Inadvands Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Chase_Witherspoon Rene Cardona, Jnr doing what he does best, though not with his usual flair nor the abundant cast normally assembled for these Latin B-grade horror fests. This one is just a re-hash of Hitchcock's "The Birds", featuring Michelle Johnson and Chris Atkins ("The Blue Lagoon") as a pair of reporters documenting the strange and sudden phenomenon gripping the world as birds of all species retaliate against mankind's sustained mistreatment.If you've ever wondered what a stray beak could do to your eye, you won't have to wait long watching this film to find out. And it's not pretty. But, aside from a brief moment or two of hysteria, "Beaks" is otherwise tame and unremarkable, a very loose narrative of clichéd story strands with little to elevate the pulse. Looks like it was shot on video or possibly made-for-TV, the production values and staging look confined, and the overall result is somewhat tedious.Aldo Sambrell features in a relatively interesting minor role as a farmer who warns of the impending danger from his personal experience whilst names like Gabriele Tinti, Sonia Infante and May Heatherly should be familiar to some audiences. For their part, Johnson and Atkins look comfortable and display apparent chemistry, then of course the title stars look more harassed than harassing, but it's difficult either way to make a pigeon look menacing. Birds on a budget isn't awful, but it's definitely not among the finest in Cardona's catalogue.

Evil-Dead-Girl I'm not sure why I marked my comment with "*** This comment may contain spoilers ***". It's pretty much spoiled before you ever watch it. Normally I wouldn't comment on a film if I'd not watched it in it's entirety. However, this one deserves that honor. Most times when I have had to stop watching a movie mid-way through it's usually an interruption by forces other than myself. Not this time, I invested 60 minutes into this one and just couldn't bear the thought of wasting another 30 minutes of my life on it. (And I've sat through some real stinkers)I don't even know where to start. Let's see; The acting was worse than I've seen at an elementary school Christmas play- the script too, for that matter, with lines like, "Turkey's are killing people, and it's not even Thanksgiving" and "Stop. The champagne's going to get hot... Don't you mean we're going to get hot and the champagne's going to get warm?". Now I do agree with some of it being so bad it was almost laughable but for the most part, this one may just be so far down the scale that it passes by the hilarity and goes right on down to "complete waste of time".I'll admit, I do like my share of gory scenes, and I suppose the one with the man's eyeball being removed was alright, but it sure wasn't enough to hold my attention. I'd be willing to bet that the makers of this film spent more money on the Hershey's Chocolate Syrup they used as fake blood than they made on their opening weekend; and let's just say there wasn't all that much chocolate syrup used. Well, maybe there was, like I said, I never made it to the end. Maybe the pigeons won the war and the world was flooded with it. And by the way, I was rooting for the birds.I was happy to see in another comment here that someone else showed concern over what might have happened to some of the birds used in this movie. It was sad really. As was mentioned earlier, you could actually see a hand throwing a bird at one of the actors, and then the scene where two of the birds were shown pecking away at the dead hang glider their feet were attached to the clothing on the body in a way that I probably don't really want to know.I was going to give it 1 star but decided since I hadn't finished it I should be fair, so I gave it 2.(I do keep my promises, and I hope this is one you've never heard of... AL)

shark-43 What a stupendous movie. So bad in every way that it is flat out hilarious. As someone else wrote - concerns over ACTUAL birds being harmed or killed during the making of this epic. Oh yeah! No doubt about it. You can actually see a crew member's hand in one shot throwing a bird at an actor. In other scenes to make it look like the PIGEONS are swarming a victim you can see the poor things have their feet tied or stapled to the actor's costume. Sheesh! Plus you can tell the money people behind the film told the director we need nudity (check) gore (check) a long para-sailing scene with a Thompson Twins late 1980's pop sound song (check) explosion (got it) and slo-mo shots of children in danger (you betcha)! This mess is very funny even though it doesnt mean to be. For lovers of Grade Z classics - check of BEAKS! Two Claws Up!

Big J-2 Yes they are, and this horror movie about birds is good and surprisingly interesting, gruesome and detailed in the attack scenes. Anybody who likes gory movies might like this. Because of habitat destruction, birds all around the world strike back at humans for a week or so and then return to being peaceful. It's an okay movie with an okay message, but it kept my interest for an hour and a half so it was worth watching.