The Birds received mixed reviews upon its initial release. Bosley Crowther of The New York Times was positive, calling it "a horror film that should raise the hackles on the most courageous and put goose-pimples on the toughest hide". Crowther was unsure whether the birds were meant to be an allegory because "it isn't in Mr. Hitchcock's style to inject allegorical meanings or social significance in his films", but he suggested that they could represent the Furies of Greek mythology who pursued the wicked upon the earth.[55] The book's author Daphne du Maurier disliked the film because Hitchcock changed the location from a farm in England to a sleepy beach community in Northern California.[56]
Andrei Tarkovsky considered it a masterpiece and named it one of the 77 essential works of cinema.[57]
Stanley Kauffmann of The New Republic called The Birds "the worst thriller of his [Hitchcock's] that I can remember".[58]
Richard L. Coe of The Washington Post called it "gorgeous good fun" in the vein of Hitchcock's earlier black comedy The Trouble with Harry, adding: "I haven't had this kind of merriment since King Kong toppled from the Empire State Building".[59] The Monthly Film Bulletin wrote: "For all the brilliance of scenes like the attack down the chimney, one rarely has a chance to suspend disbelief", but the review still thought that "there is still a great deal more to enjoy than carp at".[60] The film ranked second on Cahiers du Cinéma's Top 10 Films of the Year List in 1963.[61] Andrew Sarris of The Village Voice praised the film, writing: "Drawing from the relatively invisible literary talents of Daphne du Maurier and Evan Hunter, Alfred Hitchcock has fashioned a major work of cinematic art".[40]
Philip K. Scheuer of the Los Angeles Times was among the critics who panned the film, writing that Hitchcock "was once widely quoted as saying he hated actors. After his 1960 Psycho and now The Birds, it must be fairly obvious that he has extended his abhorrence to the whole human race. For reasons hardly justified either dramatically or aesthetically, the old master has become a master of the perverse. He has gone all out for shock for shock's sake, and it is too bad".[62] Variety published a mixed assessment, writing that while the film was "slickly executed and fortified with his characteristic tongue-in-cheek touches", Hitchcock "deals more provocatively and effectively in human menace. A fantasy framework dilutes the toxic content of his patented terror-tension formula, and gives the picture a kind of sci-fi exploitation feel, albeit with a touch of production gloss".[63] Brendan Gill of The New Yorker called the film "a sorry failure. Hard as it may be to believe of Hitchcock, it doesn't arouse suspense, which is, of course, what justifies and transforms the sadism that lies at the heart of every thriller. Here the sadism is all too nakedly, repellently present".[64]
It is the only Hitchcock movie to have been featured in Mad (as "For the Birds", issue 82, October 1963, by Mort Drucker, Arnie Kogen, and Lou Silverstone). In the Mad spoof, it is "revealed" that the birds are controlled by Burt Lancaster as revenge for his not having won an Academy Award that year for his starring role in Birdman of Alcatraz.
The film's first television broadcast was in Canada on CTV television on December 30, 1967. Its subsequent U.S. appearance was on NBC television on January 6, 1968, and became the most watched film on television surpassing The Bridge on the River Kwai with a Nielsen rating of 38.9 and an audience share of 59%.[65][66] The record was beaten in 1972 by Love Story.[66]
With the passage of time, much like many other of Hitchcock's works, the film's standing among critics has much improved. The film has been very influential on the horror genre inspiring filmmakers like Guillermo del Toro and John Carpenter.[67] On Rotten Tomatoes it has a 93% rating based on reviews from 59 critics, with an average rating of 8.20/10, and the website's consensus states: "Proving once again that build-up is the key to suspense, Hitchcock successfully turned birds into some of the most terrifying villains in horror history".[68] On Metacritic, it has a score of 90 out of 100, based on reviews from 15 critics.[69] Film critic David Thomson refers to it as Hitchcock's "last unflawed film".[70] Italian film maker Federico Fellini ranked the film among his top ten favourite films of all-time list.[71][72] Akira Kurosawa included the film in his Top 100 Favourite Films of All Time list.[73][74] In 2000, The Guardian ranked the scene where the crows gather on the climbing frame at No. 16 on their list of "The top 100 film moments".[75] The scenes where birds are attacking humans viciously were collectively ranked at No. 96 on Bravo's The 100 Scariest Movie Moments.[76] In 2021, the film was ranked at No. 29 by Time Out on their list of "The 100 best horror movies".[77]
The film was honored by the American Film Institute as the seventh greatest thriller in American cinema.[78]
Accolades
At the 36th Academy Awards, the film's special effects supervisor, Ub Iwerks was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Special Effects[5] but lost to Cleopatra. Hedren received the Golden Globe Award for New Star of the Year – Actress in 1964, tying with Ursula Andress and Elke Sommer.[79] She also received the Photoplay Award as Most Promising Newcomer. The film ranked No. 1 of the top 10 foreign films selected by the Bengal Film Journalists' Association Awards. Hitchcock also received the Association's Director Award for the film.[80]
It also won the Horror Hall of Fame Award in 1991.
