How does 'The Birds' by Alfred Hitchcock conform to or subvert the narrative theories of Todorov and Propp?

Vladimir Propp broke up fairy tales into sections. Through these sections he was able to define the tale into a series of sequences that occurred within the Russian fairy-tale. Usually there is an initial situation, after which the tale usually takes the following 31 functions. Vladimir Propp used this method to decipher Russian folklore and fairy tales. First of all, there seem to be at least two distinct types of structural analysis in folklore [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Propp 1.     The villain — struggles against the hero.
2.     The dispatcher —character who makes the lack known and sends the hero off.
3.     The (magical) helper — helps the hero in the quest.
4.  The princess or prize — the hero deserves her throughout the story but is unable to marry her because of an unfair evil, usually because of the villain. The hero's journey is often ended when he marries the princess, thereby beating the villain.
5.    Her father — gives the task to the hero, identifies the false hero and marries the hero, often sought for during the narrative.
6.    The donor —prepares the hero or gives the hero some magical object.
7.    The hero or victim/seeker hero — reacts to the donor, weds the princess.
8.     False hero — takes credit for the hero’s actions or tries to marry the princess.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Propp

After watching the movie I have decided that certain characters conform to Propps theory, however some of the characters subvert the theory due to the fact that the characters gender challenges the theory.  The villain in the movie is quite clearly the birds as they cause so much damage and pain throughout the film and conforming to Propps theory struggles against the hero. In my opinion the dispatcher in the film is Mitch’s city neighbour as he is the character who gives the hero (Melanie Daniels) the information she needs to go on her mission to Bodega Bay to see Mitch.
    
 The helper in the movie in my opinion is Annie Hayworth even though initially she seemed to be quite sceptical and untrusting towards Melanie due to the fact she had previous relations with Mitch. However she helps her as she allows Melanie to stay with her when she first arrived at Bodega Bay and gave her information about Mitch’s sister Cathy.        

The princess in the movie in my opinion is Mitch, even though he saves Melanie and others on numerous occasions and conforms to the typical stereotype by being a large rather masculine male, this challenges the convention of the theory as the theory states the princess should be a female. The reason I believe Mitch is the princess, is that in my opinion the hero (Melanie) deserves him after all the effort she went through to deliver the love birds and to meet him. Also you could say how the villain in their circumstances could be Mitch’s mum as she is preventing them from coming together and becoming a couple.I believe the father in this movie is Mitch’s mother Lydia Brenner, this again challenges the convention as this implies that she is in charge of her family and dictates their decisions this stereotypically would be done by the father. Even though she doesn’t fit all aspects of this theory in my opinion she conforms to most of the conventions and is the best fit. For example throughout the movie she was reluctant of Mitch’s and Melanie’s relationship and yet towards the end of the movie (One could presume when the villain was conquered, even though the movie ended quite ambiguously) she hugged her and looked at her in a loving and caring manner. This in my opinion is her accepting her and almost consenting to Mitch’s and Melanie’s relationship.The donor somewhat could be the lady who sold Melanie the love birds as without the love birds she would unable to deliver them Cathy. I think the hero in this movie is Melanie, this challenges the conventions of the typical hero as usually the hero would be a male and yet in my opinion the hero is a female. The theory states that the hero weds the princess and in my opinion this is likely to happen due to the fact that as the movie progresses the relationship grows stronger and they become closer. Even though she doesn’t save as many people as Mitch does physically I think she saves Mitch’s and his mother relationship. As I think her trying so hard and caring so much for Mitch allowed her mother to finally trust someone and feel like she wasn’t being abandoned , a good quote used from the movie was “Someone ought to tell her she’d be gaining a daughter” In my opinion there were no false heroes in this movie. 



Todorov theory states that that there are five main stages of a conventional narrative and these are:

1. A state of equilibrium at the outset; (Everything is normal)
2. A disruption of the equilibrium by some action;
3. A recognition that there has been a disruption;
4. An attempt to repair the disruption;
5. A reinstatement of the equilibrium
http://www.longroadmedia.com/resources/Narrative%20Theory%20Hand-Out.pdf The equilibrium is disrupted when there are random bird attacks accounted throughout Bodega Bay but as an audience the first time we see this when Melanie is attacked in the boat after delivering the love birds.
 
In my opinion the recognition of the distribution is after the attack on school when they were discussing the numerous birds attack around town and what they think it means, this is when we are introduced to numerous theories including that of an apocalypse by a drunken man.

An attempt to repair this could be when Mitch suggested to evacuate the town however in my opinion this is a rather sceptical way of repairing the situation and is more a way of escaping it.

In my opinion the film (The Birds) conforms to this theory to a certain degree however due to the very ambiguous ending we are unable to determine if the equilibrium is reinstated; although one presumes that it was as they drove off into the sunset which in my opinion is a stereotypical ending to a movie, which usually results in a happy ending.