12 Days Of Terror (2004)

Too much of everything

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

This movie first caught my attention while looking at Amazon.ca. I saw the trailer for it and immediately went on a search for it. Finding it, I bought it to satisfy my curiosity about the story of 1916.The story is a really vivid one and truthful. Colin Egglesfield does a wonderful job as Alex Ott, and he has a wonderful supportive cast behind him.Being based on a true event during 1916, you might expect the acting to be a bit blasé, but the cast really pulls this movie off in an unexpected way. I believe this to be one of the most realistic movies about sharks out there today.It puts Jaws and its sequels to shame as well as many other shark movies out there. Jaws was scary for its time, but this being based on a true story makes it even more terrifying yet.I enjoy the story of the events but I also love where it was filmed and the scenery. Its so beautiful as a backdrop and it really does this movie a whole lot of good.I can't imagine having been living when this had happened, not knowing what on earth was eating these swimmers. The turn of events is real enough and makes me not want to go into the ocean any time soon.

"12 Days Of Terror" is a lot like the later 2009 docu drama called "Blood In The Water" for Shark Week.I think both movies have a lot to offer.I made a DVD of a broadcast from a few days ago and I watched the movie for the first time last night.I was surprised to see John Rhys-Davies as a captain of a fishing boat.He actually did a good job.I had never seen John Rhys-Davies look pounds lighter.The young actor Colin Egglesfield reminded me so much of a young Tom Cruise.His facial features and some of his mannerisms were similar.I think the gore was unnecessary but that is what people want to see these days.I think that "Blood In The Water" was a little bit better.I have this movie.

Almost gentle version of Jaws, with all key elements still intact; the business officials refusing to close the beach, the one man fighting public opinion, the grief stuck mother.Here's the thing, Peter Benchley based Jaws upon this true story. So whether you consider the 1916 attacks or Jaws as the 'original' is up to you. But to my liking the film has one to many 'replica' lines from the Spielberg classic. Including the salty sea-dog of a shark hunter.Don't get me wrong, this is actually a very enjoyable film. But don't expect to watch Jaws twixt the Waltons, its better than that; including elements of politics of the time (America's continued resistance to join the war in Europe) and the class structure of rich and poor.Interesting, very interesting.... but would you pay to see it? No, I guess not.

I have been obsessed with great white sharks since I saw Jaws when I was a very small child. I have seen the movie 'Twelve Days of Terror' and read the book as well, and both are utterly fascinating. Like it was said in the book, this incident in 1916 was a 'once in a lifetime' deal. Nothing like this has ever been happened before (and if it did, it was NEVER documented) and probably will not ever happen again, at least not in our lifetimes. I whole heartedly believe that the culprit back in 1916 was a juvenile great white shark. There are scientists that believe it was a bull shark, or a group of sharks. The shark that is on the cover of 'Twelve Days of Terror' was later autopsied and 10 to 15 pounds of human flesh were found inside. There is no doubt that it was a real, true man-eater that attacked all of those people (I believe it was 6 people total, and only one survived.) A shark that preys on humans (which is not a natural food source for sharks of any species) truly, in my opinion is a freak of nature. Very fascinating.