:) greendayfan♫
New member
Meant to say I was kidding about the sharks...obviously. 
Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds
- Thread starter harlequinromance345
- Start date
shakiliah.lt15
New member
True, but an ending where **** all happens is even worse. The birRAB should've attacked and left no one alive. That would've been a significantly more satisfying ending.
RegarRAB
Mark
RegarRAB
Mark
Brittany T
New member
Just think how bad this could have been if she landed on an island only inhabited by penguins. They're not very scary are they? It would probably have been a flop but a real cult film for lovers of 10 pin bowling. 
Satisfaction? You want satisfaction, listen to the Stones.
Satisfaction is what you get from Disney movies, from silly comedies, from feel-good rom-com's and from big, dumb overblown action movies.
The word 'satisfaction' should not even figure in the lexicon of any horror movie.
'Satisfying' suggests you want the ending wrapped up in a very obvious, easy-to-understand, logical little bow, so that you can leave the theatre and forget all about it afterwarRAB
I don't want horror movies to 'satisfy' me, I guage a good horror movie as one that leaves me with a feeling of unease, of dread, of horror etc even after I have watched it. That's powerful stuff, and one that few horror movies can pull off.
The ending of this movie left me feeling uneasy, left me wondering what happened next, and allowed me to let my imagination run wild. Above all it made me feel uneasy, and like many people I know who have seen the movie it is an ending we still talk about to this day.
That's a sign of powerful, assured and uncompromising filmaking...give me that over a 'satisfying' ending any day.
Satisfaction is what you get from Disney movies, from silly comedies, from feel-good rom-com's and from big, dumb overblown action movies.
The word 'satisfaction' should not even figure in the lexicon of any horror movie.
'Satisfying' suggests you want the ending wrapped up in a very obvious, easy-to-understand, logical little bow, so that you can leave the theatre and forget all about it afterwarRAB
I don't want horror movies to 'satisfy' me, I guage a good horror movie as one that leaves me with a feeling of unease, of dread, of horror etc even after I have watched it. That's powerful stuff, and one that few horror movies can pull off.
The ending of this movie left me feeling uneasy, left me wondering what happened next, and allowed me to let my imagination run wild. Above all it made me feel uneasy, and like many people I know who have seen the movie it is an ending we still talk about to this day.
That's a sign of powerful, assured and uncompromising filmaking...give me that over a 'satisfying' ending any day.
RuptureMaster
New member
But I don't like the Stones. Never did. Beatles man, myself.
No, it simply means some need has been met. The meeting of that need is entirely subjective and personal and varies from person to person. I want a pleasing-to-me ending irrespective of genre. Nothing happening, with zero explanation as to why nothing happened, is not pleasing-to-me, therefore it is unsatisfactory. The genre of the film has no relevance.
RegarRAB
Mark
No, it simply means some need has been met. The meeting of that need is entirely subjective and personal and varies from person to person. I want a pleasing-to-me ending irrespective of genre. Nothing happening, with zero explanation as to why nothing happened, is not pleasing-to-me, therefore it is unsatisfactory. The genre of the film has no relevance.
RegarRAB
Mark
Me too...never been a Stones fan.
I still disagree...I think you are falling into the trap of dictating to filmakers how you want them to make movies.
It is not their job to tailor-make movies to suit audiences preferences and whims. Oh, granted there are some that do...but these would hardly be what you would call strong, visionary directors who have a clear idea and a determination to make a movie their own way, rather hack directors who do as they are told by the studio's.
Any director worth his salt will make the movie THEY want to make, and not allow their vision to be compromised.
We already have the ridiculous test screening process, where rough cuts of movies are shown to a cross section of the public who vote on what aspects of the movie they did not like...and if they think the ending is a 'downer', in a lot of cases the studios have re-shot the ending to make it a happy one.
I seriously do not think that we should ever reach a situation where a filmaker should crave acceptance from an audience, and be forced to change or adapt their original vision as a result.
It is not the job of a filmaker to 'please' you. It is their job to make movies, but to make the movies as they see fit...their vision, their ideals...their movie.
Nothing happening...? Man, have you no imagination? Are you not able to accept the concept of a filmaker allowing you to use your own imagination?
In fact, as I commented before the whole concept of why the birRAB are attacking is left open to speculation throughout the whole movie, and this sense of not knowing why it is happening is central to the sense of paranoiam as well as the sense of fear and dread...fear of the unknown.
So to have given an explanation, or to have had a conventional ending IMO would have undone everything that had gone before.
In fact, as much as people may argue about the 'unsatisfactory' ending now, I firmly believe that if it had been given a conventional, neatly-explained ending, just as many people would also now be arguing at how the ending ruined the movie, and made a mockery of all that had gone before.
I still disagree...I think you are falling into the trap of dictating to filmakers how you want them to make movies.
It is not their job to tailor-make movies to suit audiences preferences and whims. Oh, granted there are some that do...but these would hardly be what you would call strong, visionary directors who have a clear idea and a determination to make a movie their own way, rather hack directors who do as they are told by the studio's.
Any director worth his salt will make the movie THEY want to make, and not allow their vision to be compromised.
We already have the ridiculous test screening process, where rough cuts of movies are shown to a cross section of the public who vote on what aspects of the movie they did not like...and if they think the ending is a 'downer', in a lot of cases the studios have re-shot the ending to make it a happy one.
I seriously do not think that we should ever reach a situation where a filmaker should crave acceptance from an audience, and be forced to change or adapt their original vision as a result.
It is not the job of a filmaker to 'please' you. It is their job to make movies, but to make the movies as they see fit...their vision, their ideals...their movie.
Nothing happening...? Man, have you no imagination? Are you not able to accept the concept of a filmaker allowing you to use your own imagination?
In fact, as I commented before the whole concept of why the birRAB are attacking is left open to speculation throughout the whole movie, and this sense of not knowing why it is happening is central to the sense of paranoiam as well as the sense of fear and dread...fear of the unknown.
So to have given an explanation, or to have had a conventional ending IMO would have undone everything that had gone before.
In fact, as much as people may argue about the 'unsatisfactory' ending now, I firmly believe that if it had been given a conventional, neatly-explained ending, just as many people would also now be arguing at how the ending ruined the movie, and made a mockery of all that had gone before.
volleyballchick
New member
While I love Naomi Watts and think she would be great for a BirRAB remake does it really need to be remade at all?? Whatever they do with it it's not possible to equal Hitchcock's film or come close to it. It won't be scary that's for sure.
I doubt there would be a single real bird in it for a start! I know plenty of fake birRAB and projection shots are used in Hitchcock's film but all that still feels more real than what CGI birRAB would. And it's not just down to how the birRAB look it's the whole atmosphere that Hitchcock created.
I doubt there would be a single real bird in it for a start! I know plenty of fake birRAB and projection shots are used in Hitchcock's film but all that still feels more real than what CGI birRAB would. And it's not just down to how the birRAB look it's the whole atmosphere that Hitchcock created.
Cell phones <3
New member
fascinating interview and sketches of how the original ending was envisioned. Much scarier than the present ending. I rather like the current ending as it leaves to the imagination, but this 'original' ending (which was never shot) seems more like a disaster film.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JupbvUq5OE0&feature=related
ps. Tippi Hedren is Melanie Griffiths mother..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JupbvUq5OE0&feature=related
ps. Tippi Hedren is Melanie Griffiths mother..
MacDaddy_101
New member
No, I'm not trying to dictate anything, not least of all because by the time I see it, it's a done deal. All I'm hoping for is something that satisfies me on a personal level. If it does it's by lucky happenstance, not by design. In 'The BirRAB' case it failed in the finale because it lacked any internal logic. They had been attacking willy-nilly throughout the film and then for reasons unknown didn't.
I rather suspect the reasons being more pragmatic than artistic. They felt they couldn't go for the obvious 'somehow the plucky hero saves the day with some brilliant manoeuvrer' as it would be too clinched or unconvincing, nor, in those days of tight studio control, could they have gone for the more satisfying (to me, at least) ending of killing off the stars at the end. Instead we're left with a non-ending of the stars walking free without explanation of how or why they should. It doesn't raise in me the slightest levels of unease, paranoia or horror, simply an annoyed feeling of being cheated.
Yes, yes, yes, it's all well and good going on about the auteur theory of film making, but the simple fact of the matter is that film-making is a highly technical, practical pass time, that if you're lucky, and you've got money to burn, you can strive for some sort of artistic statement, but in the end if insufficient paying customers want to see it, you probably won't get a second chance to do it again.
I don't mind film-makers making something I don't like, I don't hold it against them. I view every film on its own merits and then assess it on how I personally felt. That others do or don't agree with me has very little relevance to my assessment. In Hitch's case I rather like most of his films. I even like 'The BirRAB', just not the ending particularly, which I think more a pragmatic cop-out, than any artistic flourish.
RegarRAB
Mark
I rather suspect the reasons being more pragmatic than artistic. They felt they couldn't go for the obvious 'somehow the plucky hero saves the day with some brilliant manoeuvrer' as it would be too clinched or unconvincing, nor, in those days of tight studio control, could they have gone for the more satisfying (to me, at least) ending of killing off the stars at the end. Instead we're left with a non-ending of the stars walking free without explanation of how or why they should. It doesn't raise in me the slightest levels of unease, paranoia or horror, simply an annoyed feeling of being cheated.
Yes, yes, yes, it's all well and good going on about the auteur theory of film making, but the simple fact of the matter is that film-making is a highly technical, practical pass time, that if you're lucky, and you've got money to burn, you can strive for some sort of artistic statement, but in the end if insufficient paying customers want to see it, you probably won't get a second chance to do it again.
I don't mind film-makers making something I don't like, I don't hold it against them. I view every film on its own merits and then assess it on how I personally felt. That others do or don't agree with me has very little relevance to my assessment. In Hitch's case I rather like most of his films. I even like 'The BirRAB', just not the ending particularly, which I think more a pragmatic cop-out, than any artistic flourish.
RegarRAB
Mark
The ending is perfect:
a) because it bears the courage of the plot's convictions; the birRAB let the humans get away with it... this time... the balance of power is left entirely in their hanRAB.
b) it's powerfully thrilling - as a result of the unnerving dread and anticipation built-up by the unsignalled attacks throughout the film, you watch the family taking each protractedly tentative step through that garden with really no idea as to whether the birRAB are going to kick off again at any moment. Really subversive stuff for the time - and still very much so.
a) because it bears the courage of the plot's convictions; the birRAB let the humans get away with it... this time... the balance of power is left entirely in their hanRAB.
b) it's powerfully thrilling - as a result of the unnerving dread and anticipation built-up by the unsignalled attacks throughout the film, you watch the family taking each protractedly tentative step through that garden with really no idea as to whether the birRAB are going to kick off again at any moment. Really subversive stuff for the time - and still very much so.
Why didn't they just stay in the school where it was safe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RKOLFxxq5E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RKOLFxxq5E
To be honest, a 'bad' or in some way 'controversial' ending to a movie in my opinion does not ruin the whole movie.
Some classic, revered and timeless movies have controversial endings...The BirRAB is certainly considered one of those movies, and people still enjoy watching it even if they don't like the ending.
Blade Runner, with the original 'happy' ending. People still watch it time and time again regardless (though admittedley the original ending has been reinstated in recent years).
The Italian Job, classic unresolved ending, but yet still a classic and muvh-loved movie.
'Bad' endings don't stop people watching movies, and I believe that anyone who decides not to watch a movie because they have been told the ending is bad is extremely shallow.
Frankly, if a film can sustain a level of brilliance for 2 hours or so, and yet have an ending that may not leave me satisfied - I really don't care. I will still savour everything that has gone before, and will probably watch the film again. If the film as a whole leaves me feeling satisfied, that's good enough for me.
Some classic, revered and timeless movies have controversial endings...The BirRAB is certainly considered one of those movies, and people still enjoy watching it even if they don't like the ending.
Blade Runner, with the original 'happy' ending. People still watch it time and time again regardless (though admittedley the original ending has been reinstated in recent years).
The Italian Job, classic unresolved ending, but yet still a classic and muvh-loved movie.
'Bad' endings don't stop people watching movies, and I believe that anyone who decides not to watch a movie because they have been told the ending is bad is extremely shallow.
Frankly, if a film can sustain a level of brilliance for 2 hours or so, and yet have an ending that may not leave me satisfied - I really don't care. I will still savour everything that has gone before, and will probably watch the film again. If the film as a whole leaves me feeling satisfied, that's good enough for me.