IronWatcher’s review published on Letterboxd:
Watched in the cinema (75th visit in 2022)
I think most movie fans are amused by today's trash movies about sharks like "Sharknado", "Supershark", "Sharktopus", "Megashark vs. Giant Octopus" or "Sandsharks". What happened to the genre of this special subgenre of animal horror? Why do trash studios keep picking animal horror to exploit mercilessly? Yet this sub-genre was extraordinarily successful from the late seventies to the late eighties. From piranhas to dogs to giant insects, films were produced non-stop, which ran more or less successfully in theaters. Also the quality ranged from "ingenious" to "cheap". It was striking at that time that the shark was the animal that appeared most often in the movies. But where did the origin of it all come from?
In 1975 Steven Spielberg presented us the movie "Jaws". Without suspecting it beforehand, Spielberg not only created a milestone in film history, but established the subgenre of animal horror in Hollywood. Before 1975, the only successful genre entry one could find was Alfred Hitchcock's "The Birds." The rest could not be accurately classified in this genre or they were absolutely irrelevant. Nevertheless, it became a crowd puller and coined the term "blockbuster".
Nowadays, you read the synopsis and realize that it's just a variation of a story you've already seen. But when Peter Benchley published his book "Jaws" in 1974, this story was not yet as hackneyed as it is today. The story about a wild animal, which is killed avoidably, continues to murder and only one recognizes the danger is today an often used motif in horror films. But no film tells this story as brilliantly as Spielberg's original. But this is not because he presents us with a gory orgy of effects but rather because of the lack of exactly these components. But let's start from the beginning.
Already the opening sequence is terrific. A young woman runs into the sea at night for a swim. You see only her head, a buoy and the vast dark sea. Suddenly something tugs at the woman and she begins to scream in panic. She is tossed back and forth, shrieks and is pulled under water again and again. Even the supposed rescue at the buoy can't help her. Further screams, the fade-in on her panic-stricken face... she continues to be torn back and forth. When you think you can't stand it any longer, she is pulled under water one more time and all you see is the wide sea and experience a terrible silence. Probably the makers didn't realize at the time how phenomenally intense this scene is. You experience sheer horror without seeing anything at all.
And exactly this "seeing nothing" is the special thing about this film. Except for the last few minutes, the shark is not to be seen at all. However, this does not detract from the film, but makes the atmosphere even more exciting. Interestingly, this was not planned by Spielberg. The original plan was to show the shark relatively often and to stage the kills bloody. But during filming there were always problems with the "shark apparatus" called "Bruce". Not only was "Bruce" unthinkably prone to any technical problems... Spielberg always thought the shark looked too artificial. Even the third apparatus built was just not good enough for him. So the script was rewritten accordingly to show the shark as infrequently as possible. As it would turn out in retrospect, this was the best move and a secret of the worldwide success. Often only the dorsal fin can be seen or the yellow barrels, which should stop the shark. Up until the finale, the shark is only silhouetted, which allows the viewer to only guess at the actual size of the monster. This leads to a very dense and exciting atmosphere and from minute to minute the desire to gaze at the monster in all its glory increases. (In fact, even as a hardened film fan, you have to admit that "Bruce" really wasn't a masterpiece of the technology of the time. He looks absolutely artificial and moved woodenly. Why the same apparatus was used in the further sequels is a mystery). However, the apparatus was not exclusively used to portray the shark. Especially in the scenes inside the shark cage, images of real sharks were cleverly inserted. Nowadays, of course, this is noticeable to you, but this does not detract from the whole. Still better than depicting sharks as CGI monsters, as it unfortunately happens far too often today.
Basically, Steven Spielberg has done everything right. This starts with the choice of actors. The trio Roy Scheider, Robert Shaw and Richard Dreyfuss simply works wonderfully. Especially the childish power games between Shaw and Dreyfuss and the temporary reconciliation while drinking together are nice to watch. Shaw especially stands out when he gives the true story about the Indianapolis. The story is so eerily told by him that a slight shiver always runs down my spine. Scheider plays the fearful Brody confidently but unremarkably. Only in the finale, when he faces the shark eye to eye, he thaws and convinces all along the line. However, it quickly becomes clear what role the individual characters on board the "Orca" embody, but this portrayal is almost too clichéd.
As you would expect from a horror or monster movie, the depth of character is only hinted at. But you have to admit that Spielberg wanted to create a film that just entertains you and not a sophisticated character drama. But how well the actors fit into their roles can also be seen in the little things behind the camera. Scheider's cult line, "We're going to need a bigger boat," was pure improvisation. He saw the apparatus and that very phrase was the first thing that popped into his head. Intended as a gag, Spielberg found this sentence so apt that it was incorporated directly into the finished version of the film. The other actors do a decent job, but don't stand out at all. The main focus is on the trio and the shark.
The camera work is impressive for the time. Spielberg works with a lot of fast camera movements, which leads to a certain hectic pace. But at the right moments, the camera remains static, which does not distract the viewer from the horror. This should be made clear by the example of the second attack. A boy is attacked by the shark. (It is not enough that Spielberg already commits a clear breach of taboo here. The death of children is still a taboo subject in Hollywood today. Here this is still shown relatively bloody). The camera remains fixed on this attack without turning away. You have no other option but to watch this. This serves as a perfect combination between hectic and calm. Furthermore, the ingenious camera work becomes clear in the first-person perspectives of the shark itself. These effectively complement the overall picture. Likewise, one must also highlight the film music by John Williams. The notorious melody is still known today and has lost nothing of its intensity. The few tones still mean an approaching threat for you today. The quiet beginning to the hectic and loud end of the "score" work here just wonderfully. Not for nothing John Williams received the Oscar for the best film music.
Jaws" does not get away completely without flaws. The shark seems almost supernatural and gradually develops human characteristics. It seems as if he acts out of personal as well as calculated motives of revenge. Furthermore, it is said to have a malicious intelligence, with which it recognizes set traps. However, this can be overlooked if you see the film as an entertaining and intense horror thriller. Spielberg does not want to lay claim to realism. For it is precisely this mystification of the predator that leads to an enormous arc of suspense.
I'm so happy to have taken the opportunity to watch this classic in an IMAX screening. Still an absolute banger of a movie!
