Weekend Thread: Estimates - Mal2 36, Jokah 29.2, Zombi2 26.7, Addams 16, Gemini 8.5 | Parasite 1.2 (37.6K), Lighthouse 420K (52K), Jojo 350K (70K avg)

[Porthos]

2 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Show 20 normal people Jaws who haven't seen it before, ask their opinion without trying to influence it, and you'll get at least a dozen reactions ranging from "fine I guess" to "eh" to "that was bad."    

 

I understand that it was revolutionary, contemporaneously. But evaluated in a vacuum, from a modern perspective (which is not, I should stress, what I endorse as the best way to evaluate movies)...   

 

Well, I was being diplomatic before. The shark is glaringly fake. As a result there's not a real sense of danger anywhere in the movie, and the emotional stakes just dont work. It's pretty tough to spend a movie sharing in the characters' fear of plastic pulled by wires. It's also riddled with cliches -- which, I'M AWARE, weren't cliches back then. This is *if* you, for some godforsaken reason, wanted to look at it only from the perspective of a normal modern first time viewer. But from such a perspective, the film basically just fails to work at all.

[That One Girl]

.

Edited February 28, 2022 by That One Guy

[titanic2187]

I have seen few 70s that I need to constantly remind myself that it is a 70s movie to make myself comfort. Jaws, unfortunately is one of them, along with Star Trek, SW4, Superman. I guess it is a generational gap. 

 

BUt some 70s movie really stunned me like Apocalypse now, taxi driver and all president man. 

 

i guess this has something to do visual style. Some of the visual or editing  used in 1970s blockbuster have been seen as weird among millennial. Therefore 1970s drama appear to be aged better as they were not relying on technology which prone to be seen as "outdated"        

[Rorschach]

I used to think Jaws was just an alright movie when I was younger.
 

Then I rewatched for the first time in forever a few weeks ago for a class and realized how fucking stupid I was. Great movie. 

[Legion Again]

3 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I edited in a closing paragraph that will maybe keep things more restrained? Maybe?  

 

And I gave serious thought to just letting the whole conversation go. But sometimes you just need to speak truth to power.  

 

This will probably be the last post of mine on the topic though. I think I've stated my position pretty clearly, I predict some people know exactly what I'm talking about and some disagree strongly, and I dont expect much flow from one group to the other.    

[Darth Lehnsherr]

 For me "fake looking" practical effects don't take me out of the story nearly as bad as poor CGI. I guess I can accept something much more easily if I know it's tangible. But hey all film experience is subjective.

 

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Darth Lehnsherr

[Jake Gittes]

9 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Show 20 normal people Jaws who haven't seen it before, ask their opinion without trying to influence it, and you'll get at least a dozen reactions ranging from "fine I guess" to "eh" to "that was bad."    

 

I understand that it was revolutionary, contemporaneously. But evaluated in a vacuum, from a modern perspective (which is not, I should stress, what I endorse as the best way to evaluate movies)...   

 

Well, I was being diplomatic before. The shark is glaringly fake. As a result there's not a real sense of danger anywhere in the movie, and the emotional stakes just dont work. It's pretty tough to spend a movie sharing in the characters' fear of plastic pulled by wires. It's also riddled with cliches -- which, I'M AWARE, weren't cliches back then. This is *if* you, for some godforsaken reason, wanted to look at it only from the perspective of a normal modern first time viewer. But from such a perspective, the film basically just fails to work at all.  

 

In the context in which is was actually made, and released, and received, and broke boatloads of records, and had a huge cultural impact, sure, a masterpiece. 

We who love Jaws are pretty normal I think

[charlie Jatinder]

On exactly one year of joining this forum, I think this place is awesome. People actually know about box office here, so that's a win plus mods are awesome. 

My only encounter with Hollywood box office buffs was Deadline comment section, so if anything this place is no where toxic as rest of places.

[Legion Again]

To be dramatically more on topic, surprised that Mal2 is still holding on to 96% with almost 1000 audience reviews.  

 

OTOH that raw review number is kind of low for the time of OD we're in. I can imagine a lot of people saw it, were whelmed, and didn't exactly feel compelled to go spend their time giving it a 3/5 on RT.

[NamakFiskKa]

The only horror movies that will stand the test of time are Predator and Terminator (which aren't horror movies half the time) 

[Cap]

1 hour ago, Thanos Legion said:

Gone with the Wind hasn't exactly aged well either...

It has aged well if you thought it was a trash film when you first watched it at ten and still think it is a trash film at thirty. 😉

 

I would also clarify that the subject matter of Gone With The Wind hasn’t aged well, and it wasn’t without Controversy when it was released. 
 

1 hour ago, Thanos Legion said:

Reporting for duty.  

I feel like I can help you rectify this transgression. 

 

1 hour ago, Thanos Legion said:

Now one ancient super successful film that actually does age spectacularly is The Godfather.

I am always reminded of Gene Wilder’s quote regarding Blazing Saddles:

 

“If it came out today, I don’t think people would say it’s cute, it’s an old fashion film. It’s still a modern film — which makes it a classic.”

 

Whether You agree that sentiment applies to Blazzin Saddles is it’s own, separate discussion. But I really like that quote out of context.  
 

You’re absolutely right about films being a product of their times. They’re also more than that. Because they allow us to reflect on how we as a society have changed over the years, and how we have not changed over the years.

 

I recently just watched Inherit The Wind with Spencer Tracy and Gene Kelly for the first time. I was stunned at how scary modern the movie felt. It felt like something that you could release today, just as it was fifty years ago, and still be socially and politically relevant. 
 

Or take Singin’ In The Rain. Just replace “talkies” with “streaming services”, and insert the Jeff Goldblum “well, there it is” gif.

=
 

And for the record, the BTS story of Jaws > Jaws. 
 

3 minutes ago, NamakFiskKa said:

The only horror movies that will stand the test of time are Predator and Terminator (which aren't horror movies half the time) 

My visceral reactions to literally watching ALIEN on the big screen three days ago say nah, not really. 

[charlie Jatinder]

14 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Show 20 normal people Jaws who haven't seen it before, ask their opinion without trying to influence it, and you'll get at least a dozen reactions ranging from "fine I guess" to "eh" to "that was bad."    

 

I understand that it was revolutionary, contemporaneously. But evaluated in a vacuum, from a modern perspective (which is not, I should stress, what I endorse as the best way to evaluate movies)...   

 

Well, I was being diplomatic before. The shark is glaringly fake. As a result there's not a real sense of danger anywhere in the movie, and the emotional stakes just dont work. It's pretty tough to spend a movie sharing in the characters' fear of plastic pulled by wires. It's also riddled with cliches -- which, I'M AWARE, weren't cliches back then. This is *if* you, for some godforsaken reason, wanted to look at it only from the perspective of a normal modern first time viewer. But from such a perspective, the film basically just fails to work at all.  

 

In the context in which is was actually made, and released, and received, and broke boatloads of records, and had a huge cultural impact, sure, a masterpiece. 

I guess that says it all. Jaws isn't perhaps for someone in 2010s but lacks is IMO character connection. SFx and scares are perhaps outdated, in that case you need characters to rescue, which isn't case here, Jurassic Park does it better, or fwiw A New Hope.

[charlie Jatinder]

3 minutes ago, captainwondyful said:

It has aged well if you thought it was a trash film when you first watched it at ten and still think it is a trash film at thirty.

[Geo1500]

16 minutes ago, NamakFiskKa said:

The only horror movies that will stand the test of time are Predator and Terminator (which aren't horror movies half the time) 

 

The only movie that aged well imo is ''Logan's Run'' from 1976.. If it gets somehow HD remaster you would think it's a modern day Sci-fi movie. 

 

And not to forget the lead actress had amazing body on her

Edited October 19, 2019 by Geo1500

[charlie Jatinder]

15 minutes ago, NamakFiskKa said:

The only horror movies that will stand the test of time are Predator and Terminator (which aren't horror movies half the time) 

Shinning I guess. Worked pretty well for me. Not in re-watch I think it will.

[Lighthouse]

Meh disney always wins

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, Charlie Jatinder said:

I guess that says it all. Jaws isn't perhaps for someone in 2010s but lacks is IMO character connection. SFx and scares are perhaps outdated, in that case you need characters to rescue, which isn't case here, Jurassic Park does it better, or fwiw A New Hope.

Brody is the POV character in Jaws just as Alan Grant is in JP. 

 

The characterization, writing and dialogue is far better in Jaws as is the acting and storytelling across the board.  But if the human element doesn't work for you the film won't work.

 

FYI, the prop shark never looked real and that never mattered b/c everything else works like gangbusters.

[Rorschach]

35 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Show 20 normal people Jaws who haven't seen it before, ask their opinion without trying to influence it, and you'll get at least a dozen reactions ranging from "fine I guess" to "eh" to "that was bad."    

 

I understand that it was revolutionary, contemporaneously. But evaluated in a vacuum, from a modern perspective (which is not, I should stress, what I endorse as the best way to evaluate movies)...   

 

Well, I was being diplomatic before. The shark is glaringly fake. As a result there's not a real sense of danger anywhere in the movie, and the emotional stakes just dont work. It's pretty tough to spend a movie sharing in the characters' fear of plastic pulled by wires. It's also riddled with cliches -- which, I'M AWARE, weren't cliches back then. This is *if* you, for some godforsaken reason, wanted to look at it only from the perspective of a normal modern first time viewer. But from such a perspective, the film basically just fails to work at all.  

 

In the context in which is was actually made, and released, and received, and broke boatloads of records, and had a huge cultural impact, sure, a masterpiece. 

I saw it in a classroom with other college kids and they were all really into it. Most of them hadn't even seen the film before and I don't remember hearing anyone saying they thought the film was bad after the screening or in my discussion section.

Edited October 19, 2019 by Rorschach

[Cap]

4 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

FYI, the prop shark never looked real and that never mattered b/c everything else works like gangbusters.

This.

 

The movie is better for it too. They realized the prop shark didn’t work - or more accurately, kept breaking down on them – And we’re forced to rethink things.

 

@Plain Old Tele Again, why Jaws should be taught as UPM 101. 
 

 

 

[Xftg123]

Popular Opinion: Tim Burton lost his spark & became box office poison after Alice In Wonderland