Rating: 
Summary: Magnificent film- a must see
Review: A perfect example of how to make a film. Director Peter Weir has constructed one of the most spectacular sea-going tales to ever hit the screen. Russell Crowe stars as "Lucky" Jack Aubrey, the undaunted Captain of the HMS Surprise, a British battle vessell which is dogged at every turn by the French warship Acheron. Vowing to bring his antagonists to justice, the vengeful chase is on in this wonderfully exciting, if not rare adventure film. Every aspect of this gem is on target from start to finish: acting, dialouge, cinematography, music, special effects, all first class. A stunning achievment.
Rating: 
Summary: I CANT BELIEVE HOW BAD THIS MOVIE IS!
Review: Let me make this quick and simple: This movie is completely overrated!
All the Action happens in the first and last 10 minutes, the 2 hours in between are so boring and annoying (music) that I almost stopped watching it.
Do yourself a favour and rent this first!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Good movie but nomiated for best picture?!?
Review: Rating System:
1 star = abysmal; some movies deserve to be forgotten
2 star = poor; a total waste of time
3 star = good; worth the effort
4 star = very good; what a movie should be
5 star = fantastic; must own it and share it with othersMY FEEDBACK:
1) Movie gave a nice eerie sense of what the hardships of living on an old ship would be like 2) Final battle was phenominal 3) Similar cat-n-mouse type storyline as Hunt for Red October except I felt October had handled the building of suspense better 4) Not sure if it was Crowe's character or him, but I wasn't drawn into the main protagonist like with Gladiator. I appreciated that the main "good guy" had redeeming qualities but the focus seemd to always be deflected from him onto others 5) Nice friendship subplot 6) Clean movie. Profanity virtually non-existent. Most teens and kids could watch. I think even the violent scenes were quick and the blood kept off camera for the most part though you know death and destruction lay about...unlike Braveheart & Gladiator that put the violence in your face. 7) Seemed to miss the emotional qualities and "sense" of "original" plot that takes a movie from good to very good or even Oscar quality...in my humble opinion. If this is the best that last year had to offer to compete with Lord of the Rings for best picture then it is no wonder Lord of the Rings won hands down. Overall: Good movie. Totally worth watching. Unless you are a die-hard Crowe fan or a fan of naval movies I'd rent before buying.
Rating: 
Summary: Amazing recreation of a bygone era
Review: I felt sorry for this movie for losing out at this years Oscars to Peter Jacksons - Return of the King, and feel that against any other competition it would have certainly swept the board. Russell Crowe is superb as Captain Aubrey, guiding his ship and crew in a search & destroy mission against an enemy French vessel of superior fire power and speed. My brother actually commented that you could almost "smell the bilge" whilst watching this movie, and I have to more than agree in it's attention to detail, and wonderful realism. The vast spectacle of it all is let down a little however by a fairly mediocre storyline, but despite this and a marginally annoying ending (let's leave the door open for a sequel) it is thoroughly enjoyable. Certain to be one of the DVD releases of the year there are some nice extra's on the 2nd disc, this collectors edition will run you around and extra $10, but the goodies are worth it, and the standard version has no special features at all. All of the performances are strong, and the power of the movie lies not only in it's breathtaking art direction, but also in the viewer being completely pulled in to the lives and actions of the main characters. Mild violence, and some graphic war scenes probably proclude this from a mainstream family audience, but otherwise it is a true sea faring "ripping yarn", full of high adventure, excitement, and plenty of swashbuckling thrown in. Good for a least a couple of viewings, this is probably a safe bet for the home collection, instead of merely renting. 4.5 Stars.
Rating:
Summary: Awesome!!!!
Review: Great movie! A must-have for DVD collectors like myself.
Rating:
Summary: This is what all naval battle films have strived to be
Review: Master and Commander...is the visceral visual embodiment of what naval war films and stories have always strived to achieve but have never been able to do: capture the realities of 19th century naval life and warfare. Based on a series of novels, Master and Commander is an amalgamation of several of the novels I am told. It is my hope that we will see more films of a similar nature in the future. I don't know who made this film - was it the Brits, the Aussies, or the Americans, but whoever did so, paid attention to detail (or kept to the source material's detail)? The great attention to detail leads me to believe it could not have been an American made film (we're notorious for throwing any reality out the window for the sake of a climactic scene or explosion). What do I mean? Watch any film old Hollywood or British film that covers 19th century seafaring subject matter (Billy Budd, Captain Blood, Mutiny on the Bounty, etc.) and you'll notice quickly that there are a large number of "older" actors present as the mates on the ships. Now take a look at Master and Commander... You'll notice that there are fewer than 10% of the crew who are over the age of 30. The fact of the matter was that people, in general, just didn't live terribly long at the time. Throw in military service at sea and you can reduce the age limit even more. Take a look at the midshipmen..."Ridiculous!", you say. They're portrayed as mere boys. That's exactly what they were. Boys were educated at home in the basics and then sent off to apprentice under a master in whatever trade they were expected to learn, be it blacksmiths, carpenters, accounts, etc. In the case of the young boys in this movie, they are the 19th century equivalent of "interns" of "management trainees" to the officers in charge of the ship. Midshipmen came from well-to-do, or upper class, families of military heritage. The boys of such officers were expected to take up the trade. Lower classes could not hope to become officers in the military. I have never before seen this accurately portrayed on film before. The film is not too unlike Moby Dick in its singular, relentless plot: Russell Crowe, as a British captain, is charged with finding the French frigate Acheron off the coast of Brazil. He is to stop or destroy the ship. The movie revolves around this singular plot. You see, Crowe's ship is much smaller, less well equipped, slower, and more vulnerable than the French ship. This is probably not a woman's movie. There is no love interest in this film unless you think of the men pining for their wives or girlfriends who do not appear on screen. Then there are the brief glimpses of native girls at one of the Brazilian islands where the ship gathers supplies. That's it. There's no hanky panky. There's no sex. There's no nudity. In fact, I could only count one curse word, and that was only because I was watching the movie with subtitles on part of the time to understand some of the quick cockney dialogue. Now, violence, there's plenty of it. There's blood, but really there's no guts. It's all blood of the the red Karo syrup variety and none of the oozing or spewing wound variety. There are no great special effects awards to be won for best dismemberments or amputations or decapitations. Frankly, it's a visceral movie, but nothing like most of the films out there. Yes, the dialogue is machine gun fast and said with an ear for accuracy. This means that unless you really understand the dialogue you're going to be lost. Now, I watch the Britcoms all the time and I was lost. That's why I turned on the subtitles. It helped tremendously. The film is very emotional and nerve racking. Frankly, I was actually a bit disappointed with the ending. I half expected it to continue. It seems to set itself up for a sequel. Or not. I just don't know. It could be that I'm just expectant of a sequel in a society that automatically provides one when a film doesn't tie up every little loose end nice and tightly. I highly recommend this film.
Rating:
Summary: Unquestionably brilliant visually
Review: Those of us who have read the entire series of Patrick O'Brien's books on the adventures of Captain Jack Aubrey and his dear friend, Dr. Stephen Maturin during the Napoleonic wars and have soaked up the atmosphere and sense of history so unfailingly captured in those books, are going to be hard to satisfy with any film representation. So although I have great respect for Peter Weir, I did not have high hopes as I sat down to watch the movie. The opening scenes, of a darkened sea and a silent three-masted 'Surprise', with only night watch on deck and most hands asleep below, gives as true a sense of period as any I could possibly imagine - and captivated me immediately. The attention to detail is remarkable and the handling of the crew; surely one of the most difficult aspects of making such a film; utterly masterful. You can smell the lower deck with the hammocks tight-packed with sleeping, farting, snorting bodies and livestock penned into the same quarters. The battle scenes are stunningly effective and the impact of shot and ball makes you wince in a manner that you'd not think possible in an age where we constantly see violent action and are inured to the sight of exploding flesh. That you could not follow who was who in the melees - or determine quite how the various battles between ships were unfolding - didn't matter, because that is exactly how such actions are in reality. Who knows how many died by friendly fire in the confusion of those hand-to-hand encounters? The percentage must have been sizable, as it is even today. Russel Crowe's performance as the utterly resolute and masterful sailor, 'Lucky' Jack Aubrey, is truly brilliant. His English accent falters little and he gives the role all the subtlety required of a character whose own subtlety is not immediately evident. Aubrey is a commander who is intensely sensitive to the mood of his crew - knows all their names - and treats them with a rare humanity for the early 19th century Royal Navy. We know he acquired this sense, in part, because as a young midshipman, he was once demoted to the rank of common sailor; and in this experience, came to understand them as few officers could. The disappointment, for me, was in the lack of development of Dr. Maturin's character. In the books, Maturin (played here by Paul Bettany) is in a sense the main character and much of what happens is seen through his eyes. He is an immensely complex man, deeply learned, and with a quaint 18th century manner of speech which contains much Irish mannerism. "You are to consider" he will say, or "I am persuaded that ...". His turn-out for formal dining occasions is the subject of much affectionate amusement among the crew (for they take pride in him as 'their' learned physician, who cares deeply for his patients) - and vexation for his Commander; for he may appear at dinner in a heavily blood-stained jacket, unwashed for several days, or with his wig awry. He is also evidently a man whose apparent age "might have been anything between twenty and sixty" and he is small and "ill-looking". He and Jack are total opposites and it is the interplay between the two characters; the great affection they hold for one another, that is the spirit of the books. So I say that I was disappointed that Stephen was not better cast and his character was not more defined. I can however also say that those scenes where the two of them make music together do succeed, by the nature of the music chosen, in coming close to the spirit of the book. I should also emphasize that we cannot blame Paul Bettany for this; the problem lies in the casting and in character development (Paul Bettany looks too young and well-kempt for the part and is given little chance to 'be' Stephen). So on the visual level this is a brilliant film and Crowe is most convincing in his role. Weir has performed a labour of love and has soaked himself in the period and the genre. People who read the books, and say that they cannot get past the vast amount of technical detail, will find no relief in the film. O'Brien was uncompromising in his use of nautical terminology and indeed of period language - readers have to take the responsibility to inform themselves in order to appreciate the book and now, to some degree, viewers of this film have the same responsibility.
Rating: 
Summary: The New Horatio Hornblower Series is Much Much Better
Review: Yes they both have the costumes, the floggings, the weevils crawling from the biscuits and of course the swashbuckling action but what separates them is the sense of believability and attachment to the characters that Master and Commander never comes close to. I also found the script awkward and unbelievable and the pedestrian plot is an afterthought. The new Horatio Hornblower series is a much better take on this exciting era and it captures the sense of adventure and romance on the deep seas that makes it linger in your memory while Master and Commander has long faded away.
Rating:
Summary: Competent but formulaic
Review: There's nothing particularly *wrong* with Master and Commander, but there's nothing particularly compelling about it either. For a movie that has received as much hype as this one, potential purchasers of the DVD should understand that they'll get a sturdy sea warfare film that provides a bit of a diversion, but not much else. There are no surprises here, nothing to really pick out of the pleasant background that unspools as the film progresses. The characters are forced and hackneyed -- the little kid with grit, the secret pacifist warrior who also has his sensitive and artistic side. And technically the movie is quite competent, managing to do a convincing job of re-creating a period look. But there's something about the way the actors work within that carefully crafted period look that undermines it, and once the viewer starts to focus on the fact that "that's Russell Crowe up there," the remainder of the film becomes an endurance contest. You know how they say good actors disappear into the character? Crowe, who has been great before (e.g. The Insider) and good before (Gladiator, A Beatiful Mind) simply has nowhere to go with this badly written character and inartfully written dialog. I personally suggest that people looking for more compelling sea adventures check out the amazing "The Bounty" with Messrs. Hopkins and Gibson squaring off, or Robert Shaw in "Swashbuckler," or even Pirates of the Carribean. Even the sea scenes in "Count of Monte Cristo" with Jim Cavaziel work better. Heck, I'd even suggest "Cabin Boy." It's not that this film is terrible, it's just that there's no particular reason to go out of one's way to see it.
Rating:
Summary: don't waste your money
Review: this is a horrible poor excuse for an action/war movie. i've only shut off 3 movies in my whole life without finishing them and this is one of them and i watch plenty of movies, i own over 400 dvds. the movie appears to be awesome from the previews, but this is a trick to get you to see it. after watching this for a little over an hour, i wanted to rip my hair out of my head because it was rediculously boring. i would give this negative stars if i could. russell crowe is an excellent actor, but hopefully he chooses better roles in the future after this one.
| 
