margaret-142 I enjoyed the acting, the scenery and the overall effects and attempt at an enjoyable FICTION pirate movie. This was not a movie about the real Blackbeard, however - even though it supposedly IS about his encounter with Robert Maynard. There were some redeeming qualities, but two scenes seemed totally out of place - one being a rescue scene in town where shades of Errol Flynn appeared. The other was the ending. Though the movie was entertaining at home, the historical value leaves much to be desired as the location of the story during the ending is totally inaccurate. All historical accounts of the demise of the pirate and the ship discuss the location as off the coast of North Carolina - a place much celebrated as the last place of the infamous pirate - not in the Bahamas.

mjdwill Living in Bristol where Blackbeard lived and drank in a pub that still stands today, I thought I would give this a try. I was left disappointed, at what potentially could of been very good. The acting is poor to say the least, and the story line was never something that had you gripped from the start. The story trickled along at a pace that never threatened to speed up, which left me Un-exited throughout.Although I don't know too many of the historical facts about Blackbeard, I was always led to believe Blackbeard to be the most feared pirate in his day. I never got that impression during the film,which again left me disappointed. If you're going to make a film about Blackbeard, at least give him an edge, make us dislike him. Although I can't say i'm an expert on dental hygiene from the 1700's, I was amazed at how many pirates had white teeth, just something else that didn't make it feel like a true pirate film.

dad24641 I was so excited about the premiere of Blackbeard. I spent four years on the island where he was killed by Lt. Maynard. While on the island, I researched the life and livelihood of the pirates that frequented the area. Edward Teach, alias Blackbeard, stood out above the rest. A colorful character who could read and write-rare for men in that age-and had considerable social graces, he was quite a hit among the ladies. The movie was almost a complete fabrication, containing little truth and ignoring the fascinating facts about this former servant to the Queen of England's, escapades. For the record, the life of Edward Teach, one of many servants turned vigilante, was far more exciting than the way this hoax depicts him. There were the numerous battles over ships, the ships he won through those battles, the smoking hat when he boarded a ship and the fact that he was caught in a sandbar in the Pamplico Sound while trying to flee from Lt. Maynard. And what of Lt. Maynard? Maynard pursued Teach because of a $1000 bounty (in 1718) offered by the Governor of Virginia to anyone who would capture and/or kill Blackbeard. Maynard overwhelmed Teach's fleet with firepower, and personally defeated him on deck of one of Teach's ships, then paraded through the area with Blackbeard's head dangling from the bow of the ship. Maynard himself bought an island in the Caribbean, supposedly with the $1000 he won for having slain Blackbeard. Most of us know that even then, an island could not be purchased for $1000. I think the movie should have stuck to the facts. They are far more exciting than the movie itself. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction!

knight1192a I don't claim to be an expert on Blackbeard, in fact like many of us I really have just a basic understanding of who he was. Not a passing understanding mind you, that would be basically be knowing that he was a pirate and maybe knowing his real name was Edward Teach. A basic understanding would mean knowing the name of the ship he's associated with the most (Queen Anne's Revenge, which was a French ship he captured and renamed), he's associated with the then English colony of North Carolina among other places, that the governor of the colony of Virginia sent Maynard after him because the governor of NC was to friendly with him. Things of that nature.Now knowing these things, when I saw ads for this movie I was eagerly anticipating this movie. I knew it wasn't going to stick strictly to the facts, what historical movie does? But I expected them to be much more of a guideline than what was presented. Yet for the most part the facts were thrown out the window to present us with a movie that should have been called "The Hunt for Kidd's Treasure." Because that's really what this movie was about, finding Captain Kidd's treasure.In that they could have used practically any pirate to be alive at any point after Kidd's death. Not only that, they could have created a pirate or said forget the pirates and just use anyone wishing to find the treasure. For that matter they could have set it at just about any time after his death, even today. But by using Blackbeard they ensured there would be a built in audience.As a movie by itself, if one heavily ignores the director and screenwriter playing fast and loose with history, it's mildly entertaining. The intrigue coming in two ways, firstly Blackbeard and Maynard's interaction in searching for the treasure together, secondly the corrupt governor of an apparent colony in the Caribbean as he looks to hide his truth from his adopted daughter and his citizens. Maynard apparently is sent to deal with Blackbeard by someone else entirely and essentially ends up shanghaied into the pirate's crew, where he hides his real nature, and rather successfully until the time comes for him to save some folks. Meanwhile, the governor and his essentially second in command have been working with pirates for a while now and are willing to team up with Blackbeard so as to get their share of his prizes. Unfortunately for them his adopted daughter falls for Maynard and becomes suspicious of what they are up too.