IMDb RATING
5.5/10
1.9K
YOUR RATING
For twelve days in July, 1916, a shark patrolled the waterways of northern New Jersey. This docudrama is based on Richard Fernicola's account of those days.For twelve days in July, 1916, a shark patrolled the waterways of northern New Jersey. This docudrama is based on Richard Fernicola's account of those days.For twelve days in July, 1916, a shark patrolled the waterways of northern New Jersey. This docudrama is based on Richard Fernicola's account of those days.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
12 Days of Terror is a dramatization of real events during the 1916 oddity where a shark cruises the NJ shores and tributaries for 12 days apparently looking for people to munch on. Some say that the concept of Jaws was taken from this true story. Many of the same Jaws characters are there, the business people and authorities who won't listen because money is involved, the few who understand the seriousness of the problem, and the 'main course' public who rely on the authorities to keep them safe from something they don't understand. Some discussion over just how many sharks were involved was glossed over since humans are a large meal and sharks don't need to eat every day because of a slower metabolism. Good acting, relatively good camera work, interesting scenery, and a passable script.
The movie is factually based, if you read the actual events that took place in Jersey in July 1916 you will see that the majority of the film stays true to events that happened.
As far as Alex being the one that stops the shark eventually, I think that is a little off-story, he is present and witness to all the attacks and uses that to tell the story in much the same way that the character of Rose tells the story of Titanic, yet she was never an actual passenger on the ship in real life.
Having read the events thoroughly, I then enjoyed the film immensely, it has no over the top CGI and relies heavily on the acting and storytelling. I can certainly see where Peter Benchley may have been inspired to write the novel Jaws.
Please don't go into this thinking that the film is a Jaws ripoff, it's not, it's the prequel!
As far as Alex being the one that stops the shark eventually, I think that is a little off-story, he is present and witness to all the attacks and uses that to tell the story in much the same way that the character of Rose tells the story of Titanic, yet she was never an actual passenger on the ship in real life.
Having read the events thoroughly, I then enjoyed the film immensely, it has no over the top CGI and relies heavily on the acting and storytelling. I can certainly see where Peter Benchley may have been inspired to write the novel Jaws.
Please don't go into this thinking that the film is a Jaws ripoff, it's not, it's the prequel!
In an industry saturated with shark themed movies it takes a lot to impress me. What needs to be done is throwing a curve ball, taking the shark movie and adding an angle or something to set it apart from the rest. The Scyfy channel to their credit have done that what with the likes of the Sharknado movies, Toxic Shark, Snow Sharks etc but with little success.
12 Days of Terror however does it successfully, kind of. You see it's based upon a book/true story and set in 1916 so immediately its set apart from the rest. That however is the best thing about it.
Starring John Rhys-Davies as the only recognizable face 12 Days of Terror certainly looks the part and the period but alas is about as exciting as a National Geographic special on sloth racing.
Seriously, I was bored to tears. Sure it looks great, the cinematography is above par and it's handled competently but I couldn't get past how dull it all was. At no point was I gripped, did I care about the characters or really find myself invested in the film.
Points for effort, but little else.
The Good:
John Rhys-Davies
Fantastic setting
The Bad:
Frustratingly lifeless
12 Days of Terror however does it successfully, kind of. You see it's based upon a book/true story and set in 1916 so immediately its set apart from the rest. That however is the best thing about it.
Starring John Rhys-Davies as the only recognizable face 12 Days of Terror certainly looks the part and the period but alas is about as exciting as a National Geographic special on sloth racing.
Seriously, I was bored to tears. Sure it looks great, the cinematography is above par and it's handled competently but I couldn't get past how dull it all was. At no point was I gripped, did I care about the characters or really find myself invested in the film.
Points for effort, but little else.
The Good:
John Rhys-Davies
Fantastic setting
The Bad:
Frustratingly lifeless
It's all too easy to just nonchalantly label "12 Days of Terror" as being just another imitation of the legendary horror blockbuster "Jaws" and exclusively focus on its shortcomings. Especially when numerous and reliable sources state that Peter Benchley himself based his novel on these same facts that occurred in the summer of 1916. You can't really accuse a movie of being a rip-off when it's based on facts, not even when it comes more nearly 30 years after a milestone movie that commercialized these same facts. "12 Days of Terror" is an admirable and modest made-for-TV production that doesn't even dream of competing with "Jaws". Director Jack Sholder ("The Hidden", "Alone in the Dark") has more than enough experience to realize he plays in an entirely different league than Steven Spielberg and merely just attempted to shoot a solid and factual shark movie. As far as I'm concerned he succeeded. The movie's main trump is undeniably the reasonably accurate depiction of the 1916 setting. The events occurred nearly 100 years ago, so you already know beforehand that this movie won't primarily revolve on sexy young chicks in minuscule bikinis. We received quite a lot of bloodthirsty shark movies recently ("Spring Break Shark Attack", "Red Water", "Shark Attack 1 to 47", etc
) but there were actually just simple excuses to show hot chicks and hunky boys parading in the latest beach fashion. This film is different. Admittedly the characters are still rather one-dimensional, but at least they're not complete retards. During the first days of the unusually hot summer of 1916, the New Jersey beaches become overflowed with tourists that wish to forget all the daily issues, like that horrible war being fought in Europe. The warm currents also bring another and very unwelcome visitor to Matawan in the shape of a hungry and extremely aggressive shark. The authorities still refuse to close down the beaches even after two fatal accidents, but when the unstoppable animal even swims up the creeks in search for more victims, courageous life guard Alex plans to catch the shark himself. "12 Days of Terror" is a thoroughly unsurprising and unspectacular thriller, but it's never pretentious or boring. Due to budgetary restrictions there aren't many special effects, exhilarating attacks or enchanting underwater shots to admire. Actually, we only properly get to see the shark's fin and even that looks fake. The acting performances are okay and the early 20th century decors are convincing enough. It's, simply put, a harmless little TV time-waster.
This movie is amazing, I caught it flipping trough channels and I had to keep watching. I did some googling and the movie is not 100% accurate in who was doing what at the time of the attacks, but it sure is close enough. Surprisingly the most dramatic scenes are also very accurate historically, and I guess it's because of the book.
That's what makes it so great, you get a feeling of realism that's missing in a lot of shark movies. They use a lot tricks to create suspense used in Jaws, and they still work great here. You can sometimes see where costs where cut, but it happens in scenes that don't affect the story too much.
If you start watching and don't like it, you owe it to yourself to watch it to the end, because it just gets better and better. A great story, and a good example of a movie based on acting instead of special effects.
That's what makes it so great, you get a feeling of realism that's missing in a lot of shark movies. They use a lot tricks to create suspense used in Jaws, and they still work great here. You can sometimes see where costs where cut, but it happens in scenes that don't affect the story too much.
If you start watching and don't like it, you owe it to yourself to watch it to the end, because it just gets better and better. A great story, and a good example of a movie based on acting instead of special effects.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe identity of the responsible shark has never been conclusively proven. While common legend states that a Great White is the sole shark responsible, some scientists think a bull shark might have been responsible for at least the three attacks in the creek. Others believe a school of sharks may have been responsible.
- GoofsThe end credits contain a few misspellings. For instance, the credit 'co-producer' is spelled 'co-producernas' and 'art director' is spelled 'art directorr' (these two examples are right next to each other).
- Quotes
Dr. John Nichols: I'm a fishman.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Monsterquest: Gigantic Killer Fish (2007)
Details
- Runtime1 hour 27 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
