine something very similar to your (rorysullivan07) theory. The expression on Lydia's face the moment she first meets Melanie sparked my idea that she (Lydia) is actually a witch and since witches are supposed to have an unnaturally intimate connection with nature this caused her unease (at meeting a potential competitor for her son's attention) to transfer to the local wildlife, which in that area must have consisted mostly of birds. Melanie's later discussion with Annie only serves to bolster this theory. Of course Lydia may not have any idea that she's the cause of their bird troubles. She may not quite believe in the extent of her "powers". She may not even realize that she is a witch.
shareUhhhhh...yeah, right. (eye roll)
shareEither the above posts are jokes or the posters missed the common knowledge answer that there IS NO explanation (on purpose!). Too lazy to read the FAQs right here or the numerous quotes/interviews with Hitchcock (and others) stating that there is no explanation and why!
shareThey missed it.
shareI know that Hitchcock says that there is no explanation. That's fair enough. However, a piece of art means whatever it means to you. I liked the film anyway, I have done for years without any explanation for the birds attacking. It worked well enough just on that level. I also know that thinking about it and giving it an esoteric, or philosophical/psychological explanation - whatever - has meant that I now enjoy the film even more.
shareThe movie was never intended to be science fiction, where there is usually at least an attempt to make an explanation, even if it's far-fetched or utterly lunatic. This is more horror than s-f. And the original story (which BTW bears absolutely no resemblance to the movie) gives no explanation that I can recall. The fun is in watching a group of people react to the new situation. You just have to suspend disbelief and jump in. When you have all the elements (script, director, actors) actually meshing togehter properly, it works. Having said that, I have to say not knowing what was behind the bird revolution has always bugged hell out of me. But that's just me.
🐈
Yes....it was all Lydia.
Look at the whole film thru the "lens of motherhood".
You'll see the motherhood motif appear in both obvious and subtle ways.
The birds were a manifestation of Mitch's mum's fear of losing her son to another woman. She didn't want to let him go.
Annie warns Melanie that Lydia won't like it - or something to that effect, I haven't seen the film in a while. The bird attacks get worse the longer Melanie is in the town, and the closer she appears to get to Mitch. Lydia tries to accept it out of deference to her son, but she cannot control her inner anxieties. I like the way she has the appearance of a bird herself, the way she wears her cardigan over her shoulders so that the arms look like a pair of wings. (The lovebirds appear unaffected because they are a pair of caged birds.)
It all reaches a crescendo in the attic scene - and it seems that is the pinnacle of Lydia's black bile of anxiety. Once Mitch has saved Melanie from that situation, Lydia would appear to have calmed down and accepted the relationship between Mitch and Melanie - hence the calmness of the birds in the final scene.
Watch it again with this interpretation and it becomes not just a great film but a bloody great film
Excellent analysis. My late mom, who passed away more than 21 years ago, had the same interpretation. As a kid I didn't like that idea and hadn't heard anyone putting forth that scenario, but now that I'm grown it makes sense. Plausible in that reality. share
why were the birds attacking people?
They were mad at us for eating so much chicken. If cows could fly, we'd all be dead. share
I don't think there is any reason for mass attacks. But lone seagulls can be unpredictable. I wonder if birds do protect a certain area at times. A seagull has swooped down close to me on two occasions just lately. At the very same spot. I was just walking towards a plot where a path narrows. As I approached that spot, a sudden wailing sound made me jump. It seemed so close to me. I looked around to see what it was. Both times, as soon as I got past that narrow area, I saw a lone seagull perch on top of a nearby telegraph post. It seems, for all the world, as though the bird didn't want me at that particular point for some reason.
shareI can now confirm that a seagull is swooping towards me with intent at that same spot. Yesterday it visibly came towards me. I've given in to it. I'm now changing my route.
shareYou might have been near or nearing a nest.
Just curious but, where do you live that they still have "telegraph" poles ?
King's Lynn in England. The gull swoops are seasonal here. July is the worst time. I noticed that a gull is perched on that telegraph pole ready in early June. I don't know if it's my mate from last year. I wonder if this might be another clue. There's a wet fish shop about 200 yards away from it's favourite spot.
shareI bet that there are plenty of birdwatchers there in your part of the world who would know the whys and wherefors of the "bird swoops" and they would be more than happy to tell you all they know. I have met several "watchers" from Great Britain and they are great info sharers!
Would also bet that those telegraph poles are actually holding electric lines these days.
Good luck with the gulls and wear a hat !
I will try to get some information from birdwatchers about gull swoops. The RSPB usually advise that it is protection of nests, or gulls associating people with food. In the meantime, I'll take your advice and get a hat ready for the July swooping season.
shareNo explanation.
After spending an hour and a half boring us to death by making us watch the main characters talk and talk and talk, the least Hitchcock could have done was given us a decent ending/explanation. But no.
p.s. If a guy comes into a store and stalks you, run away and stay away. Don't flirt with him and chase him down and drive a crappy old boat in your mink jacket. It won't work.
If you're looking for an explanation, this film isn't for you. There are plenty of films out there you could watch where witches or scientists or military experiments are the cause of what is going on.
share'After spending an hour and a half boring us to death by making us watch the main characters talk and talk and talk'
----------------------
If you had an appreciation for acting/subject matter, you would not be bored with it. But, actually, events did occur in the first 1 1/2 hours, not just talk.
He didn't stalk her -- he FLIRTED with what to him was a very attractive woman, albeit a stranger. And no men have EVER been known to do such a thing. (Sarcasm icon needed here.)
But you're right about one thing, there IS some "stalking" going on -- except Taylor's not the one who's doing it. It's HER! Hendrin stalks HIM!
In the du Maurier story there isn't an explanation either, but the birds do attack with the tide. It's been years since I've read the story or seen the movie so I don't recall if the tide was in the movie and that's why they were able to drive away at the end?
shareA lot people will say that the birds were a manifestation or a symbol of emotional fear or concern in the women. I'd say that the birds were a manifestation of a nasty personality trait shared between Mitch Brenner and his father, that is, a fear or anger towards feminine maturity and/or feminine independence. Yes, I know that the elder Mr. Brenner is dead when the movie starts, but you can see traces of this trait of his, in Lydia's behaviour.
After all, the first attack happens right after Mitch spots Melanie in the boat, and she's motoring back across the bay with her head held high, looking independent and queenly.
There's a hint of this in the conversation in the first scene, where Mitch Brenner is talking about buying lovebirds for his 11-year-old sister:
Mitch Brenner: Well, uh, these are for my sister, for her birthday, see, and uh, as she's only gonna be eleven, I, I wouldn't want a pair of birds that were... too demonstrative.
Sure, it's a cute throw-away line. But it might also hint at an ambiguous attitude that Mitch has about his younger sister's approaching adolescence.
Finally there's the conversation between Mitch and his mom:
Mitch: Mother, you just leave Melanie Daniels to me ...
Lydia: Well, OK, Mitch. If you think you know what you want.
Mitch: I know _exactly_ what I want with Melanie Daniels.
Which, considering how things turn out for Melanie, might be the scariest line in the movie.
There's a quote from Hitchcock, I saw once, which implied that, yes, there is a subtext to this movie, just as it's easy to see possible subtexts in "Vertigo" (impotence / necrophilia -- how far a man will go to be sexual, how far a woman will go to be "loved") and "North by Northwest" (Roger Thornhill grows up, as a basic take).
Wow, Stewart, you certainly have a lot of psychological insight. Just as well that psychopathy does have its benefits, apparently, as Mitch single-handedly saves all three females -- who all show they are far from "mature" or even "independent".
shareI think you've climbed a bit too far out on the limb with this one Stewart.
share