Any film would date from decades ago, but the main leads are still fascinating to watch, even if the 'shark' isn't - wobbly and slow.
And that ridiculous head from the boat that scared me shitless in the 70's so many times? Lol
But still, tense in places.
Steven Spielberg's greatest achievement. FULL STOP.
shareSteven Spielberg's greatest achievement. FULL STOP.
--
Agreed. He was young and hungry and under tight studio supervision...as the years went on and nobody could supervise him, his movies -- even the really, really good ones(Close Encounters, ET, the Indiana Jones pictures, Saving Private Ryan) sort of lost the narrative tension and involvement of Jaws. Look at Jurassic Park. The leads simply aren't as interesting as in Jaws, and the presence of kids in most scenes makes it rather a family movie.
Weird thing is, in all the sequels and various rip-offs, nobody's ever made a convincing killer shark. They actually got more and more fake looking in 2, 3 and 4.
shareBeta, not sure how old you are but I saw JAWS in the theater back in ‘75 and there was never a moment when the shark didn’t seem real to audiences. I’ve found over the years that the strong story keeps the shark alive and menacing (for me). In fact, I’d still put it up against any CGI shark.
It’s hard to describe how terrifying the movie was when first released. It tapped into a real primal fear, and the shark seemed almost supernatural. Nothing like this had ever been seen before. Of course, much of that became watered down once the film entered pop culture.
Yes, this is true. The shark has always looked fake since day 1. They joked about it in Back To The Future, which was only a decade later.
shareUnlike most blockbusters churned out in the decades since, i don't think Jaws has dated at all. It has retained all of its power to thrill and terrify. The head scene still gets me without fail.
share"The head scene gets me without fail."
--
I saw Jaws on its first day of release in 1975. Waited in a very long line, saw it with a full house that screamed a LOT.
Fun: the scene AFTER the scene where the head pops out finds Brody and Hooper trying to convince the mayor to close the beaches.
But on that opening day, you couldn't hear what the men were SAYING. The screaming was still going on from the head scene.
Indeed, the screaming only stopped when everybody started...LAUGHING. At the billboard with the pretty girl on a surf board now screaming "Help! Shark!"
It was so great . A bunch of screaming turned into a bunch of laughing.
I caught the dialogue among Brody, Hooper and the Mayor, the NEXT time I saw Jaws.
Note: Spielberg said he conceived of the head scene because Jaws "needed a big scream sooner" than when the shark pops out at Brody on the boat. What's cool about the head scene is that you are fearful that the SHARK is going to come around and bite Hooper...but its a "head fake" to a real head.
ecarle, you are spot on in your analysis of the famous “head in the hole” scene. I was ten in ‘75 and remember being terrified by even the THOUGHT of Hooper going into the water. After the famous scare, Hooper quickly surfaces and swims to the ladder on his boat — but then just stays there, hanging into the ladder! Everyone in the theater was thinking the same thing: Get out of the water!
share“Get out of the water!”
I mean who the hell dangles their feet down and just holds on to the ladder after witnessing something like that?! 😳
That's a "good news/bad news" thing about Jaws:
The film creates -- in the very first killing scene that opens the movie -- the idea of the ocean being a "zone of danger," whether near the beach or out at sea on too small a boat. We're constantly in suspense any time a character goes into the water , or risks FALLING into the water ( a close up of feet in rubber boots skidding along the edge of the boat is tense).
The bad news is that sometimes characters -- Hooper mainly -- are not too bright in going right into the water, or hanging from the boat in the water.
Its a minor, minor flaw to Jaws.
"The bad news is that sometimes characters -- Hooper mainly -- are not too bright in going right into the water, or hanging from the boat in the water."
I think Hooper is more fascinated by the shark, rather than being afraid. He understands sharks and believes he has this one all figured out. I think that's part of what makes the movie so scary. Three men are on the Orca and, in an odd sort of way, they're all unprepared for this beast. Brody knows nothing of the sea, except that he's afraid of water. Quint is a great fisherman, but is blinded by his hatred of sharks. Hooper is blinded by his arrogance that his extreme knowledge of sharks will win the day. Once the shark turns the tables the real terror begins.
I think Hooper is more fascinated by the shark, rather than being afraid.
--
While I won't back away entirely from my belief that Hooper - and some of the others sometimes -- act in a foohardy manner with "the shark in the water" sharks ARE his living and he tells the Brodys of an encounter with one that "turned my inboard into an outboard." I guess he's willing to take the risk.
---
He understands sharks and believes he has this one all figured out. I think that's part of what makes the movie so scary. Three men are on the Orca and, in an odd sort of way, they're all unprepared for this beast. Brody knows nothing of the sea, except that he's afraid of water. Quint is a great fisherman, but is blinded by his hatred of sharks. Hooper is blinded by his arrogance that his extreme knowledge of sharks will win the day. Once the shark turns the tables the real terror begins.
---
Though the movie gets away with it, the shark is given a certain "thinking villainy" in its maneuvers against the hero trio that indeed makes things quite scary. Quint says things like "that was supposed to STOP it!" or "I've never seen one run before" , etc. Hooper goes down in his "shark cage" and it proves of no help at all.
I"ve always liked how, among the trio, each ONE is "alone against the other two":
Brody is a landlubber, hates, the ocean. Quint and Hooper are "men of the sea."
Hooper is rich. Brody and Quint are middle-class and working class, respectively.
Quint is somewhat insane. Brody and Hooper are sane.
This "one against two" element keeps the three men both in different alliances and in different isolation as the film goes on.
Saw it the other night. I don't think it's dated at all. The shark looks more real than any CGI could.
shareI thought the shark looked pretty convincing in most scenes. Isn't the story that "Bruce", the animatronic shark, was faulty, so they limited the amount of time he had on screen as a result? I think that worked in the film's favour.
shareGreatest movie ever made.
shareIt gets my vote no doubt.
shareNot dated. Great action/adventure/horror film. Superb cast, great performances...that's all!!
shareI think the people who say the shark looks good need to watch this film without nostalgia eyewear. The shark looks awful. Especially the part where it hops on the boat. Or when it's eating Quint and you can see that some of its teeth are bending as they make contact with Quint.
Jaws is a well acted, written and directed movie. It holds up as long as we don't see the shark or if we do it's only fleetingly. Once the camera lingers on the shark -- like during the Orca scenes -- Jaws becomes increasingly hard to take seriously.
Jaws lives up to its rep provided it emulates the best horror movies and suggests rather than shows.
Still the greatest movie ever made.
shareThat's what sharks look like and how they move in real life when they're out of water. They just flop around and look kinda artificial. CGI would make it look too good and unrealistic. Also, it was made in 1975 LOL...... what did you expect? It's not "dated" it's just old school filmmaking.
shareYOUR NAME PUTS YOU AS CLOSE TO THE IGNORE LIST AS ANYONE,EVER...RIDICULOUS CHILD.
shareKowalski Where the hell did you come from? Why would I care to be ignored by you(or anybody)? I don't know you nor was I talking to you. So my name triggered you? I guess you can't handle reality. "RIDICULOUS CHILD"..... no, I'm an adult with common sense and logic.
shareI DONT IGNORE...YOUR NAME IS STUPID, AS IS WHAT YOULL BE SAYING WITH IT I IMAGINE...FUNNY HOW CHILDREN ALWAYS THINK THEYRE SO SMART.🙂
shareIn need of a remake. Probably one of the few films that could be improved with nothing more than a Gus Van Sant shot for shot remake with simply better effects and production values. The shark is really bad when it tries to eat the boat. If it weren't for the shock of it popping up and you just saw it you would just laugh because it is so unbelievable.
shareI would hate to see a remake. This movie is perfect in its imperfections. They are part of its charm. And without a doubt....this movie is a perfect storm of time, place, actors, story, editing, score, etc. Part of what makes it so great is the 70's era...and the simple locales on Martha's Vineyard. I'd hate to see a modern-day Jaws, set in 2020. It would kill the charm and effect. For starters, if they ran into trouble out at sea, they could just pull out their cell phones. Also, in a modern-day setting....the moment a second shark attack happened, TMZ, CNN, etc, etc....would spill into town and make a whole news production out of it.
Now, you might just be suggesting keeping the era and setting in the 70's....and just polishing it up. But even that (IMO) would be a mistake....on par with colorizing Casablanca. Some films are just so perfect (even with the flaws inherent with the times they were made)....they should never get touched or improved upon.
HE DIDNT SUGGEST TOUCHING OR IMPROVING JAWS..THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE...HE ASKED FOR A REMAKE,WHICH DOESNT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE ORIGINAL...EXCEPT MAYBE A SHOT OF PUBLICITY ADRENALINE.
shareUnfortunately, a remake (IMO) does in some way taint the original, kinda like Jaws 3D and Jaws The Revenge tainted the original. For starters, future generations of kids will see the newer Jaws production and will completely discard the original as being an oldie and way out of date. Modern TV and streaming schedules will program the newer, glossier, CGI-laden Jaws "remake"....while the original might get relegated to TCM, at best.
A newer, glossier remake would be similar to what happened with the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory remake.....just a bad, BAD idea. A lifeless, soulless attempt to improve on a classic.
Producers should just come up with a new, different shark-based story...and tell it in modern times. You CAN'T bring Jaws to modern times (biggest mistake in the history of movie-making mistakes).....and, you shouldn't try and do a remake in a 1975-era Amity......(for starters, how could you possibly top having Shaw, Dreyfuss and Scheider?)
I'm sure I'm not in the minority when I say.....leave Jaws the eff ALONE, but I guess we'll find out......
REMAKE GOOD = MORE TALK OF THE ORIGINAL PLUS NEW GOOD MOVIE.
REMAKE BAD = ORIGINAL CALLED KING,REMAKE FORGOTTEN.
WIN/WIN.
Did you suggest this as irony, because Gus Van Sant’s remake of Psycho was fcking abysmal
shareVan Sant tried to redo it shot for shot but it failed because of bad casting. The problem you have is that you need to cast a remake well and then not try and update the time period of the movie. In Jaws you would basically want to redo it and keep it in the same time period but really only focus on something better than the miserable latex and foam shark that looks like shit.
shareThat would never work because what made Jaws great was the chemistry of the cast. Recasting them with modern actors would be a waste of time and an inevitable failure. It would be easier to just to use CGI to make the model shark look more realistic.
shareYes, they could probably do that if they have a decent copy of the film somewhere. The last time I saw it the movie seemed to be in very poor shape.
share