Not knowing something doesn't mean its complicated, it just means it is unfamiliar, for you. Once you did this several dozen times, its the simplest thing ever.
The second thing is AWS is very expensive for what it does. Do you need to add DNS records? There is Route 53 which costs extra. Do you need emails? There is AWS Simple Email which costs extra. Do you need logs? The storage cost (although little) is added to your bill. Do you need databases? Do you need support?
All I am saying is that shared hosting should be first considered for static websites.
Flip it around. AWS let's you not pay for things you don't need. Then, if there's a biz requirement for something else, you make that _investment_.
Of course there are alternatives. But shared hosting is a roll of the dice. For a hobby project or POC? Sure, start with shared. But if you're certain shared is not a semi-longer term option don't wasteyour time. Shared is cheap for a reason. Saving a couple dollars will dry up quickly in downtime and headache time.
If you look at the free tier limits, and monthly costs. Putting a simple rest app behind API gateway with a few buckets and a little lambda gives you a whole lot of bang for very little cost.
If you're a person in a region and your website is going to get bursty use by people in your region then it's a pretty cheap deal.
Monthly costs < 1 coffee for a blog or some non trivial page.
I must add that AWS makes it easy to use WAF (web application firewall) to protect you from this.
Route53 cost is ridicule. Not an issue at all.