Blackbeard (2006) User Reviews

Remake of Captain Blood 1935

[mjbessette · 5/10 · 10 May 2009]

I didn't realize until caught "Captain Blood" on TCM last night and found myself listening to the same exact lines. I thought to myself..I swear I saw this moving before in color;then I realized when I researched on IMDb that it was Black Beard I watched. I was disappointed that IMDb didn't point out it was a remake of Captain Blood. The writer's for Black Beard didn't go far for lines they literally took lines from the classic original "Captain Blood". Watch Captain Blood. What is wrong with this world. No imagination at all. Every movie you watch these days is a remake of an original. Sometimes that remake it over and over again. We really need to start giving credit where credit is due. Especially when these movies are being nominated for awards and the writers are copying them.

Should have been called The Hunt for Kidd's Treasure

[knight1192a · 4/10 · 17 June 2006]

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.

REALISTIC pirate adventure

[Wuchakk · 6/10 · 13 March 2014]

RELEASED IN 2005 and directed by Kevin Connor, "Blackbeard" is a two-part TV film from Hallmark loosely based on the exploits of the infamous pirate Edward Teach, better known as Blackbeard (born circa 1680 and died November 22, 1718).

Although "Blackbeard" features real-life people and other items, like the ship Queen Anne's Revenge and Blackbeard's relationship with the governor, the story is essentially fictional. Those knowledgeable about the life of Blackbeard should know this up front otherwise it will ruin their experience. Still, even though this is a fictional story, the film IS realistic in its presentation of the basic Caribbean pirate lifestyle. Not to mention, it successfully captures the spirit of Blackbeard.

One thing that turns me off to pirate flicks like "Pirates of the Caribbean" (all of them) and "Cutthroat Island" (1995) is that they feature such a goofy, unbelievable vibe that the viewer can't take the stories seriously for more than a few moments. Well, you don't have to worry about that with "Blackbeard" because, again, this is a believable portrayal of the pirate lifestyle. The film certainly helps the viewer catch a glimpse of what it must have been like to be a pirate back in that era, the 1600s-1700s.

In regards to the historical inaccuracies of the story, how much do we really know about Blackbeard and the many adventures he experienced? Did he have a personal scribe with him detailing every detail of his life and misadventures? Of course not. The story in "Blackbeard" features events that very well COULD have happened to him and other pirates of the era. In light of all this, I don't get the rigid criticisms about the supposed lack of historical accuracy. Besides, the overrated "Braveheart" (1995) is hailed as a masterpiece, but is it historically accurate? Please (Mel Gibson portrayed Wallace as the next thing to Jesus Christ himself).

Although this is a TV flick with a small budget compared to major theatrical releases, it is comparable in spirit to films like "Last of the Mohicans" (1992) and "The Count of Monte Cristo" (2002). So if you enjoy adventure movies like these you'll likely appreciate "Blackbeard," as long as you can handle the TV budget.

Regarding the major characters, Angus Macfadyen does a good job in bringing Blackbeard to life; Richard Chamberlain is effective as the foppish aristocratic villain; Mark Umbers is a great masculine and noble protagonist; and Jessica Chastain is a fine choice as the adopted daughter of the governor of New Providence (Chamberlin).

Redheaded Jessica certainly attractive but not drop-dead gorgeous, which isn't a problem since these types of women almost always outshine the ultra-hot babes anyway (less outward beauty often creates greater inward beauty, although there are exceptions). In the second half of the film there are scenes where Blackbeard & his motley crew have Jessica captive as they camp in the jungle and there are some shots of Jessica that are absolutely stunning. Somehow the jungle brings out her enchanting beauty.

The story takes place in the Caribbean but the film was shot in Thailand. Although I would have preferred the real Caribbean, these locations are certainly magnificent. It's just that the real New Providence isn't hilly as depicted. Also, there weren't any Asian people living in the West Indies during that time period, general speaking.

BOTTOM LINE: If you're in the mood for a realistic pirate adventure and don't mind the limitations of TV productions, you can't go wrong with "Blackbeard." If you want pirates, Caribbean Islands, the Royal Navy, hidden treasures, corrupt officials, jungle adventure, ship battles, caves, castaways and damsels you can't go wrong with "Blackbeard." It's the best pirate film I've seen (not that I've seen many) and is superior to goofy fantasy dreck like "Pirates of the Caribbean," not to mention more compelling than "Master and Commander" (2003), although it's nowhere near as good as "Mutiny on the Bounty" (1962) or "The Bounty" (1984).

THE MOVIE RUNS 2 hours, 49 minutes (both parts combined). WRITER: Bryce Zabel.

GRADE: B/B- (6.5/10)

Misleading Title

[skipychic · 2/10 · 14 April 2015]

After a little study of Blackbeard and eagerly awaiting this DVD to arrive I was thoroughly disappointed with the historical account of Blackbeard. From start to finish it was not a true story.. yes, it was a boat at sea.. but it was a sloop, not a three masted big boat.. He also was given his command by the commander who he sailed for.. Successful pirates often sailed with a small fleet. Edward Teach was Captain of one of this pirate's sloops. After his boss retired, Edward continued pirating. A shrewd and calculating leader, Teach spurned the use of force, relying instead on his fearsome image to elicit the response he desired from those he robbed. Contrary to the modern-day picture of the traditional tyrannical pirate, he commanded his vessels with the permission of their crews and there is no known account of his ever having harmed or murdered those he held captive. So, by calling this movie The true story of Blackbeard is wildly misleading. His real life story is far more interesting than this movie, I would suggest anyone who wants a more realistic account of Blackbeard to search for "Blackbeard The Real Pirates Of The Caribbean", James Purefoy as Black Beard.

Very entertaining even if not totally accurate

[fallingstar76 · 7/10 · 20 August 2007]

This movie is LOOSELY based on the actual history of Blackbeard. Some of the events that happen in the movie are taken right from history, even if they are set in a different location. Either way, it's very entertaining. The main plot as well as the sub-plots offer excitement and intrigue, as well as romance. The fight scenes are well done and the whole story in general seemed plausible enough to me. My husband usually doesn't like historical movies but he said this one kept him on the edge of his seat. The one complaint I had is that some of the scenes are shot in dark locations and it makes it very hard to see on screen. I understand that they were trying to keep it as real as possible, but it does no good when you can't even tell what's going on.

Film does not focus on the life of Blackbeard

[dtcws73 · 2/10 · 30 August 2006]

Based on the descriptions appearing on the front and back cover of the movie case, one would expect this movie to chronicle the life and times of Blackbeard. Instead the movie focuses more on a fictional love story than the historical figure for which it is titled.

Blackbeard's more notable conquests and actions are not even eluded to. One would think given 169 minutes they might have squeezed in a little something more. His reputation with no specifics is only referenced.

This film unfortunately is primarily focused on a fictional love story. There are far more elements of fiction than fact in this film.

In short, much like judging a book by it's cover, do not buy/view this movie based on it's box.

Aw I was hoping to hurl my rubber parrot at the screen but it's actually a fun movie

[rooprect · 22 February 2018]

Judging by some of the reviews I read here, I was expecting this movie to be a cross between The Love Boat and my high school drama project. Arrrr, says I, I love a good trainwreck of a flick! So I hunkered down ready to laugh my avast off.

What a letdown, the movie was actually pretty fun. Most notable is the lush scenery (filmed in Thailand) full of fantasy-like seascapes and majestic islands. Scenes of the town, New Providence, were convincing, and I never noticed any obvious cgi trickery (I think they used old school matte paintings for most of these effects). Battle scenes on the high seas were surprisingly well done. Swordfights were ok except for the ole Shakespearean sword-under-the-arm gags, but actually I came to prefer that sort of violence rather than fake slasher effects.

Now on to the story. Blackbeard. Pirate. That's all you need to know. For those of you expecting a historically accurate biographical lesson, stick to your books. The story of any personage from the 17th-18th century is going to be largely improvised simply because all we have comes from a handful of witness accounts and rumors of the day. So just sit back and have fun.

Angus Mcfayden does a great pirate, ruthless and cruel but with a unique charm that makes you see him as possibly the protagonist. However, the intended protagonist is the British Lieutenant Robert Maynard (played by Mark Umbers), a dashing hero straight out of Errol Flynn's playbook. My cynicism prevented me from accepting him at first, but he grew on me.

Similarly, the romance between Maynard and Charlotte (Jessica Chastain) might be hard for cynics to swallow, but the deliberately over-the-top performance of Richard Chamberlain as Charlotte's conniving patron keeps us pleasantly distracted. I say "deliberately over-the-top" because in the bonus interview, Richard Chamberlain talks about how he decided to have some fun with the role, and he certainly did. The character becomes almost a parody of British gentry which is perfectly fitting, since the character is a total hypocrite. I thought Richard Chamberlain was the most fun to watch.

On all counts, the acting was really good if you consider that each character is an extreme personification of a stereotype. Blackbeard the rogue, Maynard the boyscout, The Governor (Chamberlain) the high class hypocrite, and Charlotte the oppressed daughter. Beginning with these stereotypes we begin to see that the filmmakers were weaving some complex parallels if you're paying attention.

Blackbeard & the Governor are both villains but from vastly different social strata. The contrast, especially when they meet, is riveting. Maynard and Charlotte, likewise, are from different social standings: Maynard a hardened soldier and Charlotte a rich heiress, and yet they both represent the common good.

While parts of the story are predictable, that's not a bad thing. After all, Pirates are predictable, right? They break things and steal stuff. That said, just sit back and enjoy the voyage.

Angus is a right true pirate, in spite of the too-clean bodice-ripper settings

[mooncaine-1 · 7/10 · 17 June 2006]

Pity the writers didn't crack a book; they mighta realized pirates don't hurl bombs, nor fire broadsides, at ships they wanted to take. You can't take cargo off a prize if she's sunk or burnt to the waterline.

Another historical gaffe: when Maynard arrives at New Providence, he looks askance at a hanging gibbet with a corpse. I don't think a British naval officer would have given such a thing a moment's attention, but rather would have noticed any lack of 'em, for it was the hanging corpses and piked heads about a town's gate that served as reassurance -- here, there is law and order. So Maynard's glance, if any, would have been an approving one.

I really like Blackbeard's accent in this. He even looks right (but way, way too clean).

Very poor production values

[moviemagicbudgeting · 2/10 · 8 September 2006]

I sat down to watch this show in the hope of some good entertainment. I was very disappointed. The design elements of the show are paper thin. The costumes are all pristine, the boats look like they are just out of the boatyard and these must me the cleanest pirates I have ever seen. Very poor. I was hoping for something from the direction but unfortunately this has been shot like an episode of Dallas. I dread to think how much money was wasted on this when there are fantastic scripts waiting to be made for a fraction of the cost. An obvious attempt to hang onto the coat tails of Pirates of the Caribean and pick up the scraps but it even fails in this attempt.

Good period piece but a little slow paced.

[joe-whalen · 7/10 · 20 June 2006]

The movie is set in the early part of the 18th century. However, when they site a French ship early in the story, it is flying the blue, white, and red flag of modern France which did not come into existence until the French Revolution some 75 years later.

It would also help if there was more character development. For example, other than duty, it is not clear what is motivating the hero to undertake the mission which serves as the basis upon which the story is built.

The settings, which I understand were built in Thailand, are also well constructed and believable as being in the Bahama Islands almost 300 years ago and provide good backgrounds for the scenes.

Pathetic at Best this is a waste of film, let alone time.

[IceBerg2076 · 1/10 · 29 July 2007]

I picked this film up based on the Cover, A Mini-Series for cheap. I got less than what I paid for. The Complete lack of Continuity, or any other production value for that matter, is Appalling. Had I been hired for this cast, I'd have left based on the poor writing alone.

I'll not confuse Larry for Barry Levinson again.

I feel sorry for Poor Stacy Keach having to have his name attached to this Crap. This Film is worse than most High School Plays, let alone your local Community Theater.

I hope Angus Macfadyen got paid well enough for His outstanding Performance. As BlackBeard he alone captures the Attention that his role demands, despite the sad performance of the Writer. HIs performance alone kept me from tearing the disc out and launching it through an open window.

I Love This Film

[Junk_Jacob · 10/10 · 25 July 2009]

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.

entertaining but unrealistic

[margaret-142 · 7/10 · 23 September 2006]

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.

Avoid

[mjdwill · 1/10 · 3 September 2006]

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.

Tripe

[wespain · 1/10 · 24 July 2006]

Unbelievable. A comic book version of Blackbeard's story. Don't waste your money renting this insipid, historically-inaccurate tripe. The setting, which should have been North Carolina and Virginia, is some mythical Caribbean colony. The actors are wasted on a script filled with stock heroes and villains. Nothing is even faintly true to the facts, except for the historic character names. The whole thing reminded me me of a Classic's Illustrated version of a greater work. The only audience this will appeal to is the kiddies, since it's done on their level anyway. Production values are generally good, but some of the night scenes are murky. Unfortunately, good tech credits can't even begin to redeem this cynical joke. If you are looking for an adult viewing experience I'd advise you to look elsewhere.

Good Overall

[dukeb0y · 7/10 · 13 July 2017]

As other reviews have said, the outfits are too bright, ships are too clean. But, surprisingly, I found it quite entertaining. Using real ships on the high seas is a plus. Richard Chamberlain does well as the governor on the island. And I thought the sets were pretty good.

Again, quite a nice few hours to spend. 7 stars.

Not historically correct but OK

[saintian · 5/10 · 8 July 2006]

The acting and filming were quite good, however the historical facts were quite distorted. Pirates are portrayed as as evil villains as they are in this film however as in the case of Captain James Kidd they were probably pawns of the wealthy. Maybe future serious pirate movies could address the fact that most pirates were either government assisted employees or scapegoats for a corrupt society. Personally I liked Errol Flynn better, unbelievable but more swashbuckling. The person who portrays Blackbeard in this film (McFayden)is a very good actor but does not come across as the strange person that history suggests he was, for example the smoking beard.Finally it was too long and in parts disjointed.

Try Blackbeard: Terror at Sea for a more accurate representation

[carmineclarke85 · 3 February 2014]

I know this is coming more than 7 years late, but no worries.

I watched this one several months ago and completely forgot about it until after I watched 'Blackbeard: Terror at Sea', also a UK TV movie, which was released one week after this one on the 10th September, 2006. I came looking for the cast of Terror at Sea and came across two conflicting films from the same month and year and realized I had in fact watched this one as well and wasn't so impressed.

This 'Pirates: The True Story of Blackbeard' truly is a 'mummers farce'(to borrow from Game of Thrones). Okay acting and costuming but terrible story line and characterization, that seems more fiction than anything, made for simple minded audiences to believe.

If you want more accuracy and less swashbuckling fiction type storyline I suggest looking at Blackbeard: Terror at Sea. It is narrated by Hands as if he wrote Blackbeards memoirs (not sure how accurate that is) and much better acting, with character focus and realistic storyline all round. It is more documentary style with the narration this way. Some of the music, especially at the beginning, is a little annoying with the narration, but maybe it was a poor audio version I watched, but when that drops off and they really get into the story.

Blackbeard is certainly a character you love to hate and hate to love.

Edward Teach 1680-1718

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 3 August 2013]

The recent popularity of Captain Jack Sparrow as essayed by Johnny Depp in several films gave someone at Hallmark Channel the idea of making a movie about the real deal on whom Jack Sparrow is based. That would be on Edward Teach known down in history and legend as Blackbeard. But sad to say that not only is Angus MacFayden competing against Depp on the big screen, but also against an actor gone from us since 1957, but one who made the role of Blackbeard truly his own.

Robert did a wonderful film about the demise of Blackbeard back in 1952 and no doubt Johnny Depp must have studied that portrayal intensely because he got so much of it in Jack Sparrow. It's not Angus MacFayden's fault, but next to Newton giving one of the great pork product performances in a role that called for it, MacFayden taking it down a notch was disappointing.

Young British naval lieutenant Mark Umbers is given orders straight from the Admiralty in London. Find out about this Blackbeard guy and take him however and trust no one in your mission because we don't know who is in with Blackbeard. This he does. Along the way he has to rescue Jessica Chastain, ward of British Island governor Richard Chamberlain who has plans for her that neither she or Umbers is in favor of.

This version of Blackbeard is all right, but once you've seen Robert Newton you can't settle for anything else.

Disappointment over historical inaccuracy of the film

[dad24641 · 1/10 · 18 June 2006]

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!

Dad and Daughter time.

[johncrawford-71793 · 7/10 · 5 March 2022]

What a lively and lovely wee film. This is what my wee girl loves.

Romance, violence and danger.

I think it is a great wee film although Blackbeards edinburgh accent did gtate my ears (Us weigies are rather crap) the acting was above par.

Absolute tripe

[chrishank · 1/10 · 3 September 2006]

This Two Parter, which is meant to be the story of Blackbeard is an absolute stinker.

The plot is paper-thin, the script is awful, the acting densely wooden, it is historically inaccurate, even the ships appear to be from the wrong period.

Richard Chamberlain (God help him) tries to act, but fails miserably, the accents of the Pirate crew veer from comically "English Van Dykian" to New York via Devon and all stops in between.

It was bad it was not even funny, I have never seen a worse piece of "entertainment" - and I've seen a few.

I suspect that the Director has a bright future as a traffic cop.

Avoid like scurvy. Unless forced to walk the plank.

Why all the Hate?

[kcterrell-25046 · 6/10 · 17 August 2022]

OK, I can suspend belief for a good entertaining story. Virtually no Hollywood movie is true to the history it proclaims. So why not in a rousing pirate tale. I've never heard anyone complain that Captain Jack Sparrow was not an actual pirate in the annals of piracy. Here, we have a good tale told in an action format that kept my interest throughout. A film using Blackbeard only as a pretext, what's wrong with that? Surely a story laden with good vs. Evil, love conquers. And good guys win is not passe. An enjoyable pastime; the writing is not so bad by Hollywood standards. And the sometimes over the top acting is perfectly suited to what the film pretends to be. I say watch and enjoy, maybe after a few beers to open your horizons to pure fantasy.

Bargain Bin Material

[nothing-122 · 1/10 · 2 January 2009]

A few nights ago I was flipping through the channels and I came upon a treasure chest full of sh**(Blackbeard), but being the generous soul I am I decided to give this movie a chance: That was my first mistake. I hated this movie from start to finish, because I quickly learned that Blackbeard was a Captain Jack Sparrow wannabe. He dressed like Sparrow; walked, talked and acted like Sparrow and just might be the "next best thing" but not quite Sparrow! Sorry I lied Blackbeard isn't "the next best" at anything, the pirate that was at my third birthday party was more of man then Blackbeard. It doesn't end there, this movie wouldn't be complete without Zoroish Bandits, Will Turner, Elizabeth Swann, Governor Swann, and Bad-Acting Pirates. Note this people I wasn't expecting much when I started watching this "film" and I use the term loosely, I just expected at least a history channel esq documentary at best, but instead I got a Pirates of the Caribbean rip off. I would rather play in a radioactive waste dump then endure another 160 minutes of this piece of trash. So, I hope this film rots at the bottom of Davey Jones' Locker with the rest of the Pirates of the Caribbean rip offs.

Typical Hollywood

[sunset25013 · 1/10 · 6 October 2006]

It's a little disgusting how little people actually research a subject before they make a movie on it. It guess that some writers feel that fact just isn't important, and it's a shame the actual history behind Black Beard is far more interesting than this mockery. Very few things in this movie is even close to the actual events. It's a shame that North Carolina doesn't even have a single part in this, but i guess the people who shot the movie was more interested in shooting in different locations. It's not even closely accurate about where Blackbeard was captured... last time i checked Ocrocoke Island didn't have the mountains that were shown in the movie. Even worse that they cut out the Governor of Virginia altogether.