The Immortal Voyage of Captain Drake

Let's keep in mind the venue. Sci Fi network is notorious for having poorly produced original monster movies. Which is why it should be complimented when one of their movies strives for something more. A fictitious take on an actual historical character's adventures is always a dangerous gamble. However, in the case of The Immortal Voyage of Captain Drake, Rafael Jordon does an admirable job of weaving actual historic legend with an interesting treasure hunt sort of storyline.

At times the character's actions seem predictable, and some of the sailors/pirates are a bit cliché, but often the dialogue is witty and sarcastically humorous. The CGI is bad, (as always in these shows) but the film's locations are actually quite impressive considering it is all in Bulgaria. The score sounded very "big" for this genre. That is a good thing. It sounded like a real orchestra as well. That is rare for Sci Fi. The sound design and mix were great. Nothing stuck out as bad or wrong, which is usually the sign of a good soundtrack, again, for this genre. The sword fighting was very good and those sequences were cut together very well by the picture editor. This is saying a lot, considering the shooting ratio was probably 3:1. I know from previous movie reviews, that these shows are shot in under 20 days, edited for two months and the sound mix is done in 4 days. When you break it down, it's a miracle that the movie is made at all. Quite an accomplishment for all those involved.

One of the best scenes in the show, is the slow motion filmed, pistol and sword dual between Drake and Sandovate, in the snow at the north pole. Very well done considering all the limiting factors of time and budget.

Adrian Paul and Wes Ramsey deliver admirable (pun intended) performances given the nature of the material and the time they had to develop their character choices. And if this is Sofia Pernas' first role in a TV show or movie as her IMDb listing suggests, look out! She was excellent in this and we will see more of her I am sure.

As far as other reviews submitted by haters, it is unfair to compare Sci Fi network originals with larger budget films. Everyone who is involved with these projects knows exactly what they are making and why. These movies are entertaining if you watch with the correct "perspective". Letting them tick you off because they aren't as good as you had hoped is a bit silly.

This was one of the worst movies I ever attempted to watch. I love Adrian Paul but his 'acting' was totally bad if you even want to call it 'acting'. It was as if he was resisting to even reciting the lines given in the script and just spit them out as 'whatever' - Okay so it was a badly written script. How desperate was Paul to do this? Even the sound track was bad! The whole movie was pitiful. I couldn't even finish it. I believe that anything (especially a film) to be done is worth doing right. It is possible to do even a low budget film in the right way but evidently the writer, producer and director of this film haven't figured that out yet and take absolutely no pride in what they do! Wes Ramsey (as 'Peter Easton') did the best acting of all even with the lame writing in the script. I believed his character anyway. Kudos to Wes for doing the best he could with such horrible dialog! Even George Lucas can write better dialog than Rafael Jordan! The overall storyline was interesting, even though it was certainly not reflective of actual events in the life of Sir Francis Drake. This venture was a total waste of time for the actors and anyone who was unfortunate enough to watch it, even for a few minutes. Even 'Ishtar' deserved an Academy Award compared to this flick.

Of course, other reviewers seem to really like this one. Everyone has different opinions and take aways from films they watch.

I have said this before and I'll say it now...SciFi (now SyFy) Channel should turn to the writers and directors of its wonderful 'commercials' to write a good 'original' film for its network! SyFy has proved to show horrible and poorly written 'original' films on a regular basis - Get with the program SyFy Executives! With the right writers, great made-for-TV films are possible - even on a lower budget.

Well, I don't make a habit of watching television, and I certainly don't necessarily expect "fine art" when I DO. I was really looking very much forward to this and then rather disappointingly, fell asleep after about ten or fifteen minutes. But the part that I saw was exactly the lighthearted, entertaining fantastical fare I was expecting. I already KNEW from the ads that it wasn't intended to be a non=fiction piece and that it featured lots of CGI and special effects.. this is precisely what I was hoping. As to those who nitpick about "poor acting" and what have you, I will look forward very much to seeing YOUR efforts on the big screen very soon. My only regrets are that I wasn't able to see the whole thing, that I can't find any more listings or showings of it, and that it doesn't appear to be available on DVD yet.

This SyFy Channel TV movie is an attempt to mix the life story of Sir Francis Drake, that heroic Brit who defeated the Spanish Armada, with some old-fashioned fantasy heroics along the lines of a Sinbad movie or JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS. The resulting concoction is a silly mess of bad acting, poor plotting, and the usual excruciating CGI effects that the SyFy channel deliver.

I wanted to like this film, I really did. I love all the old Harryhausen movies so something made as a tribute to them sounded good. Unfortunately, THE IMMORTAL VOYAGE OF CAPTAIN DRAKE is just too cheap to really work. The ships and sets are never convincing and the hammy actors in support are very poor indeed. Adrian Paul is awful too, particularly his broad farmer's accent which keeps drifting all over the place and had me cringing every time I heard it. The usual gamut of sea monsters and basilisks and the like turn up at every opportunity but the action is schlocky and will only be enjoyed by those in a very forgiving mood.

1) The accents were cringe-worthily bad. I wasn't sure if I was listening to Cornish, Irish, Spanish or Klingon. The lead actor, particularly, was perfectly capable of putting all four into his lines and randomly mixing them up.

2) Rarely will you see an American "period" film which does anything but recklessly re-write history, usually to the detriment of the country or people it targets (bitter that America doesn't have one?). This is among the worst for that crime, but take a look at the writer and director and you cannot, surely, be surprised.

3) Considering it was made in 2009, I was under the impression I was watching something from the 70s. Poor acting on a scale as bad as "Land Of The Giants", poor story and even worse editing.