MovieChat Forums > The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) Discussion > The seabird colony

The seabird colony

posted 13 years ago by feodoric
11 replies | jump to latest

McQueen's dune buggie ride through the dunes has always struck me as totally un-ecologically minded and sad to watch. What McQueen's dune buggie is actually crossing seems to me to be a colony of Least Terns, an endangered seabird species which nests on isolated sand dunes on the mainland seashores. The way the disturbed birds seem to "attack" the intruders (or defend themselves) by diving directly towards them instead of flying away, their sharp beak nearly hitting them on the head: this is a typical behavior in this species when an intruder wanders into one of their colonies

Unlike larger Terns (Common Terns, Douglas Terns, etc,) which nest in colonies on islands offshore, Least Terns nest on the mainland, a habit which has led to their demise. In 1969- i.e. around the same years that TTCA was shot - I remember finding myself walking inadvertently in a Least Tern colony in Kennebunk, Maine - all of a sudden, dozens and dozens of these birds were stalking me, flying towards me at high speed and brushing against my head (I know because one of them almost removed the cap I was wearing), screeching and rasping with their shrill calls: very scary I must say! When I got back to my room, I checked and true enough, I read that these birds are quite fearless and will defend their nests and colonies with the utmost tenacity - which is quite understandable since unlike the vast majority of seabirds, they nest on the mainland in areas easily accessible to predators, including our miserable self-destructive species. And I also learned that even back in 1969, Least Terns were already uncommon to rare, with their populations declining in Eastern North America. I did not tell the Bush-es about the Kennebunk colony lest they go shooting them with bazookas ...:-)

So watching this movie, since I'm positive that McQueen is actually driving through the nesting grounds of Least Terns, a threatened bird species, makes me extremely uncomfortable. I love this Earth and ALL its living creatures, and I despise those who refuse to take action in order to preserve what is left of nature's balance and biodiversity. I alos like McQueen and many of his movies. I'm a huge Bullitt buff, I also like The Great Escape very much, and I happen to like most of The Thomas Crown Affair (both the original and the remake, but for different reasons). Everything works in the original TTCA, if you understand that it must be viewed with a '60s-oriented or -conditioned mind (a difficult feat for people younger than me, so the apparently weak heist looked great back then!). It also deserves its R rating simply because Dunaway exhibits a totally AMORAL behavior in it (not immoral, a huge difference), an example of totally casual sex literally inconceivable back then (remember, the Flower generation and the whole hippie - free love trip had not caught up with the rest of society).

The only downer in the original was seeing the careless dune buggie ride disturbing a large Tern colony obviously displaying nesting behavior. Just right in the heart of it. What a disgrace! But what a fine movie.

Dilemma between heart and mind ...

[–] FriedEggMan 13 years ago

Don't worry about it.

They were CGI Terns.

Steve was as concerned as you so the studio blew the budget on making computer generated birds. According to the DVD extras it took a team of 16 people 18 months just for that.

If you work out the carbon footprint of all those people driving to work for 18 months it would have been better just to run the birds over.

[–] feodoric 13 years ago

Very funny indeed. Cool, you're so cool man.

Other than that, do you care at all? I wasn't expecting generating an uproar at such behavior. I simply pointed out an example of a blatant lack of respect for the environment on the big screen. As you know, people imitate what see they in movies a lot.

And please, the hell with the carbon print. Not everything on Earth can be reduced to a "carbon print." Biodiversity, for one, is not taken into account.

I am well aware of the type of reactions a post like mine can generate, and frankly, my dear...

[–] FriedEggMan 13 years ago

No, I don't care at all. We'll all be dead in a few years so why worry about things that go beyond our own lifespan.

Species come and go.

[–] feodoric 13 years ago

Great. People of your kind explain a lot of the present mess. I am still hoping that you don't really mean what you wrote here because it is the epitome of selfishness. If that's the type of values you believe in, well, I am truly sad.

I happen to care because this is one aspect which could still differentiate mankind from animal brutes.

And please, spare us with sophisms such as "Species come and go". Yes, it is true, but not in the span of one century or two of environmental incompetence and destruction. Man accelerates the rate of species extinction far beyond what you are talking about. In fact, this is something you don't seem to know, unfortunately.

It sounds so cool to not care. Well, coolness is a disposable good, like beauty and youth.

I expected controversy, but not answers as lame as what I read here. Oh well...

[–] FriedEggMan 13 years ago

Mankind is full of "animal brutes"

While the good people do good things the brutes care for nothing and are living it up. In the end THEY will be the winners.

It makes no sense for me (and millions like me) to care because in the end it's all futile. None of what the good people do will make any difference in the end. It may drag things out but at what expense?

[–] feodoric 12 years ago

You are right about the diagnosis, but your prognosis.... well, it smells of sheer cynicism, period. Opposing the animal brutes drag things on, as you say, but that's the only point of living and of evolution. Otherwise, we would not be communicating as we do here, and yes, seabirds would be just another food staple. And there would be no Thomas Crown Affair and no scene of a dune buggy wrecking a Least Tern colony.

My point is: yes, but what then? If we are living the way we do, it's because of the non-brute part of what we are. Your statement is just another version of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Our cortex is our weapon to build something that is a negation of that law. A living organism (and you are one, I presume, right?) is a shining example of all the futile forces that built something so totally different from the outcome of "hey everybody surrender to the brute forces of nature". If you wonder how thermodynamics of irreversible phenomena underlies what life is in its very core, may I suggest you to read Ilya Prigogine's excellent "The End of Certainty" which should shake off your desperate and nihilistic perspective if you have the persistence to read it all despite the mathematical equations, because it is one of the few truly essential philosophical works of the 21st century - so far. Among the many goodies that you will get by absorbing what's in the book is a logical and scientific demonstration of the existence of free will. Something that has apparently vanished in your view of the modern world.

Is protecting biodiversity futile? If your cortex is still active, you should perhaps qualify your surrendering to the brutes, whether they use dune buggies, bulldozers or missiles. And stay away from anything life-threatening: sometimes, visions of doom and gloom transform the self-awareness of one's fate into fatality :-)(

Funding pro-biodiversity and sustainable economic projects are among the few causes for which I will happily and whole-heartedly contribute financially. Including protecting seashore areas for the Least Tern, a bird species that I discovered when I was only 15 and whose vitality and liveliness are still a source of awe and excitement for me.

That being said, I wish someone would provide me the location where that bit was filmed in the original "Thomas Crown Affair"

[–] imdb-15906 12 years ago

So the dune buggy scene bothers you. That's valid, but what do you want? The movie was released in 1968, the same year The Population Bomb was published, only six years after Silent Spring, two years before the first Earth Day, and two years before the US EPA was created. We can't change the past, and it would be really sad if humans hadn't learned anything since then.

"I wish someone would provide me the location where that bit was filmed in the original 'Thomas Crown Affair'": from the "Filming Locations" section: "Crane Beach, Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA".

As for protecting biodiversity and all that: well and good. I'm in favor of that. On the other hand, the US has about 5% of the people in the world and uses at least 25% of the energy (not to mention disproportionate amounts of other resources). Briefly, everyone who lives in the US, just by virtue of being alive, is contributing to environmental destruction and economic injustice.

Look into the history of the various Endangered Species Acts in the US. From Wikipedia: "As of July 29, 2009, there are 1,890 total (foreign and domestic) species on the threatened and endangered lists. ... As of 2 November 2011, fifty-one species have been delisted; twenty-three due to recovery, ten due to extinction ...." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_Species_Act_of_1973)

So, after forty years, 23 out of 1,890 species have recovered. Not a great record, nor much cause for optimism.

[–] conductor71 10 years ago

Like Feodoric, I found the drive on the dunes an unsettling scene in an otherwise wonderful movie. For those who don't take this issue seriously, read this quote about Crane Beach that I have copied from the Essex National Heritage Area website:

Crane Beach is also among the world’s most important nesting sites for piping plovers, a threatened bird that was nearly hunted to extinction in the 19th century for its eggs and feathers. Crane Beach has been nationally recognized for its successful shorebird protection program. To protect these threatened shorebirds, we ask that you avoid the fenced nesting areas and the wrack, the line of washed-up organic debris where the birds feed and hide.

http://www.essexheritage.org/attractions/crane-beach-crane-estate

There is also another IMDb thread about it here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063688/board/thread/68385927

[–] BobbyDupea 10 years ago

To be fair, yes, the US has about 5% of the people and uses about 25% of the energy - however, the US also uses a lot of that energy producing a large share of the products and services used by people in other countries. So, some of that energy use is indirectly by people in other countries.

Of course, none of that takes away from the validity of the point that, yes, the US population does use a lot of energy and consequently causes a lot of pollution and depletion of the worlds resources. We do have to work to reduce that energy use and the pollution, as much for the future denizens of the planet as for people and other animals today.

My real name is Jeff

[–] davethemathtutor 9 years ago

The sages of the Jewish tradition in which I was raised say, "You are not expected to complete the work of repairing the world, but neither are you free to desist from it." That strikes me as a very wise approach. Keep doing what you can, and accomplish what you can, even if it's just a drop in the ocean compared to what needs to be done.

[–] BobbyDupea 10 years ago

I had no idea those were Least Terns, but that scene in one of my favorite movies has always bothered me, also. I saw Least Terms on the Outer Banks (Pea Island) and also at Chincoteague - beautiful bird.

They would not film that scene with real birds today - I hope.

My real name is Jeff