JAWS (shark film)

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

The greatest piece of mainstream cinema?

A popcorn-munching blockbuster, but made with the relatively low-key, semi-improvised, art house-influenced grit of '70s 'New Hollywood'. A masterpiece.

It's a film I can barely fault.

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

https://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,57181.30.html

I'm so bored, repetitive and lonely.

[Keebleman]

Carl Gottlieb was on the Gilbert Gottfried podcast recently.  Great interview, loads of Jaws anecdotes.  Straight after listening I ordered The Jaws Log from Amazon.

https://www.earwolf.com/episode/carl-gottlieb/

[Kelvin]

https://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,57181.30.html

I'm so bored, repetitive and lonely.

You're not the middle one. You're great! And you can never have enough threads about JAWS (shark film). It's too good to be limited to anything less than three threads.

[thraxx]

Hooper:  Jaws (shark film)!  That's a 20 threader!

Quint:  25!  And 30000 posts on 'em.

[St_Eddie]

You're not the middle one. You're great!

Charming.

[Kelvin]

I don't understand. Did I phrase it badly?

[thraxx]

I don't understand. Did I phrase it badly?

How fucking dare you.

[shiftwork2]

A friend of mine dropped possibly the most deadpan and dry line I have ever heard by enquiring what it was about.  Doesn't really carry here though, the thread title is much better - a little masterpiece of brief wit.

[St_Eddie]

I don't understand. Did I phrase it badly?

Perhaps I misunderstood.  I thought that you were implying that the OP of the middle thread (myself) was a git, as in "at least you're not the middle one.  Unlike him, you're great". 

[bgmnts]

Never seen it.

[Shit Good Nose]

Carl Gottlieb was on the Gilbert Gottfried podcast recently.  Great interview, loads of Jaws anecdotes.  Straight after listening I ordered The Jaws Log from Amazon.

https://www.earwolf.com/episode/carl-gottlieb/

I can also highly recommend the Jaws 2 Log - in some ways superior to its predecessor.

[Kelvin]

Perhaps I misunderstood.  I thought that you were implying that the OP of the middle thread (myself) was a git, as in "at least you're not the middle one.  Unlike him, you're great".

No, no, no. I just meant that he's not repetitive (the middle of his 3 descriptors, and the only one I could comment on).

Your a good poster, too. We're all good eggs. Everyone's a bloody good egg.

[St_Eddie]

No, no, no. I just meant that he's not repetitive (the middle of his 3 descriptors, and the only one I could comment on).

Your a good poster, too. We're all good eggs. Everyone's a bloody good egg.

The only egg here, is the one on my face.  I apologise for misunderstanding your words so terribly.  I shall have a handwoven basket of wax fruits sent over to you, post haste.

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

You're not the middle one. You're great! And you can never have enough threads about JAWS (shark film). It's too good to be limited to anything less than three threads.

Bless you, Kelvin. That other shark film thread is a good 'un, though.

You made the point that Jaws might possibly be the greatest film ever made. I'm inclined to agree. I mean, there's obviously no GREATEST FILM EVAH that everyone can agree upon, but Jaws is practically faultless. It completely achieves what it sets out to do.

The direction, screenplay, editing, score and performances are exemplary. It doesn't matter that Bruce looks conspicuously fake on a couple of occasions, because by those points in the film you're completely swept up in the experience. Your suspension of belief comes naturally. Spielberg has masterfully ensured that the shark has been established as a genuine, terrifying threat.

Replies From View made an excellent point in the Jaws The Revenge CGI thread: Bruce is more frightening than a 'realistic' shark, because he's a grotesque, bulky, tangible monster. He has character. If they made Jaws today with a CGI shark, it wouldn't have the same presence.

Real life sharks don't behave in the way Bruce does in the film. A shark would never repeatedly menace three men on a boat, it would bugger off as soon as they started attacking it. Again, that doesn't matter. Bruce is a monstrous villain, a psychotic force of nature. He's not of this Earth, he's a creature from Hell.

You buy into his literally larger than life existence because Spielberg, Gottlieb et al surround him with recognisably human characters. You actually care about these people, which is an element lacking in so many inferior action thrillers.

When Brody finally kills the beast, you share in his elation. It's a beautiful, ecstatic David vs Goliath moment. You like Brody, you feel for him and fear for him. I still grin, even after all this time, when Scheider erupts into near-hysterical laughter when the shark blows up. As pretentious as this may sound, it's a truly cathartic moment that stretches beyond mere entertainment. Jaws is a sublime work of art.

That was a long post, wasn't it?

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

Never seen it.

It's quite good.

[St_Eddie]

That was a long post, wasn't it?

A long but great post, Ballad of Ballard Berkley.  However, at the risk of sounding like a cunt...

Replies From View made an excellent point in the Jaws The Revenge CGI thread: Bruce is more frightening than a 'realistic' shark, because he's a grotesque, bulky, tangible monster. He has character. If they made Jaws today with a CGI shark, it wouldn't have the same presence.

...I feel that I should point out that I was the one whom first mentioned the fake looking shark from Jaws (shark film) as being far more effective than a realistic CGI shark.  Having said that, Replies From View expanded upon that thought and in a more articulate manner than myself.  Here's the pertinent posts regarding the inherent superiority of the monstrous animatronic...

...There's something about the uncanny effect of it which is more unsettling and monstrous than the more realistic CGI shark...

...That half of 480p is doing their slick fluid, soulless fakery more favours than it is the original.

I think that your use of the word "soulless" is quite on point.  Though the CGI shark may look more realistic in terms of both appearance and animation, I agree that it doesn't hold a candle to the animatronic shark, personality wise.

"Soulless" is an interesting choice of word there. I think the CGI shark is less frightening precisely because it looks quite soulful. As St. Eddie mentioned, the mechanical one has an uncanny valley, zombie-like appearance and it's that lack of soul that makes it scary...

Personally, at this resolution I find it hard to tell how realistic the CG shark is, and when it appears convincing I find it distracting; suddenly it is like a real shark, like you'd see in an Attenborough documentary, but it's behaving in a way that seems unnatural for a shark.

That's the problem.  It's supposed to be a monster, not a real shark.  I mean, obviously it's meant to be a real shark within the film's universe but in terms of the audience's viewpoint, it's a monster.  As Replies From View said, the CGI version looks like something from an Attenborough documentary.  That's not scary to me.  Real-life sharks are very rarely a threat to humans.  The animatronic shark on the other hand, is its own thing; something not of this Earth.  A monster.  It's far more effective, in my opinion.

This has turned into quite a long post of my own too.  With 70% recycled material and all.  Not even all of it my own.  Scandalous.

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

A long but great post, Ballad of Ballard Berkley.  However, at the risk of sounding like a cunt...

...I feel that I should point out that I was the one whom first mentioned the fake looking shark from Jaws (shark film) as being far more effective than a realistic CGI shark.  Having said that, Replies From View expanded upon that thought and in a more articulate manner than myself.  Here's the pertinent posts regarding the inherent superiority of the monstrous animatronic...



This has turned into quite a long post of my own too.  With 70% recycled material and all.  Not even all of it my own.  Scandalous.

Apologies, Eddie. I stand corrected. You very eloquently introduced the point that Bruce, in all his uncanny glory, is far more disturbing than a CG shark could ever be. I was actually paraphrasing your post earlier, but that's because we obviously agree!

Soz, mister.

[St_Eddie]

I find it very surprising that in today's world of endless sequels, remakes and rebo... *vomits*  Sorry, I have trouble saying this word... reboo... *dry heaves*  Urgh... reboots, that Universal haven't made another Jaws (shark film) in all of the years since Jaws: The Revenge (inferior shark film).  I wonder whether the financial success of The Meg will set the dollar signs a-flashing in the eyes of those Universal executives.

I'm not necessarily opposed to another installment, I suppose.  I think that one of the key failures of the sequels was the reliance on sticking with the Brody family.  It became ever increasingly absurd that they kept on having issues with sharks (to the point of one taking revenge on the surviving family members).  Why not have a sequel that's set somewhere else and with new characters?  Then again, I suppose it needed really be called Jaws (shark film sequel) at that point, so um, what was my point again?

Apologies, Eddie. I stand corrected. You very eloquently introduced the point that Bruce, in all his uncanny glory, is far more disturbing than a CG shark could ever be. I was actually paraphrasing your post earlier, but that's because we obviously agree!

Soz, mister.

Like Jaws (shark film); it's all good.

[Nowhere Man]

I saw it for the first time a few weeks ago, tis quite good.

[the science eel]

I saw it for the first time a few weeks ago and thought it was shit.

Dreyfuss was about the only good thing - I'd forgotten how charming he could be on-screen. But the famous rambling (improvised?) Indianapolis monologue was dull and borderline incomprehensible, and the rest of it played out like an episode of a 70s soap - glossy, corny, often ridiculous.

I'm a fan of 70s Hollywood in general - many of my absolute favourites come from that era. And I like a lot of Spielberg (love Duel, for example). But this was a massive disappointment.

[Twit 2]

You are objectively wrong about all that.

[bgmnts]

It's quite good.

It better be.

[Shit Good Nose]

But the famous rambling (improvised?) Indianapolis monologue was dull and borderline incomprehensible

Not improvised, written.  Several times.

I won't argue with you thinking it's shit - it's all subjective - but please explain how the Indianapolis speech is borderline incomprehensible?


As I say every time a Jaws (shark film) thread pops up, or Jaws (shark film) is mentioned, it's not my favourite film of all time (it's certainly number 2 or 3, though), but I think it is the most perfect film ever made, or as close as any film has come to being perfect - the script, the direction, the acting, the pace, the editing, the cinematography, the comedy, the drama, the horror, the score, the length, the effects, absolutely everything is spot on.

[kalowski]

I will argue with the science eel he/she is wrong. It is not shit. It's a pretty incredible piece of work. The Indianapolis speech is borderline perfection, which is amazing considering how it got written. It explains Quint in detail, his beliefs and thoughts.

[Shit Good Nose]

I will argue with the science eel he/she is wrong. It is not shit. It's a pretty incredible piece of work. The Indianapolis speech is borderline perfection, which is amazing considering how it got written. It explains Quint in detail, his beliefs and thoughts.

Well, I loathe and detest Citizen Kane (I won't get into it here as I've talked about it ad infinitum in various threads over the years), so I am sympathetic and empathetic to people who think otherwise generally very highly regarded films are shit, and i'll never tell them they're wrong.  But calling a succinct character defining speech that vividly recalls an experience incomprehensible...well, that IS madness.

[Kane Jones]

Jaws is a masterpiece and anyone who says otherwise is literally a fucking bellend.

They're running a Classic Cinema club in my town at the moment, and I keep badgering them to show Jaws. It was released the year I was born so it's one of those films I never got to see on the big screen.

[Thomas]

Famously, Steven Spielberg kept sinking and malfunctioning as they were filming Jaws, so they had to direct around him and the film was much better for it.

The bit where Quint gets eaten was actually improvised, after the robot shark tore his legs off between takes.

And the titular villain of Jaws was originally intended to be a Komodo dragon, until the crew arrived at the ocean and noticed that it was full of water, so they changed the reptile to a shark.

[PlanktonSideburns]

Jaws is a masterpiece and anyone who says otherwise is literally a fucking bellend.

They're running a Classic Cinema club in my town at the moment, and I keep badgering them to show Jaws. It was released the year I was born so it's one of those films I never got to see on the big screen.

Seeing as you had almost certainly already been born when it came out in the cinema, you have absolutely no one to blame for not seeing it but yourself

[Shit Good Nose]

And the titular villain of Jaws was originally intended to be a Komodo dragon, until the crew arrived at the ocean and noticed that it was full of water, so they changed the reptile to a shark.

You know full well that that's bollocks - it was originally going to be Richard Kiel and a spin-off from the Bond films, but Kiel kept sinking because he was so big, so they changed it to a mechanical shark as they thought it would be easier.