I read the Reader's Digest condensed version of the novel several months - maybe as much as a year - before the movie came out. And then I read the entire novel in the wake of the movie. I didn't understand at the time that it was considered in some ways to be a really poor novel at the time, and certainly in retrospect it ain't The Godfather. The whole sub-plot about the mob was unnecessary in the book, and the sleazy affair between Hooper and Mrs. Brody would have killed the movie commercially had it been included. However, I do think that the movie should have included the death of Hooper in the cage as the novel depicted it, and after years of reflection on this point, I think that if they had filmed the ending of the movie as depicted in the book, it may have made it a stronger movie. In the book, the shark very realistically dies of exhaustion after many hours of making war on the Orca and its crew. Spielberg changed the ending to the famous tank explosion and author Peter Benchley was so enraged by this that he walked off the set and never returned. For years I regarded the blow-up ending as the superior one ("the shark just died" lacks a certain excitement), but I've come around to Benchley's side in my later years. Jaws was a serious movie that took its characters seriously, and the rather logic-defying stunt at the end risks making it not just another cheesy horror movie, but the father of cheesy horror movies.
Yes, jaws has a blow-em-up ending, but the characters are so beautifully crafted it elevates the film to “cinema,” as Martin Scorsese might have said lately.
I found a BBC review that sums up a lot of my reactions to seeing Jaws for the first time last year: ‘Jaws is no horror movie – it’s actually a comedy’ From the goofy holiday makers on the beach, to the inept small town locals, to the silly one liners on the “fishing trip”, the film just felt so silly to me. I am sure a large part of that is simply because the film has been so heavily spoofed over the years, but a part of that is also because the film, at its core, is a summer blockbuster, popcorn monster movie. It is supposed to be kind of funny and good natured. In contrast, I get very caught up in the suspense of a lot of Hitchcock films. Even the 1940’s film adaptation of Agatha Christie’s “And Then There Were None” got me rather tense. And I certainly let out a bit of a yelp the first time I saw “Wait Until Dark”, starring Audrey Hepburn. But Jaws, along with other monster movies like Godzilla and action films in general - like the Connery James Bond titles - just feel like good movie fun more than anything else to me. Although I certainly appreciate and respect their cultural impact.
Calling Jaws "a comedy" is oversimplifying things, but there is definitely a lot of comedy in the movie, because the purpose of the movie is to be entertaining. A straight-up tense bloodbath thriller movie about a killer shark would not have had a wide appeal in 1975. Spielberg cast a wide net, and he was correct to do so.
Oh no doubt, Spielberg played it right! And I agree, the film is not a straight up comedy. It is a blend of action/comedy/suspense/thriller/slasher. But the reaction of the reviewer (an adult who saw the film for the first time in 2015), was very similar to mine (also an adult who saw Jaws for the first time recently). In both our experiences, the comedy aspects tended to dominate over some of the other aspects. The reviewer gives their opinion on why that is the case, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t. I am not trying to label the film or comment on its quality. Just sharing my reaction as someone born in the 1980’s and who didn’t see the film until the 2010’s.
This is perhaps an example of a generational divide. I saw the movie when it was released in 1975 when I was 11, and I always have considered that humor and thrills were just as potent in the movie. The best movies of the old school always had a variance in tone - usually humor deployed at key points in a serious narrative - as a sort of seasoning to the entire presentation. Too many movies these days work so hard to present a "gritty" tone that they neglect the lighter aspects that make movies human and relatable. And who wouldn't crack jokes while engaging on an ill-conceived mission to destroy a monster shark? It's either that or go into blind panic. The humor in Jaws isn't really parody, it's consistent with how people respond to unusual situations.
Indeed! I believe this thread is very much a look at how different generations experience Jaws. That is why I also gave examples of several films from the 1940s-late 1960s, which I also saw for the first time in the 2010s, that did have some “bite” for me. So I don’t think it is necessarily an age of the film situation, but specifically how Jaws itself has aged.
My 9 year old son watched it with me a few weeks ago. He kept asking me to get it for him, and I actually had the blue ray sitting around. He loved it. I thought it held up quite well.
Exactly the same thought I had about 'Jaws', as the tension was created real well in that scene. Also, the jump scare when Hooper was diving and the Head popped out of nowhere(worked at least on the first viewing). I cannot recall when first seeing the Movie, but was in the early '90s. I knew enough about Sharks from interest(almost was going to attend a College to Major in Oceanography, but story too long to get into here on what changed that plan), and knew that there was no Rogue White Sharks staying in one specific area to attack people, as White Sharks seem to travel great distances, although might stay in an area where they can feed on Sea Lions, Seals and Turtles for a few months at certain times of the year. Also, White Sharks do not eat people(their diet once reach Adult Years requires High Fat, which is why Sea Lions and Seals are what they seek out and any Deaths are due to Blood Loss from one Mistaken Bite. So, 'Jaws' would have made more sense using a Tiger Shark, which will eat People or anything. Also, there is some irony that I assume in the 1970s, there were not many White Sharks in the Cape Cod Area(and Long Island Coast), but since Sea Lions have been protected in those Areas, now White Sharks are going to those areas in large numbers in the Summer, as the large Sea Lion Population is like a Buffet for them. Kind of scary how they are swimming in only 3-4 feet of water about 10 yards off the coast though, as even getting bitten by mistake, can cause some serious damage or in rare cases, death. When living in Coastal California, I was never concerned despite knowing a few White Sharks are most likely swimming around, or as some Surfers call one when spotted near them, 'The Man in the Gray Suit', as White Sharks if really interested in people, would lead to a lot more Shark Attacks than actually occur given the number of People in the Water. Now, Bull Sharks do scare me as they seem very aggressive and you can be only Waist Deep in Water, and a potential victim of their Bites which can take a Leg, but no plans to travel to Florida and go in the Water there anyways. Anyways, back to 'Jaws', it was entertaining the first few times watching it, but kind of silly that a White Shark was taking down a Boat to eat People. The opening scene was well done though. The Nails on the Blackboard Scene made me cringe more than any Scenes with the Shark though. The Shark itself looked real fake, but assume it was '70s Special Effects, and the best that could be done at the time. Now, 'Deep Blue Sea' where Sam Jackson gets eaten was a Great Shark Movie. Also, thought 'Open Water' was very suspenseful with people stranded in the water for a long time with Sharks in the area, and further out could be a few types of Dangerous Sharks like the Oceanic Whitetip Shark, which I think were the Sharks identified in killing people on July 30, 1945, when the USS Indianapolis was sunk by a Japanese submarine, after which hundreds of men floating in the ocean for days had been eaten by sharks. I still have not seen the Shark Movie with Blake Lively yet that came out a few years ago, but thought it had good reviews-IIRC.
The blow-up ending is, for me, one of the best climaxes in moviedom... after everything the audience has been put through, they need that cathartic release... Spielberg knew exactly what he was doing, he absolutely understood his audience. A whaaaaaaa...??? Jaws is a masterpiece, period. The fashions may have dated but the superlative film-making skill inherent in the movie has not... literally lost count how many times I've seen it, if it's on television, I have to watch it to the end... and every time is as fresh as the first. One of the few films that could be said to be practically flawless in execution... an utterly, utterly brilliant piece of work. And forget the sequels; Jaws is a one-and-done story...
I think all of Spielberg's films that were contemporary at the time they were released -- Jaws, E.T., Close Encounters, Poltergeist, etc. -- do come off being dated today. I think they're very much "of their time," so they have that 1970s/early-1980s feel. It doesn't bother me, but I get that a modern audience would find them a little creaky. But interestingly, the films that Spielberg did set in the past or in the future -- Lincoln, War Horse, the Indiana Jones films, Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, etc. -- all hold up much better. I would say the same thing for George Lucas. You see a film that takes place 50-60-70 years ago, you can kind of forgive a lot of elements of style, editing, pacing, music, and so on.
Isn't that funny, see, I watch modern films and for the most part, they are just 'meh' for me. Enjoyable, but a lot are forgettable. I can't tell you the last time I saw a new film that has 'Classic' written all over it for me. If I wanna watch something that I think is great, I'll go back and watch something like 'Jaws'. That's a 'Classic'. I can't really think of much of the last 20 years being 'Classic' material, 90's for sure..... I'm sure there's a couple in their somewhere.
I have the original LP on MCA plus the full score as interpreted by Joel McNeely. Both are very good, but the full score has a Stravinsky-like ferocity that doesn't quite come through as strongly on the original LP.
Then I'm willing to be the following: She wont like Close Encounters. Personally I go back and forth liking CE. I only like the Theatrical Cut She wont like Raiders. This move works better in the theater. It use to be one of my favorite films as a kid. Now, I think there is no depth to the film. Honestly, I still like Duel the best. Maybe she'll like that. I have unable to find the TV cut of the film. The one on DVD is the theatrical cut which some people don't like the added scenes.
She loves ' Raiders..' and so do I . Depth? None. Popcorn action/adventure and the good guy wins. All the sequels however are crappy.
Jaws is a classic, character-driven flick. Shaw should have won an Oscar. The novel ain't bad either. I love Chief Brody's thoughts about Lacoste shirts. Bruce, the mechanical and often malfunctioning shark, is a clumsy hoot. And he's 100 percent analog. Not to mention that it has one of the best dolly zoom scenes ever.
I don't think "ET" can be blamed for the commercial failure of those movies, as they inherently appealed to different audiences. "Thing" and "BR" were R-rated movies meant for adults, while "ET" was a family flick. Audiences just weren't interested in "Thing" and "BR". Don't forget that both got a lot of mediocre to bad reviews in 1982, so it's not like these were much-lauded films that got lost in the "ET" onslaught...
