Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

iluvraphael 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.

climbingivy "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.

surflou 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!

rroberts-7 While I thought the movie was good. In the fact that it was filmed well and had good acting in it. I still felt it was a "Jaws" rip-off. The movie had great references to actual true life accounts of the incidents. Because of the way the story was played out I felt some what cheated out of a movie that could have captured the events of that era more accurately.I'd recommend seeing it as its not a bad movie at all. Just don't expect to see much more than a Jaws remake as far as the story line goes. To give it a little more credit than Jaws though I'd have to say the special effects were awesome. The action scenes of the attacks were totally believable. Over all I'd say if you are into sharks and action flicks this one is well worth seeing.