Good, colorful period adventure from Hammer Studios is also a curiosity - a landlocked pirate movie! The high seas are nowhere in sight in a tale set on the Isle of Devon in the late 17th century. People known as "Huguenots" have fled persecution, and set up a peaceable community. Young Jonathon Standing (Kerwin Mathews), found guilty of adultery and sentenced to 15 years in a nearby penal colony, ultimately falls into the clutches of a pirate gang who are determined - nay, hellbent - on discovering whatever treasures this island may hold."The Pirates of Blood River" is nothing great, but it thoroughly entertains the viewer for a well paced 87 minutes. It's got plenty of effective ingredients: action set pieces, rousing orchestral music (by Gary Hughes), wonderful widescreen photography, and a reasonably simple plot (screenplay by John Hunter and director John Gilling, based on a story by Jimmy Sangster). Said plot includes a theme of religious fervor, and how some people, like Jonathons' father Jason (Andrew Keir), allow this to completely dictate how they live their lives.Jonathon is no innocent - he WAS guilty, after all - but he's still quite a likable chap, and one may admire him for attempting to take a stand. The villains are appropriately despicable, with the great Sir Christopher Lee taking center stage as a French accented pirate leader named LaRoche. Among his crew are Mr. Hench (Peter Arne), Brocaire (Oliver Reed), and Mack (Michael Ripper). This excellent cast helps to add life to the familiar but agreeable proceedings. (That's Desmond "Q" Llewelyn in the small role of Tom Blackthorne.)The action is well executed, although the final battle is a little anticlimactic because there was a sequence earlier in the picture that was more intense. There's one show stopping sword fight where Arne and Reed duel (while blindfolded) over a woman. And there's a mild bit of gore, although scenes involving piranha attacks involve little more than splashing water and a bit of blood.Fun stuff, for Hammer fans and lovers of pirate cinema.Seven out of 10.

John Gilling directed this pirate adventure that stars Kerwin Mathews as Jonathan Standing, an inhabitant of a 17th century Huegenot village where he was exiled by his father for adultery to a penal colony. While there, pirates led by Captain LaRoche(played by Christopher Lee) kidnap him and force him to lead them back to the village, because the pirates want a rumored buried treasure that their founding fathers left behind, and LaRoche will stop at nothing to find it, not even murder. Marginal Hammer studios film certainly has a colorful title that sums up the plot, and good production values and acting, but story is strangely unappealing and unmemorable, despite an interesting "landlocked pirates" premise.

Christopher Lee has dozens of films attributed to him, so much so one is forced to acknowledge his superior talents. Among the many roles are characters who have but one eye. This movie " The Pirates of Blood River " is one in which Lee wears an eye patch. The story was originally written by John Hunter and directed by John Giling. It tells the story of a group of religious pilgrims called Huguenots who establish their community on an island to live in peace. Unfortunately, there is dissension among the followers due to it's unjust judgments, punishments and thereafter when a group of Pirates invade their commune. Kerwin Mathews stars as Jonathon Standing, who's own father is among those who condemned him. Glenn Corbett plays Henry his brother. The heavy is played to the hilt by Christopher Lee who plays Captain LaRoche, a French pirate, a scoundrel from the old school. Oliver Reed and Robert Shaw are among the faces in the movie. The film itself is sorry to say, uneventful despite the bullet flying, sword fighting, hangings and piranha fish attacks. The scenes were so edited, that what was left, proved milk-toast and amateurish, truly not Christopher Lee, caliber. Despite Kerwin Mathews best efforts, this movie remained a half hearted attempt at best. **

I saw this film once in 1967. My young friends and I had barely left the movie theatre and we had forgotten the plot of this movie. Apparently we got to see scenes that were cut when released elsewhere so it should have made more sense, but I remember in less than a week we argued over what had happened, and why. Since then we have forgotten almost everything about it, except for two things which we still laugh about today. One; the skeleton rising from the river after its flesh had been stripped from it by piranhas (why would a skeleton rise up? the don't float),and the terrible continuity gaffe of the potted palm tropical forest; one minute the trees were green and lush, in the next scene dry and brown, then back to green again. But it was a Hammer film, and we loved Hammer films back then. Still do. Aah nostalgia. But there is a lot to be said for production values and a budget.