Part of the problem is that every scene is poorly directed and often cut short. It's as if the writer - Edward Riche - had an interestingly convoluted idea on paper but couldn't get the director to properly bring it off on screen. Or perhaps a lot was left on the cutting room floor because the film is very choppy throughout.

The basic premise is about a guy named Dave (William Hurt with an unusual accent) who owns a restaurant that is dying on its feet because it is stuck way out on a quiet coast of Newfoundland. Dave's buddy Phonce (Andy Jones) decides to help bring in crowds to his restaurant by faking an extinct bird sighting. He figures it will help boost business and give Dave – whose wife has left him – a better feeling about his life. Sure enough the crowds show up and begin to frequent his restaurant.

Meanwhile two other subplots boil below the surface. The first subplot has something to do with a box of cocaine that Phonce has found. He and Dave plan to find a buyer but toward the end of the film some secret agents emerge on Phonce's place. It turns out, though, that they don't want the cocaine and they could care less about the fake bird subterfuge that Phonce and Dave have cooked up.

Who are they? What do they want? If you find yourself enjoying the movie then stay tuned.p> The second subplot is about a burgeoning romance that (sort of) begins between Hurt and a red-headed waitress named Alice (Molly Parker) who is Phonce's sister-in-law. She fits into the plot by merely being the love interest. She is described, in the beginning, as being 'bookish', which is just another way of saying she is an as yet undiscovered babe. Anyway, this romance plot bend is completely phony and unrealized.

Part of the problem of the film is there is too much going on and none of satisfactorily fits together. One example of this is a couple of forced off-shoot scenes involving Phonce's 'recreational submarine vehicle' that he has under wraps in his shed. He and Dave take it out into the water one evening and, of course, almost go under. But no such luck. The story continues.

William Hurt gives possibly the worst performance of his career. The character he plays is slightly autistic (I think). At least that's the way he plays it. Nonetheless he often unintelligibly mumbles his words. Fortunately, because this is a DVD there are subtitles available and they do come in handy

Audio:
The audio is presented in Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo and sounds good enough to capture all the wind and ocean sounds in the area. The dialogue often cannot be clearly understood but it can be heard just fine.

Video:
The film is presented in an aspect ratio of widescreen anamorphic - 1.78:1 and the image looks very good. In fact, it is the best thing about the movie. The colors are strong bringing out the natural beautiful surroundings of the Newfoundland area. The cinematography (by Jan Kiesser) comes across as very good with many rich colors and nice contrasts and hues in each scene.

Extras:
There is a fairly good Audio Commentary Track. Director Sturla Gunnarsson is joined by several collaborators including his DP Jan Kiesser and First AD Alex Pappas as well as a friend who asks questions to help move everything along smoothly. This is one of those commentary tracks where you can't believe they offer one but when you listen the film invariably becomes better. Sturla gives a lot of information and has much to say about many aspects of the film. Also of interest on the DVD is A gallery of production design artwork -- some of it drawn and some computer rendered. It's an odd extra because it's not the kind that you would necessarily go to again and again. The film also offers subtitles in English and French.

Overall:
Rare Birds is not a rare movie. It's a rather standard quirky romantic comedy set in a different locale. Much in the vein of Saving Grace, Local Hero or Waking Ned Devine the film tries but falls short of being fun and idiosyncratic at the same time. The DVD presentation is pretty good, the picture and sound are all above average and the commentary track proves to be better than the film. However, the film does seem to have a following of sorts (Ebert is quoted on the front jacket) and some may find it an enjoyable light entertainment.