rowan_h Really, Its hard to find words for how bad this was. I lasted half an hour and then I just couldn't stand any more. Its not just that the acting and script were bad, and they were, the setting, costumes and general atmosphere were so wrong that a bad film failed even to transport you to the world it was meant to portray which might at least have made me watch a bit more of it.I was put off right at the beginning by Edward Teach (Blackbeard) having a Scottish accent when of course he was English. Angus MacFadyen can act English why didn't he? Stacy Keach looked embarrassed as well he should and Richard Chamberlain tried to rise above it but his costume prevented him. Thailand does not look like the West Indies and the Thais don't look like African slaves.the acting was truly awful and the script sounded like a teenager had written it after watching a few old movies. The costumes were particularly awful. Richard Chamberlain's looked like a High School pantomime costume and the wigs looked as if someone had once seen a picture of an English lawyer and tried to reproduce it from memory with cotton wool. About the only decent thing in it was the ships and the at sea sequences where at least they'd spent a bit of money.I know it was Hallmark but they can do an reasonable enough job, Moby Dick was OK, this was bad, bad, bad. So bad I felt insulted and bitterly resented the rental fee. If you're thinking about watching it don't, just look out the window for an hour its bound to be more entertaining.

Junk_Jacob I have to admit i have a bit of an obsession with this movie and have probably watched it over 100 times.I cannot express how entertaining this movie is. I can honestly say i don't know much about its historical accuracy, but that as a film alone, its very enjoyable. Its tremendously pleasant break away from the standard pirate films. Its a nice break from all standard films today, for that matter.Story: Very good, i just don't know close to the truth it is. Action:Lots of sword fighting and sea battle. Good fun. Acting:Some actors play at their parts better than others. Nudity: None. Even the prostitutes keep their clothes on. Thank goodness. Violence: Lots. Blood and violence, skulls, no serious gore. Plus it has THATCH AND LULU! And Captain Ellis BRAND!!Was this a poorly made movie? This could never be that kind of film. This the kind of film that you'll love VERY MUCH.

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.

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.