• About
  • podcasts
  • Shop

Surgeons of Horror

~ Dissecting horror films

Surgeons of Horror

Category Archives: retrospective

“The Night of Bloody Horror: A Dull, Drab Dismemberment of Sanity and Storytelling”

28 Saturday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1960s horror, 1960s retrospective, Gerald McRaney, joy n houck jr

If ever a film title over-promised and under-delivered, it’s The Night of Bloody Horror. On paper, it sounds like a grimy drive-in gem—a Southern Gothic slasher soaked in Freudian dread and low-budget bloodshed. In reality, it’s a leaden, confusing slog through bad acting, worse pacing, and the kind of editing that suggests someone spilled the film reels and just guessed the order.

Directed by Joy N. Houck Jr., this Louisiana-shot mess follows Wesley, a man recently released from a mental institution who may or may not be carving up women in a series of disconnected, lazily staged murders. He also might be suffering the ghostly hangover of his dead brother’s trauma. Or maybe it’s his overbearing mother. Or a dream. Or all of the above. Or none of it. The plot doesn’t just meander—it collapses into a narrative sinkhole by the second act, never to recover.

As a horror film, Night of Bloody Horror is utterly toothless. The kills are bloodless, awkwardly blocked, and lack any tension or catharsis. Despite its title, the film is rarely bloody and never horrifying. What should be gory spectacle or psychological torment is instead reduced to flat, amateur-hour staging, complete with shrill sound cues and repetitive “shock” flashbacks that play like a slide projector from hell.

Gerald McRaney, in his first feature role, tries to give Wesley some depth, but he’s drowned by a script that gives him nothing but psychobabble and wooden melodrama to chew on. It’s an unfair start to a career that, thankfully, would rise above this mire. The supporting cast fares no better, delivering their lines with the enthusiasm of people waiting for lunch. Not a single character feels like they belong in this world—or any world.

Technically, the film is barely functional. The editing is choppy, often cutting mid-sentence or lingering awkwardly after scenes have died. The cinematography is flat, frequently overlit in some scenes and murky in others. The soundtrack is a Frankenstein’s monster of tinny stingers and misplaced jazz-funk grooves that suck any remaining atmosphere out of the room.

If there’s any entertainment to be found here, it’s accidental—unintentional comedy born from overwrought acting, bizarre dream sequences, and the sheer incompetence of the storytelling. But even as a so-bad-it’s-good experience, The Night of Bloody Horror struggles to maintain interest. It’s not weird enough to be cult-worthy, and not scary enough to justify the word “horror” in the title.

The Prognosis:

There’s a kernel of an idea in here—a Southern-fried psychological slasher with family trauma at its core—but it’s utterly squandered. Instead, what we get is an amateurish, directionless, and dreary affair that serves as a cautionary tale in how not to make a horror movie. Keep telling yourself, it’s only a picture? No need—there’s nothing nightmarish here, just the dull ache of wasted time.

  • Saul Muerte

“Race with the Devil: Satan in the Rearview – 50 Years of Paranoia on the Open Road”

26 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jack starrett, lara parker, loretta swit, occult, occult horror, peter fonda, warren oates

Somewhere between the last gasps of the hippy hangover and the creeping dread of post-Manson America, Race with the Devil barreled down the highway like a bat out of Hell—literally. Released in 1975 and directed by action-hardened journeyman Jack Starrett, this cult classic is a dusty, occult-tinged road thriller that taps directly into the national paranoia of the time. Fifty years later, it still hits a nerve—especially if, like me, your first encounter was via a late-night television broadcast that left you afraid to look out the caravan window.

The plot is lean and mean: two Texas couples—Peter Fonda and Lara Parker, Warren Oates and Loretta Swit—head out on an RV road trip to Colorado for a little dirt biking and rest. But their trip takes a brutal detour when they stumble across a midnight satanic ritual in the desert, and worse still, witness a human sacrifice. They flee the scene, but the cultists see them… and the chase begins.

What follows is part road movie, part conspiracy thriller, and all-out occult nightmare. The group is pursued across the dusty American Southwest by seemingly every local in sight—mechanics, police officers, townsfolk—all of whom might be in league with the Devil. Paranoia builds with every mile, the sense of isolation increasing even within the relative safety of the RV. There’s no sanctuary here—only dust, devilry, and dread.

It’s the Satanic Panic subtext that gives Race with the Devil its bite. Released at a time when America was nervously scanning the horizon for devil worshippers, ritual killers, and cultural decay, the film exploits that fear with precision. Unlike other occult-themed films of the era—The Omen, The Devil’s Rain, or The Mephisto Waltz—this one never lets the supernatural overshadow the real terror: people. Regular folks, hidden in plain sight, quietly devoted to something unholy.

Fonda and Oates make for a superb, contrasting duo—Fonda the laconic cool, Oates the ever-suspicious skeptic. There’s an unspoken weight in their friendship, an almost unshakable faith in their ability to muscle through the ordeal—until that faith is tested, and shattered. Loretta Swit, now best remembered for MASH*, adds a sharp emotional core to the film, holding her own in the growing panic. All four leads ground the madness in a relatable domesticity, which only makes the horror feel closer to home.

Then there’s that ending. Still bleak. Still brutal. Still brilliant. It’s a masterstroke in nihilism, the kind of finish that leaves you staring at a black screen, wondering how far evil will go to win. It was a punch to the gut as a kid, watching through half-lidded eyes during a late-night broadcast, and it hasn’t lost its sting.

Visually, the film captures the sun-baked emptiness of the landscape—open highways and desolate motels that conceal threats behind every shadow. Starrett directs with a muscular, no-nonsense style that keeps the tension simmering, while the sound design and jarring music cues keep your nerves frayed.

The Prognosis:

Race with the Devil may not be the most stylish film of its era, nor the most overtly supernatural, but its blend of Americana, paranoia, and occult horror earns it a lasting place in the canon of 1970s genre cinema. Fifty years on, it remains a taut, unsettling ride—a reminder that out on the open road, it’s not just flat tires or bad weather you need to worry about… sometimes it’s Satan himself.

  • Saul Muerte

“From Habit to Hellfire: Satánico Pandemonium and the Unholy Power of Nunploitation”

25 Wednesday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

cecilia pavet, enrique rocha, exploitation, mexican horror, nunsploitation

Before The Exorcist spawned a thousand cinematic imitators, and long before Hollywood dared tread into the cloisters of religious blasphemy, Mexico delivered one of the most blasphemously potent entries in the nunsploitation canon with Satánico Pandemonium—a heady cocktail of sin, sanctity, and sacrilege. Released in 1975 and directed by veteran filmmaker Gilberto Martínez Solares, this provocative feature walks a delicate line between erotic horror and moral indictment, all while drenched in the fevered atmosphere of forbidden desire.

At its core is Sister Maria, played with hypnotic conviction by Cecilia Pezet. She is a figure of virtue, charity, and devout service—until, that is, she finds herself tempted by the Devil himself (embodied here with a smirking menace by Enrique Rocha). What begins as a whisper of fantasy and temptation unravels into full-blown psychosexual madness, as visions of lust, sadism, and blasphemy consume the cloistered world around her.

It’s tempting to dismiss Satánico Pandemonium as just another skin-heavy slice of exploitation—and it certainly doesn’t shy away from the genre’s expected trappings. But there’s a strange elegance to the way Solares constructs his descent. The convent setting is stark, sun-bleached, and eerily calm, providing a jarring contrast to the escalating depravity. The Devil doesn’t just torment Maria—he awakens her, inviting the viewer into a layered conflict between desire, repression, and damnation.

As with many entries in the nunsploitation cycle, Satánico Pandemonium thrives on controversy. In a deeply Catholic nation like Mexico, the film’s blend of religious imagery and erotic violence sparked unease and outright condemnation. The sacrilegious content—nudity in sacred spaces, self-flagellation, perverse rituals—was designed to provoke. But unlike some of its European counterparts, there’s a cultural specificity here that adds weight to the iconoclasm. This isn’t just about sex and shock—it’s a portrait of religious hysteria filtered through a deeply Latin American lens.

Still, it’s not without its pulp pleasures. The film leans into surrealism and softcore excess with relish, and it sometimes wobbles under the weight of its contradictions. It wants to titillate and terrify, to condemn and celebrate. That ambiguity is both its greatest strength and its ultimate flaw—it neither fully critiques the institution it corrupts nor wholly surrenders to its indulgent premise. It’s as if the film itself is struggling with the same spiritual torment that haunts its lead character.

What Satánico Pandemonium offers is not clarity, but chaos—the kind of infernal, fevered chaos that marked the zenith of 1970s exploitation. As part of the wider nunsploitation movement—which includes films like School of the Holy Beast, The Nun and the Devil, and Flavia the Heretic—it holds its own with a distinctly Mexican flair. In fact, its title would later inspire From Dusk Till Dawn’s iconic stripper-turned-vampire Satanico Pandemonium, proving its cult legacy is well intact.

The Prognosis:

For all its sins, Satánico Pandemonium is a memorable relic from a time when horror wasn’t afraid to confront taboos with lurid abandon. Three stars, for the devil, the daring, and the decadence.

  • Saul Muerte

“Fangs of the Living Dead: A False Start from the Father of the Blind Dead”

22 Sunday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1960s horror, 1960s retrospective, amando de ossorio, anita ekberg

Before the eerie, hooded knights of Tombs of the Blind Dead rode out from the graveyards of Spanish horror cinema, director Amando de Ossorio dipped his toes into the genre with Fangs of the Living Dead—a gothic curiosity that plays more like a confused homage than a fully-formed fright fest. Released in 1969 under the alternate title Malenka, this early effort is notable less for its quality than for the glimmers of talent that would soon flourish in his later, more celebrated work.

The premise is classic Euro-horror: a young woman (played by the ever-enigmatic Anita Ekberg) inherits a crumbling castle from a mysterious uncle, only to find herself surrounded by alluring women, dark legends, and hints of vampirism. So far, so Hammer-lite. But where the British studios leaned into blood, mood, and menace, Fangs of the Living Dead waffles between gothic horror and awkward melodrama, never quite settling on a tone or identity.

Ekberg is game, and her presence gives the film a touch of continental class. But the supporting cast is uneven, and the plotting stumbles through cliché after cliché without much conviction. What should feel mysterious or sensual often comes off as wooden or unintentionally camp.

The most frustrating element is the bait-and-switch structure of the film. There are vampires—or at least the idea of them—but just when the story starts to build towards supernatural revelation, it pulls the rug out with a rationalist twist that saps the atmosphere. And yet, depending on which cut you’re watching, there’s an added final beat that seems to suggest the supernatural was real all along. It’s a tonal mess, and not the good kind.

Despite its shortcomings, Fangs of the Living Dead is a curious artifact. You can see de Ossorio tinkering with gothic tropes and experimenting with shadows and stone. The castle setting, the doomed lineage, the women of uncertain allegiance—all of these would be refined in his Blind Dead series just a few years later. While this film lacks the eerie silence, decaying iconography, and creeping dread that defined Tombs of the Blind Dead (1972), it does point to a director finding his way through genre fog.

The Prognosis:

Fangs of the Living Dead is more forgettable than fang-tastic. It’s an early, faltering step from a filmmaker who would soon become one of Spain’s leading horror voices. Not essential viewing, but worth a look for fans of Ossorio’s later work—or for those with a fondness for the weird and wavering twilight of 1960s Euro-horror.

  • Saul Muerte

8. “Real Fear, Real Fish: How Jaws Birthed Shark Panic and Changed the Ocean Forever”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

You know the saying: life imitates art. But sometimes art takes a chunk out of life and doesn’t let go. That’s what Jaws did. It didn’t just reshape cinema—it rewrote the cultural script for what a shark was, what the ocean meant, and who we were when we dipped a toe in the surf. Spielberg’s fake shark may have been rubber, but the fallout was all too real.

Because when Jaws hit theatres in 1975, it didn’t just break box office records. It detonated a planet-wide phobia. Rational adults who’d swum in the sea their whole lives suddenly refused to go waist-deep. Boating trips were cancelled. Beaches posted shark patrols like they were expecting Normandy-level invasions. People weren’t afraid of sharks before Jaws. After Jaws, they couldn’t stop picturing themselves inside one.

It’s not hard to understand why. Spielberg’s shark wasn’t just a predator—it was a force of nature, a myth made flesh. It was death from below, unknowable and unstoppable. Williams’ theme didn’t help either—it drilled into your brain like a warning siren. And once the public bought in, they didn’t just flinch at the water. They went hunting.

In the years following the release of Jaws, shark killings skyrocketed. Fishermen organised tournaments with the explicit goal of slaughtering as many as possible. Some sharks were mutilated for sport. Others were left to rot as trophies. The film had awakened an ancient fear and rebranded it as a civic duty. Sharks weren’t just animals anymore. They were villains. And the public wanted revenge.

Peter Benchley, who penned the original novel, would spend the rest of his life trying to undo the damage. He became a staunch conservationist, publicly lamenting how Jaws had fed hysteria. He wrote editorials, gave speeches, funded marine science. But the cultural machine had already chewed through the facts and spat out something far juicier: the monster myth.

And that myth still lingers.

Modern marine biologists have tried for decades to rehabilitate the shark’s image. We now know most species are shy, endangered, and critical to ocean ecosystems. We know attacks are rare—freakish outliers, not targeted carnage. But Jaws set the template. It tattooed an idea onto the global psyche: that beneath the surface lurks something ancient, evil, and waiting.

Here’s the kicker: Spielberg didn’t set out to demonise sharks. The terror came from budget constraints, not bloodlust. Bruce the Shark barely worked, and so the film’s horror became abstract, psychological. But abstraction has consequences. When the threat is offscreen, your brain fills in the blanks—and public imagination filled those blanks with teeth.

Yet maybe there’s something poetic in that. Because Jaws isn’t really about a shark—it’s about fear. Fear of nature, of losing control, of our place on the food chain. It’s about how humans respond when faced with something vast and indifferent. We named it. We hunted it. We called it evil. And the sea just kept rolling in.

Fifty years later, we’re still wrestling with the aftermath. Not just in how we make movies, but in how we treat the planet. The irony of Jaws is that it scared us away from the ocean, when what we really should’ve been afraid of was ourselves.

  • Saul Muerte

7. “Between the Teeth: Sound, Editing, and the Sonic Terror of Jaws”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

The scariest thing in Jaws isn’t the shark—it’s the sound of the shark. Two notes. Half a heartbeat. A musical ellipsis that creeps up from the seabed and drills straight into your spine. John Williams didn’t score a monster—he sculpted a presence. One that lurks just outside the frame, gnashing in silence, until your chest tightens and you start checking the shadows under your seat.

In truth, Bruce the Shark barely works on screen. The rubber betrays the realism. It’s stiff, sluggish, and allergic to saltwater. But Spielberg, handcuffed by malfunctioning mechanics and a limited budget, turned to the invisible: sound. And sound became the soul of the film.

Williams’ score is almost mathematical. Minimalist to the point of menace. That primal, pulsing motif—da-dum… da-dum…—doesn’t just suggest the shark is coming. It makes the water itself seem sentient, malevolent. No visuals necessary. Just rhythm. Just dread. Williams said the theme could be interpreted as “relentless, unstoppable,” like fate itself. And he wasn’t wrong. It’s practically aquatic Morse code for you’re screwed.

But the real genius lies in when the sound disappears. The opening attack? No music. Just ambient waves and ragged breathing. Chrissie’s screams. The sound of helplessness. Spielberg and editor Verna Fields trusted the silence—weaponised it, even. They understood that real horror isn’t the monster leaping out, it’s the waiting. The not-knowing. And they cut this film like a time bomb—tick, tick, breath, splash, gone.

Verna Fields deserves sainthood. She didn’t just edit Jaws, she saved it. She built its rhythm with a razor blade and a stopwatch. The cuts are precise, but never sterile. The pacing lets the tension throb, then twist. Her instincts gave Jaws its pulse, and her ear gave it breath. Fields’ decision to linger—on a bobbing raft, on a shark’s-eye view, on a reaction shot just a beat too long—makes the film feel like it’s constantly holding its breath with you.

Sound designer Robert Hoyt and mixer John R. Carter also understood the assignment. The underwater acoustics are muffled, dreamlike, warped—as if you’re already halfway gone. The difference between wet and dry audio isn’t just technical, it’s thematic. The ocean is a place where rules collapse. Where your screams don’t travel. Where your senses betray you.

And then there’s the famous Ben Gardner jump scare—maybe the purest blend of editing, timing, and sonic sabotage ever captured on celluloid. Spielberg throws the entire audience into the ceiling, not with a shark attack, but with a silent, bloated corpse slipping out of a hole in a boat. Fields cut it in her swimming pool. Spielberg added the shriek later. Together, they created a moment that still makes audiences flinch five decades later.

This is the power of Jaws—not just what’s seen, but what’s felt. And feeling is built from rhythm. From restraint. From silence. From two piano keys, repeating like a death mantra.

Other films used gore. Jaws used suggestion. Other films shouted. Jaws whispered.

And we’re still hearing it.

  • Saul Muerte

6. “Amity Is America: The Small-Town Politics of Jaws”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

Amity, as you know, means friendship. That’s the line. The pitch. The myth sold by mayoral pinstripes and anchors in sand. But Jaws is no feel-good postcard. It’s a thinly veiled civics horror story. Underneath the blood and brine is a scathing portrait of a town willing to sacrifice its children for a few more tourist dollars. Sound familiar?

Because Amity is America. Or at least the version of America we don’t like to admit exists—the sun-bleached community where civic pride curdles into denial, where public safety is trumped by profit, and where leadership means smiling through catastrophe with a cigar in hand and blood on your shoes.

Look at Mayor Vaughn, a man so cartoonishly committed to keeping the beaches open he might as well be handing out coupons for half-price limb reattachments. He’s not evil—he’s worse. He’s reasonable. He’s the guy who says “Let’s not overreact” while a shark chews through the local swimming club. His face is everywhere in 2025. He’s every politician downplaying a crisis, spinning a headline, blaming the scientists. Vaughn is the face of inaction, of plausible deniability, of capitalism cloaked in community.

This is the real brilliance of Jaws: it isn’t just a monster movie. It’s a movie about systems. Broken ones. It’s not just the shark that kills Alex Kintner—it’s the chamber of commerce. It’s the vote to keep the beaches open. It’s the hushed phone calls, the shrugged shoulders, the gentle pressure on Brody to “ease up.” The real monster doesn’t have teeth—it has a necktie.

And Brody? He’s not the sheriff, he’s the conscience. The outsider. The guy who moved to town thinking it would be quieter, safer—only to find out that even paradise has politics. His face when he sees that mother waiting for him in black is the face of a man who knows he failed—not because he didn’t try, but because the system didn’t want him to succeed.

It’s all too real. Substitute “shark” for “virus,” “chemical spill,” “gun violence,” “climate change,” take your pick. Jaws is a fable about what happens when truth is inconvenient and accountability is bad for business. A sunny allegory dipped in blood. Amity is the American dream under siege, and the town fathers would rather let it rot than admit something’s wrong.

But Spielberg never shouts. He doesn’t need to. He lets the imagery do the work. The tourist banners flapping in the wind while the ocean turns red. The newspaper headlines are getting smaller. The way Brody’s warnings are always drowned out by local laughter, local logic, and local greed. This isn’t parody—it’s prophecy.

Fifty years on, the shark still scares us—but it’s the town that hits too close to home. Jaws looked at America and asked a brutal question: when danger comes to your doorstep, who gets protected? Who gets ignored? And who gets eaten?

Spoiler: it’s never the ones in charge.

  • Saul Muerte

4. “Hooper, Brody, Quint: A Class War at Sea”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

Before the blood, before the teeth, before the fins slicing through sunlit water—Jaws is a story about three men on a boat. Three archetypes stuffed into a floating coffin and set adrift with nothing but a harpoon gun, some beer, and enough resentment to sink a battleship. Forget the shark for a moment—this is the real engine of the film: Brody, the outsider cop with a conscience, Hooper, the rich-boy oceanographer with gadgets and a grudge, and Quint, the seafaring working-class warrior who’d rather spit on authority than answer to it.

It’s Moby Dick meets 12 Angry Men, with blood in the water and resentment in the air.

Let’s start with Brody—our everyman. A New York transplant trying to keep Amity safe, but slowly realising that civic responsibility means nothing when your town’s economy is built on sunburns and fried clams. He’s the man in the middle. Not rich, not poor. Not a sea dog, not a scientist. Just a guy with a badge and a conscience, trapped between two forces louder and more certain than him. Watch him on that boat—swabbing, second-guessing, chain-smoking his stress. He’s the reluctant centre of a tug-of-war between experience and education, brawn and brain.

Then there’s Hooper—young, wired, arrogant. He’s got sonar, flares, and a boat that cost more than your house. He’s used to talking over people, used to being right. But he’s also deeply, emotionally rattled by what’s happening. A kid who loved the sea until it bit back. You can see it in that moment he stares into the opened belly of a tiger shark and realises the real killer is still out there. Hooper’s got money, but no armour. He’s the progressive in a world that doesn’t care about your degrees when the water turns red.

And Quint—ah, Quint. Salt-crusted, sunburnt, drunk on both whiskey and war trauma. He’s the last of a dying breed: the self-made man who doesn’t trust institutions, technology, or rich kids with soft hands. He’s got scars—literal and metaphorical. His monologue about the USS Indianapolis isn’t just a great scene; it’s the soul of the movie. The war shaped him, spat him back, and now he hunts sharks the way some men hunt ghosts. He’s not fighting just a fish—he’s fighting death itself, with a smirk and a machete.

Put these three together on a boat, and what you get isn’t just tension. You get a class war. Old money vs. old trauma. The system vs. the sea. Intellectualism vs. instinct. Spielberg knew exactly what he was doing here—this wasn’t just a monster movie, it was a chamber piece in saltwater. The shark? Just the trigger. The real horror is watching these men unravel—respect each other, resent each other, and finally, get ripped apart by the very thing they were trying to control.

By the time Quint’s blood paints the deck, it’s not just a death—it’s a eulogy for an entire generation of men who thought they could conquer the wild with nothing but grit. Hooper survives, but barely, and only by going under. Brody survives too, but you can see the price in his silence as he paddles away on the wreckage of the Orca. They both live, but the myth of masculinity—stoic, self-reliant, invincible—sinks to the bottom with the shark.

Fifty years on, this triptych of men feels even more vital. Not because it tells us who we should be, but because it shows us what happens when we try to be it all at once. The protector, the thinker, the killer. We saw ourselves in these three. And we watched what the ocean did to them.

Spoiler: the ocean won.

  • Saul Muerte

2. “Out of Sight, Into Terror: Jaws as the Accidental Masterclass in Minimalist Horror”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

Here’s the thing about the shark: it barely worked.

It sank. It stalled. It glitched and groaned and refused to cooperate. Nicknamed “Bruce” on set, the beast spent more time in dry dock than terrorising the screen. Spielberg was 26, sleep-deprived, in over his head, and rapidly learning the only thing scarier than a killer shark was a Universal executive demanding to know why the footage still wasn’t usable.

And somehow, that mechanical failure became a cinematic miracle.

Because what Spielberg did—what Jaws did—was weaponise absence. The shark, originally meant to be front and centre, became a whisper in the dark. A shape beneath the surface. A disturbance in the rhythm of things. You didn’t see it. You sensed it. And that, it turns out, is the oldest, darkest trick in the horror book.

The great lie of movie monsters is that we want to see them. We don’t. Not really. We want to imagine them. The moment you put teeth on screen, you give the audience a sense of control. You label the fear. Spielberg yanked that control away. With John Williams’ pulsing two-note theme doing all the heavy lifting, he transformed absence into dread. The water itself became the monster.

It was Hitchcock’s Psycho shower scene stretched over two hours—and soaked in salt. This wasn’t just an accident. It was an evolution.

The lineage is everywhere. Fast forward to 1999 and you’ve got The Blair Witch Project freaking people out with sticks and sobbing. Paranormal Activity builds its terror from night-vision nothingness. It Follows delivers slow, patient doom from offscreen threats. Even Ari Aster plays coy with his demons, knowing full well that what you don’t see can stick in the brain far longer than anything prosthetic or CGI.

But Jaws did it first—because it had no other choice. And that’s what makes it genius. The ocean becomes a canvas of paranoia. The camera lingers on legs dangling from piers, swimmers bobbing like bait, empty stretches of sea humming with invisible menace. You start scanning the horizon like your life depends on it. Spielberg took a broken prop and turned it into a philosophy: less is fear.

What’s wild is how this “restraint” has been almost entirely misunderstood by Hollywood ever since. In the years that followed, the pendulum swung back to spectacle. Bigger sharks, bigger blood, more teeth, more tech. Sequels gave us full-frontal fish. Other monster movies mistook visibility for effectiveness. But the terror in Jaws came from its limits. The scariest monster in movie history only appears on screen for about four minutes. And that’s all it needed.

Because fear, real fear, comes not from what’s in front of you—but what’s lurking just out of view. It’s the ripple. The shadow. The dark shape sliding silently beneath your feet.

And in that space—between the surface and the scream—Jaws lives on.

  • Saul Muerte

1. “The Shark That Ate the ‘70s: Jaws and the Death of the Director’s Decade”

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by surgeons of horror in retrospective

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

jaws, Killer shark, lorraine gray, Richard Dreyfus, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider, shark movies, Steven Spielberg

The 1970s began with a bang. Or maybe a bottle being smashed in some dingy Manhattan dive bar by a furious auteur screaming about final cut. Either way, it was the era of the director as God: Altman, Coppola, Scorsese, Ashby, Friedkin. Films were messy, political, experimental, personal—shot through with cigarette smoke, New York grime, and the scent of celluloid freedom.

Then came the fin.

Jaws didn’t mean to kill anything. That’s the great irony. Spielberg was a film brat just like the others, trying to make his mark, trying to keep the camera dry and the production afloat. But when Jaws exploded at the box office—wide release, national marketing, TV spots, merchandising—the studios smelled blood in the water. And they didn’t just dip a toe in. They cannonballed.

Suddenly, the auteur was out, and the high-concept was in. You didn’t need a soul, just a hook. Something you could pitch in two words and poster in one: “The Shark.” “The Alien.” “The Ark.” The seismic success of Jaws set the table for Star Wars, Close Encounters, and the age of Event Cinema. The summer blockbuster was born, swaddled in popcorn grease and lit by the flicker of a thousand multiplex screens.

What died? Ambiguity. Risk. The kind of film where a character might sit in silence, drink whiskey, and tell you a story about the USS Indianapolis—without cutting away, without cutting corners, without caring if you were bored. That kind of patient tension would soon be carved up, streamlined, test-screened to death.

And it’s not Spielberg’s fault. He made a damn masterpiece. But he also gave the studios a blueprint: thrill them, brand it, repeat. What was once a wild landscape of rogue visionaries turned into a theme park, complete with merchandising stands and licensing deals. From the moment Jaws hit, the clock was ticking on the Director’s Decade. Within five years, the studios would have their claws back in the tiller, and the artists would be back to hustling for their next passion project on the sidelines.

But the irony’s saltier than the Atlantic: Jaws is a product of the very freedom it helped destroy. You feel it in the sweat on Roy Scheider’s brow, the simmering class tension between Brody, Hooper, and Quint, the silence that builds between John Williams’ stabs of dread. It’s not just spectacle—it’s cinema. Dangerous, uncertain, and tinged with fear. And maybe that’s why it resonates still: because it wasn’t meant to be a product. It just became one.

So yes, Jaws gave us the summer movie. But it also gave us the final act of New Hollywood, played out not in a boardroom, but on the high seas—with one man trying to keep control of a beast too big, too unruly, too monstrous to contain.

Sound familiar?

  • Saul Muerte
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016

Categories

  • A Night of Horror Film Festival
  • Alien franchise
  • Alliance Francaise French Film Festival
  • Australian Horror
  • Best Movies and Shows
  • Competition
  • dark nights film fest
  • episode review
  • Flashback Fridays
  • Friday the 13th Franchise
  • Full Moon Sessions
  • Halloween franchise
  • In Memorium
  • Interview
  • japanese film festival
  • John Carpenter
  • killer pigs
  • midwest weirdfest
  • MidWest WierdFest
  • MonsterFest
  • movie article
  • movie of the week
  • Movie review
  • New Trailer
  • News article
  • podcast episode
  • podcast review
  • press release
  • retrospective
  • Rialto Distribution
  • Ring Franchise
  • series review
  • Spanish horror
  • sydney film festival
  • Sydney Underground Film Festival
  • The Blair Witch Franchise
  • the conjuring franchise
  • The Exorcist
  • The Howling franchise
  • Top 10 list
  • Top 12 List
  • top 13 films
  • Trash Night Tuesdays on Tubi
  • umbrella entertainment
  • Uncategorized
  • Universal Horror
  • Wes Craven
  • wes craven's the scream years

Meta

  • Create account
  • Log in

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Surgeons of Horror
    • Join 227 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Surgeons of Horror
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar