User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 477 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. JanetS.
    Feb 9, 2004
    0
    My husband and I went to see this garbage this weekend. After all the critics raved and it received 10 Oscar nominations. After 40 minutes we walked out with a few others who shared our opinion. I have never seen an adventure movie so dull. There is no life or feeling for any of the actors. Simply terrible.
  2. TerryB.
    Dec 8, 2003
    0
    This was as about as exciting as watching the splinters explode in the flick. The screenplay was terrible, the acting was disappointing, and there was no feeling for any of the characters. If you must see this sh.t take NoDose before you enter to see this NONaction boring film. Complete unadulterated crap.
  3. RobertH
    Jan 8, 2004
    0
    Cinematic art? I hardly think so. I found it to be boring beyond belief, tedious and without any character development. Your art would have been better sinking in the first five minutes. People were walking out in droves. Absolute crapola as far as I am concerned.
  4. James
    Feb 5, 2004
    0
    It is impossible that this movie was nominated for one Oscar let alone ten? Simply dull, boring and of no interest to me or most of the miniscule audience who watched in boredom. No character development at all. Not one character even touched me emotionally. How some of you rave about this crap is amazing. Nonetheless you're entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree.
  5. WilliamE.
    Feb 6, 2004
    0
    I only wish a U-2 Submarine had come along and sunk Russell Crowe in the first five minutes to put me and this dumb movie out of its misery. Boooooooooring.
  6. StephenO.
    Mar 3, 2004
    0
    Boring, boring, boring. I have never seen a more ridiculous movie that takes non-adventure to an all time low. How can a Pirate movie be this lethargic? The screenplay was simply awful. The acting third rate. The characters were never developed therefore leaving the audience not caring about what happened to them. Hard to believe that this movie was nominated for anything other than most Boring, boring, boring. I have never seen a more ridiculous movie that takes non-adventure to an all time low. How can a Pirate movie be this lethargic? The screenplay was simply awful. The acting third rate. The characters were never developed therefore leaving the audience not caring about what happened to them. Hard to believe that this movie was nominated for anything other than most boring movie of the year? Expand
  7. CareyG.
    Dec 4, 2003
    0
    Found it depressing and simply ridiculous. The crew had no personality, no purpose and were just drones following stupid orders. Both the movie and the ship sailed around and around and went absolutely nowhere. Couldn't wait to leave the theater.
  8. Dwayne
    Jan 3, 2004
    1
    I give one point for the photography. I only wish that this had been a non-talking documentary about the animals found on the island. As for the screenplay and character development the less said the better.
  9. Arleen
    Jan 4, 2004
    0
    I would like to take one of those exploding splinters and place it up the rectum of whoever thought to make this trash. Simply awful and boring.
  10. TooGoodToBeTrue
    Jan 8, 2004
    3
    Not the most boring film of the year (that dishonor distinctly belongs to "Mystic River") but I had flashbacks to those unedurable history school textbooks I could never bring myself to read...Certainly blows my mind why anybody would make a movie without a plot or an end.
  11. HenryB.
    Feb 10, 2004
    0
    Just a terrible movie. There was nothing that made me care for any of the characters. It made absolutely no sense with a dumb storyline in which the excess timber to repair the ship is being carried on it. Conveniently, when the ship is first attacked, not even a splinter of the repair wood is damaged. Absolutely preposterous. And dull!
  12. ArthurF.
    Feb 18, 2004
    0
    Lukewarm adventure? Try no action or adventure. What the hell was this? It was so bad that half of the ten people who watched the screening walked out in the middle. I do not understand how this film could be nominated for anything let alone 10 Oscars? Hated it.
  13. JosefH.
    Feb 20, 2004
    1
    Was this a movie or a documentary to look at beautiful unihabitated islands with strange birds? Without doubt this film lacked soul or emotion. The acting was poor and the storyline was idiotic. Russell Crowe delivered his lines as if he were speaking with marbles in his mouth. I have never seen a more monotinous meandering movie than Master. I only wish that Russell and his crew had been Was this a movie or a documentary to look at beautiful unihabitated islands with strange birds? Without doubt this film lacked soul or emotion. The acting was poor and the storyline was idiotic. Russell Crowe delivered his lines as if he were speaking with marbles in his mouth. I have never seen a more monotinous meandering movie than Master. I only wish that Russell and his crew had been sunk in the first five minutes to spare us the predicatable unmoving ending. I despised this poor excuse for an adventure film. Expand
  14. TheresaL.
    Mar 2, 2004
    0
    Boring with a Capital B. Not believable in any aspect. The acting, directing and screenplay was abysmal.
  15. JaredH.
    Jun 20, 2004
    0
    This movie sucked. It was so freakin boring. And Russell for God sakes man take the damn marbles out of your mouth. If I could have I would have torpedoed this dud to Davey Jones locker after thirty minutes. What a boring piece of crap.
  16. JohnQ.
    Dec 1, 2003
    1
    This is one of the lamest movies I have ever watched. There was little warmth in the characters and I kept glancing at my watch hoping that it would end. Other than some beautiful scenery it was not entertaining at all.
  17. DrewH.
    Dec 1, 2003
    0
    Possilby one of the most tedious movies I have watched this year. Something is missing and the characters have no warmth or appeal. Couldn't wait to leave. Avoid at all costs.
  18. Valk.
    Dec 2, 2003
    0
    Absolutely preposterous adventure story lacking in conviction or emotions for the crew. I kept hoping that it would pick up but I needed one of those cannon ball splinters to hold open my eyes? I was dozing off it was so bad. A waste of time and money. Avoid.
  19. Fusichinucca
    Dec 2, 2003
    2
    The sea was nice but the movie sucked big time. At the end of the flick, the audience was shaking their heads in a negative way. Once word of mouth gets out this film is doomed. Lots of winds bellowing the sails but not much else. Terribly disappointing.
  20. Randyflailer
    Dec 2, 2003
    2
    Hated it and couldn't wait to leave. Served no purpose and there was nothing to any of the characters. Just drones following boring orders. It it were on TV you would change the chanel. Avoid.
  21. PIRANHAG.
    Dec 3, 2003
    3
    Yes it´s true. Peter Weir made a bad movie. Epic movies are annoying people. STOP IT its not nice.
  22. WarrenT.
    Dec 5, 2003
    1
    Hated every long drawn out lethargic scene in this sorry excuse for an action movie. I have never been so bored in my life. I would rather watch paint dry than see this epic disaster of a movie again.
  23. PeytonW.
    Dec 6, 2003
    3
    Well, I know the "experts" really like this film, but there is absolutely nothing special about it. The subplots throughout the story are all cliche and nothing special. Despite the efforts to make the audience care about the characters, I really didn't. There was surprisingly little action, and the action provided was only mediocre. Overall it was a disappointment. I was often bored.
  24. MichaelS.
    Jan 1, 2004
    3
    It seems the director did not know whether to make a movie (with a strong story line and good acting) or a documentary (with facts and anecdotes weaving a rich historical fabric). The result is a failure either way. The story reads like a dull history book, the action does not make much sense, the acting and the photography are lost in this mess.
  25. DenzelN.
    Jan 15, 2004
    2
    Great scenery but otherwise an absolutely worthless boring piece of crap. I could barely keep my eyes open as it was an action movie in which the characters never came to life or had any meaning. Reading how the other posters found this a piece of art makes me wonder what they were watching? If you have insomnia then this is the movie for you. Otherwise don't waste your time or Great scenery but otherwise an absolutely worthless boring piece of crap. I could barely keep my eyes open as it was an action movie in which the characters never came to life or had any meaning. Reading how the other posters found this a piece of art makes me wonder what they were watching? If you have insomnia then this is the movie for you. Otherwise don't waste your time or money. Garbage. Expand
  26. DetroitConnection
    Jan 16, 2004
    0
    Simply dreadful. It is one of the slowest moving dullest action films I have ever witnessed. There is little if any character development and is sadly lacking the flair and adventure that was so apparent in the cartoonish Pirates Of The Caribbean. The latter was so superior to this that it makes one wonder how anyone found this to be artistic at all? As far as I am concerned Russell Crowe Simply dreadful. It is one of the slowest moving dullest action films I have ever witnessed. There is little if any character development and is sadly lacking the flair and adventure that was so apparent in the cartoonish Pirates Of The Caribbean. The latter was so superior to this that it makes one wonder how anyone found this to be artistic at all? As far as I am concerned Russell Crowe should have gone to Davey Jones locker in the opening minutes of this unadulterated boorish excuse for a motion picture. Come to think of it motion does not apply as this film crawled along at a snails pace. Avoid at all costs. Expand
  27. WaltD.
    Jan 24, 2004
    0
    I just completed watching this film and agree with the majority of viewers who despised this work. It is a slow meandering dveloping film with nice scenery but not much more. There is NO character development at all and I have NO desire to read the book, let alone 21 volumes. As a matter of fact, it is difficult to feel for any of these characters in the movie. As for Russell Crowe this I just completed watching this film and agree with the majority of viewers who despised this work. It is a slow meandering dveloping film with nice scenery but not much more. There is NO character development at all and I have NO desire to read the book, let alone 21 volumes. As a matter of fact, it is difficult to feel for any of these characters in the movie. As for Russell Crowe this is NOT one of his better performances. As for a pirate film that should scream ACTION, to tell the truth there is very little. And when it does come, you care so little for the characters that you really don't care what happens to them? As for the fight scenes, it is very difficult to tell who is who as the close-ups destroy all sembelance of what is happening to who. To compare this to Pirates of The Caribbean is not fair in the sense that although POTC is cartoonish it had charisma, flair, daring, swashbuckling and a mystical overtone to it. In Master, it is lacking any real conviction and truly is a dud of a film. If you look at the box office receipts between the two there is no comparison as Pirates dominated. What you pseudo snobbish intellectuals do not understand is that Pirates was spectacularly received by word of mouth. Master's word of mouth is so terrible that it completely bombed at the box office. One would think that any film with Russell Crowe would do well considering his stature as an actor. Sadly, I must agree with all those who hated this film. In no way, does Master make me want to read the book as Seabiscuit did with its movie. Just a terribly disappointing film from start to finish with people leaving the theater early. Expand
  28. JenniferT.
    Jan 26, 2004
    0
    This was a terrible film. An adventure? If this was on the discovery channel I would turn it off. Not very good at all. We go to the movies to be entertained not subjected to a senseless piece of drivel. There was no character development and the premise was absolutely ridiculous. Revenge, okay, if you want to believe it? It's like going after the Bismark with a row boat. C'mon, This was a terrible film. An adventure? If this was on the discovery channel I would turn it off. Not very good at all. We go to the movies to be entertained not subjected to a senseless piece of drivel. There was no character development and the premise was absolutely ridiculous. Revenge, okay, if you want to believe it? It's like going after the Bismark with a row boat. C'mon, this movie was a complete bore and a total bust at the box office once word of mouth got around. Expand
  29. DavidH.
    Jan 20, 2004
    0
    Starfox I just read your review and feel compelled to advise anyone contemplating seeing this disaster to just stay away. You could not be more off base. There is absolutely ZERO character development in this film. If so please explain Russell Crowe's background and his passion in pursuing a hopeless mission that endangers both his crew and his ship. And, please don't quote to Starfox I just read your review and feel compelled to advise anyone contemplating seeing this disaster to just stay away. You could not be more off base. There is absolutely ZERO character development in this film. If so please explain Russell Crowe's background and his passion in pursuing a hopeless mission that endangers both his crew and his ship. And, please don't quote to me from the book. Where is it in the movie? It's not. Explain why his best friend the Ship's physcian chose a life at sea with lowlife followers when he could have been so much more. Again, point it out to us from the movie. Character development, I don't think so. Also, while you're on the subject please explain where the timber came from to repair the ship? Have you ever seen this in any other pirate movie you have ever watched? As for the acting it was third rate, including marble mouth, Russell Crowe, and was difficult to follow. As the other posters have noted, ticket buyers were walking out in droves as this "so-called" action movie was basically devoid of any action except for the exploding splinters during the battel scene in which no one knew who was who nor did we care. So spare me your sarcasm about what a great movie this was. It was an absolute worthless piece of garbage that I would not sit through again unless somebody took bamboo shoots and put them through my eyes. My advice to anyone wanting to rent this film is to take NoDoze before you attempt to sit though it. For you to rate this a perfect ten as compared to the great classics makes me want to give this a score of about a negative 1,000,000. It was that bad. Expand
  30. PollyJ.
    Jan 28, 2004
    0
    How anyone saw any action or adventure in this astonishingly slow film is beyond me? It was simply terrible in which I felt absolutely nothing for any of the characters. If you can't feel emotion then the movie is dead!
  31. JuanP.
    Jan 30, 2004
    0
    I so glad to see Amber P put Kevin in place. He has no right to insult people. I saw the movie because I like Rusell Crow. But the movie is very bad. No action. I don't feel for anyone. I want fun and there was no fun and I do not like it. Very bad.
  32. TrudyD.
    Feb 10, 2004
    0
    Garbage. I could not believe an adventure movie could be this slow. The plot was preposterous; nothing was explained about why the crew elected to spend their humdrum lifes at sea; nor why they carried repair lumber on the vessel? I will point out that I have never remotely seen any other ship from that century carry timber if and when they were attacked by pirates? Usually, the ship Garbage. I could not believe an adventure movie could be this slow. The plot was preposterous; nothing was explained about why the crew elected to spend their humdrum lifes at sea; nor why they carried repair lumber on the vessel? I will point out that I have never remotely seen any other ship from that century carry timber if and when they were attacked by pirates? Usually, the ship would either win the battle or be sunk. What is Master a Boy Scout troop in that they were prepared? C'mon, this film was the equal of watching moss grow on a rock. It was boring and without any character development at all. The characters were completely lifeless and I really wish they had all drowned in the opening minutes to spare me the agony of watching this crap. Expand
  33. Teresa
    Feb 1, 2004
    0
    Painfully dull. A failed adaptation.
  34. Jamal
    Feb 15, 2004
    0
    Jamal hated this suck-ass boring movie. Where was the action? We send shuttles into space without back up parts. You telling Jamal that 400 years ago with just the wind for propulsion that there were ships sailing around with spare masts? Bullsh.t! You either won the battle or sunk. How come 400 years later the Titanic didn't carry spare metal panels to repair the damage by the Jamal hated this suck-ass boring movie. Where was the action? We send shuttles into space without back up parts. You telling Jamal that 400 years ago with just the wind for propulsion that there were ships sailing around with spare masts? Bullsh.t! You either won the battle or sunk. How come 400 years later the Titanic didn't carry spare metal panels to repair the damage by the icebergs? Who could even be stupid enough to believe the crap these writers try to pawn off on us. Master sucked as there was no adventure. Jamal tried to get a refund. Expand
  35. WinstonF.
    Feb 1, 2004
    0
    After receiving 10, count them, 10 OSCAR nominations, despite the generally poor Metacritic reviews, I was foolish enough to let the professional critics cloud my judgment. Well, I saw Master yesterday along with my wife. We both hated it. It was absolutely atrocious and so boring. It is inconceivable that any pirate movie could have so little action. And when it does come, the characters After receiving 10, count them, 10 OSCAR nominations, despite the generally poor Metacritic reviews, I was foolish enough to let the professional critics cloud my judgment. Well, I saw Master yesterday along with my wife. We both hated it. It was absolutely atrocious and so boring. It is inconceivable that any pirate movie could have so little action. And when it does come, the characters are all so undeveloped that you feel absolutely nothing for any of them. People were walking out of the theater during the screening. We were stupid enough to sit through the whole boring ordeal. I give my word in that I will never listen to the paid off professional critics again. Thank you Metacritic for providing a service that permits REAL PEOPLE, not shills, to discuss the merits of a film. Avoid at all costs. Better yet, "ABANDON SHIP." Expand
  36. KarenJ.
    Feb 21, 2004
    0
    Was Master a joke or what? Inane and inept in every facet of what makes a good motion picture. There was no motion, emotion, and certainly, no adventure in this laughable moronic story. It is beyond belief that Master could be up for any award let alone 10 Oscars.
  37. Spriggangirl
    Feb 24, 2004
    0
    Need I say anything??
  38. TomasP.
    Feb 2, 2004
    0
    I only wish I had gone down with the ship in the first five minutes of the film to avoid what may be one of the most boring movies ever made. It was terrible and I did not have feel any emotion for any of the characters. How in Gods name did this movie get ten Oscar nominations?
  39. SharonW.
    Feb 3, 2004
    0
    Repulsive is the only way to describe this terribly slow movie. Ten Oscars for this??? Kevin, are you sure you're from this planet? At one point, I became so disenchanted with the film that I started observing the few others in the theater foolish enough to have paid for this water torture. They were squirming, looking at their watches, and a few did indeed walk out about forty Repulsive is the only way to describe this terribly slow movie. Ten Oscars for this??? Kevin, are you sure you're from this planet? At one point, I became so disenchanted with the film that I started observing the few others in the theater foolish enough to have paid for this water torture. They were squirming, looking at their watches, and a few did indeed walk out about forty minutes into what seemed like an eternal bore. Other than some nice scenery and wildlife this movie is a dud. Expand
  40. SidneyF.
    Feb 3, 2004
    0
    Max we're nuts? Take a look at the Metacritic scores and then take a good look in the mirror... As a historian of this period perhaps you would care to enlighten us how Russell conveniently had all the lumber he needed on his ship to effect a complete makeover. Better yet, please advise how the far superior vessel snuck up on poor old Russell blasted his ship to kingdom com but Max we're nuts? Take a look at the Metacritic scores and then take a good look in the mirror... As a historian of this period perhaps you would care to enlighten us how Russell conveniently had all the lumber he needed on his ship to effect a complete makeover. Better yet, please advise how the far superior vessel snuck up on poor old Russell blasted his ship to kingdom com but somehow managed not to damage to the necessary SPARE timber required to make those repairs. This movie had more holes than swiss cheese. There was no character development at all. It meandered along as slow as a bead of sweat dripping from one's brow. Absolutely dreadful. Expand
  41. LassiterR.
    Feb 9, 2004
    0
    As I write this review, I have to laugh at the ten ratings most of the posters gave this awful film. First of all, it isn't worthy of any Oscar except for cinematography. I must admit that the Island Scenes were beautiful to look at. But as far as the acting and the development of the characters it was horrendous to say the least. I am absolutely dumbfounded by the acclaim the As I write this review, I have to laugh at the ten ratings most of the posters gave this awful film. First of all, it isn't worthy of any Oscar except for cinematography. I must admit that the Island Scenes were beautiful to look at. But as far as the acting and the development of the characters it was horrendous to say the least. I am absolutely dumbfounded by the acclaim the professional critics lavished among this unmitigated dissaster. It is so slow and ridiculous that I find it hard to believe that anyone could have liked it, but as I have read some of you have. The proof that the public hated this film is at the box office where it completely bombed. People were actually walking out of the theater, and some teenagers had the right idea when they called out "REFUND!" Expand
  42. BillR.
    Mar 13, 2004
    4
    The umpteenth Best Picture nom to which I respond: Yawn. Lazily acted for the most part. About as 'adventurous' as my arsehole; ending skirmish is disgracefully shot. Stripped down to its purely dramatic element, it can never maintain a competent focus on characterization. In fact, the most it can ever evoke is "Who gives a sh*t?", really. Even bigger letdown than The Truman The umpteenth Best Picture nom to which I respond: Yawn. Lazily acted for the most part. About as 'adventurous' as my arsehole; ending skirmish is disgracefully shot. Stripped down to its purely dramatic element, it can never maintain a competent focus on characterization. In fact, the most it can ever evoke is "Who gives a sh*t?", really. Even bigger letdown than The Truman Show overall, *still* waiting for a Weir film to really floor me. Expand
  43. StevenP.
    Mar 2, 2004
    0
    Probably one of the most overrated movies I have ever seen. It is so slow that it is like watching Old Man River? The acting is third rate, and as hard as I tried, I felt nothing for any of the characters. The screenplay was simply awful as was the directing. There is no action and the battle scenes fail to invoke any feeling from the audience. It is so bad that you just don't care. Probably one of the most overrated movies I have ever seen. It is so slow that it is like watching Old Man River? The acting is third rate, and as hard as I tried, I felt nothing for any of the characters. The screenplay was simply awful as was the directing. There is no action and the battle scenes fail to invoke any feeling from the audience. It is so bad that you just don't care. And where did they get the nerve to show that Russell had the wisdom to carry spare masts in the belly of the ship just in case they were attacked and not sunk? Please it is so ridiculous that it is laughable. The ship is blown to splinters, but not one hair is harmed on the replacement timber? Yeah, okay, sure, wink wink nod nod. Just a terrible movie from beginning to end. To accept the many holes in this storyline you need to really love swiss cheese. Expand
  44. HansU.
    Mar 31, 2004
    2
    I belive the book is a cheap copy of CS Forester's Hornblower books. And the movie is good in it self but it is remarkably american. No English man would speak like the most of the actors does.
  45. DavidP.
    Mar 4, 2004
    0
    Little did I realize that when I went to the theater that I was going to see another disaster movie? Master was like the "Morning After" in the Posidon Adventure in that watching it was an utter disaster. NO movie could be this bad or so slow? Where was the character development? And the screenplay was from hunger. One of worst movies I've ever seen. I wish it had been sunk before it Little did I realize that when I went to the theater that I was going to see another disaster movie? Master was like the "Morning After" in the Posidon Adventure in that watching it was an utter disaster. NO movie could be this bad or so slow? Where was the character development? And the screenplay was from hunger. One of worst movies I've ever seen. I wish it had been sunk before it was released on the public. Expand
  46. ThomasO.
    Apr 3, 2004
    0
    Pure and simple this movie was an absolute bore. For an action adventure movie I only wish that the entire movie had been sunk in the opening scene. The screenplay is full of swiss cheese that it is ludicrous. The acting is third rate and there is absolutely no emotional connection to any of the characters that appear on screen. How this movie was nominated for anything is proof of the Pure and simple this movie was an absolute bore. For an action adventure movie I only wish that the entire movie had been sunk in the opening scene. The screenplay is full of swiss cheese that it is ludicrous. The acting is third rate and there is absolutely no emotional connection to any of the characters that appear on screen. How this movie was nominated for anything is proof of the bullshit of politics. This movie plain out sucked wind. If you liked it, fine, go out and watch the paint dry or moss grow on a rock. Both are as satsifying as this crap. Expand
  47. DevonP.
    Nov 27, 2003
    1
    Terribly depressing movie in which one had difficulty caring for any of the characters. I must admit the scenery was gorgeous. Other than that, I kept looking at my watch waiting for this drek to end. A Pirates of the Caribbean it is not.
  48. PennelopeT.
    Nov 28, 2003
    0
    Hated this blood and gore boring epic. The characters were flat and never explained their drone existence in the filthy sea.
  49. PhilE.
    Feb 10, 2004
    0
    Attocious in every respect. Slow and without any emotion. As I watched this nonadventure film unfold all I could think of was the Dead Sea. This film should have been sunk before it was released. This ranks as one of the worst films of 2003. Avoid.
  50. RogerK.
    Feb 11, 2004
    0
    One of the dullest movies I have ever witnessed. Enough said.
  51. RonaldD.
    Feb 12, 2004
    0
    A row boat ride is more exciting than this poor excuse for a feature film. As a documentary, I would have changed the channel. Terribly slow and devoid of ANT character development. It makes me want to rush to my nearest library and burn the books.
  52. DarbyW.
    Feb 13, 2004
    2
    This movie gives a new meaning to water torture. Bland, trite, and idiotically slow. This lackluster boat adventure flick suffers from indifferent direction and inane writing.
  53. DebbieB.
    Feb 13, 2004
    0
    Easily the most overrated boring movie I have ever seen. Absolutely hated it.
  54. TammyD.
    Feb 13, 2004
    0
    If only a U-2 boat had magically appeared and sunk this disaster? What it doesn't make sense? It is as real as carrying timber to replace the masts after they have been destroyed by an enemy who blasted the ship with cannon fire but somehow didn't sink the ship or harm one hair on that precious replacement timber?
  55. BillyA.
    Feb 17, 2004
    0
    Talk about a complete waste of time and money then Master is it. I have never been bored more in my life. The screenplay was awful and almost laughable. The acting failed to invoke any emotion as the characters were lifeless and dull. Just terrible.
  56. KatieC.
    Feb 17, 2004
    3
    Lukewarm action-adventure with bland acting.
  57. HarrisonP.
    Feb 17, 2004
    0
    One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Boring is an understatement. Terrible writing and acting. The only decent thing was the cinematography. And if I want that I can buy a postcard. Just awful.
  58. CarlyA.
    Feb 19, 2004
    0
    This is a movie for simpletons. No creative writing, acting or directing. Awful and boring.
  59. Heidi
    Feb 23, 2004
    0
    quite frankly the most boring movie I have ever sat through. The screenplay was terrible, the acting was poor as was the directing. I really tried to feel something for the characters and was unable to do so. This movie was as bad as a two day old cold fish.
  60. KenD.
    Feb 25, 2004
    0
    There is no beating around the bush. This flick sucked from the opening scene to the antiseptic ending. Moss grows on a stone faster than this non action film moved.
  61. Ron
    Feb 29, 2004
    0
    This movie is about as dry as the deck of the boat was wet in the storm. Crowe's performance was, to say the least, boring as he pretty much had only one facial expression. His character wasn't a master or a commander. The movie was also emotionally empty. Every single sailor, minus the doctor, was the same as the next and no one who died I even remotely cared about. The plot This movie is about as dry as the deck of the boat was wet in the storm. Crowe's performance was, to say the least, boring as he pretty much had only one facial expression. His character wasn't a master or a commander. The movie was also emotionally empty. Every single sailor, minus the doctor, was the same as the next and no one who died I even remotely cared about. The plot was virtually non-existant... I give the director kudos for being able to turn an adventure movie into the most wasted two hours of my life thus far. What were the Oscar Academy thinking? Expand
  62. LindaH.
    Feb 29, 2004
    0
    I only wish this movie had been torpedoed within the first 5 minutes as it was the longest, most excruciating boring movie I have ever seen. How can any swashbuckling pirate movie be this slow. As for Russell and his one dimensional character and crew there are no words worthy of describing how awful and emotionless this film truly was. If this movie wins even one award tonight it would I only wish this movie had been torpedoed within the first 5 minutes as it was the longest, most excruciating boring movie I have ever seen. How can any swashbuckling pirate movie be this slow. As for Russell and his one dimensional character and crew there are no words worthy of describing how awful and emotionless this film truly was. If this movie wins even one award tonight it would be a complete and total disgrace. Expand
  63. LarryO.
    Mar 7, 2004
    0
    Awful.
  64. JesusC.
    Mar 9, 2004
    0
    Where was the adventure? This dog is the cure for insomnia.
  65. Amber
    Apr 11, 2004
    0
    Steff, I read your review and had to barf after laughing at how ridiculous your statement was? "Most Accurate" of the way seafaring was back then? Really? Please tell all of us how many sailing ships of that century carried extra masts in the hull just on the offchance that they weren't completely sunk? Let me help you out. The answer is ZERO. And isn't it remarkable that with Steff, I read your review and had to barf after laughing at how ridiculous your statement was? "Most Accurate" of the way seafaring was back then? Really? Please tell all of us how many sailing ships of that century carried extra masts in the hull just on the offchance that they weren't completely sunk? Let me help you out. The answer is ZERO. And isn't it remarkable that with the ship exploding into splinters that miraculously the mast escapes all damage from the cannon fire so that the ship can be rebuilt in the middle of the ocean. Steph, I wonder why the Titanic didn't have the replacement parts that according to you were available a few hundred years before? Come to think of it why didn't the space shuttle have replacement panels before reentering the Earth's atsmosphere, after all this disaster of a movie gave Russell Crowe replacement masts? This movie was an absolute dud in which none of the characters had any emotional connection with the audience. Yes indeed, it is a big ocean, but to call this fantasy flick "Most Accurate" of depicting that seafaring era is ridiculous. The screenplay had more holes than swisscheese. I would suggest that you do a little bit more reading before making such a laughable statement. If you liked this lame excuse for a movie that is one thing. But to portray yourself as being knowledgable about life at sea is a joke. This movie was one of the worst ever made. The fact that it bombed at the box office sinks it all the way to Davey Jones locker. Expand
  66. Mr.Right
    May 5, 2004
    1
    It sucked, sucked, SUCKED! Oh, and did I mention it sucked? A film this drawn out and boring should have had, at the very least, an ending worth waiting for. This film did not. If the story wasn't tedious (and at times, contrived) enough, it had to be coupled with acting that looked tired. (But I can't blame the actors too much. I think I would have slipped into a coma if I had It sucked, sucked, SUCKED! Oh, and did I mention it sucked? A film this drawn out and boring should have had, at the very least, an ending worth waiting for. This film did not. If the story wasn't tedious (and at times, contrived) enough, it had to be coupled with acting that looked tired. (But I can't blame the actors too much. I think I would have slipped into a coma if I had to read more than a few lines of the screenplay they were given.) The only reason I gave this film a rating of 1 and not 0, is because I seem to recall that a supporting actor - a kid, actually - did a decent bit of acting in this film. To anyone seriously considering renting this film: go buy some paint and paint the ceiling. Then sit down and watch the paint dry. Maybe the time you spend watching your paint dry won't be any less boring than watching this film, but the ending will be far more rewarding and your money better spent. Expand
  67. MelC.
    May 9, 2004
    0
    WORST MOVIE EVAH. It sucked. Beyond sucked. OK, they are attacked by the big scary ship. They are almost blown to bits. They escape into the fog. Thru "a masterful bit of sailing, thar, matey" they end up on the TAIL of the big scary ship! BRILL-YAHNT! uhh.. why didn't the big scary ship just turn around and blow them up? TERRIBLE acting only added to an EXTREMELY dull time. "lesser WORST MOVIE EVAH. It sucked. Beyond sucked. OK, they are attacked by the big scary ship. They are almost blown to bits. They escape into the fog. Thru "a masterful bit of sailing, thar, matey" they end up on the TAIL of the big scary ship! BRILL-YAHNT! uhh.. why didn't the big scary ship just turn around and blow them up? TERRIBLE acting only added to an EXTREMELY dull time. "lesser of two weevils?" Oh, freakin' puh-leaze. Anyone that said this plotless, useless hunk of crap was a film, let alone a good film, needs to have their freakin' head examined. SUCKED. BEYOND SUCKED. Wow, Worst. Movie. EVAH. Expand
  68. Jennifer
    Jun 4, 2004
    0
    This movie was simply comatose. The acting was dreadful. The directing even worse. And the screenplay was simply laughable. This movie just dragged on and on. If the ship had been sunk in the first five minutes it would have saved many of us the water torture pain it inflicted. Avoid.
  69. JeremyE.
    Apr 18, 2006
    4
    wow! History, Sailing, Pointless Fights, and, best of all Boredom! this film has it all. enough to make me fall asleep.
  70. JackV.
    Oct 3, 2007
    2
    I have to agree with L.A. Weekly's and Jeremy E.'s comment about "Boredom". I have usually liked all the movies I've seen on at least one aspect, except for two movies, with this being one of them. This was one of the most boring movies I have ever seen. Unfortunately, I think the majority of the movie critics got it wrong this time. I'm confused as to why it was rated I have to agree with L.A. Weekly's and Jeremy E.'s comment about "Boredom". I have usually liked all the movies I've seen on at least one aspect, except for two movies, with this being one of them. This was one of the most boring movies I have ever seen. Unfortunately, I think the majority of the movie critics got it wrong this time. I'm confused as to why it was rated 100 so many times. Expand
  71. FrankF.
    Feb 11, 2004
    0
    Craperoo from start to finish. I left shaking my head in disbelief.
  72. VeronicaT.
    Feb 11, 2004
    0
    Put me in the camp that found this totally boring and without purpose. The acting was second rate and the screenplay abominable. If you liked it that's great, but most of us found it a waste of time and money. Avoid at all costs. If you gave me a free DVD I would toss it in the river.
  73. Eliza
    Feb 12, 2004
    4
    This is a dull and wearisome boat movie. It just had no purpose or direction. The film is poorly made: it crawls at the pace of a drunken snail and the lackluster acting makes this snoozer even more interminable.
  74. Eddie
    Feb 12, 2004
    0
    I think I want to puke. How can this movie be nominated for anything? It was so slooooooooow that I wanted it to sink so I could leave. After an hour I did just that as I couldn't take any more. This is a horrible film, that isn't even sea worthy, let alone worthy of any OSCARS. Hated it.
  75. RachelJ.
    Feb 23, 2004
    0
    Master and Commander is absolutely the most lethargic movie I have ever seen. It is inconceivable that a Pirate movie could have so little character development and be as slow moving as this one is. It is not worthy of any awards and completely dumbfounds me as to how it received 10 Oscar nominations. There is nothing here for the audience to connect with.
  76. John
    Feb 26, 2004
    0
    A rubber duckie in a bath tub is more fascinating than this lame script. I wish the boat had been capsized at the beginning to spare me the agony of watching this snail meander along. Just awful.
  77. JeffS.
    Nov 27, 2003
    4
    Nice visuals, good acting, but dramatically flat. The characters hold little interest, as does the very thin storyline. Prepare to glance at your watch several times.
  78. JeffP.
    Jan 30, 2004
    4
    M&C is the type of film I respect, but didn't enjoy. It seems that the majority of people who liked the film had also read the books. Because I have yet to tackle the series, I agree their was not enough character developement. Concerning Oscar, I agree with most of the noms except Best Picture. Sadly, because of the recent negative feedback from the audiance, M&C may miss out on M&C is the type of film I respect, but didn't enjoy. It seems that the majority of people who liked the film had also read the books. Because I have yet to tackle the series, I agree their was not enough character developement. Concerning Oscar, I agree with most of the noms except Best Picture. Sadly, because of the recent negative feedback from the audiance, M&C may miss out on getting credit for it's visual FX, which would be a well deserved win. Expand
  79. Mark
    Nov 15, 2003
    4
    The Stephen Hunter review is dead-on. Everything seems to be so important that you start to wonder if anything really is. I eventually was bored to death. This is an Oscar-machine, that's it. And I wish it the worst of luck - well, this and Mystic River.
  80. GaborA.
    Dec 1, 2003
    4
    Besides accuratly portraying sea life there is little here. People say that the movie had no potential to begin with. I mean its constrained to a group of guys on a boat. At first i had a similar opintion, but then why was Jaws so good? Most Peter Weir films dont have parts that you can pinpoint and say that that was well done. However, walking out of Dead Poets Society i had issues to Besides accuratly portraying sea life there is little here. People say that the movie had no potential to begin with. I mean its constrained to a group of guys on a boat. At first i had a similar opintion, but then why was Jaws so good? Most Peter Weir films dont have parts that you can pinpoint and say that that was well done. However, walking out of Dead Poets Society i had issues to think about if not the movie itself. Walking out of MandC the only thing i was left to think about was the movie itsef, and anyone comes quickly to the conclusion that it was not well done. Expand
  81. JoshuaL.
    Dec 1, 2003
    0
    Michael, I have an open mind but I'm sorry to say I disagree with your assessment. I found this to be a very dull movie with excessive violence that served no purpose. The characters were underdeveloped and thus I was without feeling for their plight. Long on wind but not much on substance. Very disappointing to say the least.
  82. DairyH.
    Dec 12, 2003
    2
    AWESOME, ENTERTAINING, SPELLBINDING - these are words that could NOT be used to describe this film. Who cares about historical accuracy when you are bored to tears? And even if you could stay awake during the hour long filler in between, the battle scenes were not that great since there was little about the characters to make you care whether they died and zero tension to make you realize AWESOME, ENTERTAINING, SPELLBINDING - these are words that could NOT be used to describe this film. Who cares about historical accuracy when you are bored to tears? And even if you could stay awake during the hour long filler in between, the battle scenes were not that great since there was little about the characters to make you care whether they died and zero tension to make you realize the danger. Pirates of the Carribbean may have been silly and annoying in parts but at least it kept me awake. Expand
  83. ConnnieR.
    Dec 10, 2003
    0
    Terribly slow depressing boring ACTION ADVENTURE film. That in itself is an oxymoron as I could not wait to leave. People were actually walking out of the theater as it was that bad. Not worthy of your time nor money. Avoid.
  84. MatinS.
    Dec 17, 2003
    1
    A movie that builds to nothing. Really, it was a waste of money, energy, and TIME. Seriously stupid. What happened to the Gladiator character?
  85. AlbertP.
    Dec 4, 2003
    2
    I liked the cinematography but nothing else. Boring, no performances worth remembering, and I had absolutely no empathy for the crew or the time. Much ado about nothing.
  86. BudB.
    Dec 6, 2003
    4
    Really wanted to like this movie, but was completely bored. This will not and should not receive a Best picture nomination.
  87. DudleyR.
    Dec 6, 2003
    0
    Sucked big time. What a waste of time and money. Booooooring.
  88. Tracie
    Jan 1, 2004
    0
    MooCow if you thought that Pirates was a disaster all I can say is look at the receipts for Pirates vs. this crap? This may be one of the worst movies ever made. Perhaps, you are one of those pseudo intellectuals that enjoys watching paint dry? Please spare us the crap about this lethargic piece of garbage in that not one character had any soul. A waste of time and money.
  89. RachelW.
    Jan 17, 2004
    2
    Possibly one of the most overrated films ever made. It was terrible except for the scenery. If I need scenery I can find it elsewhere at much less the cost. National Geographic is more exciting than this horrible excuse for a movie.
  90. Jack
    Jan 27, 2004
    0
    Action, Adventure? This dud of a movie had neither. It was a terrible boring disjointed flick that should have sunk with the opening scene. How anyone can find any redeeming value in this dreck is beyond me? Perhaps, the book(s) were good but not this film as it was sadly lacking in conviction and character development.
  91. HoraceJ.
    Jan 28, 2004
    1
    This was one bloody mess of a movie. It was awful. The less said the better.
  92. LarryD.
    Jan 31, 2004
    1
    I just came back from watching this dreck and believe me that isn't a strong enough word. Master is one of the slowest films I have ever seen in which there isn't any character development, and even worse, the viewer doesn't care about the characters. Other than the scenery, which I gave one point for, the movie is devoid of any redeeming qualities. Since Kevin piqued my I just came back from watching this dreck and believe me that isn't a strong enough word. Master is one of the slowest films I have ever seen in which there isn't any character development, and even worse, the viewer doesn't care about the characters. Other than the scenery, which I gave one point for, the movie is devoid of any redeeming qualities. Since Kevin piqued my interest to go see it, I would suggest that Kevin present himself for psychoanalysis because this was a film only a turtle or a moron could love. Avoid at all costs. Expand
  93. KaraT.
    Feb 5, 2004
    4
    I saw this tepid adventure flick back in October, and I have no idea why it was re-realeased. While it has some decent scenery and battle scenes, it is still frustratingly dull. You'd think that a high seas adventure movie based on a beloved series would be more involving. Apparently not. The acting is pretty bland and the screenplay is shoddily written and lazily paced. If I had I saw this tepid adventure flick back in October, and I have no idea why it was re-realeased. While it has some decent scenery and battle scenes, it is still frustratingly dull. You'd think that a high seas adventure movie based on a beloved series would be more involving. Apparently not. The acting is pretty bland and the screenplay is shoddily written and lazily paced. If I had been alive during this time, I would have tried to sink this boat myself and put it out of its misery. Expand
  94. DaveB.
    Feb 8, 2004
    2
    It's obvious the $135mil spent on this film was for special effects only. No stand-out performances except for the young kid. For the ensemble cast, it just wasn't there. Crowe's performance was a disappointment, but you can't be great in every role you undertake. Going by the just the last 10 or so glowing reviews here, there must have been a call to action to It's obvious the $135mil spent on this film was for special effects only. No stand-out performances except for the young kid. For the ensemble cast, it just wasn't there. Crowe's performance was a disappointment, but you can't be great in every role you undertake. Going by the just the last 10 or so glowing reviews here, there must have been a call to action to Crowe's fans. Expand
  95. RobH.
    Nov 16, 2003
    4
    Master and Commander lacks a sense of adventure. I got the same feeling I get watching documentaries on the History Channel. Interesting and informative, but not terribly exciting or entertaining. There were long stretches of boredom, where I had trouble staying awake. The fight sequences at the conclusion, which should have been exciting, were almost all shot in close-ups where Master and Commander lacks a sense of adventure. I got the same feeling I get watching documentaries on the History Channel. Interesting and informative, but not terribly exciting or entertaining. There were long stretches of boredom, where I had trouble staying awake. The fight sequences at the conclusion, which should have been exciting, were almost all shot in close-ups where everything was blurred and hard to see what was happening. Not a bad movie, just not what the previews make it out to be. Expand
  96. AlexA.
    Nov 19, 2003
    4
    Great setting, poor story. Lack of a solid plot and many dead spots ruin this movie
  97. AaronN.
    Nov 21, 2003
    3
    Boring! This movie is way too long, the characters never come alive, and the action scenes are fair at best. I went in with high hopes, but there are just so many useless sub plots, that I didn't care who lived or died.
  98. AndrewR.
    Nov 22, 2003
    3
    Boring difficult to figure out, hard to understand the first 1/3, little action for a supposedly action movie, little to no redeeming value. I went way out of my way to see this film...big mistake. Makes me wonder if the critics are paid off !!( I know they're not).
  99. HowardD.
    Nov 22, 2003
    1
    Let me preface my remarks but saying I was very disappointed. I expected to be magically wisked away to the 19th century for a thrilling swashbuckling adventure. What I actually saw was a very violent lethargic tedious film without any real character development? I had difficulty listening to some of the dialogue, but it was drab and meaningless. I felt absolutely nothing for characters Let me preface my remarks but saying I was very disappointed. I expected to be magically wisked away to the 19th century for a thrilling swashbuckling adventure. What I actually saw was a very violent lethargic tedious film without any real character development? I had difficulty listening to some of the dialogue, but it was drab and meaningless. I felt absolutely nothing for characters whatsoever. The most astonishing part of this film was the beautiful scenery which was masterfully photographed. Other than that despite the gore, I couldn't wait until the movie was over. Very disappointing film. Expand
  100. JanetR.
    Nov 24, 2003
    0
    Terribly disappointing considering the big build up. Scenery was nice but not much else. Couldn't feel a thing for any of the characters. Came away with a bunch of smelly rotten waste of a life people floating around in a cess pool of violence. Not worthy of your time or money.
Metascore
81

Universal acclaim - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 42
  2. Negative: 1 out of 42
  1. 91
    It's a wonderfully crafted work, handsome, lively, stirring and utterly convincing in its depiction of the perils and thrills of sea life. But I'm not sure that my personal enthusiasm for it will translate entirely for viewers whose favorite movie about the high seas is, for perfectly good reasons, "Pirates of the Caribbean."
  2. Reviewed by: David Edelstein
    90
    Master and Commander hooks you from its nifty opening salvo to its nifty closing punch line.
  3. 100
    Isn't just a fabulous seagoing spectacle. It's one for the ages.