I haven't seen the film in some time, but I remember watching it as a teenager in the '90s and still finding it freaky. Like "Do I really want to go swimming again?" freaky.
That said, I tend to judge older films by different standards. I don't expect them to match the production values of today, nor to hew to modern styles in, well, anything (clothing, dialogue, camera work, editing, even the film stock). I try to judge them more in their own context. Sometimes they still hold up when compared to more modern stuff. Sometimes they're BETTER than modern stuff. But even when they aren't, when compared to other films of their time, they usually work.
For example, try going back and watching the old Buster Crabbe Flash Gordon serials from the mid 30s and 40s. Holy GOD the f/x look clunky! If you thought 1960s Doctor Who had wobbly sets...you ain't seen nothin' yet. BUT if you consider when they came out and take them in that context, they're pretty fun. But there's a lot of stuff that doesn't match modern sensibilities. Shots are usually from a static angle, often just straight on, rather than, say, a low or high angle shot. The editing is very...stale. You'll get much longer shots, rather than dramatic cuts. The music -- and this is true of many older films from that era -- is not a constant companion for the viewer. It cuts in for particularly dramatic sequences, but a lot of times it'll either be nonexistent or seem so bland that it might as well be nonexistent. So, it can be jarring to the modern viewer, even one who fancies themselves a cinemaphile.
But that said, I still think you have to consider it in its context. I mean, if you heard Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" today, you might think "Huh. Good song. Nothin' special. Sounds a lot like the stuff you hear on the radio today. What's all the fuss about?" But if you consider the context in which it came out back in '91 -- coming out of almost a decade chock-a-block full of overproduced hair metal bands (which still have their charms, don't get me wrong), it BLEW PEOPLE AWAY.
It was raw, it was loud, it was basic. Obviously, if you grew up in the 70s and were a fan of the punk scene, you'd instantly hear how indebted Nirvana's sound was to that era, but even so, it completely set the rock music world on its ear (no pun intended) at the time. It spawned legions of imitators and also-rans, and it fundamentally changed music overnight.
Is the song itself all that revolutionary? Nah, not really. Not if you listen to it out of its context. It's a catchy, cool tune, but it's not Bach or Louis Armstrong or whathaveyou. But in its context? Earth-shattering. Absolutely earth-shattering. Music changed basically overnight and NOBODY saw it coming. To me, that's the role that films like Jaws and Star Wars play. You can see how they're indebted to previous films, you can watch them today and think "Ok, decent flick, but what's all the fuss about?" if you've never seen them before. But you won't get "The fuss" unless you put yourself in the mindset of the 1970s viewer.
