One of the greatest (despite the shark)

Rating: 10/10 (25 December 2003)

We all remember the first time we saw JAWS. It is a strange quirk that a film so scary is committed to the earliest memories of so many of us.

We all remember being taunted by the score. We remember the fear and admiration when Hooper goes down in the cage, and we remember the absolute horror of Ben Gardners eyeless head screaming out at us.
From its earliest screenings on TV, through the video boom and beyond, JAWS has somehow been left to wallow towards the 'family' end of the film listings. Perhaps it is Speilbergs subsequent output, or maybe it is the increasingly bad sequels that have given JAWS this peculiar 'spin'.

I would argue that the well documented production problems encountered by speilberg and his crew, not only contributed to the films success, but also helped to create this unusual positioning of the film within the public psyche. Speilberg was unable to use as much footage of the mechanical shark as he had hoped. Salt water, and the sheer ambition of the animatronics involved conspired to hold up production and force re-write after re-write. It was during this process that the films ebb and flow (apologies), evolved.

It was here that the lack of shark would manifest itself as the prolonged sense of foreboding within the film. What developed was a real sense of the fear of the unknown, and this is where much of the films success lies. It tapped into the fear of what might be in the closet, or under the bed. The monster that we know is there even if we cannot see it.
It would be interesting to see if our memories of how old we were when we first watched JAWS are correct, or whether it is in re-living the real childhood experience of the hidden monster that makes us believe that we were younger than we were.
It is certainly true that Speilbergs youthful brilliance, and Williams unforgettable musical motif carry what could have been an enjoyable B-movie on to a much higher cinematic plane.