The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill (2003) User Reviews

Remarkable movie about a warm-hearted man

[Erewhon · 9/10 · 6 March 2005]

For a number of reasons, there are flocks of parrots in several cities around the USA; these are not native birds, but imports from the tropics. Sometimes people complain about their raucous, noisy behavior, but usually onlookers are charmed by the colorful, intelligent birds.

Even San Francisco has a few of these flocks, one centering on Telegraph Hill. Mark Bittner, a jobless but not irresponsible man living for several years on the Hill became curious about the parrots--mostly cherry-topped conures--and eventually befriended them, spending much of his time feeding the chipper, clever birds.

This movie is really about the man, not the birds, and shows how and why he became so attached to them. Bittner is an intelligent, thoughtful man, and sometimes engages in persuasive self-examination. He talks about particular birds, describing their distinctive traits, and the director uses footage that depicts these traits, winning and otherwise.

It's an oddly fascinating movie, respectful and warm toward the birds and their caretaker--and gradually turns into something even more extraordinary: a love letter to an unusual man. This is very highly recommended.

Beautiful & Entertaining

[geraldclare · 9/10 · 27 October 2004]

This is a little gem of a movie that deftly combines beautiful photography with an touching story line that gains depth as the movie progresses. The comic acting of the parrots and Mark Bittners amusing narrative keep the film from total chickflickness. Fun and touching, what more do you want. And, oh yeah, it's non-fiction. Great ending!

I guess the only film that comes to mind to compare it to is Winged Migration, a big hit film (for an indy) about birds. Parrots has some great footage of the birds in question, but none of that flying with the flock sensation thatt Winged had. But what Parrots has, of course, is humanity. The relation of Mark to the birds is central to the films arc. The film also addresses the issue of humanities impact on the environment and the natural vs unnatural setting for the parrots.

Ultimately it decides, and I agree, we've changed the environment of urban areas irretrievably so let's not pretend otherwise.

Endearing and Kind

[kasserine · 9/10 · 8 April 2005]

This documentary, produced, directed and edited by Judy Irving, focuses on an erstwhile homeless man named Mark Bittner. His life in and of itself is not that interesting and not the centerpiece of the film. It is what Mark Bittner has chosen to do with a few years of his life that is what makes The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill compelling. As the title implies, he takes care of a fairly large flock of wild parrots that congregate on, yes, Telegraph Hill in San Francisco.

It's a very simple story really. Mark, by his own admission, never really pursued any kind of career, although he once aspired to be a rock star. He lived in basements and cellars and on the street. Eventually, he began to feed and become involved with the parrots. Conveniently, he found a small home on the hill that he could squat in. The owners of the home, interviewed in the film, state that it would've seemed wrong to not let him continue to stay. Unfortunately, he must leave. The owners have decided to remodel.

The first half of the film focuses on Mark's relationship with the Parrots and how he came to be their caretakers. He has a name for each one and gives the audience stories of how he's interacted with them. Included in these reminiscences, is general background information on bird life in San Francisco and the various theories on how these South American parrots came to exist in the Bay Area.

The second half of Parrots deals with the fate of the birds now that Mark has to vacate his small home for the last three years. Apparently, his care of the birds has attracted world wide attention, especially in Europe. There is never really any tension in the fate of Mark or the parrots since, as Mark points out, the birds are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. The viewer probably has a little less confidence in Mark though, as he says he has no idea what he will do.

What works so well in this film is Judy Irving's deft editing. We are constantly treated to the beauty and charm of the parrots themselves but not so much as to make it tedious. Irving seemed to sense just when to spend time on the people and less "bird time." I did find her own voice-overs asking Mark questions to be a little intrusive at times and she even introduces herself as the filmmaker in the beginning. There does seem to be a reason for this, however, at the end of the film. I think most of the audience will be charmed. I was.

My other choices at the theater, when I chose to see Irving's documentary, was a film about the last days of the Third Reich, children growing up in brothels, and an impoverished boy making a living in an underground fighting ring.

I think I made the right choice.

The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill was refreshing.

Wildlife and humanity in the City

[mjc5677 · 10/10 · 13 February 2005]

Judy Irving and Mark Bittner have done a wonderful job capturing his calmness and humanity against the backdrop of wild parrots. Is this a film about parrots or Mark or both? Both! And it really works well. Ms. Irving put her movie making talents all together to combine a wildlife documentary and science lesson with a love story. Mark treats these birds as wild animals although many of them act like pets. They're wild and that's the way they should be. Mark and the parrots fear the hawks (Red-tailed, Red Shouldered, Coopers, and Sharp Shinned and probably a Peregrine Falcon - sorry I'm a birder), but Mark also shows us some of the aggression and odd bird behavior in the flock that seems to be pretty normal. A very good movie...and tremendous scenes of San Francisco.

Thanks Mark and Judy.

Mike Oakland

Much better than I was expecting and I was expecting to like it

[imdb-5778 · 10/10 · 14 February 2005]

Days after seeing this film I am still moved by it. It is an understatement to say that this film left a lasting impression on me. Getting up close to the individual themselves, which all had such distinct personalities and stories, changed the way I look at birds, having always been somewhat afraid of them.

Mr. Bittner is an very intelligent man, deeply empathetic and self-aware. The way he handles his departure from Telegraph Hill is truly noble and self-sacrificing.

Highly recommended. Bring a tissue. The cinematography and photography is phenomenal - some impossible-seeming shots left my jaw on the floor. The the ending was a fantastic surprise!

This is the kind of film that makes our lives richer...

[smith6079 · 11 April 2005]

This film has a zen-like quality. It masterfully documents the bitter-sweetness of life with that magical aspect of wholeness and completeness that all great art embodies. It seemed effortless, honest, open. Clearly loving, sometimes painful, tragic, always beautiful, inspiring... Finely photographed and masterfully edited, this is an actively multi-dimensional film of transformation.

Attempting to compare this film is inappropriate, in my opinion. It stands alone and quite well on its own.

I noticed it was made in 2003, which would seem to indicate difficulty in getting distribution. If this hypothesis is true, I would consider it nothing less than a criminal indictment of the society in which we live.

To all the people who brought this film to me I send my warmest regards.

clay smith

very touching and a bit sad - but left me with a big question

[cekadah · 7/10 · 8 March 2013]

a wonderfully made documentary! the story line is consistent and keeps you glued for the next situation or event in the parrots and bittners involvement with them and their daily life.

you will feel very sorry for some of the parrots. and feel glad that bittner is there to care for them. but in the end - nature wins.

my only problem with this docu was the taking of "mingus" and some other parrots (which were caged) to a parrot rescue center. it is never explained why bittner couldn't keep the indoor caged parrots when he moved. he found a place to live! and he loved "mingus". this decision is never made clear.

otherwise i would suggest this movie to anyone interested in urban wild life and human interaction with them!

A flock of parrots and a homeless man teach us about relationships, life and love

[mmrobins · 9/10 · 24 April 2005]

It's a shame more people won't get to see this film. I find that documentaries such as this are increasingly becoming much more entertaining than the rehashed plots that Hollywood dishes out. The themes that even some of the best mainstream movies explore very well are that much more poignant and interesting when they're presented in real life. What's more, the plots in real life are often stranger and more fanciful. The relationship between Mark Bittner and this group of misplaced San Francisco parrots is amazingly deep and will touch your heart. Mark recognizes many of these birds by name and knows their personalities more thoroughly than most people know their friends. It's a wonderful piece of luck for all of us that a documentary film maker took the time to explore the life of a man and flock of animals that most people would never give a second thought. All the way through you care for the animals and Mark, and the ending is wonderful for mark and the film maker in a way that seems like it had to be dreamed up for Hollywood.

Beyond the warmth of a human heart - caring of and connecting with the birds

[ruby_fff · 8/10 · 17 April 2005]

It's like being friends to the wild parrots of Telegraph Hill.

This documentary is made with lots of lovingness and doses of TLC (tender loving care).connecting with the birds - wild parrots of Telegraph Hill in San Francisco. It's nothing eccentric at all describing Mark Bittner 'talking' to the birds - in fact quite down to earth. We're fortunate that filmmaker Judy Irving shared this 'personal' documentary of Mark Bittner and his account/journal of his inter-activity with the parrots, even included honorable mentions of the specific parrots by name (on the advertising poster): Connor, Olive, Mingus, Picasso & Sophie, Pushkin, and Tupelo. It's a birds tale integrally told, and quite affecting and hopeful, in spite of the multiple arising difficulties to tackle and resolve.

This is a bird lovers must. A San Francisco city lover's treat. The official Web site 'wildparrotsfilm.com' is worth visiting, too, as it offers background information and pictures, like the story on how the music was scored by composer Chris Michie, and the film being dedicated to him, and how the theatrical Pelican Media release of the film is in conjunction with the publication of Bittner's book of the same name.

A remarkable movie. A must see!

[jogliore · 10/10 · 21 April 2005]

This is a beautiful movie, a remarkable movie going experience. Mark Bittner is a man richer than Bill Gates & Paul Allen put together. His love for the parrots radiates through the movie. I was at a theater that was 90% full and the crowd was mesmerized, including some very young children. The movie is honest too, some of the birds die. The movie is one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. It deserves to make a lot of money. Word of mouth has generated large audiences in Seattle and the movie has moved to different and larger venue. If only Hollywood could make movies half as good as this one. This movie will make you look differently at the animals in your life.

Less Than Truthful And So Less Than Riveting

[Danusha_Goska · 5/10 · 10 May 2006]

The buzz about "Wild Parrots" is that it is a heartwarming portrait of a gentle man's bittersweet love affair with beautiful parrots.

Well, okay, if that's the movie you saw, great.

The "Wild Parrots" I saw was disappointing.

The least I expect from any filmmaker is honesty. If you use your camera to ferret out truths that most of us miss, and present those truths articulately and in an interesting way to others, you work deserves a showing, no matter its topic. I love birds and haven't much interest in sports and would rather watch an insightful sports documentary than a movie about birds that plays it safe and fudges its story.

"Wild Parrots" follows forty something San Franciscan Mark Bittner's relationship with a flock of feral parrots that live on Telegraph Hill in San Francisco. Bittner spends much of his time hand feeding the birds and observing their behavior. Bittner, who is of sound mind and body but declines to work, lives rent-free in a cottage owned by people who apparently do work.

The documentary's drama comes when the cottage owners decide that they must renovate the cottage. Given how extensively it needs to be renovated, they ask Bittner to leave.

Bittner is shown weeping on camera. He gives away Mingus, a parrot he had living in the cottage with him. He says goodbye to Conner, a lone member of a species that is different from the rest of the flock. Conner had never been able to find a mate (a hard thing for a parrot, as they are very social) and Bittner had performed some mate-like functions for Conner, for example grooming him.

Mingus is sent to live in a facility for abandoned parrots, and lonely Conner, after appearing to mourn Bittner's departure, dies tragically.

The movie wants us to believe that Bittner is being victimized by the couple who asked him to leave their cottage, where he had lived for years without paying any rent. The movie wants us to believe that Mingus and Conner's sad fate is all the fault of the evil landlords.

Oh, baloney.

Bittner makes it clear that he has long refused to work for a living, preferring what he calls a more "spiritual" and "pure" lifestyle. Jesus was a carpenter . . . but that kind of labor is not good enough for Mark Bittner.

Bittner could have gotten a job, enabled himself to pay rent, moved to a new apartment, and taken Mingus with him. After Bittner was evicted, he was taken in by friends in the East Bay. He was a short public transportation ride away from the parrot flock. He could have easily continued to visit the wild parrots; Conner did not have to mourn him.

I've lived in the Bay Area. I met many who didn't work, and who didn't pay rent. These folks often announced themselves as above such pedestrian concerns as, oh, paying money for the food they ate, or contributing to society through labor. These folks often sponged off of their parents and friends. They often disappointed their loved ones and children. Like Bittner, they always had quotes from Zen scriptures at the ready to make themselves sound deep.

Maybe there is a good reason why Bittner could not work, or live up to his commitments even to a flock of birds. The film never explores that question, though. It accepts, without any curiosity, Bittner's self description as a man too spiritual to work. The filmmaker became lovers with Bittner. Even so, women have been able, in the past, to explore the truths, both the benign truths and the hard truths, of their lovers' lives. That's what art is for, even art about parrots.

The film doesn't even look very hard at the parrots it captures in its frame. There are very difficult to watch scenes of parrots attacking an injured flock member. No theory is offered as to why this happens.

Any film featuring footage of parrots, other birds, and the sun on San Francisco Bay can't be all bad; "Wild Parrots" is beautiful. I just wish "Wild Parrots" had had a little bit more courage, a tad more curiosity, and some honesty. If the film had been more probing, and more honest, about both Bittner and the parrots, I'm sure I would have liked him, the birds, and the film much more.

I Want It On DVD!

[noyou · 9/10 · 30 April 2005]

I just saw this on April 28, 2005, in the theater, and it was great! It was a last minute decision for us to go to the movies, and this was the first film to begin since we arrived, so we picked it, just for the heck of it. We had no idea what to expect, but both ended up loving it. I actually almost cried once, but I won't give away the moment.

It has a great message, regarding how many people view animals incorrectly, thus, treating them inhumanely sometimes, even when they think they are treating them great.

I was told by the Producer/Director/Editor, Judy Irving, that it won't be out on DVD until early 2006, after the theatrical distribution is over.

Here is the website for the film. You can email them to be added to a list, so you will be notified of when the DVD is available. But if you have the chance, I highly recommend seeing it in the theater. They deserve the money and recognition from the box office sales, plus, seeing it on the big screen is much nicer, IMO.

http://www.wildparrotsfilm.com/

great film, interesting and inspiring

[ShimmySnail · 10/10 · 12 May 2005]

The filmmaker Judy Irving says in the film she wanted to do a more personal film for once, but it appears she got more than she bargained for.

The twin subjects of the film are one of the two parrot flocks in San Francisco and Mark Bittner, a barely employed but highly intelligent musician whose life had come to revolve almost completely around observing and interacting with the wild parrot flock. They they are technically wild (escaped from captivity or born to escaped parents), Bittner would supplement their food and care for the wounded and dying parrots.

Mark had taken his own pictures and video of the parrots in some of their more memorable moments: first flights, acts of parrot bravery, etc., and his personal views of the parrots thoughts and actions, while he is not a parrot biologist by training, seem instantly sensible. He goes through a rundown of their mating pairs, childrearing practices, and daily habits on a parrot by parrot basis, so that by the end the viewer can tell the parrots apart, and the personality differences between them seem so striking that the viewer constantly has to remind himself that Bittner is not talking about human beings.

I think each viewer will probably always view parrots more anthropomorphically after this movie, and that may be the real treasure of the film. The film follows a bit of the publicity surrounding the parrots, what different people in the city propose to do about this non-native species (e.g. trap it, exterminate it, ignore it), but after seeing them live and love and play for an hour and a half up close, it's impossible to see them as just more colorful pigeons or pests or a curiosity of island biogeography.

The filming is extremely well done, capturing many moments it might be thought would be impossible to capture without uncanny luck or infinite patience, the film moves at a good pace, and it covers both the parrots and the questions most viewers have about them such as: Are any professionals studying them? Where did they come from? How do they survive outside of their native South American habitat? What threatens their existence now? How does Bittner manage to do any of this without a job or a place to live? Are there any other flocks in North America? And it's a film that children can enjoy, too, both for it's visual beaut y and educational value.

It's not about birds

[E Canuck · 9/10 · 24 July 2005]

It's a bit odd: I just realized, I've only just met Mark Bittner on screen in a documentary last night--about 17 hours ago, to be exact, but I find myself thinking of him as someone I've known, and have known for a while. He's in the set of mental friends collected second-hand from books, movies, exceptional radio or other not-first-hand sources. A character fictional or non-fictional whom I may forget I don't ACTUALLY know, because some artful person has given me a sense of relationship to him, an unconscious kind of companionship.

In this case, that artful someone is Judy Irving, the documentary filmmaker of Wild Parrots.

Drawn to the film as a pair of people who have grown interested in birds, parrots especially, my partner and I went to this picture expecting it to be about birds. Of course it is, on the surface, however, in the best kind of way, Wild Parrots transcends its subject matter. I'm confident in saying it's not about birds. No more than anything is ever isolated and entirely separate from everything else--oh, just go and see Mark and the birds. He puts it eloquently, even while he's quoting somebody on this matter of the illusion of separateness. Life plagiarizes itself. Irving's film plagiarizes Bittner's book, and the best kind of taking, bird from human, human from bird, happens here.

P.S. isn't it a good thing reality TV, Academy Awards, or something else is causing this flourishing of documentaries, so we're seeing them in regular run movie houses and not only at film festivals?

WONDERFUL FLICK! I laughed, I smiled, I teared up a bit.

[jh12jh21 · 10/10 · 1 April 2005]

If you like San Francisco, love animals, particularly Psittaciform birds, i.e. parrots, conures, budgies, macaws, cockatoos, galahs, etc., this is a MUST SEE MOVIE! If you ever loved your pets or companion animals, this movie will touch you.

The storyline is bittersweet. Mark Bittner is a latter day Saint Francis, the patron saint of this picturesque town, living off the largesse of others as Francis of Assisi did. Some scenery is gorgeous with stunning vistas of San Francisco Bay and Alcatraz and dazzling closeups of birds and flowers. Other scenes show the mundane and quaint close up views that residents encounter every day. This gentle story unfolds gradually, as if you're there in person and not seeing it through a camera lens.

WARNING! No graphic sex, gratuitous violence, or car chases take place. This movie is less scary than Bambi is for the bambini! (Bambi frightened me at age 4!)

Seek "Wild Parrots" out, since it's in very limited release. Or ask your local art house to get it! I'd see it again and buy it if it ever comes out on DVD. It was truly worth it!

more than birds

[edweirdow · 9/10 · 12 May 2005]

As others have commented, this is a fascinating documentary about non-indigenous parrots which have escaped into the wild and are taken under the wing of an apparent misfit. The arc in the story line is how Mark comes to the zen realization that all of life is interconnected. How many ¨wild¨ portions of our existence do we encounter that will fill our lives with love and wonder if we care to open ourselves to them¿ Not all who wander are lost, as the adage goes. And although Mark does intrude somewhat on the birds'wildness by feeding and caring for them, he essentially feels it is best to just leave them alone. He accepts them for what they are. Loved the surprise at the end, which underlines the central message. Whatever faults a critical eye may see in the film-making technique are more than overcome by Irving's sensitive approach.

Charming story of a man who took it upon himself to care for the birds.

[TxMike · 20 March 2006]

Good 80-minute movie!! In many ways reminds me of "Pale Male", the similar documentary of birds settling in residence in Manhattan, including the mating and fledging habits. Here we have Mark Bittner, a virtually jobless and homeless musician who never quite made it in San Francisco, and now is essentially a squatter with permission from the property owners. There has been a colony of wild parrots in San Francisco for some time, and Bittner began feeding and attending to them near Telegraph Hill, a prominent feature of the area. When a bird became ill, he took it in and nursed it back to health until it could survive on its own again. He had names for most of them.

Bittner is a kind and scruffy looking fellow, with a very long ponytail hanging down. When asked about his long hair, he said he made a promise to himself that he wouldn't cut it until he found a girlfriend. That answered a key question! There are many theories where the wild parrots came from. The movie included 4 or 5 locals telling their versions, all of which are different. But no one really knows. However, they thrive and their numbers continue to increase. Eventually Bittner had to leave his apartment because the owners were making major repairs, so he went to stay with some friends in a different part of the area, forcing him to say a teary eyed goodbye.

SPOILERS, in case anyone really is sensitive. Bittner did cut his hair, we see it, because he found a girlfriend, in the person of Judy Irving, the director of this film. Undoubtedly a perfect match.

I'm sorry, but 8.0?

[michaelingp · 3/10 · 5 May 2006]

I'm not one to rain on anyone's parade, but this feels more like an homage to the film maker's boyfriend than a compelling movie. If all you are interested in is a modest nature film with a few spectacular shots of bird behavior mixed in with a lot of pedestrian shots of the bird flock mixed in with some documentary-style talking-head scenes, mixed in with endless shots of Mark feeding birds out of his hand, well, OK.

But IMDb members rate this film 8.0! Didn't any of you get tired of seeing Mark feed the birds? Haven't any of you fed birds yourself? Did any of you feel that if Mark's philosophy was so deep he might have made something more of his life than feeding birds?

As a nature documentary, I'd rate it a 5 (compare the photography to March of the Penguins, for example), but as a feature-length film, it lacked a story, it lacked drama, it was repetitive, it didn't take me anywhere I haven't been, and, ultimately, it just didn't persuade me into believing its "animals are just as feeling as people" philosophy.

enchanting story of a fascinating man and his birds

[rebecca_roe · 10/10 · 19 March 2005]

I was dubious when first sitting down to watch this documentary, but after the first 5 minutes I was enticed by the simplicity of it all; a man who loves the wild parrots in San Francisco. It starts out with the man, Mark Bittner, explaining to some passerby about the parrots and how they survive. Soon mark explained the persona's of each and every one of his birds, whom he named with great pride and precision. My favorite was Connor, who was the only Blue-headed conure in the flock of cherry-headed conures. Poor Connor had no mate, and he was the outcast of the flock. My heart went out to him, and I realized: only a great movie such as this would make you sympathize for a parrot. Soon the movie explained that Mark is a semi-homeless struggling musician, who occupies, but does not pay rent, a tiny cottage. I find it inspiring that a man who can hardly feed himself feeds dozens of parrots. I admit, though the story was deep and melancholy, I laughed quite a bit. And the surprise ending through me off guard. In conclusion, you should definitely see this documentary, because it made me cry, laugh, and make my heart soar all at once.

Bird's Eye View

[bitcetc · 9/10 · 16 April 2005]

Not only an endearing, entertaining and environmentally intelligent documentary, this film is also funny, thought-provoking and inspiring. The story of Mark Bittner's journey to become the expert on and the caretaker of the flock of wild parrots of Telegraph Hill, while avoiding most of the appearances of being connected to society or to society's values along the way, certainly makes one wonder about the importance of some of the taken-for-granted symbols of success. The respect he earns for the study of the birds is a result of the intelligence, sensitivity, and acute observation skills he brings to his passion, while he wryly maintains a charmingly self-deprecating view of himself-- even if he DOES deny being eccentric. What's wrong with eccentric? It is a movie about the parrots as much as about Mark. If you can watch this movie and not be convinced of the individuality of the birds' personalities, then you are hopelessly anthropocentric. If you watch Mingus dance and are not convinced he's enjoying the music, or if Connor's story in no way moves you, then you may have become far too limited in your view of the world; a bird's eye view is certainly called for. This is a quirky and lovely story, lovingly told. I did not find the ending to be a surprise, as many did, but agree that it was uplifting.

Congratulations to director Judy Irving. Like the other reviewers, I will buy the DVD because this is one I'll want to see again over time. A-

Bird Love

[mpofarrell · 10/10 · 29 May 2005]

"The Wild Parrots Of Telegraph Hill" is something of an anomaly in current film-making these days. An unassuming, quiet little movie (excepting the various "chatter" of bird species featured in the production), it chronicles the day to day life of Mark Bittner and his flock of wild parrots. Bittner, a San Fransisco resident who moved to the city near the end of the Beat era and the dawn of Haight Ashbury, struggled for several years as a street musician before giving up his dream of having a successful music career. Living as a homeless man for over a decade with the occasional odd job here and there, Bittner eventually settled down in a rundown little cottage near the top of Telegraph Hill, a charming, picturesque area of the city dense with myriad foliage and fauna. A natural bird sanctuary, the hill was also a nesting area for exotic wild parrots from South America who inexplicably showed up years before and made the area their home. Some local residents are interviewed who give various (and often humorous) theories on how the parrots may have ended up there but in the end it remains a mystery.

The film focuses on Mark Bittner's relationship with these amazing birds. Taking on the role of caretaker, he feeds and cares for the parrots, consisting mostly of cherry-headed green conures. He identifies all 45 of these creatures by individual speckled markings and names. The camera hones in on a number of the birds to give the viewer a front row seat to distinct personalities such as Mingus, Tupelo and the lone blue crowned conure of the group, Connor.

Director Judy Irving films this story of Bittner and his bird friends in a slapdash style that hardly calls attention to itself. She narrates at times and even discusses the fact that she wasn't quite sure what the focus of her film was originally going to be. The birds were a starting point but meeting Mark Bittner turned out to be more than just a happy accident. A lifelong naturalist and bird enthusiast, Irving rarely intrudes, letting her camera record very directly, simply and powerfully this story of a modern day St. Francis.

"The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill" is almost artless in its presentation. Unlike "Winged Migration", the French 2001 Oscar- nominated documentary about migratory birds, Irving's film is competently photographed but lacking in the lush visuals that distinguished the former film. The Parrots stay close to terra firma, a necessity considering the menacing Red-Tailed hawks often hovering overhead.

Mark Bittner's story is truly inspiring and ultimately surprising. Judy Irving makes it even more so with an even-handed approach that almost, but not quite, collapses at the end. What could have ended on a sugary and sentimental note emerges as clear, forthright and unforgettable.

Birds are people too!

[cwogaman · 10/10 · 6 May 2005]

I first heard of this movie when I was walking down the Greenwich stair-walk with a couple of friends who had seen the movie shortly before our walk. This is the same staircase featured in this movie. Based on their enthusiastic recommendation, I was excited to see that this movie when it listed in New Haven.

This documentary is primarily effective for one reason: discovery-driven, instead of agenda-driven, film-making. The viewer gets the sense in "The Wild Parrots" that she is a part of the evolving action. I daresay that "The Wild Parrots" is not only sublime but actually exciting because of the sense of evolving discovery that underlies each spontaneous moment.

From the standpoint of characterization, Mark Bittner is given development beyond his position as bird care-taker. He is the sort of man that many would not give a second look at, but by the end of the movie, he is someone I would really like to get to know better, someone whose outlook on life could, if applied on a large scale, make for a better living experience for all people and birds alike.

Mark gives many of the birds names, because he cares to get to know and observe them. Significantly, the observation on the part of the San Francisco Zoo's Curator of Birds that Mark began by describing the relationships among the birds underlies Mark's deep understanding of relationships that take place in the natural world without our knowing of such relating going on.

Mark sees, and convincingly relates to his viewers, that these birds are more than mere animated objects, but are indeed persons. What is a person? Someone who can love? Reason? Form relationships? Be thankful? Ask yourself the question "what is a person" after seeing "The Wild Parrots," and I suspect you might have a wider understanding of what a person is.

In fact I left this film feeling moved and with questions that could change the way I think of relating to other people, the animal world, and myself. Despite a slow start, "The Wild Parrots" finishes as a convincing and transformational experience for subject and audience alike.

Life is a waterfall

[jfinch87 · 9/10 · 3 July 2005]

All too often, the pace and anxiety of modern life blinds us from the typical parts of our experience we tend to overlook. When this dilemma grows to a boiling point, we are forced to ask ourselves questions we may not normally consider: What makes me happy? Who am I? And, How can I make this world a better place? While the Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill is indeed an extraordinary story, it touches on the core of these universal questions. The film introduces self-dubbed "Dharma Bum" Mark Bittner as he is barely scraping to get by in life, living on the streets of San Francisco, when he meets a flock of parrots. Bittner's fascination with the parrots leads him to follow their flock and gradually begin to win their trust. The ensuing story is all at once a hilarious comedy about his winged companions, both filled with tragedy, love and finally redemption as Bittner explores the unique relationships he has with each bird. While some critics claim he anthropomorphizes the animals during his narration, I would disagree. Instead of projecting himself onto the birds as "pets", Bittner exposes the implicit connection we have with all creatures, whether birds or humans, and reminds us that the lines we draw between all animals are ultimately very arbitrary. The director, Judy Irving illustrates this connection beautifully, using vivid, up-close photography of the birds and how they express themselves with the rest of the flock. Although some may contend that her style of editing makes for a boring rhythm, I believe that she purposely embraces a slower pace in order to make the viewer ask themselves the same question every "homeless seeker of truth" must ask: "Who am I."? And so, when I left the theater, remembering the cockatiel I once loved like a friend, I asked myself those same questions. It's been 6 months since I saw the movie, and it's still on my mind. I'm glad that there were enough people who appreciated this story to get it distributed, so that more people got the chance to experience this excellent film.

Funny and touching

[Simba4 · 9/10 · 3 April 2006]

It's nice to find a film the whole family can enjoy (G-rated)! It's hard to say what this movie is more about - the wild parrot flock or the gentle man who loves them. Yet, it's easy to see, without Mark, the movie would be nothing. He is the window into their world, showing us their unique personalities, and their value to the world. After the movie ends, be sure to watch the flock update and extras on the DVD. My 9-year old daughter emailed Mark that night...we hope to hear from him sometime. I hope the film does not turn him into a celebrity...we have enough of those already! And many kudos to Judy Irving for creating such a sensitive film and the way she handled the ending. Just perfect!

More than a film about wild parrots, it's about survival in the city, and more.

[Bill-382 · 9/10 · 10 August 2005]

There was, and still is, considerable controversy about these flocks of escaped and feral tropical birds. In rural areas they threaten fruit crops, or so I'm told. And how they survive Chicago and New York winters is hard to fathom. When they are referred to as "non-native species" there is some irony; most of us, including Mark, are "non-native". And the damage we do... However, it's not about that. It is about living in the city, getting on, managing with the clear understanding that there are dangers, and how critical it is to show some care and concern. This is a very clever film, and very well done. The message seems simple and straightforward, but it turns out there are several, less obvious messages. See for yourself, and do not miss it.