You are right. I thought the movie came first, when I saw it as a kid. So I thought the book was a tie-in, because of the cover of the book with the movie poster image. But I like the book, also.... in form of The original hardbound, Double Day, the Bantam edition and the illustrated Reader's Digest Condensed editions.
I'm just really lucky in that regard. When we were moving my in-laws' house they had a ton of paperbacks in their collection including two copies of Jaws. So they were in a closet on a shelf for decades and I just happened to inherit them.
Jaws also is similar to Cujo in that both represent the Beast of adultery. In Cujo the book Ted, the boy, dies and in Jaws there's the dead unborn dolphin. Children greatly suffer from the beast. Hoppers death is foreshadowed when Ellen, like a shark, gets what wants then discards the body.
Very cool! I actually need to see the movie again, but I thought the book was much more interesting and had more layers than people might recognize. I'm curious to see how I'll react to the movie after reading.
I’m rereading Jaws. A bit more editing and another revision and the book may have been great. I think my issue with the book is that it’s full of good ideas and so-so execution.
I suppose you're right. It's so iconic, that it sort of rises above close inspection. Have you seen my interview with John Anthony DiGiovanni? He's the artist for the Suntup edition and his work is alive. Superb art for this book.
@@THEJEFFWORD I’m catching up with your channel. I subscribed a few days ago. Posted an unboxing of the first edition of Jaws yesterday. I watched the movies and then this fake Jaws called Cruel Jaws which was so bad it was fun.
U can't bring Me down. With this review. Your Suicidal Tendencies hat , or whatever is behind You is influencing my comments. I'm one of the few that likes the Book.
Great review. Here’s mine: This story is a mans fear of being cuckold (there's something wrong in my marriage) presented alongside his fear of nature (there's something wrong in the water). Plus the shark sex allusion was hot.
The movie never even suggested that the shark was supernatural or looking for revenge, what on earth are you talking about? The movie, exactly like the book, focuses on the abnormal size and on the surprising intelligence of the shark, both in the book and movie, Quint is always a step behind and gets more and more worried as all his attemps at killing the shark fail, but there is no mention of anything supernatural and the shark is nothing more than an animal, albeit hated by Quint, exactly like the book, and I should know, I read the novel three times and saw the movie about twenty times. The supernatural and the revenge aspect only appear in the sequels, which were not directed or produced by Spielberg. It's pretty clear you don't know the movie very well, which is fine, but then why compare it to the novel? With all due respect, I just don't get it.
I had to rewatch my review to see where the mix-up happened and I'm not really making the claim that the movie did these things (revenge, supernatural elements) but movie audiences reaction certainly made the shark into more than animal and so did the marketing. When things are blown up out of a =ll natural proportion on the big screen hyperbole ensues. I really don't focus on the movie because I don't care about the movie. this was a book review and I was surprised by how deep it was.
@@THEJEFFWORD I get you're not fond of the movie, i'm merely saying that in the book, the shark is abnormally clever (he outwits a seasoned fisherman), abnormally huge (he sinks a sizeable boat) and abnormally strong (he destroys a shark cage and dives with three barrels, an impossible feat according to Quint). Seems pretty clear to me that Benchley feels his shark is an unstoppable force of nature, dare I say, a monster in everything but name, which is fine by me, I don't begrudge him that choice.
@@CHALETARCADE You might find my interview with Wendy Benchley (Peter's widow) interesting. They weren't happy with the way sharks were demonized after the film was released. I do agree that the shark was a force of nature and that is probably the point. There's this indomitable force that is made all the more lethal by the follies of the people on land. ua-cam.com/video/inao2clM0H4/v-deo.htmlsi=eomDo1sP8qX6W3j2
@@THEJEFFWORD I know about Benchley's remorse, the DVD featurettes mentioned it. Even Spielberg had second thoughts about the bleakness and violence of the film. As for the long-lasting impact of the movie on bathers, I see it as a testament to the absolute brilliance of Spielberg's direction. The movie is way more terrifying and tense than the novel, which I always enjoyed, but which somewhat dilutes the main menace with the superfluous mafia and adultery plots. What I'm getting at is that you can't begrudge a storyteller his talent and efficiency.
@@CHALETARCADE Oh I'm not. I might have seen the movie a total of once, but I certainly know the impact on our culture, on cinema, on soundtracks, on summer movie releases, on phobias, and on the legacy that includes Shark Week. It's a movie people "know" without ever having seen it. And for that, Spielberg is legendary. I can admit all that and still not really care about the movie. And my affection for the book is driven in part by the low expectations I applied to the story from my impression of the movie. Jaws the movie is a cultural phenomenon that the book can't hope to match--even though it inspired the movie. And that all makes sense to me.
This classic monster tale of human nature problematic that happened have sharks attack people it way they deal with it social problematic people dealing with wanting be high society to low society thinking and problem with dealing wrong in their town situation story
@@THEJEFFWORD time to switch your style up then. I'm clean shaved (face) these days and it's a ball-ache. Just so people don't think my beard is deliberate. You can't even just do nothing now
Big Lebowski reference nice
Always and as often as possible.
You are right. I thought the movie came first, when I saw it as a kid. So I thought the book was a tie-in, because of the cover of the book with the movie poster image. But I like the book, also.... in form of The original hardbound, Double Day, the Bantam edition and the illustrated Reader's Digest Condensed editions.
Those are some wonderful editions to own. I was surprised by how much I enjoyed reading it, not my normal selection, but a good one.
I have that Bantam book edition of Jaws, also. But yours looks as good as new... like Mint Condition! Way to take good care of it!
I'm just really lucky in that regard. When we were moving my in-laws' house they had a ton of paperbacks in their collection including two copies of Jaws. So they were in a closet on a shelf for decades and I just happened to inherit them.
You brought the dog to a book review? Walter!
I didn’t rent it shoes. I’m not buying it a beer. He’s not taking a turn.
It’s a show dog. With papers.
@@THEJEFFWORD 😂😂
I am going to the beach tomorrow, spending four hours reading jaws, then four in the water 😅
Maybe swim before you read. :D
Jaws also is similar to Cujo in that both represent the Beast of adultery. In Cujo the book Ted, the boy, dies and in Jaws there's the dead unborn dolphin. Children greatly suffer from the beast. Hoppers death is foreshadowed when Ellen, like a shark, gets what wants then discards the body.
That's a solid take and one I hadn't considered. Thank you for sharing it and making the reading even deeper.
I did a vlog for the three Jaws books (there's a playlist on my channel). I preferred the book and was disappointed in Ellen (and Hooper).
Very cool! I actually need to see the movie again, but I thought the book was much more interesting and had more layers than people might recognize. I'm curious to see how I'll react to the movie after reading.
I’m rereading Jaws. A bit more editing and another revision and the book may have been great. I think my issue with the book is that it’s full of good ideas and so-so execution.
I think I had low expectations when I jumped in. So I was very happy with the book. I never was a fan of the movie.
the shark on the first edition cover is pretty sedate.
I suppose you're right. It's so iconic, that it sort of rises above close inspection. Have you seen my interview with John Anthony DiGiovanni? He's the artist for the Suntup edition and his work is alive. Superb art for this book.
@@THEJEFFWORD I’m catching up with your channel. I subscribed a few days ago. Posted an unboxing of the first edition of Jaws yesterday.
I watched the movies and then this fake Jaws called Cruel Jaws which was so bad it was fun.
I enjoyed your review
I appreciate that! Thank you.
Actaully it does hint alot to the shark being evil.
Jaws is a villian so don't make him into a normal shark because he is far from normal
There definitely is something wrong with that shark.
U can't bring Me down.
With this review.
Your Suicidal Tendencies hat , or whatever is behind You is influencing my comments.
I'm one of the few that likes the Book.
Yes it’s ST! And you have great taste in music and books. I don’t see why anyone would hate Jaws.
@@THEJEFFWORD 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Great review. Here’s mine: This story is a mans fear of being cuckold (there's something wrong in my marriage) presented alongside his fear of nature (there's something wrong in the water). Plus the shark sex allusion was hot.
Love it! Great review and a great take on the book. Also great hearing from you-you haven’t commented in a long time. Welcome back!
@@THEJEFFWORD found an English review: ua-cam.com/video/PLNA_57a9qE/v-deo.html
You look like Matt Hoper.
I WISH I had his money. Or his talent. Or anything marketable.
Pls make a review about Moby Dick
Ahhh I’ll give it a shot. Sad of me not having read it already.
Oh shit. I did Moby-Dick and Jaws. and the fact that this is a possibility on Jeff's channel means I will subscribe.
The movie never even suggested that the shark was supernatural or looking for revenge, what on earth are you talking about? The movie, exactly like the book, focuses on the abnormal size and on the surprising intelligence of the shark, both in the book and movie, Quint is always a step behind and gets more and more worried as all his attemps at killing the shark fail, but there is no mention of anything supernatural and the shark is nothing more than an animal, albeit hated by Quint, exactly like the book, and I should know, I read the novel three times and saw the movie about twenty times. The supernatural and the revenge aspect only appear in the sequels, which were not directed or produced by Spielberg. It's pretty clear you don't know the movie very well, which is fine, but then why compare it to the novel? With all due respect, I just don't get it.
I had to rewatch my review to see where the mix-up happened and I'm not really making the claim that the movie did these things (revenge, supernatural elements) but movie audiences reaction certainly made the shark into more than animal and so did the marketing. When things are blown up out of a =ll natural proportion on the big screen hyperbole ensues. I really don't focus on the movie because I don't care about the movie. this was a book review and I was surprised by how deep it was.
@@THEJEFFWORD I get you're not fond of the movie, i'm merely saying that in the book, the shark is abnormally clever (he outwits a seasoned fisherman), abnormally huge (he sinks a sizeable boat) and abnormally strong (he destroys a shark cage and dives with three barrels, an impossible feat according to Quint). Seems pretty clear to me that Benchley feels his shark is an unstoppable force of nature, dare I say, a monster in everything but name, which is fine by me, I don't begrudge him that choice.
@@CHALETARCADE You might find my interview with Wendy Benchley (Peter's widow) interesting. They weren't happy with the way sharks were demonized after the film was released. I do agree that the shark was a force of nature and that is probably the point. There's this indomitable force that is made all the more lethal by the follies of the people on land. ua-cam.com/video/inao2clM0H4/v-deo.htmlsi=eomDo1sP8qX6W3j2
@@THEJEFFWORD I know about Benchley's remorse, the DVD featurettes mentioned it. Even Spielberg had second thoughts about the bleakness and violence of the film. As for the long-lasting impact of the movie on bathers, I see it as a testament to the absolute brilliance of Spielberg's direction. The movie is way more terrifying and tense than the novel, which I always enjoyed, but which somewhat dilutes the main menace with the superfluous mafia and adultery plots.
What I'm getting at is that you can't begrudge a storyteller his talent and efficiency.
@@CHALETARCADE Oh I'm not. I might have seen the movie a total of once, but I certainly know the impact on our culture, on cinema, on soundtracks, on summer movie releases, on phobias, and on the legacy that includes Shark Week. It's a movie people "know" without ever having seen it. And for that, Spielberg is legendary. I can admit all that and still not really care about the movie. And my affection for the book is driven in part by the low expectations I applied to the story from my impression of the movie. Jaws the movie is a cultural phenomenon that the book can't hope to match--even though it inspired the movie. And that all makes sense to me.
To me, if the two whole chapters of Ellen and Hooper's affair were cut, this would be the perfect thriller.
Yeah I can agree with that.
Add a comments
This classic monster tale of human nature problematic that happened have sharks attack people it way they deal with it social problematic people dealing with wanting be high society to low society thinking and problem with dealing wrong in their town situation story
Great insight. I think the book has much more depth than people give it credit for.
Ever heard of these 'hipsters'
I never hear of hipsters until they’re no longer cool.
@@THEJEFFWORD time to switch your style up then. I'm clean shaved (face) these days and it's a ball-ache. Just so people don't think my beard is deliberate. You can't even just do nothing now