Buy Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World Movie. Watch online or Download
Genres: ActionAdventureDr
Starring: Richard McCabe, Russell Crowe, Paul Bettany, David Threlfall, James D'Arcy, Lee Ingleby, Edward Woodall
Director(s): Peter Weir
Available Quality: Hi Def
Country: USA
Year: 2003
Available Quality: DVD, Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def, Hi Def
IMDB Rating: 7.4 out of 10 (85532 votes)
The year is 1805. Europe has fallen to Napoleon, and only the Royal Navy stands in his way to total victory. Off the cost of South America, a new conflict is brewing. Captain Jack Lucky Jack Aubrey (Russel Crowe) of the Man-of-War HMS Surprise is under orders to sink or capture the French privateer Acheron, which has been deployed to the region. After seven weeks of uneventful sailing, the Acheron strikes first, all but crippling the Surprise in an engagement in which Aubrey realizes his enemys ship is nautically superior to his own. Along with his close friend and confidant Stephan Maturin (Paul Bettany) who also happens to be the ships surgeon, Aubrey is now faced with the choice of retreating to England and admitting defeat or remaining at the Acherons mercy. Aubrey must now do the impossible if he is to survive, repair his ship, catch up to his enemy and defeat the Acheron--somehow.
 |
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (iPod) | Resolution: 480x208 px | Total Size: 393 Mb |
|
|
 |
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (Hi Def) | Resolution: 852x368 px | Total Size: 704 Mb |
|
|
 |
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1920x1080 px | Total Size: 7510 Mb |
|
|
 |
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1280x544 px | Total Size: 3144 Mb |
|
|
 |
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (DVD) | Resolution: 1024x426 px | Total Size: 2796 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
curry_mouth (22 May 2012)
great movie
I throughly enjoyed this movie and would not discourage others fromspending an hour or two watching this film (if they have the time).There's not so much of a solid plot that can be followed throughout themovie, but there are minor themes involved and it's easy to loseoneself in the action and drama of "Master and Commander." I'm only ahigh school student but I do know a little about naval warfare and thewar/conflict that circled around the brits and the french...it wasreally interesting watching an itty bitty of history play out on film.I expected the battles to be longer, but the time allotted to thesesequences was sufficient.Don't be disappointed by the lack of female characters...the film doesfine without any romantic twists...I'd focus on the relationship thecrew had with the main characters (i.e. tension between the 'cursed'guy and the crew)...they added a lot to the film, especially the dr andhis affinity towards scientific research. I thought this film was good. Although it lacked a strong plot, nothingwas overplayed and this movie's a new experience to enjoy if you'reinto action...ships...intricate themes- themes that most other movieslack and themes that have more substance in this movie than in othermovies (due to the overshadowing of a main plot).
bkoganbing (22 May 2012)
"This Ship Is Our Home, This Ship Is England"
For those who like action and adventure from a more romantic age youcan't beat Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World for yourneeds. As a film it rates right up there with Captain HoratioHornblower which starred Gregory Peck and Damn the Defiant with AlecGuinness, a couple of films I liked very much.Russell Crowe completely fits my conception of Patrick O'Brian'sNapoleonic naval hero 'Lucky Jack Aubrey'. He's a worthy successor toC.S. Forrester's Horatio Hornblower. The books have been best sellersfor years and this is Jack Aubrey's first screen appearance.The film opens with Crowe in command of a ship that's just seen a lotof action and it's not in the best of shape. Orders from the Admiraltycome to him. There's a French frigate who's quite a bit bigger thanCrowe's ship, nevertheless she's the only one near her in thosesouthern latitudes so it's a search and destroy mission. One that can'tbe accomplished until necessary repairs are made.There's surprisingly little combat action in this film until the veryend. It concentrates on character and goes into the most minute ofdetail the life on board a British ship of the line during theNapoleonic Wars. The action takes place in 1805 right after the Battleof Trafalgar and the United Kingdom is still keeping a lot of shipsclose to home.Crowe is nothing short of outstanding as Aubrey the charismatic captainof this vessel. He gets good support from the rest of the cast, myfavorites being ship's surgeon Paul Bettany and Max Pirkis as the youngmidshipman who Crowe takes a fatherly interest in.In a sense the character's nickname of 'Lucky' is a misnomer. What youget Crowe's Jack Aubrey is a man of skill and daring and experience whoknows how to take advantage of breaks and make his own luck. Never moreso when he has that final encounter with the French ship.Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World gives you a realfeeling for the Napoleonic era. I do hope that Russell Crowe getsanother chance to bring 'Lucky Jack Aubrey' back to the screen again.
Movie Nuttball (20 May 2012)
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World!
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is an ok film but that'sallin My opinion. Russell Crowe was very good in his role but that's all thatis good in this movie except the scenes with the animals. In fact, I thinkthat was the most exciting part in the movie! I mean the very few battlesinthe movie were staged good but it seemed like the film was lackingsomethingand I really don't know what it is. I guess this movie just didn't haveanything interesting to pay attention too but if it focused on the animalsmoreand even Crowe's Opponents and not his entire crew then I believe that themovie would of been better. Was all of those operating scenes needed? I dothink this film was better than Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of theBlack Pearl though. This may be the best film of its kind but I wouldstillprefer Cutthroat Island much more if anyone is looking for an exciting warboat and pirate type film. What was the deal to have three composers forthefilm? In My opinion I think this movie is ok but its nothing special. Ifyouwant to see Crowe in another epic role then watch Master and Commander:TheFar Side of the World!
JohnRouseMerriottChard (19 May 2012)
For England, for home, and for the prize!
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is directed by PeterWeir, it stars Russell Crowe as Jack Aubrey and Paul Bettany as StephenMaturin. It is spliced from various novels in the AubreyÂMaturin serieswritten by Patrick O'Brian. The film takes place during 1805, duringthe Napoleonic Wars and finds Captain Jack Aubrey and the crew ofBritish frigate HMS Surprise ordered to intercept, destroy or take as aprize the French privateer Acheron. But the Acheron (The Phantom as thecrew of the Surprise call her) is no ordinary ship, and her Captain issmart. So Lucky Jack has his work cut out; not only in the pursuit ofthe Acheron, but in harmonising the crew under his command. Especiallyhis loyal and trusting friend Stephen.It's pretty evident within the first few minutes of Master & Commanderthat this is no standard blockbuster naval based war movie. If you areafter, or was expecting, a wave to wave Bruckheimer carnage a-likepiece, well you best, or should have, stay(ed) away. For this is aPeter Weir movie, in fact this is a Peter Weir "period" movie, whereattention to details and character dynamics are the order of the day.There's battle action here for sure, beginning and end, and terrificthey are too. As first cannonballs crack and splinter its targets (notethe sound work here), and later as blade meets blade; it's exhilaratingstuff alright. But this is more interested in palpable tension, both ondeck and on the waves. Threat is never far away, again, this is iscovered by the impending duel with the Acheron and Aubrey's tacticalpursuit/escape of her. While the crew give us a series of characterdramas to involve us in the make up of a man-o-war's personnel. Howdifferent classes and males (there's not one female in the film) of allages have to work together as one efficient unit in order to surviveand triumph. Except for an interlude spent on the lusciously filmedGalapagos Island (Russell Boyd Best Cinematography Academy AwardWinner), the film is set 99% of the time out at sea, on a cramped ship,this tells you that Weir is interested in telling a character drivenstory, cloaked in realism, above all else.The teaming of Weir with the highly rated O'Brian material looked agood one, and to someone like me who has never read an O'Brian novel?It is. But many of O'Brian's fans have been upset by either the stuffmissing in the film, the stuff put in to fully form Weir's vision ofthe characters, or for Crowe not being Pugwashy enough. Thesecomplaints were inevitable since they come with practically everyadaptation of novels these days. It should be noted, tho, that Weir wasvery much a fan of O'Brian, and in fact always felt inspired by thetight intricate detail of his writings. What of the author himself?Well he passed away three years before the film was released, but hehad always envisaged Charlton Heston for the role of Aubrey. So, who inthe modern era comes closest to Heston's physical presence on screen.Why Russell Crowe of course. Who not only brings that to the character,but also depth, because Aubrey comes with many traits. Strength,honour, stubbornness, leadership and loyalty are a given for a Captainon the high seas. But Aubrey is also vulnerable, self aware, playful,knows his limitations and able to laugh at himself. Crowe peels offeach layer and delivers a high quality performance; from our firstencounter with Crowe as Aubrey, the realism so loved by Weir is given ashot in the arm; and it stays throughout the movie.An excellent piece of casting then, as is that of Paul Bettany as shipssurgeon, science and nature lover, and best pal of the Captain, StephenMaturin. Bettany & Crowe had formed a friendship on 2001s A BeautifulMind. Where their on screen chemistry lifted an already fine film, toan even better one. So it be here too. Stephen & Jack's relationship isthe core of the piece. Two very different men yet as tight as two peasin a pod, with Stephen serving as the code breaker for the audience assea talk and tactical intrigue weaves in and out of the story. It'sthere where Bettany excels, for he not only has us believing in thiswarm (platonic) friendship, he's also got us rooting for him since heis in essence the odd man out on this ship. Our sympathy is firmly withhim, our friendly rebel if you please. Of the rest there's note worthyturns from Billy Boyd, James D'Arcy & Edward Woodall, while Lee Inglebygives a really heartfelt and emotionally engaging turn as Hollom.The film is not without flaws, tho. The pace of the piece does slipfrom time to time, while the talky middle section may stretch thepatience of some. And the film isn't long enough to give the maincharacters some back story for the audience to work off. But it's stilla great movie. Ripe with intelligence and interestingcharacterisations: and boasting enough adrenalin, humour and upset tofill out a big budgeted 1950s historical epic. Get on board folks, thisis quality film making. 9/10
Stephen M. Hipkiss (18 May 2012)
Certainly Not the Lesser of Two Weevils
Peter Weir's Master and Commander is a wonderful movie to behold andparticipate in. Having not read either of the books this movie is based on,I approached the film as a young mid-shipman might, full of anxiety,excitement and fear. Which Russell Crowe would be at the helm? The over the top Maximus? The headthumping Bud White/Hando? The little man in lifts wearing his father'sVictoria Cross out on the town for Oscar night? I'm pleased to say it wasnone of them  but instead a fresh face and true Master and Commander of HisMajesty's Royal Navy, a genuine man's man. Hat's off for Crowe's turn, he'sdefinitely found his sea legs. And where has Paul Bettany been hiding? ÂWhat a performance!Strong supporting cast, script, effects, and pacing makes this a true epicfilm that somehow manages to maintain a sense of intimacy known only by asmall group a of people trapped for months at a time enduring great commonstruggle with humor, faith, courage, setbacks and triumph.Score was a bit wanting and repetitive, but not distractingly so, and it'shighlights outweighed its low points.9/10
Targe (17 May 2012)
Overall a Masterpiece
The attention to detail in this movie is one thing that reallyimpresses me, particularly in the actor's wonderful job of studying andspeaking 18th century British Naval lingo and accents flawlessly. Youfeel immersed in the belly of this tiny British Frigate (at 28 guns, itwas indeed a tiny warship for the time and barely worthy of the titleFrigate) which brings me to the first of many minor complaints.We are shown a very skillful and apparently distinguished commander,who apparently served with the immortal Nelson himself, yet this man,at the apex of his career, is commanding what might today be called apatrol boat. He should be commanding a massive 74 gunner ship of theline by this time in his career, and we are offered no explanation asto why this is not so.The reason of course is because of production values. No 74 gunnerexists any more in the world and would have to have been re-createdcompletely digitally. That they managed to do this with the 'French'Constitution class heavy frigate is proof it could have been donethough.Apparently they originally had the British against the Americans. Thiswould have made a far more enjoyable movie for me, since the AmericanConstitution class 44 gun frigate, (armed with 24 inch main guns, btw,not 18 as stated in the movie) was never loaned to the French.Secondly, such a boat would have eaten the lowly British frigate forbreakfast on the first engagement, fog bank or no fog bank. Theinequality between these two ships is so massive as to nearly begimpossibility of any good outcome for the Brit boat. The passage ofsuch a unique ship would have been known, and the British would havedispatched at least 2 (more like 4 for good measure) 36 gun frigates inpursuit.But technical errors aside, where this movie shines is in the acting,and in the costumes, set and the passion the actors threw into it toget the mood right. Wonderful job, I suspect the director sent them alloff on a tall ship sailing adventure cruise to get their heads into itbefore the movie began.
davideo-2 (14 May 2012)
If only it could 'command' your attention a bit better
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For AMealInstead*Avoid At All CostsIn April of 1805,the majority of Europe is under siege from Napoleon'sinvading forces.Captain 'Lucky' Jack Aubrey (Russell Crowe) commandeershisbattle ship,the HMS Surprise,across the Atlantic ocean,hoping to interceptany sudden attacks.Along the way,they cross paths with a nasty French shipby the name of the Archeron,and are soon engaged in a fullscale,all-guns-blazing battle for victory that will test Aubrey'sleadershipskills to the absolute limit.I can tell when a film is boring the living sh*t out of me,'cos as I'msitting there slumped in my auditorium chair,I'm getting easily distractedand having silly thoughts in my head (which,had I poorer selfrestraint,I'dbe thinking out loud.)The first half of Master and Commander certainlyboredthe living sh*t out of me,with it's droning,monotonously toldtale,numourouscliched wartime battle ship characters and scenarios and lack of anyactualstructural coherence to the story.This may be a depiction of actual eventsduring the Napoleonic wars,but surely they could have found a more deepandmeaningful way to convey them?The second half's a bit more fun than the first (if the boredom hasn'tcaused you not to stick around long enough to see it),Crowe hadconsiderablescreen presence in the lead role (though I could ultimately give or takehim) and there are,it has to be said,two spectacular battle sequences atthebeginning and at the end.They are comparable,in a way,to those of SavingPrivate Ryan,though nowhere near as devastatingly realistic (although allthe wood and shrapnel flying everywhere does have some kind of frighteningreality to it.)Since it's not as long as it could have been anyway,Master and Commanderisa just about tolerable and sometimes rather enjoyable endeaveur,just in noway unmissable.***
amyalternate (14 May 2012)
Perfect
Master and Commander is one of the most perfect films I have everwatched. I don't think there was an extra scene, not a useless line,everything about the film is perfect. The end though, no spoilersreally, was ... well I sprang up out of my seat and hollered at thescreen, slapped my leg and wish the movie would never end. The more Ithought about the film, the more I read into it, the better it became.It is more than a war film or a sea film, it portrays the old world,and the new together. Yada yada, won't go on but you all must see it.Weir was robbed, he should have been given the Oscar instead of PeterJackson. I've never watched the Oscars since.
Kevin (10 May 2012)
SEA THIS MOVIE
Visually this was an impressive film and Russel Crowe's screen presenceheldmy attention throughout. However, I felt that the film could havebenefitedby also showing the story from the French crew's point of view. A battleofwills between the French and English captains would have really broughtthewhole thing to life (see Pacino / De Niro in Heat).Judging by the box office success I guess there will be a sequel andhopefully they can add a bit more "spice" to the story.
Martin Doege (10 May 2012)
Much better than remembered
It says something about the general dullness of 2009 cinema when youcan go back to a (at the time) somewhat mediocre-seeming 2003slow-paced meditation on seamanship and find some redeeming value init! Six years ago, M&C mostly disappointed --- when His FlabbinessRussell Crowe suspended himself sideways from the rigging, you mostlyfeared that the main mast would surely give away due to theconsiderable added weight, and Paul Bettany's petulant, annoying,balding MD was another nuisance. Also, the porked-out midshipmen hardlylooked like one's imagination of the sea-worn products of early 19th-century cuisine and lifestyle. And what was the plot again, exactly?Inspired no doubt by the success of the "Hornblower" TV mini-series,M&C set out to give us the big-budget version of Hornblower, withbigger storms, bigger ships, bigger VFX. And it mostly succeeded,somehow, even though at the time of its release it seemed like afailure. But then again, how can you possibly fault a film that has thegood sense to use Bach's cello suite #1 for its breather in the middle,the totally-pointless-but-still-wonderful Galapagos episode?I think the trick is to approach this movie like a French art-housefilm from the sixties--- where nothing ever happens, no plot lines areever resolved, and where the ending seems oddly circular and to comeout of nothing ("Whoops Mrs. Miggins, the enemy captain is actuallystill alive -- so let's turn the ship!"). Like I said, it's a kind ofmeditation, so the whole idea that this movie should deliver on thebasis of action scenes was flawed to begin with. It's much like "MobyDick", except that in this version the white whale never gets caughtfor more than five minutes. Which doesn't make it any less enjoyable,especially if you consider the wonderful sound design. So myrecommendation would be to watch this together with the "Hornblower" TVseries---the two artistic visions wonderfully complement each other.
hardnuts (08 May 2012)
Overall Good Effort!
Overall an excellent try to stay true to Mr O'Brian's vision. The use ofseveral tricks from different books kept the pace of the movie fast andwithlittle time for boredom. However I don't think the characters of Jack andStephen had much of a chance to show the true bond and affection for eachother. Also there was no mention of Dr. Maturin's other career withBritishintelligence. Possibly these can be corrected if a second movie ismade.
dossboss (08 May 2012)
nice idea - wrong books
an interest in the "era of fighting sail" would lead a reader throughseveral nautical series including c. s. forester (horatio hornblower),alexander kent (richard bolitho), dudley pope (nicholas ramage), deweylambdin (alan lewrie), and eventually patrick o'brian (jack aubrey).to anyone who has read these series, the o'brian books are hands-down themost boring and least accurate (historically or technically) of the lot.whypeter weir and miramax dumped $150M into such pathetic storytelling isbeyond me.committed to one of patrick o'brian's banal efforts, we now have a filmguaranteed to be trite, dull, and frequently nonsensical. i will give fullpoints to the cinematography, however. the sailing scenes werebreathtakingand worth nearly any degree of idiocy to watch.i was glad that i had seen this film, but will not buy a copy of it.pity.maybe if weir had read alexander kent instead...
(01 May 2012)
A good effort , but...
This film was really a good effort to compress the contents of several Patrick O'Brian novels into a feature length motion picture. The title is also somewhat misleading , since NONE of the events of "Master and Commander" are actually portrayed in the film , and the plot heavily relies on "Far Side of the World" for most of the story line. Russell Crowe really becomes Jack Aubrey , and Paul Bettany portrays a fairly true part of the character Steven Maturin.Unfortunately for the viewing audience , much of Doctor Maturin's role in the novellae is not revealed , that of the Admiralty intelligence officer.I thought that the portrayal of life aboard a Royal Navy "Man O'War" was truly outstanding , and the portrayal of the young midshipmen extermely accurate.What I really liked about the film:(1) Excellent scenes of the ship under full sail.(2) Russell Crowe's portrayal of "Lucky" Jack Aubrey.(3) Realistic battle scenes , not for the faint of heart.What I disliked about the film:(1) Not enough background on the past history of the major characters.(2) Story line was abriged too much.(3) The ending was a little weak , and left LOTS of room for a sequel.Overall , this is a magnificent story of the sea and the iron men who sailed the wooden ships. It could have related to the Napoleonic wars a bit better. Patrick O'Brian has lots of other good action novels that would possibly make a sequel (or sequels) that would be even better than this film. A really strong 4 stars , and I highly recommend it. The "bare bones" version is a better buy , but the 2 disk set is OK , too.
pathaniav (30 April 2012)
Very Satisfying
I thoroughly enjoyed this one. Weir almost perfectly captures life on afrigate in the early 19th century; he has an astonishing eye for accuratedetails. The story has echoes of Moby Dick; and the game of cat and mousewith the French ship draws you in. Leavened with just the right amount ofhumor and with far less pandering to mushy sentiments that one wouldexpectfrom a major Hollywood product - this one kept me engrossed from thestart.
(29 April 2012)
Master and Commander
This review is from: Master and Commander - The Far Side of the World (Widescreen Collector's Edition) (DVD) I bought it because of the many high rating reviews, tried very hard to like it but in truth I found it too slow and in fact boring, a real waste (...).
Patrick Gillam (29 April 2012)
See it more than once
This movie is so packed with characters, details, humor, subtexts andactionthat I hadto see it again right away. I loved it the first time, but the second waseven better. I can'twait for my third viewing.If you felt so-so about it after the first viewing, *go back.* You'll berichly rewarded.
zandam14 (27 April 2012)
The Truth
Master and Commander was a hell of a movie. It's not just anotherremake. It seems like all movies made now are just remakes. This isn'ta remake. Its the kind of movie that will be remade 40 years from now.It is an original movie. If you can't understand the plot of the movie,I pity you.Basically the H.M.S. Surprise gets orders to take a "prize" the Frenchship Acheron. The movie begins with a great little battle and from thatpoint goes to chase mode. It doesn't seem like the movie would be thatlong just because the plot is so simple. However, along the way we geta lot of character description. This is common in the more classicmovies, movies that are truly great. i.e. Gone with the Wind, TheGodfather, Citizen Kane, Raging Bull. The setting is described flawlessly. The ship looks exactly as a shipfrom the 1800's would look. It shows the cramped living conditions, thepoor dental hygiene, and the more primal mind frame during this periodof time. The acting performances were outstanding. Crowe does a good job andreally seems to be a sea captain. The actor playing the Doctor did anexcellent job as well. Its amazing to see him come from A Knight's Taleas a comedian to Master and Commander as a serious cello playing doctorthat has a thirst for discovering new species on the Galapagos Islands.This movie has few flaws and for that should be considered one of thebetter movies of the year.
Uxbridge (27 April 2012)
Good, old-fashioned, adventure-at-sea flick
Good film. Russell Crowe and Paul Bettany really pulled it off nicely andrather convincingly. I've read some of the O'Brian books and this picturemolds a couple of the stories together seemlessly. For any fans ofseafaringadventures, this movie is a must-see. You won't be bored.
octahog-1 (24 April 2012)
Am I missing something?
I really do not understand why this film is getting such great reviews. Iwill say the battle scenes are great, but that's about it. Russell Croweisa great actor but not here. For me this film was almost a joke in theactingdepartment. It was predictable and dull. I really don't believe peoplewouldbe as calm and cracking jokes while there being blown to bit's. Howcriticshave reacted to this film is exactly what is wrong in Hollywood. It reallydoesn't take much to make them happy anymore. What was the purpose of thisfilm? The Dr. friend needed to get thrown overboard along with most of therest of the cast. Sorry this is just another bloated Hollywood waste oftime. Oh, and please do not compare this film to Lawrence of Arabia thatfilm IS a classic!
Sonia (24 April 2012)
Simply marvellous!
I have recently seen 'Master and commander', played by the New Zealender,although Australian by adoption, Russell Crowe. Never have I spent such agreat time in the cinema!. It is a brilliant movie and from the beginning tothe end the action takes place so there is no time to get bored. It is notalso the story itself which makes the film interesting, but also theexcellent perfomances of Russell Crowe (an actor who also deserved an Oscarfor his magnificent perfomance in L.A CONFIDENTIAL) and the British bornactor Paul Bettany. It is sure this film will be nominated to the next Oscarawards in 2004 and I hope Russell Crowe to be nominated as best actor in aleading role. (He is the best one, without the slightestdoubt)
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20