Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Building the Scene: The Birds


Alfred Hitchcock is a director so well known and beloved by both cinephiles and non-cinephiles alike that most writers on the art of cinema would prefer to talk about someone else should the opportunity arise. After all, hasn't Hitch been analyzed, critiqued, elevated and deconstructed ad nauseum at this point? Probably, but that's not going to stop me from doing it again. Why? Because sometimes a director is so well known and beloved that we take for granted just how skillful said director is behind the camera. For this extended edition of this October's "Creepy Moments" series I'd like to look at how effectively Alfred Hitchcock achieved extraordinary suspense and tension in the much misunderstood The Birds, a film considered at the time a lackluster follow-up to Psycho (but wouldn't most films ever made suffer from the same perception) but upon further reflection is as brilliant in many ways as Hitchcock gets.

One of the most effective elements of The Birds is its lack of music. Impressive and memorable musical scores are as associated with Hitchcock's films as Italians with guns are with Martin Scorsese's and yet The Birds is silent. It's music is the call of the birds themselves. It's opening credit sequence alone, with fleeting blurred images of crows flying in and out of the frame, their cacophonous caws the only sound we hear, is a marvel of tension filled disquiet. The film is in bold technicolor but without music it appears distant and faded, the conversations feel overheard, and the characters sans musical cues for heroism and courage seem all too human and all too vulnerable.

While there is much to admire here the setup for the attack on the schoolchildren is one of Hitchcock's finest hours as a director. Most documentaries on Hitchcock make the mistake of showing this scene from where Tippi Hedren sits down on the bench. This is wrong because Hitchcock begins the tension at the top of the scene with Hedren's convertible seen driving towards the schoolhouse. The audience doesn't know it yet but this opening shot is a psychological plant on the part of the director. He is fixing the image of the schoolhouse on the hill in the viewer's mind as a serene image of safety and security. Nothing can go wrong here. Later when the children are fleeing we will see this same shot only with hundreds of birds rising up magnificently behind it. It's a visual strong enough on its own to signal extreme and imminent danger but combined with the memory of the peaceful schoolhouse planted in our minds just moments before it becomes something else entirely, something more unnatural and at odds with our perceptions of how the world should look and work.

__________________________


By the time Hedren walks into the school to warn the teacher and students the scene is essentially over. The attack follows and works because Hitchcock built up a lingering menace in the playground first but it's superfluous to the tension already achieved. And again, when you watch it, take note of how quiet the scene is. The birds make little to no noise and the children's singing is muted from inside the schoolhouse. The song they're singing provides a kind of tempo to the scene as well as a haunting quality, as if ghostly voices were singing in the distance.


__________________________


Next is the attack. The opening swarm from behind the schoolhouse echoes the earlier serene shot with the car approaching it. As I said, the thrust of this scene is done anyway with the setup but is mesmerizing to watch regardless and provides a terrific payoff to the initial setup.


__________________________


Finally there is the film's ending. I've talked to many a person unimpressed with this ending. "It just kind of... ends, you know." I don't know how to respond to that. It doesn't "just end" it fades out into quite possibly the end of the world, the beginning of an assault on humanity by nature or just the end of human settlement in Bodega Bay. Whatever the true "end" may be I find this conclusion to the story one of Hitchcock's ballsiest moments as a director. Note just near the end how the crows caws go from natural sound to heightened unnatural sound just before the fade out. What does that say? Again, no music, no credits, not even the words "The End." Note that the camera precedes the three principals making their way outside. For the camera to do this there can be no door, otherwise Rod Taylor would have to reach "through" the camera to get to it and then the camera would block it from opening. In a brilliant solution by the cinematographer Robert Burks, Rod Taylor simply mimes opening the non-existent door while a lighting effect fills in the rest. It works beautifully.


__________________________


If you haven't seen The Birds, and I can't imagine there are too many out there that haven't, it is readily available pretty much everywhere. Give it a look but be prepared to meet the movie halfway. The Birds is a movie that keeps its secrets closely guarded, under the wing.

55 comments:

bill r. said...

This is one of my favorite Hitchcock films, and this is one of the best scenes he ever put together. You're right, the song is key. I love this scene so much, I can't even tell you.

I wish Hitchcock had made more ture, supernatural horror films like this one.

Arbogast said...

I saw this at such an early age that The Birds remains for me less a movie than an origin myth. It's setpieces are like fragments of legend handed down - the bird strike in the motorboat, the attack on the town, the attack on the school, the attack on the birthday party and that image of the guy without eyes... these are like cave paintings on the walls of my cranium.

Greg said...

Bill, if it's a favorite then I assume you have suffered the same frustrations most supporters have upon hearing the movie "has no ending." I hate this critique, if one can call it that. There's even a discussion board on IMDB about how there must be an alternate ending out there, right? I find the ending incredibly haunting and disquieting. And the way the crow sounds change to a supernatural sound just at the end. Freaky.

As for this scene at the schoolhouse I'd have to say it is balls-to-the-wall briliant. A textbook study in how to build tension and suspense and a sense of danger all at once and then actually have a payoff that equals the build-up.

Greg said...

Arbo, I saw Schickel's doc on Hitchcock on tv in the early seventies before I ever saw this movie. I was but a tyke and the scenes from it (all the ones you mention) were burned onto my memory banks, same as you. By the time I saw it a few years later I had already committed at least a third of the movie to memory, without ever having seen the movie.

bill r. said...

Greg - Yes, I've heard that complaint. It's asinine and deeply frustrating, and people want that kind of ending because they've been taught to expect it in horror films, even when it's bad. Why, just yesterday on MY blog, I mentioned "the phony sense of closure" that I almost thought I wanted from a story. It's been pounded into us!

My favorite movie press release ever is this one, regarding what would appear now to be the aborted remake of The Birds, thought to be a sure thing a few years back:

Cathy Schulman has made her first hires and promotions as president of Mandalay Pictures and Mandalay Independent Pictures. A highlight of the Mandalay Pictures’ slate at Universal is the remake of Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Birds,” scheduled to be in production by early fall. “We think we have a very contemporary take,” Schulman said. “In the original, the birds just showed up, and it was kind of like, why are the birds here? This time, there’s a reason why they’re here and (people) have had something to do with it. There’s an environmental slant to what could create nature fighting back.”

I hope that woman was fired, and then killed and eaten.

Greg said...

Cathy Schulman on a remake of Picnic at Hanging Rock:

"So in the original is was like, okay, they're gone but where'd they go? In our remake (very contemporary by the way) they find the girls and the teacher hiding behind a tree at the end. 'Oh there you are you silly gooses!' everyone says and so on. You get the idea."

Greg said...

Cathy Schulman again, on No Country for Old Men:

"Just didn't work did it? How I wish they'd let me head that one up. Here's what I would've done. First, I'd have made Chiguhr the former partner of Sheriff Bell from years before. Second, Hello, I would have given it an ending! Chiguhr and Bell would meet at the crossroads and Bell would say something like 'Anton you never could cover your tracks with me' and then Chiguhr'd say something like 'you'll never take me alive Tom' and then BAM! Everything slo-mo as they both reach for their guns and... pretty good huh? But boy, the version they did - disaster."

Flickhead said...

Nice write-up, Greg. This could be Hitchcock's most unique film in its (apparent?) dismissal of narrative conventions... though there could be (is?) a study made of Mitch's Oedipal condundrum, 'Tippi' Hedren's free-spirited 'bird' a threat to Jessica Tandy's sanctuary, Suzanne Pleschett's smouldering schoolteacher waiting for Rod the Rooster to leave his hen house, yadda yadda yadda...

A couple of years ago I attempted to turn my 17-year-old niece onto The Birds as she "loves scary movies." Within thirty minutes she was bored out of her skull. When the shock and/or action scenes came, all she said was "God, that's so fake," or "You think this is scary?!?"

It reminded me of that episode of Two-and-a-Half Men when Uncle Charlie Sheen tries turning his 11-year-old nephew onto Jaws. The kid was bored shitless. "This sucks!" said the kid. "You want scary? Try watching Snakes on a Plane! Now that's a classic!"

bill r. said...

Greg, speaking of the IMDB boards, I actually saw something pretty funny there once, regarding an alternate ending to NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN. I can't remember it exactly, but a poster basically wrote (sarcastically, of course) that it should have ended with Moss killing Chigurh and then flying to the Carribean with his wife. Then the last scene shows Bell receiving a package. It's from Moss, and it conatins half the money. There's a note from Moss that says something like, "I hope this will help you retire. Take care of yourself. This is no country for old men."

I thought that was pretty funny.

Also, the novel on which PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK actually DID have an alternate ending. Unless somebody beats me to the punch, give me a while to find the information. It's NUTS.

Greg said...

Within thirty minutes she was bored out of her skull. When the shock and/or action scenes came, all she said was "God, that's so fake," or "You think this is scary?!?"

God that shit pisses me off! I hate the attitude that completely misses the point of mood, atmosphere, suspense and tension because the special effects aren't "realistic" enough. Aside from the obvious logistical problem that cgi often looks worse than optical printing and travelling mattes against blue screen, there is the idea of eschewing art in favor of technical machinations.

I suspect, though could be wrong so take no offence if I am, that you are like me when confronted with such attitudes. I begin to viciously and relentlessly condescend, patronize and othewise belittle until the party in question is truly sorry they ever said anything so stupid. Just the other day my wife and I were talking about something illogical our wonderful teens do (what it is is irrelevant, just suffice it to know it is illogical) and how when she complains about it they just write it off that's she's an uptight adult. Then I said, "not me, when I point it out they stop." "Well yeah," my wife said, "Jesus Christ, it's just not fucking worth it going against you on most things."

To cause possible further offence, I assume Bill is also like this.

Greg said...

Bill, I can't wait to see the info on the other ending for Picnic at Hanging Rock. I'm purposely not seeking it out since you said you will find it.

Arbogast said...

"Well yeah," my wife said, "Jesus Christ, it's just not fucking worth it going against you on most things."

I'd like to think you guys did it after this conversation.

Can I be the only person in the world who never had to endure a conversation about how The Birds ends? The consensus among us kids back in the day was that it ends as it ends. Birds. Live with it!

bill r. said...

Here it is. I got my information this time from a blog, but I remember finding the same information on Wikipedia, which now doesn't include the craziest stuff. So maybe take this with a grain of salt, but I have seen several sources for it. But here, the blogger discusses the missing final chapter (excluded by the publisher, and later published on its own):

As it turns out, Lindsay did write what had happened, but her publisher felt that the chapter would be best left out of the book for an unsolved mystery. In the film adaptation, no attempt was made to make an explanation.

While some thought the claim that Lindsay had written this chapter was a joke or hoax, after her death, it was published as The Secret of Hanging Rock.

The chapter follows Miranda, Marion, and Irma continuing their climb, and being joined by Miss McCraw, who they fail to recognize, who has also fallen under some sort of trance. They remove their tight corsets and throw them over a cliff, but they never hit the ground, and are left suspended in space. The four see a "hole in space," then Miss McCraw, Miranda, and Marion crawl into a small hole in the rock, transforming into odd crab-like and lizard-like shapes. Irma hesitates, and is left clawing at the rock as a boulder covers the hole.


THE END.

Greg said...

I'd like to think you guys did it after this conversation.

I'm not that forceful. In areas of love I'm sweet and gentle.

And yes, you must be the only one because I've heard that ending gripe numerous times. Maybe your imposing presence scares people into not complaining.

Greg said...

Bill, after seeing your comment I looked it up on Wikipedia and it is there. How odd. I mean, for a science fiction piece I suppose it could work but for this story that feels as wrong as ending To Kill a Mockingbird with Scout's abduction by aliens. A hole in time-space, in the middle of Picnic at Hanging Rock? What the fuck?

bill r. said...

The space-time hole is on Wikipedia, but not the "crab and lizard-like creatures". That's the truly strange part to me.

Greg said...

Well yes, there's that. I would assume if that was really written by the author it was an attempt to make it appear as if Irma hallucinated the whole thing so it still isn't an explanation, only the deranged mind of Irma. It's a possibility at least that's what the author intended.

bill r. said...

Also, as far as this goes:

To cause possible further offence, I assume Bill is also like this...

Eh, sort of. I certainly think those things, but I rarely say them. In the real, non-internet world, I rarely find myself talking to people who take movies as seriously as I do, so I tend to keep film conversations on a certain level, and not allow myself to get wrapped up in what I perceive to be the ignorant statements of the other person. Which itself is a condescending thing to say, but what the hell, none of those people are here.

Greg said...

Which itself is a condescending thing to say, but what the hell, none of those people are here.

True, screw 'em! I have a bad habit of getting my ire up over people not appreciating film. I shouldn't but I do. I will defend a classic film I don't even like because the person who is dissing it is doing so for all the wrong reasons due to their ignorance. And then I get condescending and have caused a few "fuck off's" to be hurled in my direction. Now it's different just talking about favorite movies or such and someone says "Prince Caspian" and I say something like, "Yeah, I heard that was pretty good" because it's not worth my time otherwise. But when someone starts going off about how much Welles sucks or something I get pissed. It's strange because I'm the complete opposite online and it's because we're all cinephiles so when someone here disagrees on the topic of a beloved film I know they probably have good arguments and reasons for doing so.

bill r. said...

I'm more likely, I think, to get sniffy on-line. If I'm talking face-to-face with someone who doesn't care that much about movies, why get all up in their face about it? Movies aren't everything, after all. But if I'm talking to someone who I think should know better -- or, really, who I think should share my opinion, damnit -- then I'm more likely to get aggressive. I don't think I'm that bad about it, though.

Greg said...

No, you're not. I have noticed that you and I historically have had more feisty debates with people than most others online. I've even had a few with you. Hell, one time just about six months ago I was so upset by Dennis' support of a particular movie that I e-mailed him voicing my discontent. Geez, thank God Dennis is such a nice guy. I get too worked up sometimes.

Flickhead said...

"I suspect, though could be wrong so take no offence if I am, that you are like me when confronted with such attitudes. I begin to viciously and relentlessly condescend, patronize and othewise belittle until the party in question is truly sorry they ever said anything so stupid."

No, I gave up caring long ago. It's just worth the effort. (I'm in the heart attack/stroke zone.) I shrug my shoulders and say, "Fuck it."

Greg said...

Yeah, I should have been more specific. I guess I'm talking about people running down something out of ignorance, not just disagreeing with me. If someone just has bad taste and likes crap I couldn't care less. But getting disrespectful of things they don't even understand - Aaaargh! Even then though I can see giving up and walking away. I just don't - yet.

Greg said...

Like when the Siren got her ire up about the Sunrise joke at the Oscars. That's exactly the kind of thing that pisses me off too.

bill r. said...

I've been very close to blowing my stack on a couple of occasions about No Country for Old Men. Really, really close. My problem is that, whatever meager gifts I have for articulating my thoughts in writing do not always carry over to speech. So I'd probably just stutter and sound stupid and not help my case in the least. Therefore, I try to let it go, but that honestly doesn't always make me feel better.

What movie did you e-mail Dennis about!? I must know! Speaking of Dennis, in case you haven't seen, he just gave both you and I, and many other people, some very nice shout-outs on his blog.

Greg said...

What movie did you e-mail Dennis about!? I must know!

Oh it would just make me look like an idiot. I probably should have never let it get to me. Maybe I'll e-mail you later. Right now I actually have to go run a few errands but I'll check in with SLIFR first thing when I get back.

Marilyn said...

Well, Youtube wasn't having none of my prying eyes.

Greg said...

Initially they were fine with the non-embedding then I guess they changed their minds. Oh well, the final scene works for whatever reason.

Rick Olson said...

Yeah, evil YouTube. I really wanted to see the clips. Only the embedded one comes through, and not the link to it either.

Liked the analysis, by the way. You should do more. store it on another server ... I store the ones I've done at coosacreek.org for this very reason

Greg said...

Rick, the analysis is quite lacking without the scenes but thank you. What server do you use? I need a good external video storage space I can link to and embed from as the Google/YouTube conglomerate is pretty much a complete corporate tool at this point. Thing is we all know that had the clip stayed up THE BIRDS would have never again made money for Universal. I would have taken all their business with my little clip. Whew, good thing they caught it.

Reverend Blood said...

I hope that woman was fired, and then killed and eaten.

I'd do it. Eat her, that is.

Greg said...

You're hired!

Rick Olson said...

Greg, I use BlueHost, but I think Go Daddy is faster. But since they've been doing those (crappy) TV ads, they might have gotten too much business for their own good. That's what happens to those low-cost providers, they grow beyond their own capacity to keep up.

If I had it to do over, though, I'd probably go with Go Daddy. If you're serious, go find some of the boards dedicated to web hosting services (but be careful, there are a lot of on-line, paid endorsements in the game) and see what the consensus is for the current cream of the crop.

Marilyn said...

I read Tom's Kiss Me, Stupid post, which was interesting, but I think he gives Wilder too much credit. I actually saw a bit of this movie months ago. I can't remember why I turned it off - bored, had somewhere to go, who knows. But the comments were great. I really wish I'd been able to participate. I'm feeling pretty isolated from the greater blogging world I used to know.

Christopher said...

I like the way this film seems to be some sort of love triangle story between Taylor,Hedren and Pleshette(which is actually fairly interesting and well played)..but then it turns into a story about BIRDS and more and more Birds!heh heh..sneaky Hitch..
Saw The Birds in the theatre when it was re-released in 1967...Never one of my faves,its really grown on me over the years..

Greg said...

Marilyn, why isolated? You've written great reviews lately, you've commented here, I've commented there, etc. Covering so many films in such a short amount of time surely leads to some burnout. Let Rod post a bit now and relax.

I did miss you at this month's TOERIFC and even mentioned you in the comments at one point. It was a very good discussion, one I enjoyed very much.

Greg said...

Christopher, it wasn't a fave of mine either but like you it grew on me over time. My first couple of viewings probably left me feeling cold and distanced but that has happened to me numerous times with Hitchcock only to warm up to his genius after a few more viewings.

Greg said...

And Marilyn, the clips are up now courtesy of my photobucket account.

Marilyn said...

I'll take a look.

Anonymous said...

tdraicer:

I always assumed-even as a kid-that (as the drunk says in the bar) "it's the end of the world" at the end of The Birds. I didn't need to actually see everyone pecked to death (as we would in Michael Bay's The Birds, at least until some Transformers and Bruce Willis saved mankind).

And the birds in The Birds look a lot less fake than most CGI.

But I was brought up in the 60s, so what do I know?

Greg said...

tdraicer, I find much cgi much more fake looking than old miniatures and optically matted blue screens. When it's done really well cgi can look great but often times it's a quick job that looks crappy, like every time Peter Parker becomes Spiderman and transforms into a computer illustration with bizarre unnatural movements.

As for the ending I too see it as the beginning of the end with Bodega Bay being the first location of a spreading war of humanity against nature in which humanity will ultimately lose. Our four human characters are driving away but to what? The birds are everywhere having claimed Bodega Bay for their own. The rest of the world will soon follow.

Margaret Benbow said...

I share your ire at those who can't let a mystery be...I would KILL anybody who let me know where those birds come from.
There's one scene I always watch with an extreme guilty joy, and that's the birds'concentrated attack on Tippi Hedren inside the house. I feel the joy because the assault is so dazzlingly choreographed that it's fascinating to watch; exhilarated at the blow-out-all-the-stops frenzy of the scene; and deeply guilty because, as we know, Miss Hedren wasn't acting. The hours it took to film this scene were the most terrifying of her life.
About the ending: I don't think we should assume the birds are everywhere and will exterminate all humans. After all, in my opinion we're breathing on science fiction territory here, where there's a hardy tradition of brave bands of human survivors eventually prevailing; or the oppressive wildlife/aliens simply dropping dead, as happened in The War of the Worlds. All it would take would be a good dose of Asian Crow/Raven/Starling Flu.

Christopher said...

I never really felt it was the end of the world at the end of the Birds..However I did consider it might be the end of the world for the one whos gotta clean up all that bird shit..

Tom said...

I totally agree - this movie doesn't need any music. A masterpiece.

Greg said...

There's one scene I always watch with an extreme guilty joy, and that's the birds'concentrated attack on Tippi Hedren inside the house.

It's just incredible how the movie culminates from isolated incidents to that relentless attack at the end until the door opens and there they are, crows, starlings, seagulls, just sitting there, watching, staring.

Also, good point about the end of the world but I suppose I mean the end of life before the war with the birds, kind of a turning point. Or, in fact, it all could just be directed against Bodega Bay or Tippi. That's what's great about it, the ending can mean any number of things.

Greg said...

Christopher, your joke just made me realize a flaw in the film for the first time, mainly, there is no way in hell after all that bird activity at the house that they're going to walk outside to a clean car.

Greg said...

Tom, not only does it not need it but the eerie effect of using the bird calls for the "music" heightens the atmosphere of unease.

Marilyn said...

Greg - Come on, isn't it more eerie to no bird crap on the car? It's like they are planning something far worse than ruining the car finish.

Greg said...

I bet they're saving it all up to shit on their heads.

Jandy Stone said...

The Birds is one of my favorite Hitchcock films (and Hitchcock is probably my favorite director, so that's saying a lot); I actually find it much scarier/more intense than Psycho. That could be because with Psycho, I had the experience you did with The Birds, where I had already seen most of the key scenes out of context, so when, say, the shower scene came on it didn't scare me at all. I appreciate it of course, but it wasn't an OMG WTF moment like it would've been for the original audiences. (The juxtaposition of the skull on Norman's face in the next-to-last shot gave me far more of a start.)

The Birds on the other hand, I knew nothing about (except that seeing it had made my mom forever deathly afraid of seagulls at the beach...) when I saw it. I swear I didn't even breathe for the last three minutes. Even now that I've seen it a bunch of times, I still get more tense watching The Birds than probably any other film ever. It's just incredible.

And I (like everybody else, I'm sure) always use the schoolhouse scene to illustrate to people how to effectively build suspense. He goes back and forth between her and the jungle gym so many times, and each time moving closer to her - when all you want is for him to move the camera back so you can see what's going on behind her, but he doesn't. And then the last time on her lasts SO LONG, and you're just about to jump off the seat in anticipation, and she looks at the schoolhouse not once (as in the previous shots), but TWICE. Oh, the dread. It's palpable.

And the ending is perfect. That remake is still listed on IMDb, I think, but I really hope it's dead. Giving the birds an explicit reason for the attacks ruins the entire thing, and anyone who thinks differently shouldn't be allowed near a film script.

Jandy Stone said...

And re: the matting/fakeness, it's been a while since I've read it, but didn't Robin Wood actually use that as part of his argument for the film (in "Hitchcock's Films")? Something about the matting isolating the characters from their surroundings, and isolation/need for family and community being one of the major themes of the film. I forget how it all went, but I think he tied it into some of the similar matted scenes in Marnie.

Greg said...

Jandy, Hitchcock's mastery is evident throughout the scene. Aside from everything you mentioned is the way he frames Tippi rising when she sees the birds on the monkey bars.

I certainly hope no one ever remakes it either. It's interesting how no explanation really fits because there are loose ends for every theory including that Hedren's character caused it by bringing the caged lovebirds because when they leave the daughter takes the lovebirds with her right past all those birds. It's like the birds are saying, "Yeah, take your lovebirds and leave. And don't come back. This Bay is ours now."

And I love matting and optical printing. CGI feels just as unnatural looking but with a glossy veneer that I despise. I think of mattes and optical printing as Edward Hopper, providing a sense of isolation and looking slightly unreal but possessing of great depth. CGI landscapes with their multi-colored skies and soft fuzzy clouds and mists have always reminded me of Thomas Kincaid the less said about that the better.

Margaret Benbow said...

Yes, the silence of the birds at the end, as the humans leave, is almost contemptuous. A completely quiet, sinister, avian version of "Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya...and by the way, we know where you live."

Kuroinu said...

Greg, I recently took my nephew (9 years old) to see the movie at a wonderful old theater near us that does classic movies every Friday night. On the way there I explained how it could be scary, although I didn't think he would be, and he wasn't. Once again, these kids today. LOL

Anyway, my point for writing. My nephew made an interesting observation that caused me to wonder. He said he knew why the birds were coming. He said it was all the cigarette smoking. He noted how the birds first arrived when she was lighting up a cigarette. There was a great deal of smoking in the movie, almost over done, and there appeared perhaps even an exaggeration in the size of some lighter flames as well.

Now, those of us old enough know that there was a great deal of smoking during those times. However, the movie was released in 1963 the same time of the beginning of the anti-smoking movement where the battle lines were drawn over placing a Surgeon Generals warning on cigarette packs.

I have wonder if my nephew stumbled upon something? Was Mr. Hitchcock sending us a message about smoking as well? LOL Have you ever heard anything regarding any hidden smoking message in the movie? Thanks for your time. Ed

Greg said...

Ed, I personally don't think there is any discernible reason for the birds but your nephew nevertheless makes an interesting point. Crows are in fact known to be attracted to cigarettes and burning embers. Fires have actually been started by because they pick up a lit cigarette discarded on the ground and take it to a nest on the roof of a building. Even if Hitchcock didn't intend that I think your nephew could make a case for it, and it's an interesting way to look at it.