Connect with us

Lifestyle

‘Jaws’ and the parental debates it set off

Published

on


LOS ANGELES (AP) — It didn’t take long for “Jaws” to make an impression. The movie that launched the summer blockbuster season and changed how people view sharks and the ocean 50 years ago also created a dilemma for parents: Was it a movie their children could watch?

To help answer that, The Associated Press went to the film’s star, Roy Scheider.

Legendary AP Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch interviewed Scheider and others for a story that ran on July 28, 1975, roughly a month after “Jaws” arrived in theaters.

The story is included below as it ran.

___

At a sunny hotel swimming pool, a small freckle faced boy rushes up to Roy Scheider and exclaims with delight: “I think you played really good in ‘Jaws.’”

“You see,” says Scheider as the boy runs off to swim. “Some children seem able to handle it.”

Scheider, star of the smash hit film which is breaking box-office records, was reacting to a stormy issue now almost as hot as the movie itself — should children see “Jaws”?

The debate stems from the rating given to the movie — PG, meaning parental guidance suggested.

Several critics and members of the movie industry have called the rating too lenient. Some use it as an example of flaws in the frequently criticized rating system.

In practice, PG places no restrictions on who may see a film. Any child with the price of a movie ticket can view “Jaws,” which climaxes with a man vomiting blood as a giant shark chews him up.

Los Angeles Times critic Charles Champlin noted that the PG “does not sufficiently warn parents that the giant shark includes children among its victims and that children are known to be particularly impressed by what happens to children on the screen.”

Movie makers whose films recently were give the more restrictive “R” rating — requiring an adult to accompany any child under 17 — have protested loudly.

Some have even appealed to the rating board of the Motion Picture Association of America for a rating change.

“With some of our innocuous action pictures we’ve been hit with Rs,” says Paul Heller, producer of “Enter the Dragon.”

“But here we get a picture where there’s all sorts of gore and blood, where arms and legs are seen floating in the water, where a girl is seen covered by crabs on the beach, and other horrifying scenes, and it gets a PG.”

Producers of the film “Rollerball” unsuccessfully appealed their R rating after “Jaws” was released, claiming their film’s violence was far less objectionable.

Universal Studios, which released “Jaws,” has taken the unusual steps of warning in its advertisements that the film “may be too intense for younger children.”

Youngsters interviewed at a Los Angeles area beach after the movie’s release expressed fears of swimming in the ocean.

One 12-year-old girl confessed “I think about it so much. I dreamed about it. It really scared me.”

But Universal has no complaints about the PG rating, and, according to Rating Administration, no one may appeal a film’s rating other than its producer and distributor.

Scheider, who portrays the sheriff of the beach resort menaced by the killer shark, recalls that “Jaws” was made with the intention of obtaining a PG rating.

“The picture was judiciously shot to avoid unnecessary amounts of gore,” he says, recalling that some bloody scenes were added after final footage was reviewed by the filmmakers.

“When the film was brought back to the post, the editor and director found that it was necessary to show, after an hour and a half, what the shark does. the audience demands it.”

The scene of the girl covered with crabs was added later, he notes and the finale in which Robert Shaw is chewed up was embellished.

“I personally think that scene could have been modulated a bit,” says Scheider.

But Jack Valenti, president of the MPAA and father of the seven-year-old rating system, defends the “Jaws” rating.

“In the view of the rating board, ‘Jaws’ involved nature’s violence, rather than man’s violence against man,” Valenti has said.

“This is the same kind of violence as in ‘Hansel and Gretel.’ Children might imitate other kinds of violence, but not the kind seen in ‘Jaws.’”

Valenti declared that, “If this were a man or woman committing violence as seen in ‘Jaws,’ it would definitely go in the R category. But it’s a shark, and I don’t think people will go around pretending they’re a shark.”

The rating controversy hasn’t hurt business. Universal reports that “Jaws” grossed an incredible $60 million in its first month and seems destined to grow richer than “The Godfather,” the current record holder.

Scheider says his own 12-year-old daughter has seen “Jaws” twice — but only after he and his wife explained “which things she was going to see were real and which ones were not real.”

“She was scared in many parts, but she knew it was a movie,” he says, suggesting that parents who let children see the movie explain first that “This is going to scare you. It’s going to be like a roller coaster ride.”

“Some kids understand his and some don’t,” he concedes.

“… I would be very careful about children under 10. If they’re susceptible to nightmares, get scared easily and are impressionable, I’d say no, don’t see it. If the child can handle it, fine, see it.”

Scheider holds the cynical view that the rating system exists because “most parents don’t give a damn what their kids see.” But he is convinced that a child who sees “Jaws” without guidance won’t be permanently traumatized by it.

“It’ll go away,” he says. “You can live through it. Traumatic shocks in entertainment disappear. Traumatic shocks through the lack of love and ill treatment by parents and peers persist through all of life.”



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Lifestyle

Franck Sorbier fuses Andean splendor with Parisian pageantry

Published

on


PARIS (AP) — Franck Sorbier, the Paris couturier officially inducted into the haute couture fold in 2005, delivered a regal, Inca-inspired spectacle on Wednesday that fused theater and artistry with the cosmopolitan codes of couture.

The show’s standout image was a model crowned in gold, wielding a giant sun-topped staff—a visual exclamation point for a collection steeped in pageantry and myth.

Sorbier’s silhouettes had a historic weight, with loose, voluminous skirts swirling beneath strict, structured bodices, conjuring a sense of ceremony. Gilded chainmail and coin-like embellishments suggested a protective armor, but rendered in delicate, sleeveless forms.

A poncho, fringed in sumptuous gold, mixed Andean spirit with Parisian panache—while elsewhere, lush, unfurling coats were embroidered with organic, figurative motifs that seemed to grow across the fabric. Detail shone throughout: dense ruffles poking from the bottom of old-world shirts, rich shawls cascading with embellishment, and surfaces that rewarded a second, closer look.

Sorbier’s backdrop was equally arresting — a landscape of bubbling, volcanic fabric, amorphous and vividly alive, underscoring his ability to transform couture into a living tableau.

Known for merging cultural narratives with technical virtuosity, Sorbier proved once more that Paris couture can look backward and outward, drawing inspiration from global myth while staying rigorously hand-crafted.

Through this cross-cultural lens, Sorbier’s latest collection stood as a bold reminder that couture, at its best, is both spectacle and narrative.



Source link

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

The 5 best vehicles for campers, according to Edmunds

Published

on


Summer days beckon and with them the prospect of campfires, fishing holes and scenic hikes. When it’s time to commune with nature, you need a car that can get you there and offer convenience and utility once you’ve arrived. Whether you’re looking to get far off the beaten path or simply enjoy the outdoors with some comforts of home, we’ve rounded up five of the best vehicles for the occasion.

Ford F-150

Before SUVs, pickup trucks were the ultimate camp car. Put a shell over the cargo bed, lay out a foam roll and sleeping bag and voila — instant shelter. The Ford F-150 is not only America’s best-selling truck, but it also makes an ideal camper. Optional four-wheel drive helps get to remote sites, but the camp-friendly Pro Power Onboard is the star feature. It’s an integrated system that delivers power ranging from 2,000 to 7,200 watts to household-style outlets in the cab and bed. That’s enough to run portable speakers, electric grills and movie projectors, or even recharge electric dirt bikes. The all-electric F-150 Lightning generates even more power — up to 9,600 watts — and features 11 outlets. You’ll need the F-150’s optional hybrid V6 engine in XLT trim or higher to get Pro Power Onboard. We’ve found the fuel economy slightly disappointing in our own F-150 equipped with Pro Power Onboard, but have used the innovative system while camping to run the heat overnight and even power hedge trimmers for yard work.

2025 F-150 XLT with Pro Power Onboard starting price (including destination): around $59,320

Lexus GX

If you prefer more luxury from your campmobile, the Lexus GX fits the bill with its rugged styling and a classy, leather-soaked interior. Based on a truck platform, the GX comes with standard four-wheel drive and low-range gearing, giving it excellent capability on dirt roads and trails. Hardcore off-roaders can opt for the Overtrail and Overtrail+ trims that add beefy tires and hardware for even better traction. An available third-row seat and ample cargo space mean more people or gear can join the ride. And despite its impressive backwoods ability, the GX is still a Lexus. It offers plenty of luxury features, including massaging front seats, perfect for relaxing after long hikes.

2025 Lexus GX 550 Overtrail: $73,830

Mercedes-Benz Sprinter

More functional than an SUV but nimbler than an RV, the Sprinter is an infinitely customizable van with a high roof that lets you stand up inside. Campsite cooks will appreciate that utility when prepping meals, but the rest of the Sprinter’s big, boxy cargo space is just as useful. Hundreds of accessories from the factory or aftermarket companies transform the Sprinter’s big, boxy cargo space into the ultimate in-car camper with all manner of racks, beds, cabinets and storage. Two different lengths and 8-foot or 9-foot roof heights give the Sprinter exceptional versatility, along with a range of tire and suspension options. The Sprinter’s blank-canvas price doesn’t come cheap, starting slightly above $50K before any accessories. But its possibilities are endless.

2025 Sprinter Cargo Van: $53,125

Rivian R1T

Experienced campers can be forgiven for a skeptical eye to EVs. Most don’t have enough range for travel to and from distant campsites. With up to 420 miles of range, the R1T doesn’t have that problem. It’s capable of pulling an 11,000-pound trailer on your camp adventures, while standard all-wheel drive and advanced drive modes that expertly manage traction make easy work of tough trails. Like the Ford F-150, the R1T also offers integrated power distribution with four 120-volt outlets and six USB charging ports, meaning your rechargeable flashlights, headlamps and camp lanterns can always stay topped up. (The R1T even comes with its own flashlight.) Clever storage spaces such as a lockable front trunk and storage bin under the bed are perfect for securing things before leaving camp unattended.

2025 Rivian R1T: $71,700

Subaru Outback

The Outback’s long, low-ish body harkens back to an old camp favorite: the station wagon. The Subaru splits the difference between wagon and SUV, though, with plenty of trail capability and more than 70 cubic feet of maximum cargo capacity. Camping pros will like the Wilderness trim for its rugged all-terrain tires, protective lower-body armor, water-repellent upholstery, and 9.5 inches of ground clearance that rivals most Jeeps. Standard roof rails, a low roof height and a 700-pound weight limit make it easy to pile gear on top of the Wilderness, and a hands-free liftgate allows easy access once at camp. A front-view camera is also useful for careful approaches to unfamiliar trails and campsites.

2025 Outback Wilderness: $43,130

Edmunds says

Today’s best cars for camping offer a range of capability, utility and even luxury. Whether you prefer trucks, SUVs or vans, there’s something for every camper.

____________

This story was provided to The Associated Press by the automotive website Edmunds.

Dan Frio is a contributor at Edmunds.



Source link

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

Trump’s big bill cuts Medicaid, SNAP: How it could affect babies

Published

on


WASHINGTON (AP) — The impact of the massive spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on Independence Day is expected to filter down to infants and toddlers — a segment of the population that is particularly vulnerable to cuts to the federal social safety net.

Many middle-class and wealthy families will see benefits from the new legislation, but programs that help low-income families keep babies healthy have been cut back. While state money funds public schools and preschool in some cases, programs supporting the youngest children are largely backed by the federal government.

The law extends tax cuts that Trump passed during his first term in office and pours billions more into border security as the president seeks to broaden his crackdown on immigration. To pay for these initiatives, the law cuts Medicaid and food stamps — programs relied upon by poor households with children — by more than $1 trillion.

The legislation Republicans called Trump’s “big beautiful bill” is set to deliver some gains for families with children. It increases tax credits, including one that now allows parents to deduct up to $2,200 per child from their tax bills. And it introduces investment accounts for newborns dubbed “Trump Accounts,” each seeded with $1,000 from the government.

Still, advocates say they do not make up for what children are likely to lose under the new law. And they fear what comes next, as the next Trump budget proposes more cuts to programs that help parents and babies.

Medicaid cuts could add to strains on families

Over 10 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health care. About 40% of births are covered by Medicaid. Newborns, too, qualify for it when their mothers have it.

The new law doesn’t take little kids or their parents off Medicaid. It institutes Medicaid work requirements for childless adults and adults with children over the age of 13. But pediatricians warn the cuts will be felt broadly, even by those who do not use Medicaid.

The Medicaid cuts are expected to put a financial strain on health care providers, forcing them to cut their least profitable services. That’s often pediatrics, where young patients are more likely to use Medicaid, said Lisa Costello, a West Virginia pediatrician who chairs the federal policy committee for the American Association of Pediatrics.

The ripple effects could exacerbate an existing shortage of pediatricians and hospital beds for children.

“Any cuts to that program are going to trickle down and impact children, whether that’s pediatric practices who depend on Medicaid to be able to stay open or children’s hospitals,” Costello said.

States also use Medicaid to pay for programs that go beyond conventional medical care, including therapies for young children with disabilities. Under the new law, states will foot a greater portion of the bill for Medicaid, meaning optional programs are at risk of getting cut.

Advocates worry that if an adult loses Medicaid coverage, it could ratchet up household stress and make it more difficult for parents to make ends meet, both of which can negatively impact youngsters. And parents who lose their health insurance are less likely to take their children to the doctor.

“When parents lose their health insurance, they often think that their children also are no longer eligible, even if that’s not the case,” said Cynthia Osborne, a professor of early education and the executive director of the Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center at Vanderbilt University.

The law increases tax credits for parents who qualify

The law increases the child tax credit to $2,200 per child, up from $2,000. But parents who don’t earn enough to pay income tax will still not see the benefit, and many will only see a partial benefit.

The measure also contains two provisions intended to help families pay for child care, which in many places costs more than a mortgage. First, it boosts the tax credit parents receive for spending money on child care. The bill also expands a program that gives companies tax credits for providing child care for their employees.

Both measures have faced criticism for generally benefiting larger companies and wealthier households.

“It’s a corporate business tax break,” said Bruce Lesley, president of the advocacy group First Focus on Children. “It makes their child care dependent upon working for an employer who has the credit.”

‘Trump Accounts’ will be opened with $1,000 for newborns

The law launches a program that creates investment accounts for newborn children. The “Trump Accounts” are to be seeded with $1,000 from the government, and children will be able to use the money when they become adults to start a new business, put the money toward a house or go to school.

Unlike other baby bond programs, which generally target disadvantaged groups, the federal program will be available to families of all incomes.

The program’s backers have pitched the accounts as a way to give young people a boost as they reach adulthood and teach them about the benefits of investing. Critics have argued that families in poverty have more immediate needs and that their children should receive a larger endowment if the goal is to help level the playing field.

A food assistance program faces cuts

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) faces the largest cut in its history under the law. It will, for the first time, require parents to work to qualify for the benefit if their children are 14 or older. But even households with younger children could feel the impact.

The law kicks some immigrants — including those with legal status — off food assistance. It makes it more difficult for individuals to qualify by changing how it considers their utility bills.

SNAP has historically been funded by the federal government, but under the new law, states will have to shoulder some of the financial burden. Cash-strapped governments could decide to implement new requirements that would make it more difficult for people to qualify, said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Some states may decide to exit the program altogether.

“When young children lose access to that healthy nutrition, it impacts them for the rest of their lives,” Bergh said. “This bill fundamentally walks away from a long-standing nationwide commitment to making sure that low-income children in every state can receive the food assistance that they need.”

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending