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.

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.

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!

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.