Master And Commander: The Far Side Of The World Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x1080 | 7517.01 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x528 | 8137.55 MiB | 720p | |
|
720x288 | 1429.35 MiB | hidivx | |
|
592x240 | 709.29 MiB | divx | |
|
320x128 | 291.58 MiB | hpc | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
The Courage To Do The Impossible Lies In The Hearts of Men.
During the Napoleonic Wars, a British frigate, HMS Surprise, and a much larger French warship, the Acheron, with greater fire power, stalk each other off of the coast of South America. Russell Crowe brings great intensity to the role of Captain Jack Aubrey. Lucky Jack, as he is referred to by his crew, is well regarded by his men, who trust him implicitly, even after the first devastating battle and an apparent personal vendetta against the French captain. While the naval battle sequences are quite fantastic, the film is successful because director Weir chose to build the story to get to know the men who are locked aboard the tight quarters of a small ship and how they interact everyday. The officers and the mates are well-known by the time the final battle comes. Paul Bettany offers a strong performance as the surgeon and naturalist who balances the violence of his chosen life with the quiet demeanor of the scientist. He is the captain's friend and confidant, the two frequently playing violin and cello duets together. The horrors of the injuries from the war are frequently implied, but vividly depicted in the reactions of the characters.
| Russell Crowe | Capt. Jack Aubrey |
| Paul Bettany | Dr. Stephen Maturin, Surgeon |
| James D'Arcy | 1st Lt. Tom Pullings |
| Edward Woodall | 2nd Lt. William Mowett |
| Chris Larkin | Capt. Howard, Royal Marines |
| Max Pirkis | Blakeney, Midshipman |
| Jack Randall | Boyle, Midshipman |
| Max Benitz | Calamy, Midshipman |
| Lee Ingleby | Hollom, Midshipman |
| Richard Pates | Williamson, Midshipman |
| Robert Pugh | Mr. Allen, Master |
| Richard McCabe | Mr. Higgins, Surgeon's Mate |
| Ian Mercer | Mr. Hollar, Boatswain |
| Tony Dolan | Mr. Lamb, Carpenter |
| David Threlfall | Preserved Killick, Captain's Steward |
| Peter Weir |
7.50 out of 10 (35194 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Not as good as I expected
posted on 28 Aug 2009Firstly let me say that I enjoyed the movie. It depicted as near as possible the conditions on board a British man of war in the early 19th century. However, even though it was adapted from a couple of Patrick O'Brian's books, it was almost plotless. Apart from the opening and closing battles, almost nothing happened. Very little was explained and at the close of the movie, most of the characters remained anonymous. To those people who had no interest in the Napoleonic era, the movie would have seemed deadly dull. It would appeal to die hard O'Brian fans who would have seen the O'Brian characters come to life. American audiences, raised on a steady diet of wham bang action and special effects would be bored silly. Still, it was streets ahead of the 'Hornblower' series which was full of historical inaccuracies and very much misrepresented the fictional Hornblower character. Personally, I felt that Crowe, even though he made a good attempt at the role of Aubrey, was miscast - as was Paul Bettany as Maturin. I saw Gerard Depardieu as being the closest to the physical Aubrey, Stephen Rea as a perfect Maturin, and Peter Postlethwaite as a sublime Killick. Kevin Whately would have made a very good Tom Pullings. Oscar winning material? perhaps. I rate this 7 out of 10.
Bettany, Crowe, and considerable atmosphere ALMOST keep M&C afloat
posted on 24 Aug 2009First of all, you should know where I'm coming from. My favorite genre is historical epic, and I am in general a great admirer of Crowe and his films. In this case, though, the few redeeming qualities of Master and Commander, in which Crowe's performance is included, simply do not add up to an end result that is worthwhile. The only reasons I can imagine to see this movie would be if you were researching for an essay about Russell Crowe, find visual effects to be paramount in a film's overall value, or are unqualified in your interest in all things related to British naval history. Aside from these purposes, I can not imagine how a viewer could leave this film satisfied. While there may actually be a plot, it is certainly hard to discern. At best, it is disjointed and decentralized. All that being said, this film is still a credit to the acting talents of Crowe and Bettany, and to the abilities of those responsible for its technical merits, of which there are many. Sadly, though, these efforts are wasted on a film that is truly worthless otherwise.
Bias far from reality...........
posted on 14 Aug 2009I thought this movie was very tedious. It had one decent battle scene at the beginning and a marginal battle scene at the end. Everything in the middle was uninteresting filler. They spent more time on the Galapagos islands then anywhere else looking at animal specimens that I couldn't care less about. If I wanted that I'd have watched Jaques Cousteau. I was expecting a movie about wooden naval ships, but those were more of a background scene in this movie. The character of the captain was also as shallow and see through as plastic wrap. All the other characters around him has to tell the audience how great the captain is because the captain character sure couldn't demonstrate it on his own. The political correctness was also nauseating. Make better use of your time and money by checking out something else. Now let's try others capable actors and not about a fiction movie but the true life of french privateers where this movie tend to go, Robert Surcouf life is 10 times more interesting and passionating than the phantasm of O'Brian book, just a movie telling how Surcouf captured the HMS Kent and so much more British warships would not be a story close to reality, it would be the reality of this times!
And the point of this movie was ????
posted on 10 Aug 2009Ok, so the scenery was spectacular, and the sailing ships were a beauty to behold, and there were some moments of good acting. But over two hours of watching Russell Crowe and his band of merry men chase down another sailing ship on the high seas was a bit much. The plot was pretty thin, and after a while, it felt like I was watching the same movie a second time. Unless you're *really* into watching a few beautiful sailing scenes, save your $8+ and rent the movie when it's released to DVD in a few months.
Great movie, amazing shots and scenes
posted on 10 Aug 2009Master and Commander : The Far side of the world is the best sea-adventure,war movie i ever saw. The movie is very realistic and the movie shows the people what sea-life on a huge boat was in that time. Also the Beautiful soundtrack makes the movie to the top. Good acting i think they made a very nice choice with Russel Crowe. Also the story is good and don't forgot the amazing shots and scenes on sea! Hoist the Colours! should i say a very nice movie you will like it! And great is that the movie is not only war! It contains many peacefully moments of music, and sometimes dramatic moments. Also the movie includes all what a sea movie needs! storms,Sea battlles......
See it more than once
posted on 06 Aug 2009This movie is so packed with characters, details, humor, subtexts and action that I had to see it again right away. I loved it the first time, but the second was even better. I can't wait for my third viewing.If you felt so-so about it after the first viewing, *go back.* You'll be richly rewarded.
From Patrick O'Brian's Norfolk to Acheron
posted on 07 Jul 2009It has been common practice under some regimes to re-write politically incorrect History or Fiction. Fiction may not be that important. Still, the real name of Acheron is known. This will make some of your politicians happy and the whole world think again.
Stunning achievement!
posted on 01 Jul 2009Outside of the very good BBC production of "Horatio Hornblower", I have not seen a film that shows the day to day life of the English seamen as well as this film. I found the cast to be perfect and the soundtrack makes you seem as if you're there. Congrats to Peter Weir!
swash not quite buckled
posted on 01 Jul 2009a movie is a book with more than half of it left out. peter weir's "master and commander: far side of the world" includes incidents from two of the twenty jack aubrey/stephen maturin novels of patrick o'brian, but it feels like a parallel structure, not an adaptation.no line of meaningful dialog has been taken from o'brian's original keenly comic and sharply dramatic writing; but in the weir adaptation the dialog is serviceable if not distinctive. yes, o'brian did tell the "weevil" joke but it is so far below the standard of his own wit that it serves only to illuminate aubrey's character as a simple seaman.russell crowe's aubrey has the requisite charisma, bluffness, courage, and joy in both sailing and in battle; his wisdom in handling men; his assiduity in teaching the midshipmen; and his delight in music. what is missing is his simplicity of spirit and his iron separation from his men and officers other than his friend maturin (so that the "jonah" subplot never comes to his attention). we do get some sense of his naval duty and his absoluteness of command, but not in the subtly varied way presented in the novels.the saddest hint of the "classic comic book" level of sociology in the movie is the utter failure to deal with the aubrey/maturin friendship in any meaningful way. this no doubt proceeds from the decision to make maturin a mere foil, rather than aubrey's co-equal. they forgot to make a buddy movie when the opportunity demanded it.the shocking violence of both the warfare and the medicine of the 19th century is well-captured; the actual sailing scenes are magnificent; the model work is more than adequate; and the fact that there is very little plot other than "a man o'war makes a voyage" is forgiveable.the attempt at giving maturin equal stature to aubrey by having his galapagos islands scientific explorations shown in detail is, however, unsuccessful. no hollywood movie is ever going to give science the same emotional weight as warfare.
Lavish but straightforward
posted on 23 Jun 2009Russell Crowe plays an English naval commander in this cumbersomely-named, lavish, but fundamentally straightforward tale of the Napoleonic Wars. It's to director Peter Weir's credit that, despite it's great length, this movie rarely drags, and the detail of life at sea is painstakingly reconstructed (although the common bond of endeavour among the crew is perhaps overdone). But it doesn't really catch fire either, lacking as it does a certain moral complexity; Crowe's character is a hero lacking not only in fatal flaws, but any discernible flaws at all. The beautifully reconstructed ships compensate for the complete (but correct) absence of women in the cast.
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
posted on 23 Jun 2009"Master and Commander" is an interesting film that tries to combine pure entertainment with philosophy and historical detail. To some extent, one could say, it is successful. This is not so much because of the story (which is pretty thin), but more because of the interest Peter Weir puts on the crew and their internal dynamic. The strongest parts of this movie are in its non-battle sequences, when the interest is almost fully on the captain and his crew. To make it short: What we have here is a character-drama-blockbuster. But: As a blockbuster it may be too slow for a big part of the audience. And as a character drama, it doesn't go deep enough, it stays on the surface. But the result is still better than most of the blockbusters today, you just have to take it for what it is and you will be able to enjoy it very much.
Such a great actor
posted on 19 Jun 2009Russell Crowe delivers a stunning performance yet again in what is definitely an Oscar worthy role. Crowe stars as Captain Jack Aubrey, a British ship captain in 1805 who is given orders to disable a French ship and help stop the dominance of Napoleon.The film starts with a near miss as the two ships do battle, then follows Aubrey and his crew in their quest to outdo the bigger and better equipped Acheron. It gives an interesting viewpoint of what life at sea was like during this period.Master & Commander also marks the return of director Peter Weir (The Truman Show, Dead Poets Society, Witness). He is also equally as worthy of an Oscar for his work, provided they haven't already etched Peter Jackson's name on the statuette.Visually stunning and masterfully acted, I believe this is one of the best movies of the year.
Best film of 2003.
posted on 19 Jun 2009An absolutely wonderful film, and yes, it should have taken Best Picturehonors over both Lord of the Rings (a sympathy vote from the Academy) andMystic River (too messy/ unresolved).This film is proof that the sum of the parts are at times greater than the whole (or main plot). I've read several reviews that knock M&C for not being the action blockbuster they'd hoped for, but the film simply has a different kind of structure to it. It's more a series of vignettes (like Pulp Fiction) that might lead you to believe the climactic confrontation with the French Frigate is really the point of the movie (see PF's opening restaurant holdup), but by its conclusion, we''re reminded that the crews' personal moments are as telling of the times (if not more so) than the English vs. French battles at sea. The scenes of the man-overboard dilemma, the doctor's own surgery, the midshipman's self-doubts, etc., are powerful and haunting long after the film's conclusion. The French captain's scheme near the end is a great discussion- starter (see the forum). The music is wonderful-- how cool to make classical music hip again! ;-)Action-film fans may be disappointed to see this film is a little smarter than their typical audience might be, but drama, history and classics fans, enjoy! Weir's attention to detail here (and yes, even to nautical-story stock, at times) is highly commendable, Crowe's portrayal of Jack Aubrey is tough but respectfully experiential, and the cinematography of both land and sea is astonishing.The conflict between the captain and doctor over the Galapagos-stop may not be entirely thrilling, but it does add a nice cultural and scientific backdrop to the Napoleanic-era fighting scenes.See this film as soon as you can, if you haven't already. Then, call Hollywood and ask for a Best Picture (and Best Director) recall. ;-)
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World!
posted on 17 Jun 2009Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is an ok film but that's all in My opinion. Russell Crowe was very good in his role but that's all that is good in this movie except the scenes with the animals. In fact, I think that was the most exciting part in the movie! I mean the very few battles in the movie were staged good but it seemed like the film was lacking something and I really don't know what it is. I guess this movie just didn't have any thing interesting to pay attention too but if it focused on the animals more and even Crowe's Opponents and not his entire crew then I believe that the movie would of been better. Was all of those operating scenes needed? I do think this film was better than Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl though. This may be the best film of its kind but I would still prefer Cutthroat Island much more if anyone is looking for an exciting war boat and pirate type film. What was the deal to have three composers for the film? In My opinion I think this movie is ok but its nothing special. If you want to see Crowe in another epic role then watch Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World!
Huzzah! This isn't the movie I feared it would be
posted on 15 Jun 2009As a fan of the O'Brian books, I was worried by the trailer I saw: almost no Maturin, an apparently pivotal moment when a young boy takes command of the ship... oh dear, I thought; maybe it will be a great film but it won't be anything like those wonderful books. Fortunately (for book fans, at least), the marketers were lying! Pretty much everything you could want from an adaptation is here, which of course explains why a lot of people don't seem to like it: it has an episodic nature, the humour is embedded in character, the attention to detail is almost obsessive, and (I think this is the crucial one), it makes little concession to readers/viewers who don't know the environment. Few "mainstream" films of recent years have chosen to assume that the audience is this knowledgable and intelligent, for which Peter Weir must be roundly applauded. You have to bring your brain in with you for this one. For any book fans with lingering doubts: The weevil joke is perfectly done; and rest assured, Killick is perfect too.
Falls far short of its goals...authentic period detail and atmosphere...
posted on 15 Jun 2009I always think of films like TWO YEARS BEFORE THE MAST and MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY as among the most satisfying of sea epics. MASTER AND COMMANDER, on the other hand, is an impressive looking film that seems to be short on story material and therein lies the difference between an engaging sea epic and a mildly interesting one.None of the faults lie in the acting. I found the cast uniformly excellent but have to admit I preferred RUSSELL CROWE much better in other recent roles than here, as the obsessed Commander. It's not a fully rounded characterization and there's nothing he can do to hide the fact that his character is never fully explained.This is the sort of film that has to be seen on the big screen to be truly engaging. It's full of atmospheric period detail as to costumes and settings and all of the naval battles are authentically gripping. But somewhere along the way, one becomes aware of too much running time and that's always a signal that the plotting just isn't strong enough to sustain two hours and twenty minutes of a viewer's time.On the other hand, it could be that with all the hype, I expected too much.
An extraordinary performance by a performer of extraordinary talents.
posted on 05 Jun 2009I have seen two Russell Crowe films; Gladiator and Master and Commander, The Far Side of The World. I was hesitant to see Master and Commander for fear that Mr. Crowe's performance in Gladiator might have been a fluke. Master and Commander proves, beyond question that Mr. Crowe's talents are exceptional, his capability limitless, and his films of a remarkable caliber, and quality rarely witnessed by this movie viewer. And these qualities are consistent in both performances.I have found Mr. Crowe's films to be much like a good novel; difficult to stop before they end, and much enjoyed with repeated viewings.I have discovered one negative quality about Mr. Crowe's films: when I've finished watching all I have, there is little else that proves sufficiently, or equally as entertaining to watch.
Historically accurate, but Weir forgot to sign it
posted on 03 Jun 2009For a great technical achievement this is at least worth renting. For the unsurprising story however one may look elsewhere. Russel Crowe turns out much better than feared, actually he fit quite well. The other was all quite characterless, except for the doctor who was OK, but maybe too "reasonable" for this voyage. I can easily understand his motivation for the "Darwin voyage" to the Galapagos, but he didn't go quite well as the warrior. As a pacifist, why would he enroll on a war ship? The ship was cramped and dirty, and it had a realistic atmosphere. So was the chaos during the sieges realistically shown. We get to see things exclusively from the ships viewpoint often impressively photographed. But as this is a Peter Weir I would want more in terms of inventiveness and character.
Worth the Price of Admission
posted on 26 May 2009After seeing this film I realized 2 things:1) With the exception of a couple of Brazilian natives, there are NO women in this film.2) Russell Crowe is so riveting on screen that I would probably buy a ticket to watch him do laundry.Though the overwhelming action sequences are sometimes so loud that I couldn't understand a word being said on screen, I still found it to be an enjoyable and watchable flick. That I couldn't hear what was being said was sometimes of no moment. This is not a film that spends a lot of time explaining itself. There was enough inexplicable nautical terminology tossed about that eventually gave up trying to understand what the hell they were talking about and went on faith that I would be able to figure out the pertinent details of the story.The story was not a particularly strong one, but the movie was well executed. Both Crowe and Paul Bettany did excellent jobs, although there were a few moments when I wanted to smack Bettany's rather effete doctor around and tell him to catch a clue...We're at war and you want to stop to check out the scenery? Still, he makes a good on screen "conscience" for Crowe and his behavior sets the stage for the moments when we get to see a more human side of Crowe's character.When I left the theatre I didn't feel as though I'd wasted my $8.00...and that's something in this day and age.
British Propaganda
posted on 30 Aug 2009Whilst I must admit that M&C is a very good film technically, there are some subtle twists in this film that make a very one sided view of the Napoleonic wars.Firstly, even though the movie does not say this literally as it would have the wrath of the historians, it does hint that France and not Britain was the agressor in this war. This is not entirely the case. The only reason Napoleon rose to power in France was because Britain was waging a war against France. After France's revolution that saw the end to an autocratic leadership and saw a people's revolution, Britain decided that that kind of personal freedom in France was not good for its politics and fearing that the revolution would spread waged war. Secondly. Britain was not fighting for freedom, but for the economic power in world. At this point Britain had violently conquered half of the globe and had fought the USA etc. This war was about nothing else but economic power, but this is hollywood so you can't say that.