That's also true, though 2001 is unique in its intentions and to me is one of our rare cinematic poems. It's in three acts, but these acts are not dependent on what traditional films rely on. I think it succeeds on its own unique terms. Being an earlier film, it has less effects than STAR WARS or JURASSIC, but its intentions are for the viewer to partially decide.
Having read the Marvel comics Jack Kirby treasury edition long before actually watching the film, the hidden ideas Kubrick was aiming for seemed pretty evident even though I was 11 at best.
''Jaws, on the other hand, is fairly low-key, believable and realistic in the first half, with a few swimmers getting munched on here and there, then turns into Terminator On Water! in its second. An hourlong movie wouldn't have been marketable, granted, but from an artistic standpoint, I'm inclined to think the whole expedition/hunt sequence ought to have been scrapped, or at the very least drastically reduced.''---Gaith.
JAWS, unlike most movies, is a two-act tale, first on land, then at sea. It takes one hour for the isolated trio to prevail, except of course for Quint. So the pacing of part two, even for a pre-George Lucas film, may have seemed unnatural. Luckily you had Richard Dreyfuss to keep it hilarious and Robert Shaw to keep it dramatic. Spielberg tried not to have his audience guess that Scheider would be the winner, even though he IS top-billed and all and arrives right at the beginning, unlike his two shipmates. The shark kills five people, which is also impressive by 70s standards. When the TERMINATOR came on the scene that body-count skyrocketed....
Bottom line: the pacing was unusual. Seeing it as a kid, I was surprised how long they were at sea.....and nervous for the safety of the trio. This was intentional, which is why Spielberg actually filmed at sea. CGI didn't exist. But if it had, I can't see how it could've made JAWS more memorable. Does anyone out there prefer DEEP BLUE SEA?