Here's a pretty good article that gives a bit of a history of Jaws and also details some of the lasting effects it's had on the American movie industry. Give it a read. Report below in an online class discussion. Your comments should be thoughtful and thorough. You will be graded on quality as well and quantity.
SUMMER FILMS: ON THE BEACH
The Movie That Created the 'Summer Movie'
By TERRENCE RAFFERTY (NYT)
Copyright New York Times Company Apr 30, 2000
Twenty-five years ago, Steven Spielberg's ''Jaws'' created the Summer Movie as we know it: the action-heavy ''thrill ride'' sort of picture, aimed at sensation-hungry younger audiences, which moves into theaters around Memorial Day and remains there, partying hard, until the school year starts up again in September. ''Jaws'' opened on June 20, 1975, and its phenomenal popularity -- it was the first movie to relieve American audiences of more than $100 million of their hard-earned money -- helped turn Hollywood into what is now largely a summer-business town, sort of like Amity, the New England beach resort where the film's dire events take place. Watching the picture today, you might interpret it as a kind of allegory, in which the business community of Amity, refusing to close the beaches after a couple of fatal shark attacks, eerily embodies the ethics and aesthetics of the entertainment industry. The distributors and exhibitors do not shut down the multiplex even when they know that something lethal -- a ''Speed 2,'' a ''Godzilla,'' a ''Wild, Wild West'' -- lurks within.
This is not to say (as some do) that ''Jaws'' is responsible for the ''blockbuster mentality'' that has held sway over the major studios for the past couple of decades. When did Hollywood not try for blockbusters? You can pin this rap on any enormously lucrative picture you happen not to like; just from the decade preceding ''Jaws,'' suspects include ''The Exorcist,'' ''The French Connection,'' ''Love Story'' and ''The Sound of Music.'' ''The Godfather'' has the alibi of obvious greatness; even if it were the culprit, not a court in the world would convict it. The worst you can say about ''Jaws,'' I think, is that its success suggested, to the beady-eyed studio marketers, a link between the kind of movie it so spectacularly was and the time of year when it was released.
When studio executives first saw ''Jaws,'' they must have reacted like those old cartoon characters whose eyes would pop open and turn into dollar signs. The movie proposed a solution to a problem that had been plaguing the suits since the late 60's -- how to tap into the big ''youth'' market, but reliably. The studios didn't quite understand the appeal of pictures like ''The Graduate,'' ''Bonnie and Clyde,'' ''Easy Rider'' and ''M*A*S*H'' and certainly couldn't replicate it. (For that matter, they couldn't even figure out how to clone ''Love Story.'') But ''Jaws'' was, on the face of it, entertainment of a type the studios knew how to produce. At that time, action pictures were mostly being marketed to older audiences, but ''Jaws'' showed Hollywood it could sell action to kids too, with a few adjustments -- a faster pace, a hipper kind of humor, a stronger sense of horror and no Charlton Heston. (Mr. Heston had in fact wanted to play the police chief in ''Jaws,'' but Mr. Spielberg wisely rejected him in favor of Roy Scheider.) And why not release that type of movie in the summertime, when -- for the middle-class young, at least -- the livin' is easy?
The discovery of the action-youth-summer nexus is a stirring myth for marketing departments, a Grail legend for M.B.A.'s. Ordinary moviegoers, however -- and especially those over 25 -- tend to view this achievement as rather a mixed blessing. What if, some pleasant evening in July, you want to go to the movies, but just don't feel like a blow-you-through-the-back-wall-of-the-theater experience? You're out of luck, and that could make you a tad resentful toward ''Jaws'' and its spawn. But that feeling should be resisted, because ''Jaws,'' like ''The Godfather,'' is a great film. And it, too, deserves immunity from prosecution for the crimes of present-day Hollywood.
In order to grant ''Jaws'' the coveted ''Godfather'' exemption, though, it may be necessary for film historians and the higher-minded segment of the film audience to overcome a few prejudices about genre. ''Jaws'' is, after all, fundamentally a horror movie. There's a rugged, nautical-adventure component to the second half of the picture, in which the three main characters -- Police Chief Brody, an icthyologist named Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss) and the salty old shark-hunter Quint (Robert Shaw) -- roam the coastal waters in search of the giant homicidal fish. But the movie has a lot more in common with ''Dracula'' than with ''Moby-Dick.'' This great white shark is no Great White Whale, gorging on metaphor; it's a monster, pure and simple, and its sole purpose is to generate fear.
That's the essence of the horror genre -- in fact, the only way of defining it that connects supernatural thrillers about ghosts and vampires with sci-fi monster movies (''The Thing,'' the ''Alien'' series), and also with slasher and serial-killer sagas (''Halloween,'' ''The Silence of the Lambs'') that don't require the viewer to believe in occult forces, life after death, the Devil, or extraterrestrial organisms. The shark of ''Jaws,'' as conceived by Peter Benchley, the author of the best-selling 1973 novel, is a natural predator exaggerated just enough to turn it into an acceptable horror-story nemesis: it's described as a ''rogue,'' with atypical feeding patterns that almost suggest a purpose, a malevolent will; and it's larger than normal, making it, of course, that much harder to kill. Those are the characteristics requisite to a monster: a whiff of evil and an aura of invincibility.
And Mr. Spielberg, who had successfully attributed those very qualities to, of all things, a big truck in the television movie ''Duel'' (1971), knew even more than Mr. Benchley did about the mechanics of producing fear. One of the reasons the film is so much better than the book is that Mr. Spielberg is more single-minded in his dedication to scaring us silly; he eliminated the novel's distracting subplots, and his editing rhythm is so unsettling that the audience never gets the chance to relax, even during apparent lulls and scenes of comic relief. We're always aware of something awful under the placid surface.
How much an individual viewer actually enjoys that unremitting tension is, I suppose, a matter of temperament. What makes a horror movie more disturbing than other kinds of suspense thrillers and action movies -- police dramas, say, or the international intrigue Tom Clancy serves up -- is that the anxiety it generates is magnified by a sense of helplessness: you're up against a force that can't be mastered by reason. Many adults, especially those of the well-educated, professionally accomplished variety, don't like that feeling one bit and may complain about having been manipulated by a genuinely scary movie like ''Jaws.'' (If there's manipulating to be done, they're going to be the ones to do it.) Those of us who don't feel quite so masterly are a good deal more comfortable with the horror experience. Teenagers get it in a big way.
Two years after ''Jaws'' opened, Mr. Spielberg himself sounded a little sheepish about what he'd done, almost apologetic about the film's effectiveness. ''I have very mixed feelings about my work on that picture,'' he said. ''I saw it again and realized it was the simplest movie I had ever seen in my life. It was just the essential moving, working parts of suspense and terror.'' He was unfair to himself. Of the thousands of suspense-and-terror machines constructed for the movies in the medium's first century, only a few have made their ''moving, working parts'' function so smoothly. (Even though the movie's mechanical shark, famously, didn't work very well at all.) But Mr. Spielberg didn't want to be known as, in his words, ''a shark-and-truck director,'' perhaps in part because, like all young virtuosos -- he was 28 when ''Jaws'' opened -- he had a tendency to get bored with his own facility, to undervalue the skills that other artists would sell their souls for.
And he probably suspected, too, that as a director of horror movies he would never be taken entirely seriously as a filmmaker and might even wind up looking faintly disreputable. (The career of his friend Brian De Palma would, over the next 10 years, provide confirmation of that suspicion.) Mr. Spielberg could have used some of the magisterial confidence of Alfred Hitchcock, who was always inordinately proud of ''Psycho'' -- the ''Jaws'' of 1960 -- precisely because it was the film in which he exercised the most absolute control over viewers' responses. The master of suspense wasn't apologetic about creating fear, because it's a potent emotion, and he was fortunate (or, if you will, cynical) enough to believe that for a filmmaker no emotion was better than any other.
Hitchcock may not have been right about that. The sheer terror of ''Psycho'' is less complex, and less rewarding for the audience, than the metaphysical dread that informs ''Vertigo.'' And fear, it should be said, is potentially more dangerous than many other emotions: wielded by demagogues and propagandists, it can be hugely destructive. But it doesn't have to be, and it doesn't have to be moronically simple, either. ''Jaws'' is the proof.
Although Mr. Spielberg's technical prowess is ideally suited to the horror genre, his temperament really isn't. He brings a rather sunny outlook to extremely dark material, a contrast that weirdly enhances the paradox at the center of Mr. Benchley's story: the juxtaposition of summertime fun and sudden, violent death. (In ''Jaws,'' a day at the beach isn't exactly a day at the beach.) Mr. Spielberg doesn't merely juxtapose those elements but seems rather to unite them; they meet, somehow, at the horizon.
What struck me as I watched ''Jaws'' again recently (there's a good letterboxed video but no DVD yet) is how much more humor and beauty Mr. Spielberg brings to it than it really needs to be an effective genre piece. The interplay of the three men in the boat is often hilarious (think, for example, of the improvised-looking scene in which they drunkenly compare scars), and even the most shocking bits of carnage are so elegantly conceived that they have a sort of perverse wit. For all the relentless, terrifying momentum ''Jaws'' builds up, it's an unusually companionable horror picture: it doesn't oppress viewers with claustrophobic atmosphere or try to wow them with special effects. As far as I can tell, there isn't a single process shot in the movie. The ocean and the clear sky are allowed to be themselves, and so are the three sensibly apprehensive men who move through this gorgeous setting in search of the beast. ''Jaws'' makes fear look natural -- which of course, it is. In this picture, we understand terror so well we can even laugh at it.
I don't mean to denigrate ''Jaws'' by making it sound profound. This is not the sort of picture that wants the audience to think too hard. It's a visceral-experience movie, and its distinction, I believe, is that it's truer to the experience of physical fear than any other horror movie, before or since. I also wouldn't want to claim that the film's influence hasn't been a little pernicious. We'd all give a lot, I'm sure, to have been spared the overbearing action-and-horror fests of the past 25 summers (including, prominently, Mr. Spielberg's own ''Jaws'' knockoff ''Jurassic Park''). But it's time to let ''Jaws'' off the hook. Like the great white, it is what it is, and does what it does with extraordinary efficiency and power. And so what if most of its descendants have been terrible? If every summer movie were as good as ''Jaws,'' none of us would ever get to the beach.
Before it was a ''blockbuster mentality'', what do you guys think you would of thought of the film before it was released? Do you think it would appeal to you?
ReplyDeleteI don't think it would appeal to me because i've never really been a fan of movies where it's man vs. beast.
DeleteBecause it was the first shark movie of its kind, I would say yes. Otherwise, I wouldn't've been interested if the story had been overused a thousand times before. Even on the rare occasions that I do go see movies in theatres now, I never do it just because it's a presumed "blockbuster"; it's all based on how intriguing the content is itself.
DeleteI guess it would kind of just because it's different than what was around at the time
DeletePersonally, yes it would appeal to me because of the shark and action aspect of it. But after watching it those to things dont mean anything anymore. there is so much in this movie that contributes it to being such a good movie, "Blockbuster".
DeleteSince in today's terms i see man vs. beast movies as a joke, i would have thought very little of it since i would expect it to be a pity film. Back in those days, though, i would imagine that without the internet and the amount of entertainment we have today i would see it in order to experience something which was thought of as frightful.
DeleteI think I would becuase it's a good movie thanks to the music, drama, action, and actors.
DeleteI think one of the reasons any movie is popular is because people want to jump on the bandwagon. If their friends are all excied for it, it is contagious. I know that I would not have been that excited for it. ut if all my friends were going crazy about it and trying to get me to go, I definately would.
DeleteI agree with dakota because I personally think I would still like it because it's an intriguing plot and sounds interesting. Movies aren't all about if they are "blockbusters" or not. The content and plot is what keeps me going to see films.
DeleteNo matter what title Jaws is given, I would still enjoy watching it. It doesn't matter if it's called the worst movie or the best movie. It's always going to be a great movie to me.
DeleteI wouldn't go and watch this movie if I didn't know how incredible the story and characters are because that is usually what a like about movies. But, because it actually does have these things, as well as great atmosphere and suspense, I would say yes.
DeleteI think it would be very aplealing becuase it would have been the first shark movie. And also becuase I like movies that gives me a "thrill ride" as Spielberg's said.
DeleteI think i would be on the border of seeing it or not seeing it. At first maybe i would be too scared because "Jaws" came out in the summer and that's when people travel to places by an ocean. As a kid i think it would seem to be too scary almost. Eventually though, i would go see it maybe after i have heard more about it.
DeleteI agree with Antonika on that it kind of was the first shark movie of its decade. I think it would appeal to me because it is so different from what else had been coming out the year or even decade for that matter. As the article states, the only movie really comparable to Jaws is Pyscho and Drive, which was just a TV movie. I guess my point is that it is so different is why I would want to see it.
Delete"Although Mr. Spielberg's technical prowess is ideally suited to the horror genre, his temperament really isn't. He brings a rather sunny outlook to extremely dark material, a contrast that weirdly enhances the paradox at the center of Mr. Benchley's story: the juxtaposition of summertime fun and sudden, violent death." This is somethign that I hav definately notice in Speilerg's more recent movies, adna I think that is something tin Jaws that keeps you watching. Because even though the overall mood of a scene is happy, you know someone may die any minute!
ReplyDeleteI agree because Jaws really does seem like an overall happy movie with beach goers and little kids having fun. It seems like your typical fun day at the beach. Just the sudden blood and violent death really makes it a thriller.
DeleteI think I am going to agree on with you guys. It starts out as a happy scene then a shark attacks making it into a parent wrost nightmare. so in some ways it's a horrer movie and mostly others its a typical day at the beach. so its more like a happy movie with gorey scenes.
DeleteI totally agree with you. The way everything just flowed together. As Keelan Said, "He brings a rather sunny outlook to extremely dark material." It's summer and everyone is at the beach having a great time and then comes a shark attack. You wouldn't expect a shark attack in the day, most likely in the night for an horror movie.
DeleteDo you think if there were more scenes in which is wasn't so happy-go-lucky the movie would be better?
Delete"For all the relentless, terrifying momentum ''Jaws'' builds up, it's an unusually companionable horror picture: it doesn't oppress viewers with claustrophobic atmosphere or try to wow them with special effects. As far as I can tell, there isn't a single process shot in the movie. The ocean and the clear sky are allowed to be themselves, and so are the three sensibly apprehensive men who move through this gorgeous setting in search of the beast. ''Jaws'' makes fear look natural -- which of course, it is. In this picture, we understand terror so well we can even laugh at it." I love this statement and couldn't agree more. It was relieving not to have to worry about focusing on all of the editing and have it thrown in my face, and instead I was able to actually take the cinematography, shooting locations,and storyline itself for what it was. I was able to have my own uninterrupted interpertation, and for this reason I really enjoyed Jaws. (If you couldn't tell, my general trend on movies is the more special effects there are, the more averted I am to watching and liking it)
ReplyDeleteI agree. I felt jaws was more than just a horror film with a shark.To me it had more feeling to it than a lot of ther movies that are not in the horror genre.
DeleteI agree with your view on processed shots and i do believe that Jaws was a great film. I too love a natural looking movie but i also find beauty in movies where CGI is used for the sake of art. I think there can be a balance but CGI has obtained a negative connotation due to its overuse and budget cut ways.
Deletebobby-- agreed. If it's an experimental art film, then by all means, show us how talented you are with a computer. If it's an action movie.. please, incorporate some actual action that will actually thrill me.
DeleteI couldn't agree more. I'd rather watch something that has great cinimatography than a movie with constant edited special effects being thrown at you and you have to idea where to look or what's going on. In Jaws you always know what's happening, where to look, and where to focus.
DeleteI agree. I thought it worked perfectly with out all the special effect other movies would throw us. They went about this movie in a calming way, but scary at the same time.
DeleteDo you guys think that if they never showed the shark it still would be a good movie. Like they just show people dieing from shark attacks without showing the shark. I think it still would be because it wa the drama, music, acting, and the plot of the story all put toghther that made it a good movie.
ReplyDeleteyeah I kinda agree with this.. Joey said before he doesn't care for man vs. beast movies, and I don't either, and yet I really liked this film. Definitely NOT just because of the shark. I feel this kind of twist on it would cause even more tension and it'd MAKE a reason for a jaws 2.
DeleteWell, they have to show the shark a little because he's part of thge story. Now I'm not saying he makes the movie what it is, I'm just saying that he's a pretty big component considering the movie's about a giant shark.
DeleteI watched one of the videos where it said that the shark wouldn't work at first so they actually showed a lot less of the shark than they already did in the movie. I actually liked that it didn't show the shark alot and I feel like the suspense would still be added from people just dying from the shark attacks. I remember in the beginning of the movie, the shark was never actually seen when the girl died and I feel like that was so much more compelling and dramatic than just showing the shark.
DeleteWell like Mr.Cowlin said, all of those things combined made the movie great. If we were given subjective shots and fogged up water instead of a shark the entire time then it would have been pretty disapointing. There is a sort of imaginary component which is key for a good horror since your audience creates the monster but i believe that if you don't give any outline then the audience can go off and their thoughts can wander and create a monster which wouldn't fit into the entire plot.
DeleteI think not showing the shark when he killed the first two people builds up suspense and developes an ominous attitude for the shark as a character. When we finally do first see him when Brody is pouring blood into the ocean, it is so dramatic and one of the best pop out scenes in horror. Brody then delivers the famous line, "We're going to need a bigger boat".This line whould not have been as dramatic if we had seen the shark previously.
Deletewell i agree with you on the fact about the music and acting and all of that BUT them showing the shark added so much to the film. without the shark being shown they would have lost a bunch of scenes and it wouldn't have been as much of a hit. so overall the movie wouldn't be as great as it is without the shark.
DeleteI also watched it and it was very interesting that what you think would be the easiest thing to do turns out being one of the more difficult aspects of making the film.
DeleteThe fact that it doesn't show the shark gives it some mystery. You don't know how big it is or what it looks like so you don't know what they are up against. And when it does come it does not disappoint. Was it essential to show the shark? No, and I don't think it would've changed much. But it was an cool effect, and it was good to see the thing that caused all of the terror in the the first place.
DeleteI don't know if it has been mentioned but has anyone seen the movie Super 8? ecause that's another spielberg movie that never shows the alien until the very end, it builds up the suspense!
DeleteI agree with the mystery aspect, but you can't not show the shark. It's like in the new Halloween they show Michael Myers way to much, whereas in the original they show his face/mask less which in turn makes it freakier when we do see his face/mask.
DeleteI think the movie would still be great with out us seeing the shark because the shark wasn't the only thing that made the movie great, but how the characters interact with eachother and just the setting of the movie.
DeleteI agree that it would still be a good movie, but at the end when he blows up the shark it would be strang not to see the shark but just a big explosion.
DeleteYeah I agree with Jacob. I think that if you'r making a full on "Shark movie", we as the viewer need to see at some point what the characters in the movie are dealing with. I think people who get annoyed if Spielberg never showed "Jaws" himself, and just gave us water thrashing, and blood ridden water.
DeleteI thought it was intersting how Speilberg comment on his movie "Jaws" as the simpilest movie he ever made. I think that this is what makes the movie such a good horror film. So many directors over do it in horror movies and it is just too much and not beleivable. I think Speilburg had a good balance of simplicity and action/suspense to make the movie enjoyable to watch.
ReplyDeleteI completley agree with you. I thought it was amazing that Spielberg called it his simpliest film. Everything in "Jaws" has so much meaning to it. Every character has so much depth. It seems inconceivable that it was simple. But Spielberg is a genius and master of movie directing.
Deletei think its simply just a great movie no matter how much effort was/could have been put into this move the plot was structured really well which was what got this movie to succeed so much.
DeleteIn the extra credit video spielberg actually said this was the most difficult film he's worked with.
DeleteI totally agree with you.Even thought this movie was simple, it's is way bettter than most horror films with a lot of special effects. As Kendall said, "It had a good balance." The movie really did.
DeleteOk so after viewing the film "Jaws" what did you think of it? Also I want to know what would you do if you were a situation like jaws? which character would you be and why? what would you do differently or how would you react to the situation and why?
ReplyDeleteTo be completley honest personally I'd stay the hell away from a giant shark who enjoys eating others.
DeleteThis'll sound totally weird, but I'm a photographer and I really wanna be a storm chaser. in that aspect, I can see myself as Hooper because when you have a passion and you have an opportunity to really show that you know what field you're studying/in, then by all means carpe diem. However I hate vacations and oceans are nothing special to me so I can totally see myself as the sheriff just asking for a bigger boat so I can get the hell outta there alive.
DeleteWould you try and pet it?
DeleteIf I was in that situation I would be the scientest because he lives.
DeleteOh wow. If i found out there was a giant man eating shark at the beach, I'd pack my bags and leave.
Deletethat's awesome Ali!
Deletethe sheriff lives too...
DeleteI would be Hooper since i felt the sheriff is completely passive and i would not have the patience to deal with two men who argue over bigotry the entire time. I would also love to highly educated and rich rather than a man who acts on impulsive instinct which the captain embodies. I would take all the tools i need and do my job rather than care about the officials and ow much money can be made in return for human life.
DeleteThe first time I watched Jaws, I was a lot younger, but when I saw it again in class I liked it a lot more. I was able to appreciate the acting and cinematogrophy. I think Jaws is a simple story, but with the acting, directing and action, it is a great film that is perefctly balanced out. If I could be a character I would probably be Quint because he follows his own rules and has learned how to be a great fisherman through experinces, not a book.
DeleteAli--The scientist was a pain in the butt why would you want to be him? The sheriff lives, and he's cooler so I'm going to have to disagree with your opinion, which had no reasonable explanation ata all
DeleteSomething I would do different is bring those grenades that work under water, though I don't think they had those in the 70s.
DeleteBilly...what the hell?
DeleteI would be Jaws. All he does is eat, sleep, and produce offspring to finish the rest of Brody's family off. It would be a simpliar life. The only bad part is that you are guaranteed to blow up.
DeleteI agree with Matt's point. I would too be a shark/shark-man in order to finish off the Brody's. I believe that it would be fun and intersting if the shark had more personification and development!
DeleteBilly S why would you want to be one of the idot charters that died? Are you thinking about sueside there are concllers in the school
Deletein this situation i would not at all be anywhere neer water. i would let people that are more experienced and more professional handle it. i would also not let any of my kids into the water at all.
DeleteDanny Legittino he's rich why not be him.
DeleteAli, I didn't ask for a response
DeleteAswear the question, he's rich why not be him?
DeleteJust because hes rich doesnt mean anything. I mean yeah everyone wants to be rich and it would be nice but thats not a legit reason to want to be him.
Deleteyou spelled aNswer wrong...
DeleteIf i couldn't be Jaws. I think i would choose to be the guy that says, "uuuuuh Whaaaaaaat". I don't know why, but he seems to the guy who knows what he wants.
Delete"And he probably suspected, too, that as a director of horror movies he would never be taken entirely seriously as a filmmaker and might even wind up looking faintly disreputable" I agree with this statement because I think he's right to think that. Once you make so many types of one genre you get tagged as a guy who makes those kind of movies. Think about Jim Carrey, he's a pretty good comedian, then he goes out and does a movie like The Number 23, which was awful because we can't take Jim Carrey seriously. If Spielberg continued to do horror flicks he would be tagged as a horror director like Wes Craven. We wouldn't be able to watch movies like Saving Private Ryan, and believe that it was made by Spielberg without being surprised. I think that by Spielberg getting out of the horror business like he did, made his career as a director so good, and also made it known that he can do any type of movie without limiting himself to one genre like many directors and filmmakers do.
ReplyDeleteI agree cause just like in the remake of Psycho we couldn't take the new Norman Bates seriously because he was played by Vince Vaughn who is known as a comedy actor in romantic flicks or romantic comedies. Although they are actors and are supposed to be professional and just play a role, we take actors roles very seriously and identify them accordingly.
DeleteI agree with Spielberg when he called "Jaws" a simple movie. It is basically a below average B-movie idea. But he put so much effort into each moment of the movie and the acting is so good, it feels like you are there with them. I don't think it was fair that he bashed himself so much, but I think Jaws is a simple movie with incredible amounts of effort and an overall passion towards making it, it is hard to call it a simpl movie.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I think the public forgets the role of actors... the role of actors is to STAR in a movie and ACT and portray a story.. Instead, graphics and editing has taken over, so the standard for actors today is a half-assed job. Because of the quality of acting, I agree entirely.. that's what made a big chunk of the movie so successful. You could tell each man was totally in their part.
DeleteI agree i love that he took an average summer movie, and made a movie that's now mentioned some of the greatest movies of all time.
DeleteHas there been a half-decent performance in any summer blockbuster other than a few superhero movies? No. Most directors of blockbusters are focused on is making money without putting any effort in whatsoever. I saw the new Ghost Rider reluctanly with some of my friends. The most fun I had was laughing at Nicholas Cage's acting "skills." But apparently these movies keep making money so Hollywood will continue to crap out movies with awesome effects and horrible acting and story.
Deletei think that it is interesting how speilberg can say its an easy movie becuase all of these modern day movie directors see who can put in the most speacialo effects. who can make the most drama. and who can make a good movie when really none of their movies are good. the fact that jaws was all filmed on location and the way it was make with the shark and everything showed how little effort they put into the movie which really made everything alot better. by not trying speilberg made an awesome movie. when all of the other people try and try but dont succeed.
ReplyDeletesometimes backing away from the situation and letting it unfold itself instead of having your hands in it obsessively turns out for the better. I totally agree in this case.
DeleteIf you watched the 6 minute clip about how the shark wasn't working i feel like it wasn't just that he backed away but that he couldn't try harder. In the clip he says he wanted the shark in more than it was in which would have ruined the magic throughout the movie. I agree that it came out well but i think it wasn't just because Spielberg backed away but it was because he couldn't do anything else.
Deletei didnt mean he backed away i just meant to make a great movie you shouldnt put in as much effort because if you try too hard it just doesnt come out right. i have learned that from personal experience you just go with it.
DeleteDo you guys feel like the movie would still be as good if it didn't have the 3 main characters; the officer, biologist, and old sea captain? I personally feel like those 3 characters really brought the life to the movie, I feel like everyone could relate to one of them in some way. What if there was only the Quint? or maybe some other charcter? Do you think it would still be as good a film?
ReplyDeletenope nope. we need the trifecta here. like what we went over in class yesterday, it had all the most perfect components and even if it was missing one, you'd be able to tell there was something not quite sufficient about it.
DeleteThose re three main characters the plot line would be compleatly different if they tried to do without them. that wouldnt suicceed and i think it was what those three characters did acting wise is what helped them succeed more.
DeleteNo I dont think the movie would as good if they dident have the three main charters however I think if they replaced them with charters just as meingfull then thats a different story
DeleteHonestly no because after learning about archetypes and how they affect movies, I feel it would take away a lot of the movie's feeling.
Deletei feel that since the sheriff wasn't as much of a leader as he could have been it could have been some other archetype of a leader rather than a sheriff. You need the trifecta but i don't think you need the sheriff. He is generally pretty lame if you ask me and i think some other sort of official could have done his role. He's too passive.
DeleteI think the movie is best with all three charaters who balance it out. But the only way it could work without those three characters would be if it were just Quint. Brody is too boring by himself and he is not a nature man who would be able to catch a shark out in the ocean by himself. Hooper is too scientific to where it would not be man against beast, it would be more like science against beast, which would make it boring for me personally. I think Quint is interesting because he learned how to fish through experience and is rugged and manly enough to be believabe as catching a shark of that magnitude.
DeleteI think the movie could still have been a success without the three main characters, however, they are a big part in the movie. Also, for some reason I can't imagine it just being Quint by himself.
Deleteone of the reasons i think jaws became so popular is not just because its an awesome movie but because it was released at the right time too, during the summer when kids want to go outside and hang out and do things, perhaps see a movie?
ReplyDeletei also agree that it was awesome because it was natural fear. It was a force of nature harming innocent people and it can happen in real life. "a whiff of evil and an aura of invincibility." is what made Jaws even scarier and more interesting because the shark was invincible and i wouldn't want to be in the sheriffs place. would you?
DeleteWe said in class that it was an accident that he tried so hard, but I agree with you there. I think that is why the OSCAR winning movies come out at the end of the year. It is too cold to play outside so the parents hire a baby sitter and go see a movie. Also, because it is around Christmas, the younger adults can get time off of work to see a movie.
DeleteWhat i don't understand is why producers would not want to release films during the summer. It seems illogical not to release content when everyone is free and money is flowing and people wish to spend time having fun.
DeleteI liked the film, I thought it was a great film. evrything was so natural about. Even the horror scenes seemed natural.Speilbrg said, "Even if it(film) were the culprit, not a court in the world would convict it." And I agree wwith him. the Film was simple, but yet so powerful.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree! I think it is by far the best film we have watched so far. What i really liked was the naturalness of the film. There was something about it the just kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time!
DeleteI completley agree. Everything was completley natural with no big effect coming at you constantly.
DeleteDefinitely I liked the movies we watched so far, but this is the only movie that i walked out and loved.
Delete''I have very mixed feelings about my work on that picture,'' he said. ''I saw it again and realized it was the simplest movie I had ever seen in my life. It was just the essential moving, working parts of suspense and terror.'' When I saw this quote by Spielberg in the article, I asked myself how?! Why does he think that it was just a "simple" movie? In my opinion, Jaws is much more than a simple movie. It is perfectly staged and the story and character developement was great. It was all perfectly put together and no matter how many times you see it, you will always be at the edge of your seat waiting in suspence, even though you know what's coming. To me, Jaws is way more than just a simple movie.
ReplyDeleteI guess I can see why Speilberg would say this. I don't think he was getting his exact ideas on screen. For example, the shark and how it worked is an example of this. He might just see a bunch of problems that he didn't like to watch when it comes to Jaws.
DeleteI see what you're saying. When we were amazed with the shark swimming and attacking the boat, he's probably only seeing a whole bunch of problems with it.
DeleteExactly!
DeleteThe author of the article compares Jaws and Pyscho. I personally find it interesting that he would compare the two because they are both structured pretty similarly with a building story and interesting characters. Anyone else agree?
ReplyDeleteThe characters had seperate stories and those stories were built together to create the main story and in psycho you have it pretty much laid out for you like who the characters are and where theyre going and in jaws throughout the movie the characters develope so i disagree. i think they're pretty diferent.
DeleteI agree because their are alot of similar things between the two movies. Someone dies, people investagate, another person dies, two people kill/capture the force that is killing the people. Also they both are horror movies and keep us at the edge of our seats.
DeleteI agree this two movies genarate a natural fear that made this movies great.
ReplyDeleteIs this in response to my question?
Deleteyeah dude.
DeleteDid anyone not like the movie? or have a major complaint about it?
ReplyDeletemy only complaint would be why would they have to mess with a classic? they should've just kept jaws at jaws and been done with it. all in all though, amazing.
DeleteI know right they should just left Jaws in all its glory. Instead of making terrible sequels that tint the name.
Deletehaha i agree. jaws 2, 3, 4 the revenge was just a bit ridiculous. jaws was one of the movies that can't be replaced or made into another sequel because what more is there to do?
DeleteMy only problem with the film is at one point i could kind of tell the the shark wasnt real but it was only for a quick second so it didnt bother me
DeleteIf you see the video on how they made the shark, you would truly appreaciate a little more.
DeleteThat is not how Hollywood works. They can milk anything as long as it made money before. Haven't you guys heard of the sequels they made to the Disney animated movies? Though I will say it is not at all a good thing.
DeleteI think Jaws is just an example of a perfect movie.
DeleteI don't agree because even though both are a bit similarly structured in the way that they don't pop the horror right at you, there's a lot of differences between the two. The characters, the building of the plot, and just the overall theme are really different.
ReplyDeletePyscho and Jaws are just too different in my opinon, to be considered similar.
Deletewhat was your favorite scene from "Jaws" and why? what made it your favorite scene?
ReplyDeletewhen everything was sliding while the boat was tipping over and filling in with water. honestly, that scares me more than a shark in the water.. because once your boat is down, you're done for. and this whole scene was absolutely believable and it just carried itself out nicely.
DeleteI actually loved the beginning scene when Kristie first gets attacked by the shark. Just the whole way it was put together and I loved how it didn't just show the shark. I feel like it was just so dramatic and compelling at the same time. It really just made you kind of jump when the shark first bites her.
DeleteMy favorite sceen is when Brody is dumping blood into the ocean with his face is facing the camera complaining and then all the sudden the shark emerges from the water and it is the first time you see Jaws. You kind of know it is going to happen because everything is in focus and Brody is placed to the right of the screen where there is room for the shark to come into the scene. I think it is one of the best pop out scenes in movie history.
DeleteI like the part where they're all under the boat. It such a fragile scene becuause you've already seen the shark and know it's going to come back. The mood changes very sporatically. First they're angry and arguing, then they're happily singing and comparing scares, and the next thing you know, the shark attacks. This scene defines the whole movie in terms of suspense, characters, and atmosphere
DeleteThe scene when the sea captain shoots the shark with his harpoun gun. It gives us a hint that they just might kill the shark.
DeleteThe night scene when hooper is underwater and he's checking out the wrecked boat and he found Jaws's teeth and then theres a pause and the dead body just popped out of nowhere from inside the boat it just slid out so creepy! and that was the only scene that actually scared me so thats why its my favorite.
Deletemy favorite scene was when the sea captain fisherman got eaten by the shark becaus ethrought the whole movie you never actually saw a shark eat anything you just saw the water turn red. when you see the shark actually eat a humman it un wraps the story more and even the gross blood and gore added to making it look really good and it kind of screwed all of the other people on the boat because they had no idea what they were doing.
DeleteMy favorite scene, is when Brody is Overseing the beach. You can truley feel his anxiety when watching the kids and adults swimming in the water. As the camera angles get closer and closer the sweat on his head and blank star really transfer Brody's emotions to you. The scene keeps you on egde the whole time and never lets up.
Delete"For all the relentless, terrifying momentum ''Jaws'' builds up, it's an unusually companionable horror picture: it doesn't oppress viewers with claustrophobic atmosphere or try to wow them with special effects". I love this quote. It really explains why i like "Jaws". Spielberg never over do anything. No scene of Jaws attacking was overdone. It was all believable. Nowadays, we see way too much over the top scenes that we know can not happen. In "Jaws" everyscene is plausable. This what makes it a true horror.
ReplyDeleteI think that this movie is famous for many reasons mainly because it is the first of its kind. Before jaws there really was not any movie like it. Also there was a good amount of character development. This allows the audience to get to know the character more than most movies. An example of this is when Quint is telling the story of the submarine. There was so much detail that made the movie a step above everything else that was released that year, and even to this day.
ReplyDeleteLOVE THIS!!! yes yes yes
DeleteDo you guys think all the crazy sequels to Jaws tarnished the original?
ReplyDeletethis was my first time watching Jaws... and so in the past when I heard people discuss Jaws, I just kidna rolled my eyes. any movie that has 4 parts is probably useless. now that I've actually seen the movie, I think it stands on its own and really proactively asserts itself as a strong film.
DeleteNo because ID didn't see them, but the idea of it makes this movie less enjoyable.
DeleteIf they were made by the same director then yes. But since they were not, I would say no. But i think it is a little tarnished that Roy schneider did Jaws 2.
DeleteSequels are hardly ever good, and just insult the original. Unless it was bad in the first place, then you just wonder why they would even make a sequel.
DeleteNot at all! Even though they are called "Jaws" and are the sequels they are not even rated together because one movie (Jaws the original) is a classic and the others were just a waste of time and money.
DeleteI agree with Billy S. I havent scene them so I wouldent know. But I did see the trailers and it did look preety dull making Orignal look bad.
DeleteAll the crazy sequels to Jaws really emphasize all of Jaws great cinematic components of the 1st one. It shows that no matter how you try and re-make Jaws, it's not going to compare to the fantastic 1st version.
DeleteI don't think anyone can really complain about how the shark wasn't real enough, and that it was kind of "fake". I think at the time this was the best they could do with making Jaws look real enough for the audeince. It easy to say it looked fake because were so filtered by todays special effects like "Transformers"
ReplyDelete