APCrook All American 1453 Posts user info edit post |
I saw a commercial that said Spielberg threw Peter Benchley off the set after he objected to the movie's ending. I'm assuming that refers to Richard Dreyfuss surviving.
That's some cold shit to be thrown off the set of a movie for which you're essentially wholly responsible. 7/2/2006 10:00:37 PM |
Kodiak All American 7067 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "That's some cold shit to be thrown off the set of a movie for which you're essentially wholly responsible." |
HA! You obviously haven't read Jaws.7/2/2006 10:48:51 PM |
StingrayRush All American 14628 Posts user info edit post |
do tell, i haven't read it 7/2/2006 11:15:11 PM |
APCrook All American 1453 Posts user info edit post |
^^I read it when I was thirteen. I can't think of anything else at the end of the movie that would piss off the book's author than the survival of a character that died in the book, but my memory of the book is vague. Instead of acting like a book snob, justify your dickhead comment with some other speculation as to why Benchley didn't like the book's ending.
[Edited on July 2, 2006 at 11:29 PM. Reason : ]
[Edited on July 2, 2006 at 11:41 PM. Reason : good call, I'm a grammar nazi myself... however, I'm drunk.] 7/2/2006 11:28:38 PM |
wilso All American 14657 Posts user info edit post |
YOUR NOT YOU'RE GODDAMNIT 7/2/2006 11:30:47 PM |
Kodiak All American 7067 Posts user info edit post |
Other than the basic concept and the names of the characters, the film has almost nothing to do with Benchley's novel. The book is barely even about the shark; Benchley seems mostly concerned with an affair between Hooper and Mrs. Brody. It's terribly written and frankly boring as hell. He received a screenplay co-credit for the film, but it's doubtful that much of his work made it to the screen. So to call him "essentially wholly responsible" for the film is not really correct. Steven Spielberg and editor Verna Fields are "essentially wholly responsible" for the movie. 7/3/2006 12:19:08 AM |
jimb0 All American 4667 Posts user info edit post |
im trying to think if somebody didnt just get cold busted 7/3/2006 12:45:49 AM |
vinylbandit All American 48079 Posts user info edit post |
Spielberg pulls that shit all the time.
John Hammond is supposed to get eaten by Compys in Jurassic Park. 7/3/2006 12:51:23 AM |
APCrook All American 1453 Posts user info edit post |
^^^There you go, that beats the hell out of your first post.
I worded mine poorly. By wholly responsible for the film, I meant the characters and premise wouldn't have been there without Benchley's book.
Still, the AMC commercial said Benchley objected to the movie's ending. I can't think of anything else that happens at the end except that Hooper resurfaces, and that Benchley must have objected to that character living. What else could it be? 7/3/2006 7:34:08 AM |
TheBrewery All American 1358 Posts user info edit post |
^^^^ I don't remember a lot about the book, really. I read it a loooooong time ago. But, I mainly remember that it bored me to tears, and wasn't much like the movie. 7/3/2006 7:40:08 AM |
wilso All American 14657 Posts user info edit post |
i believe he was upset with the idea of shooting a compressed air tank. 7/3/2006 10:37:12 AM |
slackerb All American 5093 Posts user info edit post |
Which is worthy of getting tossed off the set for.
Didn't you guys watch the Mythbusters where they test that shit. 7/3/2006 11:53:24 AM |
TheBrewery All American 1358 Posts user info edit post |
Still a great movie. 7/3/2006 5:58:16 PM |
Kodiak All American 7067 Posts user info edit post |
^^^^^ At the ending of the book, Hooper is killed in the cage, Quint gets dragged underwater Ahab style, and the Orca sinks, leaving Brody floating in the water. The shark is swimming up to attack him, and when it's a few feet from him, it suddenly dies from all the harpoons and barrels. The shark's cause of death is more realistic, but the whole scene isn't really any less ridiculous than in the movie.
[Edited on July 3, 2006 at 8:17 PM. Reason : .] 7/3/2006 8:14:44 PM |
Republican18 All American 16575 Posts user info edit post |
7/3/2006 8:14:46 PM |
Republican18 All American 16575 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Other than the basic concept and the names of the characters, the film has almost nothing to do with Benchley's novel. The book is barely even about the shark; Benchley seems mostly concerned with an affair between Hooper and Mrs. Brody. It's terribly written and frankly boring as hell. He received a screenplay co-credit for the film, but it's doubtful that much of his work made it to the screen. So to call him "essentially wholly responsible" for the film is not really correct. Steven Spielberg and editor Verna Fields are "essentially wholly responsible" for the movie." |
i have read the book a bunch of times, and i actually liked it, but your right, the book had like 3 plots going on at the same time, the shark, the affair between hooper and brodys wife and also something to do with the mayor of ammity and like mob ties and corruption or something7/3/2006 8:17:27 PM |
EverMagenta All American 3102 Posts user info edit post |
But you are, anyhow.7/3/2006 10:54:40 PM |