Steven Spielberg has said “he truly regrets” the “decimation of the shark population” after his hit film Jaws.
The story is a movie classic but unfairly demonised the shark in many people’s eyes, leading to a rise in sports fishing in the US.
Spielberg was asked on the BBC’s Desert Island Discs how he’d feel having real sharks around his island.
“That’s one of the things I still fear,” he said.
“Not to get eaten by a shark, but that sharks are somehow mad at me for the feeding frenzy of crazy sports fishermen that happened after 1975.”
He added: “I truly and to this day regret the decimation of the shark population because of the book and the film. I really, truly regret that.”
The author of the Jaws novel, Peter Benchley, also once spoke of his own regrets.
More on Steven Spielberg
Related Topics:
“What I now know, which wasn’t known when I wrote Jaws, is that there is no such thing as a rogue shark which develops a taste for human flesh,” he said in an interview in 2000.
Spielberg, 75, counts Jaws among his biggest blockbusters along with the likes of Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park and ET.
Advertisement
His latest semi-autobiographical film, The Fabelmans, is about a boy who aspires to be a film-maker in post-war America.
Image: The success of Jaws made Spielberg a superstar director
He joked on Desert Island Discs that it was “$40m of therapy”, adding: “I didn’t know really what I was doing, except I was answering a need I had.
“Being an orphan, or recently orphaned by the loss of both parents, to recapture some of those memories in some way that wouldn’t seem too indulgent to actors I really respected. So it was a tight rope for a while.”
“Probably the biggest struggle I had making the film was not to get emotional,” he said.
“But there were times where it just it was out of my control.”
Image: Spielberg’s new movie is The Fabelmans. Pic: Amblin Entertainment/Universal Studios
Set for release at the end of January, it stars Michelle Williams, Paul Dano, Seth Rogen and Gabriel LaBelle.
Spielberg said it was “absolutely right” to see him as a “sentimental and nostalgic” person.
He added: “I think nostalgia even more than sentimentality, but I never bristle when I hear that at all unless somebody says it ruined the movie for them…I don’t like that.”
It is much more than a battle over vaccines in the United States.
It has become a proxy war about trust, freedom, and the role of government in public health.
The debate about childhood immunisations, once a matter of bipartisan consensus, is now a defining clash between federal government, state leadership and the medical community.
At the centre of it is the federal government’s sharp policy shift under US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.
He has rolled back vaccine recommendations and reshaped advisory committees with sceptics.
States have responded along ideological lines – Florida planning to abolish all vaccine mandates; California, Oregon, and Washington forming a “Health Alliance” to safeguard them.
The western states felt they had to act when the head of the agency tasked with disease prevention was sacked.
Image: Robert F. Kennedy Jr appears before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday. Pic: AP
Image: Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks at the hearing. Pic: AP
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:10
Is US politics fuelling a deadly measles outbreak?
Jab mandates compared to ‘slavery’
Several senior figures at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have resigned since Susan Monarez was removed.
The turmoil in public health has led to a fragmented system where Americans’ access to vaccines and the rules governing them, largely depend on where they live.
Likening vaccine mandates to “slavery”, Florida’s surgeon general Joseph Ladapo said the government had no right to dictate them.
“Your body is a gift from God. What you put into your body is because of your relationship with your body and your God,” he said.
It is a tug of war between collective responsibility or individual choice and one that will redefine public health in this nation.
Donald Trump is to rebrand the US Department of Defense as the “Department of War”, according to the White House.
The president will today sign an executive order allowing it to be used as a secondary title for the US government’s biggest organisation.
It also means defence secretary Pete Hegseth will be able to refer to himself as the “secretary of war” in official communications and ceremonies.
Image: Mr Hegseth could refer to himself as ‘secretary of war’ under the change. Pic: Reuters
Mr Hegseth posted the words “DEPARTMENT OF WAR” on X on Thursday night.
Permanently renaming the department would need congressional approval, but the White House said the executive order will instruct Mr Hegseth to begin the process.
The Department of Defense – often referred to colloquially as the Pentagon due to the shape of its Washington HQ – was called the War Department until 1949.
Historians say the name was changed to show the US was focussed on preventing conflict following the Second World War and the dawning of the nuclear age.
Mr Trump raised the possibility of a change in June, when he suggested it was originally renamed to be “politically correct”.
Image: The department is often just referred to as the Pentagon. Pic: Reuters
His reversion to the more combative title could cost tens of millions, with letterheads and building signs in the US and at military bases around the world potentially needing a refresh.
Joe Biden’s effort to rename nine army bases honouring the Confederacy and Confederate leaders, set to cost $39m (£29m), was reversed by Mr Hegseth earlier this year.
Opponents have already criticised Mr Trump’s move.
“Why not put this money toward supporting military families or toward employing diplomats that help prevent conflicts from starting in the first place?” said Democratic senator Tammy Duckworth, a member of the armed services committee.
Mr Trump’s other federal renaming orders include controversially labelling the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf Of America”and reverting North America’s tallest mountain, Denali in Alaska, to its former name of Mount McKinley.
The Mexican government and Alaska’s Republican senators both rejected the changes.
For so long, the Epstein story has cast them in a cameo role.
Everyday coverage of the scandal churns through the politics and process of it all, reducing their suffering to a passing reference.
Not anymore.
Not on a morning when they gathered on Capitol Hill, survivors of Epstein‘s abuse, strengthened by shared experience and a resolve to address it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:54
Epstein survivors call for release of all files
In a news conference that lasted over an hour, they brought an authenticity that only they could.
There was vivid recollection of the abuse they endured and a certainty in the justice they seek.
They had the safety of each other – adults now, with the horrors of youth at a distance, though never far away.
It was an emotional gathering on Capitol Hill, attended by survivors, politicians and several hundred members of the public who turned up in support.
Banners read “Release the files”, “Listen to the victims” and “Even your MAGA base demands Epstein files”.
Image: Haley Robson was one of several Epstein survivors who spoke. Pic: AP
A startling spectacle
That last statement isn’t lost on Donald Trump. As if for emphasis, one of the speakers was the ultra-loyal House representative Marjorie Taylor Greene – they don’t make them more MAGA.
In a spectacle, startling to politics-watchers in this town, she stood side by side with Democrat congressmen to demand the Epstein files be released.
It reflects a discontent spread through Donald Trump’s support base.
He is the man who once counted Jeffrey Epstein as a friend and who has said he’d release the files, only to reverse course.