Customer Reviews

12 Days of Terror

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

12 Days of Terror is essentially a made-for-TV docu-drama that intends to captitalize on the consistent ratings buster "Shark Week" programs that Discovery Channel shows during sweeps a couple times a year. However, that doesn't make this film any less interesting or, a couple of times, emotionally charged.

The docu-drama presents the basic facts of the very real, very strange shark attacks that took place on the Jersey shore in 1916, when several people were attacked by a shark (or sharks) and subsequently died as a result of the attacks. Since it had only been a few years previous that people began to actually take swims in the ocean, the fear that these events induced was very real and very damaging to the burgeoning seaside resorts. One of the more bizarre aspects to the attacks is the fact that apparently one or more sharks made their way up Mattewan creek ( a freshwater creek) and took the life of a small boy and then that of the boy's would-be rescuer. Then, later, the shark mutilated yet a second boy.

12 Days of Terror stars former model/current TV soap opera hunk Colin Egglesfield as the lead in the film. Egglesfield will probably never win any acting awards, but this isn't a big budget film either. Egglesfield holds his own fairly well and isn't painfully bad, and at moments, even displays some thoughtful acting chops. Egglesfield, who is in just about every scene, is the emotional center of the film, and acts as "Everyman" in his reactions to the events that play out.

The script is based on a book which documents the true tragic events on the Jersey shore during the summer of 1916. The storyline has been adjusted to make it a bit more cinematic and dramatic. It doesn't really hurt the story, but it does make it seem that certain people were involved more consistently than they were.

Egglesfield's real life counterpart was certainly involved in two of the deaths, but beyond that he was not. The writers obviously wanted to create a linear lead for the film. The part of the fisherman (John Rhys-Davies) is a large supporting part, however, in reality, the fisherman only provided assistance when the shark was discovered in the creek. Rhys-Davies method of over-acting certainly balances Egglesfield's sub-acting.

What would have made the film a bit more robust is more background information on the era itself. Modern audiences are often uninformed and quick to dismiss historic events because they don't know the "why" aspects of the situation. More emphasis on the naivete of the experts with regard to sharks would have really helped. Instead, we only see that the shark expert keeps attempting to interview our male lead to learn more about what actually happened. That isn't effective in demonstrating what was known or believed at the time - more information should be shown so that we can see the difference between what was believed 90 years ago by science and what even the lay swimmer knows today. That would have been effective.

So...the film is not exactly true to the facts...does this make it a bad film? No. The acting isn't exactly stellar. Does that make it unwatchable? No. In fact, if anything, this film is more of a teaser, enticing the viewer to go out and read the book or at the very least to learn more about the actual events that took place that fateful summer of 1916.

Worth your time if you are interested in some of the historical aspects of the events.

Maybe it's because people seemed more dignified in the early 1900's, I'm not sure, I just enjoyed watching a shark film without the sterotypical cast, including the arrogant shark hunter, a bunch of foolish babes that get eaten, etc. etc. It made me think of A and E's (Arts and Entertainment) version of, 'The Great Gatsby,' in it's design. Overall one of the better shark films.

The movie was good. I bought it for a friend and she really liked it. Of course she's crazy about sharks and scary movies so take that as you will.

If you ever wanted to know what happened in 1916 in New Jersey and the shark attacks in Mattawan Creek, this is the movie to watch, its kind of bloody

I thought this movie was well made, more realistic than JAWS.
It wasn't a Spielberg summer time blockbuster like JAWS.
This was the story that Peter Benchley used for the inspiration
to write the book & then make the movie JAWS.
Plus I'm sure they put more money into making JAWS, Than 12 Days
of Terror, but the shark in this movie looks a little more realistic
than JAWS.
The shark they built for JAWS looks like a submarine not a real shark.
I thought this story was easier to swallow than JAWS as far as realism.
I rate this DVD a 5 of 5 stars!!

I like this movie an awful lot. With all apologies to Peter Benchley, may he rest in peace, I find this movie a lot more believable than the Spielberg/Benchley one. This one is based on a true story that occurred off of the shores of New Jersey in the Summer of 1916. The photography is, in my opinion, much more "life-like" than the Jaws version, and the attack scenes especially. I'm not saying avoid the Jaws movie, heaven forbid, just give this one a chance. I think that you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Since I live in Matawan, NJ where some of the shark attacks took place in 1916, I was extremely interested in seeing the movie. I felt it was very well done and that the time era in which it took place came through as very realistic. Although it wasn't as scary as Jaws, it did keep you on the edge of your seat when the attacks occurred.

This movie retells the tragic story of how, during 12 days during the summer of 1916 in New Jersey, a shark attacked and killed 4 people, while maiming a fifth. The victims were Charles Vansant on 7/1/16; Charles Bruder on 7/6/16; Lester Stillwell and Stanley Fisher on 7/12/16. Joseph Dunn was also attacked on 7/12/16, but was the lone survivor.
This movie is non-stop in the suspense and action. There is literally very little time to catch your breath and relax before the next attack takes place. There is an attack and death within the first 20 minutes of the movie! If that wouldn't grab your attention, I don't know what would! I found this movie held my attention from the beginning, and is worth watching again. I actually prefer this movie over Jaws, maybe because it's based on true events.
The special effects in the movie are okay, at times looking like it was computer generated. You never get a good look at the wounds of those that have been attacked by the shark, but you get just enough of a glimpse to see the damage that was done, and why it was so devestating.
The events of this movie are considered to be the inspiration for Peter Benchley's "Jaws." Scenes in this movie can be found to be similar to what Peter Benchley wrote in his book. For example, after the first death, a lifeguard named Alex tells people that the death was due to a shark attack, but was told it could have been done as a result of an errant torpedo from a German U-Boat. This is very similar to Jaws, when the girl dies, and Brody is initially told is was due to a shark attack, but then later told it was the result of a boating accident.
A bonus feature states that a 7 1/2 foot Great White Shark was caught and found to have human remains inside of it, but there is speculation that it was actually a Bull Shark, and not a Great White.
Skip Jaws, watch this instead!

i saw this movie on television here in australia,my grandmother told us the story of these shark attacks in 1914 my grandfather was on the train that took the man to asbury park he lived in leonardo at the time. when i was 5 we moved to matawan.the movie is very close to the real story. i an 69years old and live in australia.
thank you for this great service
joe maclean

When I rented this movie I was expecting another Shark Attack 1, 2 or 3 type movie, but this movie was better. The acting was good, the setting was excellent for the era and the low budget involved, and most importantly you didn't get those really fake (and funny) special effect shark attack scenes.

I started reading the book Close to Shore a few years ago which is about the same events of 1916. I am just not a reader, so when I saw this movie was available I immediately rented it and have watched it twice that is how much I enjoyed it.

If you like shark movies you won't be dissappointed in this movie, unless you like shark movies purely for the really bad special affects.